Slashdot Mirror

The issue of election integrity is bigger than the Kerry Bush race. For the first time in the history of this democracy, we are trusting electronic tabulating machines to count votes in a presidential race. Machines which reknown computer scientists and cryptologists have proven to be insecure and untrustworthy.

In addition to being insecure and untrustworthy these machines left no "paper trail", no way of verifying the machine's count in a recount. When you have no paper trail, the only tool to investigate the integrity of a machine count is that of statistics, as Berkeley researchers were forced to rely upon when they concluded that voting irregularities lead them to believe 260,000 votes were invalidly awarded to Bush. In fact when 4,258 votes were awarded by a Diebold machine to Bush in Franklin County, Ohio we only knew that result had to be wrong because only 638 voters had casted ballots. Unfortunately this wasn't an isolated event as Diebold has stirred a string of such voting irregularities. According to Bob Fitrakis:

Due to computer flaws and vote shifting, there were numerous reports across Ohio of extremely troublesome electronic errors during the voting process and in the counting. In Youngstown, there were more than two-dozen Election Day reports of machines that switched or shifted on-screen displays of a vote for Kerry to a vote for Bush. In Cleveland, there were three precincts in which minor third-party candidates received 86, 92 and 98 percent of the vote respectively, an outcome completely out of synch with the rest of the state (a similar thing occurred during the contested election in Florida, 2000). This class of error points to more than machine malfunction, suggesting instead that votes are being electronically shifted from one candidate to another in the voting and counting stage.

All reported errors favored Bush over Kerry.

Which leads us to question the integrity of the election especially when the exit polls were so clearly in favor of Kerry.

The CEO of Diebold has made no attempt to hide his support for Bush. Ironically, he has publically stated that he is "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year". Later he stated it was a mistake to have said that, he meant it as an American, not as the CEO of a corporation that was contracted to count votes in Ohio. The CEO however isn't the only one to be painted with a big brush of suspicious, as at least five convicted felons secured management positions in his company. One of which served time in a Washington state correctional facility for stealing money and tampering with computer files in a scheme that "involved a high degree of sophistication and planning."

In my response I have analyzed the integrity of the Ohio election through the prisim of electronic voting, others have made other arguments regarding why they think an investigation is warranted as I can assure you the problems with Diebold is not limited to Ohio nor is electronic voting the only "irregularity" in Ohio [1] [2]

True. And there are powerful lobbies that try to change the scientific reports.

For example, Dr Robert Watson was the previous chairman of the IPCC, and he was calling for urgent action [against greenhouse gases]. Exxon didn't like him, so it complained to the Whitehouse he was "too aggressive" on the issue.

The Bush administration then lobbied other countries in favor of Dr Pachauri, actual chairman of the IPCC. Dr. Pachauri was more aligned to Exxon, and came to be the chairman due to them and the Whitehouse lobby. So he definitely wasn't an anti-global warming freak.

He reviewed all scientific data and now he says that he personally believes that the world has "already reached the level of dangerous concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere" and called for immediate and "very deep" cuts in the pollution if humanity is to "survive".

He also told delegates: "Climate change is for real. We have just a small window of opportunity and it is closing rather rapidly. There is not a moment to lose."

You can check it here

Yes

Why are those questions lowlights, but Helen Thomas' questions are celebrated by antiwar.com and others?

In a November 2002 talk at MIT, Thomas revealed: "I censored myself for 50 years when I was a reporter. Now I wake up and ask myself, 'Who do I hate today?'"

http://slate.msn.com/id/2080034/ Helen Thomas the Pundit writes a sharply partisan syndicated White House column about what she thinks--as opposed to Helen Thomas the Reporter, who wrote about what she'd learned.

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0108-05.htm http://www.antiwar.com/comment/helen.html Helen Thomas Socks it to the White House

HELEN THOMAS: At the earlier briefing, Ari, you said that the President deplored the taking of innocent lives. Does that apply to all innocent lives in the world? And I have a follow-up.

MS. THOMAS: My follow-up is, why does he want to drop bombs on innocent Iraqis?

To be fair, MI5 might have saved the receipts from when British firms sold conventional weapons and WMD precursors to Saddam.

First, the question posed had no time period specified. It was simply "have you ever experienced this", not have you experienced it under the current administration. Anyone who's been employed for 8 years or longer has spent more time under another (Democratic) administration than the current one.

And, of course the Clinton administration would never, ever put politics before policy. I love how these debates always degenerate into "your side is evil, my side is pure."

And, those people happen to populate the West Wing of the White House

I didn't realize that members of Congress now populated the west wing. In case your longer term memory fails you, have a look here and remind yourself of all the people (including Kerry) who said Saddam had WMD's.

The fact remains that everyone's decision was based on faulty intelligence. Congress voted yes on on Iraqi invasion. Quit blaming Bush, as he was only the most visible proponent of invasion.

no ones hands where clean, its just some keep them in their pockets

Here a small sample about a new store of this chain that recently made a lot of noise in Mexico

I agree, the U.S. should have ceded control a long time ago. Are you happy?

Yes, I am happy. But you missed the point of that. You (assuming you're the same AC) said US occupation of Panama was "news", so I posted several links for you to peruse to show that its "old news". I'm glad you found credibility problems with one or two of my links, it means the time I spent looking for three was worthwhile.

And so what if Iraq had a democracy 50 years ago.

It makes your original statement about voting for the first time wrong, assuming you can find a 65 year old Iraqi. Thats all.

HOW YOU FEEL SUPERCEDES THE FEELING OF THOSE IRAQIS VOTING IN IRAQ.

Thanks for the caps, I had no idea that my feelings superceded the feelings of those in Iraq. I know that for the most part they're happy, and at this point in time all I can do is hope Bush's experiment works and that Iraq becomes a peaceful secular democracy.

You mention that the U.S. is going to slap Iraq with a bill.

Aww, you got me there. Bush promised it would come from Iraqi oil money. Then he "retracted" that promise. Of course, Bush has other ways of getting money out of Iraq.

Here's to hoping that History will prove me wrong and I am missing the signs, and we won't be doomed to repeat it.

The tragedy here is less the fate of one misdemeanorous student and more in what this story says about the state of education today.

That this kind of cheating is so prevalent as to drive the GRE board back to humble graphite and tree pulp can only mean that the once noble relation of student and teacher has degenerated into adversity, and the institution of the examination, once seen as a test to be passed honorably and as a way of betterment of the self, is now seen as nothing but an inconvenient obstacle on the road to success and self-indulgence, to be overcome by any means necessary.

I might also add that it does not cast the state of IT security in a flattering light that the only way the GRE board has of feeling secure in its test results is to go back to handwritten tests. Makes me nervous about the legions of electronic voting machines upon which our democracy increasingly depends...

You get what you vote for.

Stop blaming voters for their government's actions. The last two elections proved that you do not get what you vote for.

Absolutely. Propaganda works wonders. After all, how else do you explain that half of Americans believe Iraq was involved in 9/11. It certainly doesn't suprise me that students don't understand what the government can and can't do when they don't learn it in schools and the media doesn't cover it because it isn't sex, violence, or an entertaining show.

Of course, you're forgetting the counterintuitive yet also highly likely result of global warming - an ice age.

Possibly just another one of those problems that we can deal with, but maybe not. At any rate, it debunks your argument that global warming is almost definitely a good thing.

Quote: "Americans put their hands over their hearts and preach to the world about freedom and human rights, and then turn around and torture prisoners, and attack freedom of the press, not to mention .... and then are bewildered that the world doesn't love them." Amen! This is so true. I've been saying it for a long time now that the US is the most undemocratic country in the world - the powers given to the people are second to what the corporate world wants and nothing more. Don't believe me? Then why does the RIAA have the unpecedented right to dDos suspects, something which is plainly illegal to every other citizen of the US (other than the armed forces, CIA, FBI and other secret services). mmm? Please explain. You have one law for everyone, not favourites who get special treatment. Try explaining it all to the hundreds of people in Cuba imprisoned illegally by the US - the US has contravened just about every rule under the Berne and Geneva conventions with those poor souls. This is an interesting article: http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file =/headlines05/0114-02.htm/ There's one thing i've learnt and that's Americans are very patriotic, to the point of being blind to fair criticism of their beloved country. I'm quite happily convinced that this is a pre US attack on Iran - first cut off their link to the world. Hell, they already illegally have spies in Iran. Since the US treats foreigners with no respect, then I'd suggest that those US spies that do get caught get hung, since spying is illegal in most countries. I bet the US would cry foul there! The US loves rules that suits itself, and if it fucks any other country over, so be it. That's why the US is so despised throughout the world, and you better believe it, it is. And that despise is growing, year by year, with more and more people disliking the US. If I sound anti US, I proudly am. Of course, if I was in America and said this, i'd be branded a terrorist and arrested and hidden away and tortured by the CIA no doubt. So much for freedom of speech! Dave

>Fine but quit whining that stupid hysterical laws like Kyoto keep getting shot down.

Kyoto wasn't shot down. Every country with any leadership whatsoever ratified it. I'm sure it's pure coincidence that a president who is completely in bed with the oil industry would shoot down a treaty that calls for reduced greenhouse gas emissions.

>The idea that man is causing global warming is laughable.

Only by those who refuse to pull their heads out of their asses.

>As is the pathetic insistence that it is real in spite of whatever logic and REAL science is applied to your histrionics.

Pull your head out of there and have a look around sometime.

Harvard tries to make up for it by giving away good grades to practically everyone.

You couldn't be more wrong. My worldview was completely affirmed by the events of 911. That so many people were taken in by such a transparent charade is the frightening thing. But you go ahead and believe that the terrorists are under your bed. Won't change anything really. Simple-minded people always need something external to be frightened of. It helps them rationalise their bigotry.
Ahhh, the classic condescending liberal. Simple-minded people eh? I'm still laughing over your fallacious statement. At first I was surprised to read this, but then the effect quickly subsided. You see, you're bigotry is a constant affirmation of just how hypocritical you libs really are. It's just...SAD!
Which is why the world must resist American imperialism as much as possible. Since WWII, American behaviour on the world stage has deteriorated to the point where it is completely unconscionable. That is, no one of conscience can stand it any longer. Sure, the racist, the bigoted, the xenophobic, and the just plain greedy love it as long as they receive the benefits. But those people don't count the cost, either to others or their fellow citizens.
Oh I get it now! You're for peace, but against the means to obtain it. The very notion that you would stand up against America's goal to rid the world of terrorism and oppression makes you an enemy of mankind. Based on your post, I would say the statement of "the racist, the bigoted, the xenophobic" clearly apply to YOU. How you can come to the conclusion that its Americas fault for the current events (such as terrorism) in this world is sophistry.
So which terrorist organisation was based in Iraq?
Was??? More like IS. Have you not been paying attention to the news? We have terrorist blowing up car bombs outside of Iraqi (not American) police stations, abducting innocent international civilians and sawing their heads off in the most barbaric of ways. Keep in mind that these terrorist activities will only increase the closer Iraq gets to democratic election time. If you must know one thing, know this. The terrorists do NOT want a democratic Iraq. They know the moment Iraq becomes a democracy is the moment they lose power and control over the majority of the people.
Just for clarification, let me provide you with the definition of terrorism according to Dictionary.com.
Terrorism: "The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons"
And no, America does not fall into the definition of a Terrorist organization simply because the vast majority of Iraqis want our help. It's sad I even have to point this out. But being that you hate America, I feel I must.
Would you care to back that statement up with some facts?
I'm going to attempt this from a different angle. First, take a look at this article. http://www.commondreams.org/views/100100-102.htm
Now, please read this one. http://www.heritage.org/Research/TradeandForeignAi d/wm630.cfm
Do you noticed something wrong with the over all picture? I do. Libs will often attack America for it's lack of contribution based on sol monetary value given by it's government alone. Yet, the dirty little secret your never told is the amount of donations by the private sector and donated man power from both military (oh ya, that's evil. How could I have forgotten *sarcasm*) and the Peace Corps.
Speaking of aid, did you know that it was America who was the first to physically (not monetary) bring aid to Indonesia the moment news got loose regarding the tsunami. Now you may criticize the initial 15 million proposed by Bush. However, at the time it was still unknown how much damage there really was. So to this day, the ca

Well, he may not be a religious leader, but he's a religious leader: George W Bush, for starters. I'm told his administration has severely cut funding abroad for birth-control initiatives which even slightly chafe with his own religious convictions.

For instance if an organisation puts out literature on birth control which even mentions the word 'abortion', they're automatically de-funded. this is a side-effect rather than a direct effect but it stems directly from religious conviction.

Admittedly this is not a direct problem, but a consequence of a web of relationships.

I'm also told that numerous muslim "scholars" have spoken out against condom use.

Still, these major reports are the tip of the iceberg - regional religious authorities are far more likely to go against it than national or global ones which may have to respond to international attention.

And let's not even start on the falwells of this world that believe AIDS is God's Will

Hope I dont come across as insulting but the bottom line is it is a class war. The example of Saddam Hussein killing Turks and Kurds was the same thing, those with power and money wanting to put down Iran. They used Saddam, gave him the horrible weapons he used against both Irani soldiers and Iraqi civilians. It doesnt matter if the perps were solely from the Reagan administration or the Thatcher administration or the French or Russian. The bottom line is and was that human beings (western ppl like you and eastern ppl like the poor iraqi and irani saps) are considered expendable and unless we the people stop allowing those in power to use us we (regardless of which nation state we belong to) will continue to be killed to further someone elses agenda. I hope I didnt sound patronizing but from where I stand, Bush Blair Saddam the Saudi leaders Ariel Sharon , the late Arafat are all equally culpable and all equally evil. Please read the following if/when you have some spare time.
Mesopotamia. Babylon. The Tigris and Euphrates by Arundhati Roy
Instant-Mix Imperial Democracy (Buy One, Get One Free) by Arundhati Roy

OK, I'll bite. I don't give a shit about my karma, no one here listens to me anyway.

Why does the religion of peace need special instructions on how to act civilized?

Because all religions do.

Why is the religion of peace directly responsible for 28 out of the 30 violent conflicts raging in the world today?

'God told me to strike at al-Qaida and I struck them, and then He instructed me to strike at Saddam'
-- George W. Bush

Why is the religion of peace responsible for the vast majority of terrorism in the 20th and 21st Centuries?

Because terrorist groups were funded by western powers such as the CIA, France and Israel.

Why are the practitioners of the religion of peace routinely slaughtering unarmed practitioners of every other religion wherever they can get away with it?

Oh, really?

Why does the religion of peace call for the murder of anyone who converts from the religion of peace to another religion?

Because the religion of peace is slightly less peaceful than other monotheist religions, but not much. And just like not all Muslims are like Mullah Omar, maybe not all Christians are like Pat Robertson, either.

Why do so many of the believers of the religion of peace look forward to the opportunity to rape 72 virgins in heaven if they die while killing innocent women and children of other religions?

Maybe the whole concept of going to heaven for being obedient to some guy in the clouds is fucking retarded in the first place.

Why do the leaders of the religion of peace routinely issue fatwas (death warrants) for anybody who questions their holy book of peace and their holy prophet of peace?

See #6.

Why is the religion of peace responsible for the sexual mutilation of millions of little girls and the savage oppression of women?

No it doesn't.

Why did millions of the practitioners of the religion of peace laugh, cheer and dance in the street because 3,000 innocent men, women and children were murdered by seventeen men who supposedly hijacked the religion of peace?

You must be referring to the other religion of peace.

And why dont the real practitioners of the religion of peace condemn the supposed hijackers of their religion?

Because their websites were shut down by the FBI days before 9/11.

Frankly, I'm an atheist and I don't care about religion, but I'm sick of people being hypocrites. Are we going to use the excuse of the oh so evil Political Correctness to dehumanise the Muslims, as it happened to the Jews in Europe before the Holocaust? History has shown that there is far more to fear from fascism that grows in mass hysteria induced by propaganda than scarecrows used by chickenhawks to justify imperialism.

As far back as 1981, the British Royal Navy tested a top secret weapon system called 'Laser Dazzle Sight,'(LDS). and they used it during the Falklands War where high speed, wave-skipping Argentinean pilots, met a dazzling array of laser beams designed to blind them.

According to this Royal School of Artillery paper 'The most likely choice of lasers for a dazzle weapon would be
Argon (458 - 515 nm, blue/green) or Ne YAG freq doubled(532 nm, green).'

According to the Federation of American Scientists In the 1970's it was claimed that Chinese soldiers were blinded by Soviet-built laser systems during the China-Vietnam war. During the Iran-Iraq War, over 4,000 Iranian soldiers sustained injuries due to Iraqi laser systems. Throughout the 1980's, the Soviet Union were long suspected of directing lasers at US spyplanes. Today anti-personnel laser weapons are inexpensive, sold openly by the Third World, have line-of-sight aiming, and are capable of producing catastrophic results if used against aircrews and sensors in flight.

In 1989 a US-USSR bilateral agreement imposed restrictions on the use of low-energy lasers. In 1989 the International Committee of the Red Cross called for multi-lateral controls.

On 13 October 1995 the Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons (Protocol IV) was proposed. In 1998 it became international law but Human Rights Watch is concerned that the US is developing Dazzle weapons that do not cause permanent blindness and would circumvent the blinding weapons agreement.

Now while the threat from laser weapons are real, I think the odds are greater that a real terrorist would use a man portable anti-aircraft missle.

And you say 'fuck them' to the ones who don't give a shit? Really? These people are just trying to survive. Saddam didn't kill any of their family. But the US/UK did. No wonder they're pissed. If apathy is such a problem - what about abroad? What percentage of americans voted? Have you ever heard of the eugenics program a few decades back? No american I've ever met personally has, but these sorts of atrocities were committed with government backing until 1963 . They are just as wrong. Or how about Guantanamo Bay? Or the fact that the only two countries who chose to censor the torture of POWs at Abu Ghraib (until everyone else had printed them, then the cat was out of the bag) were the US and Iraq , whose media was at the time under the control of... the US?

Of course I am assuming that you are american. If not, let me know and I will tailor the response to your own country. I am from the UK and I know our history is just as bad over the last 100 years, and worse over the last 1000 years.

Interesting. For me, and most people in the world, a US military base would be absolute bottom on any list of worries. Especially the one at Diego Garcia, given its history. It's been cleansed already of its rightful inhabitants by the leaders of the free world; it would be fitting if the military base got wiped out too.

Everyone talks about how horribly insecure the touchscreens are.

But in a lot of counties that didn't use them, the results from things like optical scanners were still stored and calculated using GEMS. Which is not too secure.

Read that, and then read this.

The problems weren't with touchscreens. They were with GEMS, though. But whoever hacked Florida knew enough to not mess with touchscreens: they went right to the source, and that's also why it wasn't spotted.

And we've all seen this, about the Democrats trying to not let Diebold supply the voting machines to Ohio, after their CEO stated that he was "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the President next year"?

I'm still confused as to why no one (in mainstream America) seems to care at all. There was blatant fraud going on, particularly in Florida counties.

Everyone talks about how horribly insecure the touchscreens are.

But in a lot of counties that didn't use them, the results from things like optical scanners were still stored and calculated using GEMS. Which is not too secure.

Read that, and then read this.

The problems weren't with touchscreens. They were with GEMS, though. But whoever hacked Florida knew enough to not mess with touchscreens: they went right to the source, and that's also why it wasn't spotted.

And we've all seen this, about the Democrats trying to not let Diebold supply the voting machines to Ohio, after their CEO stated that he was "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the President next year"?

I'm still confused as to why no one (in mainstream America) seems to care at all. There was blatant fraud going on, particularly in Florida counties.

To me, the murder of children -- wherever it occurs -- secures a higher priority of national concern than some dog yapping at the feet a naked terrorist.

So we have not only a straw man going on, but also a falsehood. Saying the murder of children is a higher priority is a distraction. Why bring up that it's not a "high priority" and then proceed to argue about it?

And how about the fact that these "naked terrorists" are mostly innocent civillians (according to ICRC) ? Would you feel different if it was your son or father this happened to?
And you are ignoring the fact that a lot worse was done that "dog yapping at the feet". Inmates of Abu Grhaib have been murdered and raped.

Soon, it will be China and India that you're pointing fingers at, and not the US (or Europe).[1]

So... Then what?

And uh, is this news? Does anyone credible seriously disagree that emissions from human activity are at least in part contributing factors? Or is this another jab at boogiemen that don't exist? There's nothing "remarkable" about these so-called findings.

Also, the "Earth" isn't in danger. Yes, I know this distinction is splitting hairs, but what's in danger is Earth's inhabitants. Our actions are not going to alter a several billion year old rock.

[1] Don't feed me the per capita shit. China will be a far, far greater polluter in this realm, per capita or no. Further, the economic empowerment of the Chinese people will eventually drive them to a level of concern about the well-being of the environment, so, in a way, their accelerated economic development is a good thing, politically and environmentally. Incidentally, China has proven they can reduce greenhouse emissions, even while growing economically (1, 2)...but the point is, they're still on an upward trend. And they've got a lot more people who will begin to thirst for energy-hungry luxuries.

just goes to show you liberal ideology is wrong. throwing more money at something doesn't fix the problem.

Hello, we appear to have sent your talking points to the wrong address. "Throwing more money at something" is now part of the conservative ideology.

Sorry for the oversight.

-GWB

There was a nice article by Frank Rich in the NYTimes on this, but unfortunately, you would have to pay to read it now.

Just in case you have a subscription or don't mind the price: The Great Indecency Hoax

Oh, wait! There's a free copy here.

Even though most of the "news" is not properly fact checked, and is blindly accepted as true, I have issue with the article that says:

Indeed, big-ticket acts like Metallica and Don Henley have famously denounced illegal file sharing. And the Recording Industry Association of America, which has filed thousands of lawsuits against individual file-sharers, often invokes musicians as prime movers in its crusade.

Metallica, yes, Don Henley, dunno.

Metallica can continue to charge $75+ for half full concert venues (vs $35 and sold out, no pun intended).

Don Henley on the other hand is no sympathizer for the RIAA.

The Eagles have their own recording company and they are not RIAA members.

Also, this url, http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0217-01.htm, has more info straigh from Don Henley's mouth (pen, keyboard, whatever).

Im very surprised that noone has replied to you yet on this matter, but the gas and bio weapons Saddam used in 1991/1992 against the Kurds was purchased from the US and the UK in the 1980s, including the ability to produce more of them. Yes, the vast majority of WMD that we are looking for in Iraq are tehre because we sold them to Iraq. It is true that Germany and France also took part, as did Russia and China, but for the 1980s WMD were commonly traded arms, and the US was one of the biggest traders in them.

Source
Source
Source
Source
Source
Source
Source
Source
Source
Source

46% of Oklahomans voted against this law, so I don't know how the opposition was all out-of-town astroturfers or that there was "no opposition". Wal-Mart is who is coordinating the national effort, and their financial contributions regarding this are a matter of public record. I also know that the campaign for this was primarily focused on evangelical churches, just as Coburn's recent campaign was and Inhofe's before him, especially in rural eastern Oklahoma.

As far as it being a good law or not, it depends on a variety of factors. If you have a lot of money, it is a good law, if you don't make much money, it is a bad law. I would say that it is a bad law economically for 80% of the population, a good law for 1% of the population, and for 19% of the population its sort of a wash.

What the law does is imposes government regulation on contracts between unions and businesses. It declares that unions and businesses can not come to certain types of agreements. It is not even a free market bill, since in a free market a union and business would be able to come to any type of contract they want. This makes it illegal for employers to come to certain agreements with unions which favor the union. It's the government helping big business screw workers. And 54% of Oklahomans voted for it, praise the Lord.

The Bush administration has emasculated environmental laws, and government oversight of industry.

Check out Robert F. Kennedy's book Crimes Against Nature for a shocking appraisal of the current administration. Another book summary.

They pervert science to meet the needs of the big business/polluters.

The end result is that we are at risk. Rates of childhood asthma are way up, carcinogens in the air and water are increasing. They do this under the guise of small government, and deregulation. But, what it really amounts to is a ticket for their big contributors to bypass any responsibility to the people and the environment.. essentially a backdoor tax on you and me - someone eventually needs to deal with the problems they create. Either in cleaning up the messes, cleaning polluted resources like water and air, or paying medical costs resulting from their contaminants. That financial burden gets passed to the tax payers, since Bush/Cheney have given industry a free pass, rolled back regulations, eliminated oversight, and killed any enforcements.

If you think the way they came in and dismissed the problems with Microsoft was bad, you should look into what they did with companies the Clinton administration was prosecuting for environmental issues. They are ten times more egregious.. Companies that cause billions in damage in environmental accidents get most charges dropped, and fines of less than $10,000.

I think you would find some of the articles and speeches of the "moral" resistance fighters interesting.

That's a weak propaganda tactic -- I never called the resistance fighters moral. One can state that killing is never a moral act, or at least that's what we learn from Christ's words.

What I said was the resistance holds the moral position of defending their own country against an unprovoked invasion by a foreign aggressor.

I'm just not sure where you can access them on the unclassified web.

Am I supposed to be wowed because you claim to have access to some classified web? Wow. How 3733t.

Collateral damage is regrettable.

Please spare me your CNN spin-speak. Talk English. Don't use language to obfuscate, use language to describe things accurately. Call it what it is. It is not "collateral damage", it's dead and wounded civilians that we're talking about.

We'll again conveniently ignore the strict rules of engagement that we operate under

I'm sure, at some times, some soldiers do have strict rules of engagement. But that certainly isn't the case all the time.

For example, this SF Chronicle article cites a lieutenant giving his soldiers rules of engagement before a patrol of "Shoot to kill. No questions asked."

Or as this British Guardian newspaper article reported about the US attack on an Iraqi wedding party, as one woman stated of her firsthand experience, "We went out of the house and the American soldiers started to shoot us. They were shooting low on the ground and targeting us one by one....I fell into the mud and an American soldier came and kicked me. I pretended to be dead so he wouldn't kill me." The Guardian confirmed this with multiple eyewitnesses and among the 42 dead were many women and children. While the US military claimed that the wedding party was a military target, video taken during the party and afterwards proved otherwise. No one was ever prosecuted for those murders, though the military claimed to be "investigating" the matter.

Or how about the military's rules of engagement that shooting looters was fine? Or the current rules of engagement that anyone out after curfew can be shot on sight?

Or what about the military's actions in Fallujah? In Australia, the Sydney Morning Herald notes a few war crimes of the US military. The US attacked hospitals (to keep them from being used as propaganda -- another words, to keep the doctors from saying how many civilians are being killed) which is a clear violation of the Geneva Conventions. There are many reports that inside Fallujah the rules of engagement allowed for free fire zones. The US purposely did not allow any males from teenagers to old men to leave Fallujah, instead preferring to slaughter them inside the city. The US deliberately cut off water and electricity to a city of 300,000+ for weeks -- impacting both resistance fighters and mothers and children alike.

But of course, thanks to a neutered US corporate mass media, few people know the extent of the war crimes of the US military. What gets reported is the mere execution of one prisoner because it was caught on video. And like the Abu Ghraib torture, the military is allowed to claim it was just a "bad apple."

Rules of engagement, please.

>"But the bottom line is that the US/UK invasion is illegal and without justification."

In your opinion.

No, not just in my opinion. Let's get this straight: The vast majority of the people of the world consider the US/UK invasion to be illegal and immoral.

Even large majorities of people in the UK oppose (and opposed) the invasion.

Everyone from the Pope to the Dali Lama to the UN Secretary General has declared the invasion illegal and immora

I think you would find some of the articles and speeches of the "moral" resistance fighters interesting.

That's a weak propaganda tactic -- I never called the resistance fighters moral. One can state that killing is never a moral act, or at least that's what we learn from Christ's words.

What I said was the resistance holds the moral position of defending their own country against an unprovoked invasion by a foreign aggressor.

I'm just not sure where you can access them on the unclassified web.

Am I supposed to be wowed because you claim to have access to some classified web? Wow. How 3733t.

Collateral damage is regrettable.

Please spare me your CNN spin-speak. Talk English. Don't use language to obfuscate, use language to describe things accurately. Call it what it is. It is not "collateral damage", it's dead and wounded civilians that we're talking about.

We'll again conveniently ignore the strict rules of engagement that we operate under

I'm sure, at some times, some soldiers do have strict rules of engagement. But that certainly isn't the case all the time.

For example, this SF Chronicle article cites a lieutenant giving his soldiers rules of engagement before a patrol of "Shoot to kill. No questions asked."

Or as this British Guardian newspaper article reported about the US attack on an Iraqi wedding party, as one woman stated of her firsthand experience, "We went out of the house and the American soldiers started to shoot us. They were shooting low on the ground and targeting us one by one....I fell into the mud and an American soldier came and kicked me. I pretended to be dead so he wouldn't kill me." The Guardian confirmed this with multiple eyewitnesses and among the 42 dead were many women and children. While the US military claimed that the wedding party was a military target, video taken during the party and afterwards proved otherwise. No one was ever prosecuted for those murders, though the military claimed to be "investigating" the matter.

Or how about the military's rules of engagement that shooting looters was fine? Or the current rules of engagement that anyone out after curfew can be shot on sight?

Or what about the military's actions in Fallujah? In Australia, the Sydney Morning Herald notes a few war crimes of the US military. The US attacked hospitals (to keep them from being used as propaganda -- another words, to keep the doctors from saying how many civilians are being killed) which is a clear violation of the Geneva Conventions. There are many reports that inside Fallujah the rules of engagement allowed for free fire zones. The US purposely did not allow any males from teenagers to old men to leave Fallujah, instead preferring to slaughter them inside the city. The US deliberately cut off water and electricity to a city of 300,000+ for weeks -- impacting both resistance fighters and mothers and children alike.

But of course, thanks to a neutered US corporate mass media, few people know the extent of the war crimes of the US military. What gets reported is the mere execution of one prisoner because it was caught on video. And like the Abu Ghraib torture, the military is allowed to claim it was just a "bad apple."

Rules of engagement, please.

>"But the bottom line is that the US/UK invasion is illegal and without justification."

In your opinion.

No, not just in my opinion. Let's get this straight: The vast majority of the people of the world consider the US/UK invasion to be illegal and immoral.

Even large majorities of people in the UK oppose (and opposed) the invasion.

Everyone from the Pope to the Dali Lama to the UN Secretary General has declared the invasion illegal and immora

I think you would find some of the articles and speeches of the "moral" resistance fighters interesting.

That's a weak propaganda tactic -- I never called the resistance fighters moral. One can state that killing is never a moral act, or at least that's what we learn from Christ's words.

What I said was the resistance holds the moral position of defending their own country against an unprovoked invasion by a foreign aggressor.

I'm just not sure where you can access them on the unclassified web.

Am I supposed to be wowed because you claim to have access to some classified web? Wow. How 3733t.

Collateral damage is regrettable.

Please spare me your CNN spin-speak. Talk English. Don't use language to obfuscate, use language to describe things accurately. Call it what it is. It is not "collateral damage", it's dead and wounded civilians that we're talking about.

We'll again conveniently ignore the strict rules of engagement that we operate under

I'm sure, at some times, some soldiers do have strict rules of engagement. But that certainly isn't the case all the time.

For example, this SF Chronicle article cites a lieutenant giving his soldiers rules of engagement before a patrol of "Shoot to kill. No questions asked."

Or as this British Guardian newspaper article reported about the US attack on an Iraqi wedding party, as one woman stated of her firsthand experience, "We went out of the house and the American soldiers started to shoot us. They were shooting low on the ground and targeting us one by one....I fell into the mud and an American soldier came and kicked me. I pretended to be dead so he wouldn't kill me." The Guardian confirmed this with multiple eyewitnesses and among the 42 dead were many women and children. While the US military claimed that the wedding party was a military target, video taken during the party and afterwards proved otherwise. No one was ever prosecuted for those murders, though the military claimed to be "investigating" the matter.

Or how about the military's rules of engagement that shooting looters was fine? Or the current rules of engagement that anyone out after curfew can be shot on sight?

Or what about the military's actions in Fallujah? In Australia, the Sydney Morning Herald notes a few war crimes of the US military. The US attacked hospitals (to keep them from being used as propaganda -- another words, to keep the doctors from saying how many civilians are being killed) which is a clear violation of the Geneva Conventions. There are many reports that inside Fallujah the rules of engagement allowed for free fire zones. The US purposely did not allow any males from teenagers to old men to leave Fallujah, instead preferring to slaughter them inside the city. The US deliberately cut off water and electricity to a city of 300,000+ for weeks -- impacting both resistance fighters and mothers and children alike.

But of course, thanks to a neutered US corporate mass media, few people know the extent of the war crimes of the US military. What gets reported is the mere execution of one prisoner because it was caught on video. And like the Abu Ghraib torture, the military is allowed to claim it was just a "bad apple."

Rules of engagement, please.

>"But the bottom line is that the US/UK invasion is illegal and without justification."

In your opinion.

No, not just in my opinion. Let's get this straight: The vast majority of the people of the world consider the US/UK invasion to be illegal and immoral.

Even large majorities of people in the UK oppose (and opposed) the invasion.

Everyone from the Pope to the Dali Lama to the UN Secretary General has declared the invasion illegal and immora

Pencil marks don't smudge. Ink does. That's why we use pencils. Unless the detection device is a wad of rubber, the pencil marks will remain, if they were put there correctly.

I'm not sure I agree with you there. I can smudge a pencil mark off with my sweaty finger, especially if it isn't made very dark. Pencil is, after all, just graphite and clay pressed together. A quick Google search on "pencil smudges" finds at least a few sites about handwriting and pencils that agree with me. I think you can agree it is harder to smudge off a laser printed ballot, right?

Having watched people follow "idiot-proof" input methods, I don't think that having input methods that disallow invalid entries solves the problem. All it does is make the problem less easy to see, because now we have what looks like a valid ballot. An invalid ballot is an indication of some other problem, and forcing the voter to create a valid ballot only hides that problem.

Instead, your solution leads to "spoiled" ballots, and every ballot that is "spoiled" leads to a cry of "I've been disenfranchised!" or "The <winning party> has cheated!" (note: I'm not making any statement as to the validity of these claims - valid or not, I would just like to have fewer spoiled ballots, and therefore fewer chances for either this type of problem to occur or to be claimed by the loser.)

It is impossible for an input method to disallow certain choices without also assisting the user in making a choice. That assistance will always bias towards some result.

Again, your system allows someone to mark both candidate A and candidate B, and doesn't alert them to this, and essentially throws their vote away as spoiled. I don't think it would be biased to warn the voter that their choice is invalid, reset it so there is NO choice for that office (which is what you would do by spoiling their ballot) and telling them they should choose one candidate again. The two possible outcomes are A) no vote is cast (same as a spoiled ballot) or B) they actually choose one candidate. How is that biased?

i believe if you parse my sentence correctly you will realize that i subtly said that perhaps America is not civilized and, therefore, might not view turkey's actions as wrong. however, civilized people would find turkey's actions disturbing and therefore i will consider myself civilized, rather than american.

as a side note, my first thought was to say "western eyes" but then i remembered ghandi's quote about "western civilization" being a good idea. if you parse that correctly, he is saying the west is not civilized but it would be a good idea for it to become civilized. so instead, i wrote civilized eyes.

i think the most arrogant thing i ever heard was barbara bush (W's overbearing mother) on good morning america: "why should we hear about body bags and deaths, oh, i mean, it's not relevant. so why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that?"

These kinds of scary FUD stories come up again and again, but the problem is not world production, it is a distribution problem. So while US farmers are payed to produce too much food and while thousands of tonnes of food go to rot in Canada, African's are left to starve.

The real obstacle to the world's food issues have far more to do with economics, politics and popular will rather than the production capacity of the planet. Perhaps this won't be a big deal anyway, the UN forcasts that the earth's population will begin to decline in our lifetimes

If I had to guess why the reported totals favored Bush over the poll tapes, I would say it is likely due to the fact that Bush had an enormous advantage in absentee ballots, which weren't counted until days later. Once again, it's a silly conspiracy theory and nothing more.

I'm talking specifically about the numbers reported on November 2nd by the poll tapes printed directly from the polling place machines at the close of voting. This is what was requested in the public records request.

Can you please link to whereever it is you are getting this misleading information? People "throwing out" vote totals? Please link. The preloaded voting machines were out of Pennsylvania, a state that John Kerry won handily, which renders it a non-issue. I do agree, though, that if there is legitimate voter fraud, it should be investigated and the offenders should be prosecuted regardless of who it helped or where it happened. I think those "preloaded" votes were satisfactorily explained. Trust me, when I first heard about them it set off big alarm bells with me as well.

OK, it is now obvious that you did not see the link I provided in the original post titled Vote Fraud Smoking Gun. Let me sumnarize it for you. Non-partison auditors made a public records request for the signed Nov 2nd poll tapes from Volusia county, They received unsigned poll tapes that were claimed to be reprints of the original tapes. They demanded the originals, and upon arriving at the records building where they were stored discovered panic filled election officials throwing out the signed and dated poll tapes. Upon comparing these tapes with the 'reprints' they discovered significant differences 'indicative of fraud' favoring Bush in every single precinct examined. Most of this was caught on video tape and police were even present for much of it, so this can hardly be discounted as baseless rumors.

I am not screaming that Bush stole the election, there is just not enough hard information to say that. But there is now solid evidence of major fraud in Florida - real evidence, not just statistical studies - and that means we should investigate further and find out how far the corruption reaches. Even if it did not effect the election this time, it is a serious problem that needs fixing. Let us not forget that localized voter fraud might not tip a Presidential election, but it certainly does (and has) tipped local elections and congressional races. My goal in making noise about this is not to overturn the current election, but to fix the system for the future.

Here that link is again

If I had to guess why the reported totals favored Bush over the poll tapes, I would say it is likely due to the fact that Bush had an enormous advantage in absentee ballots, which weren't counted until days later. Once again, it's a silly conspiracy theory and nothing more.

I'm talking specifically about the numbers reported on November 2nd by the poll tapes printed directly from the polling place machines at the close of voting. This is what was requested in the public records request.

Can you please link to whereever it is you are getting this misleading information? People "throwing out" vote totals? Please link. The preloaded voting machines were out of Pennsylvania, a state that John Kerry won handily, which renders it a non-issue. I do agree, though, that if there is legitimate voter fraud, it should be investigated and the offenders should be prosecuted regardless of who it helped or where it happened. I think those "preloaded" votes were satisfactorily explained. Trust me, when I first heard about them it set off big alarm bells with me as well.

OK, it is now obvious that you did not see the link I provided in the original post titled Vote Fraud Smoking Gun. Let me sumnarize it for you. Non-partison auditors made a public records request for the signed Nov 2nd poll tapes from Volusia county, They received unsigned poll tapes that were claimed to be reprints of the original tapes. They demanded the originals, and upon arriving at the records building where they were stored discovered panic filled election officials throwing out the signed and dated poll tapes. Upon comparing these tapes with the 'reprints' they discovered significant differences 'indicative of fraud' favoring Bush in every single precinct examined. Most of this was caught on video tape and police were even present for much of it, so this can hardly be discounted as baseless rumors.

I am not screaming that Bush stole the election, there is just not enough hard information to say that. But there is now solid evidence of major fraud in Florida - real evidence, not just statistical studies - and that means we should investigate further and find out how far the corruption reaches. Even if it did not effect the election this time, it is a serious problem that needs fixing. Let us not forget that localized voter fraud might not tip a Presidential election, but it certainly does (and has) tipped local elections and congressional races. My goal in making noise about this is not to overturn the current election, but to fix the system for the future.

Here that link is again

I, for one, believe in this electronic voting machine conspiracy crap. Sure, a few voting machines probably rigged the votes for Bush, but on the other hand, most likely other voting machines rigged it for Kerry.
I think you are missing the point that the manufactures of the voting machines are all strong republican backers, and the two main swing states, Florida and Ohio, both have partisan republicans running the vote counting process. The Democrats would not even have the opportunity to rig the vote in any significant way in those states.

If you have not checked out the article I referenced earlier I really recommend it. It points to potential 'systemic' fraud that could add up to many hundreds of thousands of votes in florida alone. Repeat the tactic in a bunch of non-swing states just to pad the popular vote... and you have a recipe for a stolen election.

It helps when over third of the population is voting on touchscreen voting machines with no paper trail, particularly when they are manufactured by a company with strong republican ties, and a history of fraud and criminal activity.

I am not saying that it definetely happed, just that it is not impossible, and that the early signs of fraud are enough to justify further investigation. We are talking about the fundimental underpinnings of our democracy here. I say that is worth a little extra digging just be sure. The cost of being wrong is just too high.

What's to stop them from changing the code on enough of the machines to win? We'd never know what happens after we inspect the code. In the right area they COULD possibly win with only a handful of doctored machines.

It is already certain that vote fraud occured in an alarming number of isolated cases. The only question now is if it occured and went undetected in enough places to actually swing the election. Here are a few of the things we already know for certain:

In several districts, electronic voting machines were preloaded with thousands of votes for Bush before the election started. Where it was discovered, the machines were reset and did not effect the outcome. The question is, in how many districts did this go undetected because voter protection advocates were not there to check the machines.

In at least one case, a location in which only about 600 people voted recorded over 4000 votes for Bush. No explanation has been given for this, though it is likely another example of 'pre-loaded' machines.

In at least one local election, a manual recount of the ballots swung the vote total by a large amount compared to what the electronic vote machines had reported, enough to move the winner from the republican candidate to the democrat.

But the biggest smoking gun is in Florida's Volusia county where election offitials were caught red handed throwing out the official signed poll tapes from Nov 2nd. When these tapes were compared to the reported vote numbers, they showed that votes had been added to Bush's total IN EVERY SINGLE PRECINCT EXAMINED. If this was done in many more Florida precincts, it could explain the eight point swing between the exit polls showing Kerry winning and the official tally showing a Bush win. We must at least acknowledge the possibility, and insist on a full audit of the Florida results... not just a recount done by the same Florida partisans, but full, impartial audit.

Muslims in the US actually have more freedoms than any in the world, including the Arab world.

Those in Guantanamo Bay deserve to be there. They were caught committing crimes against humanity. They are not prisoners of war.

And generals are not talking about "crusade". Those are Osama's words.

Islam once was thought of a peaceful religion. Now its thought of as a cult, no more than the gothic mysticism that Hitler tried to foist on the German people.

They thought that the US was like Russia, weak and inept. They didn't count on George Bush. That's why he won.

Yes, they'll (DARPA) probably install it on the brand new remote controlled sharks.

See: Captain America:Superhero of the Military-Industrial Complex

And now what do we get? We're the fucking Arrogant Northeast Liberal Elite? How about this for arrogant: the South is the Real America? The Authentic America. Really?

Cause we fucking founded this country, assholes. Those Founding Fathers you keep going on and on about? All that bullshit about what you think they meant by the Second Amendment giving you the right to keep your assault weapons in the glove compartment because you didn't bother to read the first half of the fucking sentence? Who do you think those wig-wearing lacy-shirt sporting revolutionaries were? They were fucking blue-staters, dickhead. Boston? Philadelphia? New York? Hello? Think there might be a reason all the fucking monuments are up here in our backyard?

No, No. Get the fuck out. We're not letting you visit the Liberty Bell and fucking Plymouth Rock anymore until you get over your real American selves and start respecting those other nine amendments. Who do you think those fucking stripes on the flag are for? Nine are for fucking blue states. And it would be 10 if those Vermonters had gotten their fucking Subarus together and broken off from New York a little earlier. Get it? We started this shit, so don't get all uppity about how real you are you Johnny-come-lately Oooooh I've been a state for almost a hundred years dickheads. Fuck off.

Arrogant? You wanna talk about us Northeasterners being fucking arrogant? What's more American than arrogance? Hmmm? Maybe horsies? I don't think so. Arrogance is the fucking cornerstone of what it means to be American. And I wouldn't be so fucking arrogant if I wasn't paying for your fucking bridges, bitch.

All those Federal taxes you love to hate? It all comes from us and goes to you, so shut up and enjoy your fucking Tennessee Valley Authority electricity and your fancy highways that we paid for. And the next time Florida gets hit by a hurricane you can come crying to us if you want to, but you're the ones who built on a fucking swamp. Let the Spanish keep it, it's a shithole, we said, but you had to have your fucking orange juice.

The next dickwad who says, It's your money, not the government's money is gonna get their ass kicked. Nine of the ten states that get the most federal fucking dollars and pay the least ... can you guess? Go on, guess. That's right, motherfucker, they're red states. And eight of the ten states that receive the least and pay the most? It's too easy, asshole, they're blue states. It's not your money, assholes, it's fucking our money. What was that Real American Value you were spouting a minute ago? Self reliance? Try this for self reliance: buy your own fucking stop signs, assholes.

Let's talk about those values for a fucking minute. You and your Southern values can bite my ass because the blue states got the values over you fucking Real Americans every day of the goddamn week. Which state do you think has the lowest divorce rate you marriage-hyping dickwads? Well? Can you guess? It's fucking Massachusetts, the fucking center of t

And now what do we get? We're the fucking Arrogant Northeast Liberal Elite? How about this for arrogant: the South is the Real America? The Authentic America. Really?

Cause we fucking founded this country, assholes. Those Founding Fathers you keep going on and on about? All that bullshit about what you think they meant by the Second Amendment giving you the right to keep your assault weapons in the glove compartment because you didn't bother to read the first half of the fucking sentence? Who do you think those wig-wearing lacy-shirt sporting revolutionaries were? They were fucking blue-staters, dickhead. Boston? Philadelphia? New York? Hello? Think there might be a reason all the fucking monuments are up here in our backyard?

No, No. Get the fuck out. We're not letting you visit the Liberty Bell and fucking Plymouth Rock anymore until you get over your real American selves and start respecting those other nine amendments. Who do you think those fucking stripes on the flag are for? Nine are for fucking blue states. And it would be 10 if those Vermonters had gotten their fucking Subarus together and broken off from New York a little earlier. Get it? We started this shit, so don't get all uppity about how real you are you Johnny-come-lately Oooooh I've been a state for almost a hundred years dickheads. Fuck off.

Arrogant? You wanna talk about us Northeasterners being fucking arrogant? What's more American than arrogance? Hmmm? Maybe horsies? I don't think so. Arrogance is the fucking cornerstone of what it means to be American. And I wouldn't be so fucking arrogant if I wasn't paying for your fucking bridges, bitch.

All those Federal taxes you love to hate? It all comes from us and goes to you, so shut up and enjoy your fucking Tennessee Valley Authority electricity and your fancy highways that we paid for. And the next time Florida gets hit by a hurricane you can come crying to us if you want to, but you're the ones who built on a fucking swamp. Let the Spanish keep it, it's a shithole, we said, but you had to have your fucking orange juice.

The next dickwad who says, It's your money, not the government's money is gonna get their ass kicked. Nine of the ten states that get the most federal fucking dollars and pay the least... can you guess? Go on, guess. That's right, motherfucker, they're red states. And eight of the ten states that receive the least and pay the most? It's too easy, asshole, they're blue states. It's not your money, assholes, it's fucking our money. What was that Real American Value you were spouting a minute ago? Self reliance? Try this for self reliance: buy your own fucking stop signs, assholes.

Let's talk about those values for a fucking minute. You and your Southern values can bite my ass because the blue states got the values over you fucking Real Americans every day of the goddamn week. Which state do you think has the lowest divorce rate you marriage-hyping dickwads? Well? Can you guess? It's fucking Massachusetts, the fucking center of the gay marria

And now what do we get? We're the fucking Arrogant Northeast Liberal Elite? How about this for arrogant: the South is the Real America? The Authentic America. Really?

Cause we fucking founded this country, assholes. Those Founding Fathers you keep going on and on about? All that bullshit about what you think they meant by the Second Amendment giving you the right to keep your assault weapons in the glove compartment because you didn't bother to read the first half of the fucking sentence? Who do you think those wig-wearing lacy-shirt sporting revolutionaries were? They were fucking blue-staters, dickhead. Boston? Philadelphia? New York? Hello? Think there might be a reason all the fucking monuments are up here in our backyard?

No, No. Get the fuck out. We're not letting you visit the Liberty Bell and fucking Plymouth Rock anymore until you get over your real American selves and start respecting those other nine amendments. Who do you think those fucking stripes on the flag are for? Nine are for fucking blue states. And it would be 10 if those Vermonters had gotten their fucking Subarus together and broken off from New York a little earlier. Get it? We started this shit, so don't get all uppity about how real you are you Johnny-come-lately Oooooh I've been a state for almost a hundred years dickheads. Fuck off.

Arrogant? You wanna talk about us Northeasterners being fucking arrogant? What's more American than arrogance? Hmmm? Maybe horsies? I don't think so. Arrogance is the fucking cornerstone of what it means to be American. And I wouldn't be so fucking arrogant if I wasn't paying for your fucking bridges, bitch.

All those Federal taxes you love to hate? It all comes from us and goes to you, so shut up and enjoy your fucking Tennessee Valley Authority electricity and your fancy highways that we paid for. And the next time Florida gets hit by a hurricane you can come crying to us if you want to, but you're the ones who built on a fucking swamp. Let the Spanish keep it, it's a shithole, we said, but you had to have your fucking orange juice.

The next dickwad who says, It's your money, not the government's money is gonna get their ass kicked. Nine of the ten states that get the most federal fucking dollars and pay the least... can you guess? Go on, guess. That's right, motherfucker, they're red states. And eight of the ten states that receive the least and pay the most? It's too easy, asshole, they're blue states. It's not your money, assholes, it's fucking our money. What was that Real American Value you were spouting a minute ago? Self reliance? Try this for self reliance: buy your own fucking stop signs, assholes.

Let's talk about those values for a fucking minute. You and your Southern values can bite my ass because the blue states got the values over you fucking Real Americans every day of the goddamn week. Which state do you think has the lowest divorce rate you marriage-hyping dickwads? Well? Can you guess? It's fucking Massachusetts, the fucking center of the gay marria

Tell that to France. They have a GREAT nuclear program, AND lower energy costs. The generate over 75% of their electricity from nuclear power.

1. Did you even read your own link? It says "France has been one of the slowest countries in the EU to open its electricity and natural gas sectors to competition in line with EU regulations." Why? Because they are not competitive. In fact "In France, the nation that made the biggest investment in nuclear energy, the national utility, Electricite de France, is carrying a $30 billion debt, mostly because of its nuclear investments"

"And while French nuclear advocates like to praise the nation's cheap domestic power prices, in reality, when compared to 10 other European Union nations, France ranks fifth in domestic power prices. In fact, since 1985, France's electricity prices have seen the smallest decrease in the EU. And while four new reactors are under construction there, none have been initiated since 1996."

Your link also says: "French government organized a national energy policy debate, which focused on determining France's energy mix for the next 30 years, particularly the status of nuclear power and the future role of renewables...Key of the aspects of the white paper included: increasing the use of renewables..."

Smart engineers are able to solve problems....they leave that to management.

2. You read too much Dilbert. Engineering is finding the best solution to a constellation of problems. Those problems include cost, schedule, profit, economics, safety, nuclear proliferation, waste disposal, operational reliability, etc. etc. etc. If you think you can develop a 100% perfect system (not 6 nines, or 9 nines, or whatever, but perfect) you are naive and potentially dangerous to those who use your products. You have two technological design options, one where the stakes are VERY high no matter how unlikely, but has NO advantages over the other path, which tromps it on almost every measure. Would you pick the first one? Just cause its technologically wizbang geeky?

Nuclear proliferation...Pretty much a non-issue,

3. Don't you even read the news? How did North Korea build their nuclear weapons? With a breeder reactor built for power generation. Many other countries have followed this same formula, A nuclear power plant is the fast track to nuclear weapons. Read, learn. (Try "Nuclear Choices", MIT press for a nonbiased technical but down to earth read).

For example, solar power is definitely NOT cheaper than nuclear power on any meaningful scale.

4. Wrong. On capital costs alone solar is competitive with nuclear, and after you consider operational costs, security cost, waste disposal costs, decommissioning costs, and etc - solar tromps it. Nuclear cost $2/W in capital cost alone. New photovoltaic technologies are being produced for $1/W, and wind hydro and geothermal even less, never mind all the other "hidden" external costs of nuclear. In fact, nuclear After a trillion-dollar taxpayer investment, it delivers little more U.S. energy than wood. Globally, it produces less energy than renewables."

That's a policy issue not a technical one. Let the gov't build the plants then

5. Of course its not a technical issue. Technically Nuclear power works just fine. But outside of science experiments, just because something is cool doesn't mean it should be done. It would be cool to freeze your arm in liquid nitrogen, hit it with a hammer and watch it shatter to