Slashdot Mirror

> We have a messed up society.

What the US has is a constitutionally protected gun business.

There are more than 20 US manufacturers of guns. This business is worth about $30 billion a year (
http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2013/0103/A-look-at-America-s-gun-industry).

The US market for guns is more than 300 million people. Gun ownership in Canada and the UK, to cite figures from nations that have gun-control laws, is at about 30%. Gun ownership in the US is at about 80%.

So, the probability of a gun in the US being in the hands of a crazy person is very high.

The probability of a gun in the US being in the hands of a person who will *go crazy* at some point is also high.

The guns won't go away -- there are too many of them now, and a profitable, constitutionally protected gun business with a huge market will do whatever it must to keep producing and selling.

The only practical options for gun ownership are

constraints on types of weapons and quantity of ammunition for citizens, and
annual psychological testing of gun owners.

In short, political suicide.

Since Australia enacted stricter gun control laws after a horrible mass shooting in 1996 there hasn't been one since:

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-Pacific/2012/1224/Could-the-US-learn-from-Australia-s-gun-control-laws

So you tell us again this won't fix the problem. Go ahead.

Columbine happened during the previous assault weapons ban. So you can tell yourself again, that it will fix the problem... Go ahead.

Since Australia enacted stricter gun control laws after a horrible mass shooting in 1996 there hasn't been one since:

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-Pacific/2012/1224/Could-the-US-learn-from-Australia-s-gun-control-laws

So you tell us again this won't fix the problem. Go ahead.

Because we are not Australians! Different culture, and we have drugs and gangs like no where else in the civilized world.

Since Australia enacted stricter gun control laws after a horrible mass shooting in 1996 there hasn't been one since:

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-Pacific/2012/1224/Could-the-US-learn-from-Australia-s-gun-control-laws

So you tell us again this won't fix the problem. Go ahead.

Okay then, this won't fix the problem. Australia != America.

Or with a bomb.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

To date, this remains the deadliest school killing. The guy had a gun, but chose explosives.

I'm not going to pitch in on this emotional debate, save to point out that if you outlaw guns, crazy people will still find ways to kill other people, and in mass numbers.

That may be exception to the rule, instead of statistically significant. Gun-control laws in Australia show different results:

Though gun-related deaths did not suddenly end in Australia, gun-related homicides dropped 59 percent between 1995 and 2006, with no corresponding increase in non-firearm-related homicides.

From: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-Pacific/2012/1224/Could-the-US-learn-from-Australia-s-gun-control-laws

There's more than a decade of experience with "they will use something else for mayhem" not proving to be true. I agree most of the NY law is just plain dumb, but if any positive change is going to be made we have to throw out the dumb notions and misconceptions on both sides.

Since Australia enacted stricter gun control laws after a horrible mass shooting in 1996 there hasn't been one since:

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-Pacific/2012/1224/Could-the-US-learn-from-Australia-s-gun-control-laws

So you tell us again this won't fix the problem. Go ahead.

Parts of IT need trades / apprenticeships not just schools like the one listed they are good for high level design but not so much for day to day desktop / sysadmin stuff.

Also CS is not IT it's more for high level design / coding.

Also way to much is put on the college degrees even harvard says that.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Education/2011/0202/Does-everyone-need-a-college-degree-Maybe-not-says-Harvard-study

I guess that nails it. But the link I found also refers to the option of capitalizing the entire prefix: "AL Qathafi", which was (one of!) the spellings used by his ex-web site. Also, the wikipedia article on the Gadafi also lists middle names.

or a skeptic of $prevailingOpinionOnHighlyPoliticizedTopic in the scientific community.

*yawn* The only people still denying AGW are not "skeptics" they are people who have a political or economic reason to deny it. Especially in light of this, this and this. These are people who were specifically trying to disprove everyone else and instead confirmed the prevailing stance the "politicized topic".

Sorry, but the last remaining industry shills trying to proclaim AGW as not true are being intentionally dishonest.

Yes, thats exactly what it is. Todays world has new tools for propaganda apart from newsspin.
This game portrays the Syrian fight against terror in simplistic black and white just like most mainstream media likes to show it.
However, nothing in this world is as simple as that.
What you will not see in that game is:
* leading Syrian terrorist group Jabhat al-Nusra (categorised so by none other than US of A)
* daily beheadings done by islamist rebels (aka al-Qaeda)
* teaching beheadings to their children (will not post link as anyone can find it if (s)he so wishes)
* daily kidnappings for ransom by islamist rebels (aka al-Qaeda)
* killing of christians en masse by islamist rebels (aka al-Qaeda)
* destruction of churches by islamist rebels (aka al-Qaeda)
* all war crimes imaginable, mostly by islamist rebels

Just some links:
Fate of Christians in Syria
US designates Syria's Jabhat al-Nusra front a 'terrorist' group at lightning speed
#OpSyria v.2.0

I wholeheartedly agree. If the corporate media starts brainwashing people, be it for commercial gain or under political pressure, they usually succeed.
Why should simple people question mass-media? They have neither the information nor mental abilities to confront such power.

Also take a look at Alex Thomson at Channel 4 and Robert Fisk at the Independent.
Both are veteran British journos and both are actually raportinf FROM Syria. Not sitting in some comfortable chair 4000 km away.

Yes, thats exactly what it is. Todays world has new tools for propaganda apart from newsspin.
This game portrays the Syrian fight against terror in simplistic black and white just like most mainstream media likes to show it.
However, nothing in this world is as simple as that.
What you will not see in that game is:
* leading Syrian terrorist group Jabhat al-Nusra (categorised so by none other than US of A)
* daily beheadings done by islamist rebels (aka al-Qaeda)
* teaching beheadings to their children (will not post link as anyone can find it if (s)he so wishes)
* daily kidnappings for ransom by islamist rebels (aka al-Qaeda)
* killing of christians en masse by islamist rebels (aka al-Qaeda)
* destruction of churches by islamist rebels (aka al-Qaeda)
* all war crimes imaginable, mostly by islamist rebels

Just some links:
Fate of Christians in Syria
US designates Syria's Jabhat al-Nusra front a 'terrorist' group at lightning speed
#OpSyria v.2.0

Make crap up? Instead of sounding like a dick, you should have attempted to correct me in a more polite manner. Do you talk that way to your family, friends or coworkers? I doubt it, Mr condescending internet know-it-all tough guy.

Here are my articles:
http://olive-drab.com/od_army-horses-mules_lastpack.php
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/Decoder-Wire/2012/1023/Presidential-debate-101-Does-US-military-still-use-horses-and-bayonets
http://usmilitary.about.com/od/jointservices/a/militarydogs.htm
http://www.defense.gov/home/features/2006/working-dogs/

Limit your Google search to the past year only and you will get articles talking about robot mules. Robot mules are being developed to support front line troops starting with the marines. And If you actually read your links you would have noticed that they are dated from 2007, or 5 years ago. They also only describe their use by special forces in unique situations (mountainous regions in Afghanistan). There are no plans for deploying pack animals as ground support to front line troops (AKA grunts or ground pounders). Horses are used but their number is minuscule and limited to special forces and parades. That means you wont find grunts riding horses nor will you see mules delivering supplies to solders on the battle field.

Think before you speak.
 

Contrary to what you'd think from what politicians say, Israel is not a treaty ally.

also today:
the EPA has banned BP from federal contracts.

Already pretty much debunked because an older, longer calendar exists, but you can always give me all your earthly belongings, just in case.

Re KGB visions:
COINTELPRO (Counterintelligence Program) is the well known one. e.g..
So you http://www.businessinsider.com/richard-masato-aokis-history-with-the-black-panthers-2012-8
In the 1990's you had Code-named PATCON, "Patriot-conspiracy," http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/04/18/patriot_games
A lot of created groups controlled top down.
From the UK you have long-term sexual relationships with political activists.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/nov/21/met-police-spies-women-undercover
Antiwar groups in the USA seem to face the same old party tricks of facial recognition, OCR of any plates of parked cars near a meeting, the young 20 something who wants direct action, the older louder person with 'experience' who wants direct action... or the young woman who knows someone who has great ideas about direct action...
As for cyber groups - recall http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2012/0306/Anonymous-unmasked-hacker-ringleader-turned-FBI-informant - seems to be the same old turn, top down control, wait, raid ideas.

Amen! I've been waiting for years for people to recognize the need for some actual collaboration once in a while. Even Klingons have a saying about it. "Only a fool fights in a burning barn."

Today the Christian Science Monitor also published a great list of specific steps that could create more collaboration in Washington and end the uncompromising gridlock.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2012/1107/After-Obama-win-how-civility-can-come-to-Washington

Kosovo was also "a region within Serbian sovereign territory", but when the Serbs started to wipe out the locals - which, according to you, they had full rights to, as a sovereign country - their whole country was pounded much worse than Georgia.

By "you", I assume you mean the US government, which I assure did not represent my personal views in the matter, and whose executive at the time was an asshole I voted against in the previous presidential election, right?

Get a grip: the US has an internal revolution every 4-8 years; we just do it peacefully, rather than by lobbing shells between the red and blue states. You might want to try it some time.

You guys really don't "get" Democracy yet, do you? So the majority of you elected an asshole, Gamsakhurdia. Georgia has Parliamentary elections every three years; ignore the inflammatory rhetoric from the asshole, and work to get a majority for some other party in the next election in 3 years. Problem solved.

The foreign power in question built the barracks because it was part of a peacekeeping force that was officially accredited as such by the joint commission from all sides of the conflict after the last war. Said agreement was not formally withdrawn by Georgia until September, i.e. after the conflict. Ironically, the commander of the Georgian battalion of the same peacekeeping force received orders to participate in the take-over of the city (and carried them out).

If you can't resolve the conflict internally, then an internally accredited peacekeeping force isn't going to be able to do it either. Appeal to the UN for intervent. There appear to be 189 countries willing to back that, including 3 of the 5 permanent UN security council members, and as of that date, 6 of the remaining 10 non-permanent serving members would probably voted for a resolution as well, if only to piss Putin off.

Yes, I understand the commonly held view that Russia pushes a lot of money into controlling the outcome of the elections in neighboring states - http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2012/1001/Beware-Russia-s-hand-in-elections-in-Georgia-Ukraine-Lithuania - but the answer to this is that you have to refuse to be bought, and call out those who are willing to accept the payola.

Actually, they have tried to make teacher strikes illegal in certain cases. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Education/2012/0912/Chicago-teachers-strike-Illegal-under-Illinois-law

Don't worry, they'll be able to tell if you're scratching you're balls, or reaching for a remote control switch, because they'll be simultaneously bathing subjects in backscatter x-rays, to see through their clothes and vehicles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backscatter_X-ray
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0929/Feds-radiating-Americans-Mobile-X-ray-vans-hit-US-streets

That, and they'll also have a personality profile and social index built off of your online activity, since they surreptitiously identified you with facial recognition technology.

See http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0103/p01s04-woap.html, for example.

In a Stalinist personality cult, deities are treated as threats to society because they compete with the authority of the infallible leader. These systems are atheistic only in the most literal, technical sense, because the leader acts as a God-substitute in all ways but the purely spiritual.

North Korea takes the above idea and mingles it with spirituality as well. Their official state faith is more like some sort of wacky variant on ancestor worship than a classical theistic religion.

Ultimately it doesn't matter whether you're living in Pyongyang, North Korea or Lynchburg, Virginia. Faith-based bullshit corrodes civilization.

"The 1980's are calling for their foreign policy back" -- Barack Obama :)

That wouldn't be fair to the Russians. After all, they are still spinning up the old Soviet practices, aping the Cold War, and they apparently aren't done with them yet. It certainly appears that the Russians would rather be the enemy than be ignored.

Russia restarts Cold War patrols
Report: Russia may base bombers in Cuba
More Russian bombers flying off Alaska coast
Report: Russian Nuclear Attack Sub Patrolled Waters Off Gulf for a MonthUndetected
Canada does not like Russian nuclear bombers patrolling Arctic territory
Japanese, South Korean jets trail Russian bombers over Pacific
UK jets greet Russian bombers
New Russian Anti-Missile Facility Opens in Kaliningrad
Russia claims new missile can overcome missile defenses

No, that's wrong. It attacked the nuclear enrichment facility responsible for producing heavy water. If you didn't know, it's a different set of equipment to produce heavy water for nuclear weapon, the concentration in heavy water has to be an order of magnitude higher.

Actually, it attacked centrifuges, necessary for enriching Uranium. The Iranians had been putting a lot more of them into operation to obtain both more Uranium, and more highly enriched Uranium. Funny, they turned down offers to get enriched Uranium from other nations. It is almost as if they had something to hide, such as exactly how much Uranium of what enrichment they were producing. The only reason they would be likely to do that would be if they intended to do something unauthorized, like build bombs. By the way, heavy water isn't actually used in nuclear weapons themselves, although tritium is used in boosted and thermal nuclear weapons.

The Stuxnet cyberweapon may have destroyed as many as 1,000 Iranian nuclear-fuel centrifuges – more than one-tenth of the Natanz uranium enrichment plant's capacity – in late 2009 and early 2010, according to a recent report by a nuclear arms-control watchdog group - - Stuxnet attack on Iran nuclear program came about a year ago, report says

--

That's really too bad that you got your facts wrong in the first place.

Funny, I was thinking the same about you.

Not just Early Engines..

Let's see, there was the Titan IV which took out a facility at Edwards AFB on April Fools Day in 1991. Now that was an Air Force engine, but fairly modern. There was another Titan IV which exploded in more spectacular fashion.

Recently, we have the NASA Morpheus Lander Explosion.

Then there's the Delta II, which is a newer launch system which has exploded at least twice that I'm aware of. Once in 1995 and another in 1997.

The point is that NASA and the Air Force and their various subcontractors, SpaceX not included, don't have a perfect record on launch vehicle malfunctions. You can't have lots of propellant with oxidizer burning without some sort of malfunction. While still rare, these events can and do happen and it's good to see SpaceX plan for these kinds of things unlike the Soviets did when their Moon Rocket went "boom" when they were testing in the 60s In Fact, all four launches of the N-1 were failures.

You have to remember that the person may have been too shocked to push the button.

For example, a NASA project launched by balloon damaged a bunch of property and endangered members of the public. This could have been avoided by the guy who was supposed to trip the failsafe release for the balloon. But he didn't do so even though it pulled a crane through a fence and an SUV. Story is that he was paralyzed by horror through the accident and just failed to act.

The fact that he has spoken at length in multiple speeches against this film, without one word in support of the concept that even hateful speech is Free Speech and protected in America.

Let me guess, you get all your news from Fox News and Youtube?

I say that because he you are completely wrong.

Here are a two news sources you may want to check out.

http://www.csmonitor.com/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world/us_and_canada/

Which makes even more bemused by this poll:

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/Decoder-Wire/2012/0627/Alien-attack!-Americans-pick-Obama-over-Romney-to-battle-invasion-from-space

Please, will the sensible and non-crazy muslims please stand up already and disown these lunatics?

But not to protest would be blasphemy, you could be convicted for it. Hell, if this law takes affect we might all have to do a Muzzie and riot or risk prosecution.

Nope. See http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/Latest-News-Wires/2012/0921/While-Arctic-melts-Antarctic-ice-hits-record.-Is-warming-debunked

Yes, Antarctica seems to be at record highs in ice levels. Hansen is just being sensationalistic, as normal.

Sorry bro, small organic farms that use intensive growing methods produce equal or greater yields that GM crops without fertilizers or pesticides.

That's funny, bro, I read an interesting recent article that would seem to disagree.

Everybody has an opinion about how the government should be run, but nobody can seem to take the time to learn how the government actually is run. This is an across the board sequestration of government spending not a spending cut aimed at NASA.

There's this common perception that throwing money at education will solve the problem. History has shown that this isnt true. Why is it that charter schools get better results with fewer resources? It's simple: they don't have teachers unions. Teachers unions allow them to get high pay for doing a shit job.

There are also the common misperceptions that a) charter schools are better and b) teachers unions have anything to do with school results. You should probably reinvestigate your position about charter schools: This study is already a couple of years old but it's very telling. More recent studies have also shown that on average their results are on par with the public school system but often times worse, so I'm not sure how you can say that the existence of teachers unions has anything to do with current school results if there are few, if any differences between systems that do and do not have these unions.. Also, since throwing money at education isn 't the solution, as you say, then taking money away from (already underpaid) teachers and allotting it to the school system would have little to no effect anyway.

To make things even more interesting, it was overdubbed to be as offensive as it is. The original seems to be some kind of college project, using bad green-screen sets with bad acoustics. You can tell which bits were overdubbed because they sound better than the original.

If you watch closely, you can see that when the actors are reading parts of the script that do not contain Islam-specific language, the audio from the sound stage is used (the audio that was recorded as the actors were simultaneously being filmed). But anytime the actors are referring to something specific to the religion (the Prophet Muhammed, the Quran, etc.) the audio recorded during filming is replaced with a poorly executed post-production dub. And if you look EVEN closer, you can see that the actors’ mouths are saying something other than what the dub is saying.

For example, at 2:53, the voiceover says “His name is Muhammed. And we can call him The Father Unknown.” In this case, the whole line is dubbed, and it appears the actor is actually saying, “His name is George (?). And we can call him The Father Unknown.” I assume the filmmakers thought they were being slick, thinking that dubbing the whole line instead of just the name would make it more seamless and less noticeable to the viewer. But once you start to look for these dubs, it’s hard to see anything else.

Has no one else been wondering why Germany is being seen as a utopia with all of the answers, recently?

No. Germany is a prosperous western nation. Germany has its budget deficit under control. Germany has its trade balance under control. Germany financial laws minimized exposure to toxic debt. As a result, the effects of collapse of the debt bubble in '07-08, the so-called financial crisis, were much more limited in Germany, amounting to a total bailout liability of only about 5.5% of GDP. The costs to other western nations was/is much higher.

Among the many effects of this is that Germany still has the luxury of indulging new social programs. It is also the go-to repository of wealth whenever one of the unproductive and misgoverned PIGS needs to be propped up which gives Germany a great deal of influence in the EU.

In my opinion Germany has all of these things for three basic reasons;

First, Germany has managed to keep its spending under control. There are many public benefits and a great deal of wealth redistribution in Germany, but the Germans don't tolerate large accumulations of debt; if the revenue of the German treasury can't fund it the dependents don't get it. That includes the medical system and the education system.

Second, Germany has an industrial policy that isn't subject to certain veto by pressure groups and their civil lawsuits. This means Germany can make choices, like replacing nuclear reactors with renewable, coal or anything else they decide to use and it doesn't get killed by some judge. This attracts capital.

Finally, Germany protects its domestic industry and workers from unrestrained competition with Asia. Trade unions, businesses and governments can all, independently, pursue importers in court to enforce Germany's sovereign trade laws, and they do so with high frequency. This all somehow happens without statist punditry crying 'oh noes trade war!' The result is Germany has a fully developed industrial base and workforce that is very attractive to capital.

Wealth is important. Germany has consistently sustained real wealth creation since the end of of the Second World War through hard nosed trade policy, credible industrial policy and sound fiscal governance. It doesn't surprise me that Germany has earned some respect.

> None of the target audience for this device will care

Plenty of people care about force fed ads.

Some people will even pay to avoid them or just buy someone else's product.

This isn't about Free Software religion. This is a hardware vendor blatantly abusing the customer. In an era where technology is allowing us to filter out or avoid ads entirely, it's a pretty stupid move.

Amazon is selling the hardware below their cost, in part because of the ads. How is that abusing the consumer? It's not like it's the first product in the world that's subsidized by ads, but in this case it's a luxury product that's easy to opt out of. It's much harder to opt out of things like buses and bus shelters covered by ads

Oh, and they offer a 30 day return guarantee for the device - if you turn it on and feel abused by the ads, you can box it up and return it for a full refund.

I think you're misreading their target market - they aren't targeting the sophisticated user that's uses (or has even heard of) ad blocking software, they are targeting the rest of the market (the users that don't read Slashdot), where users aren't so offended by ads. The more sophisticated user probably isn't going to buy a Kindle, or if they do, they are just going to run CM on it (and will enjoy the ad subsidized price without actually having to view the ads, so everyone wins -- those that don't care about ads will see them, and those that care enough to block them can do so).

Why do you still keep coming to Slashdot since ads are prominently featured on the site (and not just a "lock screen" that's only active when you're not using the site)? You're forced to use blocking technology to block the ads if you don't want to see them. From your post, you sound like one of the many people that care about being force fed ads, yet you continue to patronize a website that force feeds ads to you (even more obtrusively than the Kindle).

No but I am in the habit of pointing out fallacies

Google censors apps. Not very well, but they do

http://www.csmonitor.com/Innovation/Horizons/2012/0202/Google-Bouncer-tasked-with-taking-on-Android-malware

yeah it's Malware again, but Google does it. They are not an honourable company anymore than MS or Apple are.

Now you made me bring MS into it!

And the countries we would prefer to turn into a flat landscape of radioactive glass... have oil but no fresh water.

Maybe you're not aware of what's under the ground where this man walked... oh yeah, and this guy also. This should enlighten you what this "Arab Spring" was really about.

If you honestly believe that the Obama administration is going to be using Predator drones against ordinary American citizens, you are so whacked out that it is beyond belief.

Various local governments are already using to spy on Americans; is this so far-fetched?

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2012/0616/Drones-over-America.-Are-they-spying-on-you

Reminds me of the stupidity of Bill Richardson with respect to Great Lakes water.

Guns are banned in many parts of Europe and even in countries where they are banned, gunmen open fire on crowds, e.g.:

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Latest-News-Wires/2011/1214/Belgium-gunman-also-killed-a-cleaning-woman

So:

D) Get an illegal gun, because no gun ban in the history of the entire world ever, anywhere, in any time nor place, has ever been meaningfully successful at keeping guns out of the hands of nutjobs.

This from an anti-Muslim hate site. No supporting citations to their numbers, but they promise to "supply sources upon request". Instead of each item linking to some citation, they link to other pages on the anti-Muslim hate site that says the exact same thing as the item.

I decided to test your assessment. I took the first six news items they listed:

The List of Islamic Terror Attacks from 2012
2012.06.18 Pakistan Quetta 5 69 Five Shiite students are blown to bits by Taliban bombers.
2012.06.18 Afghanistan Tagab 6 13 At least six locals are exterminated when religious extremists detonate a bomb at a bazaar.
2012.06.17 Nigeria Trikania 5 40 A Shahid suicide car bomber crashes through a church gate and blows up at least five Christians.
2012.06.17 Iraq Fallujah 6 12 Two children are among six slain by Jihadi bombers.
2012.06.17 Nigeria Zaria 34 125 Holy Warriors walk into two church services and detonate, leaving over thirty worshipers dead in the carnage, including at least ten children.
2012.06.16 Pakistan Landi Kotal 26 65 Sharia advocates detonate a truck bomb amid a crowd at a market, sending over twenty-six souls to Allah.

And this is what I found after a minute or less of Google news search for each - reasonable evidence for each of the six items listed.

Pakistan Bus Bombing Kills Students In Quetta
Blast in French-controlled Afghan town kills six
Islamists Bomb Three Churches in Kaduna State, Nigeria
Iraq bombings kill four, wound 32
At least 50 dead in three Nigeria church bombings, reprisal attacks
Around the World

Now then, the links below are from a side bar labeled "News" on the front page. Apparently the sites you complain about as being hate sites include Reuters, the BBC, the CS Monitor, The Telegraph, the Emirates 24/7, and other lesser lights. In short, you are full of baloney - to be polite about it.

Massachusetts Man Pleads Guilty in Toy Plane Bomb Plot...
Kenyan Muslims Help Guard Churches Following Attacks...
British Muslims Accused of Plotting EDL Massacre...
Islamists Pool Forces to Kill African Christians...
Iran Seeks to Legalize Marriage for Girls Under 10...
Clerics in Egypt Call for Pyramids to be Destroyed...
(Egypt) Unaccompanied Woman Spotted on Train, Quickly Raped...
Sword-Wielding Imam and Wife Brought Down by Police...

http://www.csmonitor.com/Innovation/2011/1220/Google-invests-94-million-in-California-solar-farms Oh, wait...

khipu laid out plenty of facts and 2 minutes crawling the net would confirm everything he says.

How much data do you need? If you need everything referencing, here's about 5 minutes worth:

Healthcare cop-out:

Cut a secret deal to kill the public option, while campaigning on its behalf
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/miles-mogulescu/ny-times-reporter-confirm_b_500999.html

Cut a deal to exempt abortion services from health care reform
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/03/21/deal-struck-on-abortion-clears-path-for-health-care-passage/

Pushed for a 5 year prison term for Charles Lynch, the operator of a medical marijuana dispensary, legal under California law
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/04/21/BA1V175SB9.DTL

Granted waivers for 30 companies, including McDonald's, exempting them from health care reform
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/health/2010-10-07-healthlaw07_ST_N.htm?loc=interstitialskip

Warmonger:

Sent 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8389778.stm

Successfully protected Bush officials from prosecution for torture
http://washingtonindependent.com/33985/in-torture-cases-obama-toes-bush-line

Proposed a three year freeze on domestic spending, exempting cuts from the Pentagon and Homeland Security
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/26/obama-allies-struggle-to_n_436996.html

Argued that the widespread use of Predator drones is a justifiable form of self-defense
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/03/drone-attacks-legit-self-defense-says-administration-lawyer/

Revived "Prompt Global Strike" weapons system, considered too controversial by Bush Administration
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/04/obama-revives-rumsfeld-era-missile-scheme/

Backed off on his promise to close the prison at Guantanamo
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/26/us/politics/26gitmo.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

Extended the Patriot Act without making any reforms
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2010/0301/Obama-signs-Patriot-Act-extension-without-reforms

Cronyism:

Violated his own ban on lobbyists working for the administration
http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/promise/240/tougher-rules-against-revolving-door-for-lobbyists/

Sided with utility companies in lawsuit to stop greenhouse gas emissions
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/08/26/obama-stance-on-climate-suit-stuns-allies/

Gave permits to BP and other oil companies, exempting them from environmental protection laws
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/14/us/14agency.html

Appointed Lawrence Summers as his top economic advise

khipu put plenty of facts forward, and 2 minutes on google would confirm everything he says.

Here you go, some facts with references:

Cut a secret deal to kill the public option, while campaigning on its behalf
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/miles-mogulescu/ny-times-reporter-confirm_b_500999.html

Granted waivers for 30 companies, including McDonald's, exempting them from health care reform
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/health/2010-10-07-healthlaw07_ST_N.htm?loc=interstitialskip

Continued renditions of alleged terrorists to countries where they could be tortured
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/25/us/politics/25rendition.html

Blocked the release of photos documenting the torture and abuse of detainees by the US military
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/05/president-oba-5.html

Continued the practice of indefinite detentions for alleged terrorists
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/21/AR2009052104045.html

Extended the Patriot Act without making any reforms
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2010/0301/Obama-signs-Patriot-Act-extension-without-reforms

Pushed for mandatory DNA testing of those arrested for crimes, regardless of whether they have been convicted
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34097.html

Dramatically increased government secrecy, blocking more FOIA requests in 2009 than Bush did in 2008
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/16/obamas-broken-promise-fed_n_500526.html

Cut a deal to exempt abortion services from health care reform
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/03/21/deal-struck-on-abortion-clears-path-for-health-care-passage/

Announced a $60 billion sale of arms to the Saudi Arabian dictatorship, the largest arms deal in history
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_162-20016181-503543.html

About 6 minute's worth

Uhh, anyone remember the BP oil spill ? I guess no one can forget that. It's clear with that attempt to stop the oil spill, any organisation or company didn't know how to stop it.

Oh they knew exactly how to stop it. It's a simple hydrodynamics problem. You need to drill a relief well to inject mud down at the bottom where there's zero ambient pressure, rather than trying to force it down through oil exiting at 10,000 psi at the top. But a relief well would take months to drill, and every day the spill continued was driving BP's reputation and stock price lower and lower. So they had to put together a dog and pony show of wild ideas and hail mary schemes during those months which had virtually no chance of succeeding but would give the public the sense that they were doing something until the relief wells were finished.

That's why it seemed like they were flailing around impotently and all the ideas to stop it failed one after another. Things like "junk shot" were just PR moves to deflect criticism, not expected to actually succeed. The only realistic solution were the relief wells. (Well, the blowout preventer was supposed to prevent it too, but apparently it encountered a situation it was not designed for and ended up about 7% short of the force needed to sever and seal the pipe as they were designed to do.)

What you said seems to me to deflect attention away from the main issues:

Another war? You will be poor. Want to be unemployed? Support more deficit spending. War is destructive to economies everywhere. The right things, that make life better, don't get made.

War investors want war. People like the Bush and Cheney families that have investments in war companies want more war.

Most violent nation: By some measures, the U.S. government is the most violent that has ever existed (for example, most countries invaded, highest percentage of citizens in prison).

The U.S. government is not the U.S. people. The U.S. government often engages in secret violence, apparently partly to encourage other violence. Secrecy cannot be democratic, because the people have no power if they don't know what the government is doing.

Nuclear fuel suppliers want to stop competition. Those who supply uranium fuel for reactors don't want Iran competing with them.

Jewish destructiveness is not new. Jews haven't gotten along with the surrounding people for the last 3,700 years, according to their own history books.

Jews want U.S. taxpayers to pay for defending them against the enemies they have made everywhere. If U.S. taxpayers learned how much taxpayer money is given to Israel every year, they would protest.

Encouraging Jewish violent behavior is anti-Jewish. Those who want war are not being religious. They just want war.

Get a few facts: Iran's nuclear program: 4 things you probably didn't know

it was on an isolated network, they just somehow got the malware on a thumb drive that was brought into the facility.

If you think they aren't going to use boats and explosives, you are probably wrong (for example). I have no doubt they will try to use anti-ship missiles as well, but speedboats are too attractive as a weapon. Of course they will use them.

But then there's the law of unindented consequences. It seems that states that ban texting see an increase in accidents. People who text continue to text but do so by putting their hands in their lap, which is even more dangerous. So be careful what you wish for.

Full article