Slashdot Mirror

I also laughed at the TFAs, with the picture of the Vodka and Red Bull on the other TFA...and what about those Jager-bombs?

But, it could be another front on the war on energy drinks. Google searching for "Red Bull kid death", looking for an article about how excessive energy drinks are causing health problems in kids, yields this first propaganda hit. But all it takes is one of these to get pusilanimous parents in an uproar.

But I'll admit that those drinks are bad. They almost always but taurine and ginseng and other shit into them to increase the synergistic effects, and they taste like by-products from a meth lab.

One of the TFAs also says that Sparks drinks have been discontinued, but they're still readily available in my state, and there's no shortage of them. But the worst(best?) one is Joose.

Oh, I did not watch Tuesday's The Daily Show until now, so I missed this clip, which is extremely relevant to our discussion. Hannity's clip can be found on FOX's website. The switch starts at 1:30 (watch the foliage and the amount of people).

Let me paraphrase you:

So the question becomes: Why did FOX's editing room use footage of a DIFFERENT event? The answer becomes obvious when you listen to the overvoicing (sic) from the host and a guest that appears regularly in FOX's programs - the previous event had a higher turnout, closer to the numbers claimed in the voiceover.

That's reminiscent of what propagandists did in former Eastern Europe.
- They didn't blatantly lie. [or did they?]
Instead they distorted the truth, with creative video edits and voiceovers.

Now, you may claim that Stewart is "accusing FOX of a distortion that is not a distortion. HE'S the one who is deliberately not telling the truth." In other words, that TDS did a creative video edit to make it seem like FOX did something that they didn't do.

Unfortunately for you that's not the case. The situation was so clear and embarrassing that Sean Hannity had to acknowledge it on air. He says that it was "an inadvertent mistake, but a mistake nonetheless". I hope that you are not so gullible as to think that it was indeed a mistake. This was as much a mistake as MSNBC cutting the footage to conceal a man's skin color.

But of course distorting the truth in this way is not new for FOX. Here you have a brief compilation of several other instances in which FOX clearly used deceptive techniques such as "creative video edits and voiceovers" to push their agenda, every one of them as egregious as MSNBC's sleazy trick you linked to. Except that the main message in that case was true (white men with guns, one with an AR-15, were at the event), while in most (all?) of these cases the main message is the deceptive one (e.g., the event had a far less turnout than what the commentators claimed and the images showed).

Of all the media in the present-day USA, FOX is the one that most frequently resorts to tactics reminiscent of what propagandists did in former Eastern Europe.

I would love to see how you rationalize everything you said in your posts now. Really. I expect an answer from you.

Did Fox Noise cover this incident? Check their search engine. The answer is no (although they did cover a similar issue with Indymedia in 2004). Why not? Maybe, just maybe, no one except /. readers and 1st Amendment lawyer types thought it was a very interesting story. You'll notice that the link in the story is to a blog that covers 1st Amendment issues on a CBS News site, an outfit that is not exactly a darling of the right. Also, RTFA! EFF tried to discuss the issue of the gag order in a letter filed at the end of May. Given it has been 5 months with no response from DOJ, maybe Indymedia and EFF are only just now considering it safe and legal to release the story.

Not everything is a left-wing media conspiracy except to reality-challenged bozos like yourself who can't be bothered to think beyond whatever sound bite you were handed this morning.

This also means that other news outlets cannot display clips of Glenn Beck saying foolish things or fact check a FoxNews story...Then, when Fox News describes their reporting as fact checking, then it becomes a story of "he said/she said".

I doubt if Murdoch wants to block Google's access at all (he'd need a morons.txt file instead). He wants them to pay: this would give the hit-count of a free-access google-indexed site (preserving advertising rates), but the direct revenue per view of a paywalled site.

His web admins and business managers probably understand robots.txt quite well, and have made it consistent with their business intentions. Just for giggles, here is the robots.txt from Fox News:

User-agent: *
Disallow: /printer_friendly_story
Disallow: /projects/livestream
#
User-agent: gsa-crawler
Allow: /printer_friendly_story
Allow: /google_search_index.xml
Allow: /google_news_index.xml
Allow: /*.xml.gz
#
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_search_index.xml
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_news_index.xml

Note that there are entries explicitly allowing the Google indexers...
FWIW, that's the first time in years that I've looked at anything at a fox site.

I doubt if Murdoch wants to block Google's access at all (he'd need a morons.txt file instead). He wants them to pay: this would give the hit-count of a free-access google-indexed site (preserving advertising rates), but the direct revenue per view of a paywalled site.

His web admins and business managers probably understand robots.txt quite well, and have made it consistent with their business intentions. Just for giggles, here is the robots.txt from Fox News:

User-agent: *
Disallow: /printer_friendly_story
Disallow: /projects/livestream
#
User-agent: gsa-crawler
Allow: /printer_friendly_story
Allow: /google_search_index.xml
Allow: /google_news_index.xml
Allow: /*.xml.gz
#
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_search_index.xml
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_news_index.xml

Note that there are entries explicitly allowing the Google indexers...
FWIW, that's the first time in years that I've looked at anything at a fox site.

Even Fox is saying robots.txt:

User-agent: *
Disallow: /printer_friendly_story
Disallow: /projects/livestream
#
User-agent: gsa-crawler
Allow: /printer_friendly_story
Allow: /google_search_index.xml
Allow: /google_news_index.xml
Allow: /*.xml.gz
#
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_search_index.xml
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_news_index.xml

Just for grins, I took a look at http://www.foxnews.com/robots.txt, and guess what? It specifically allows google.

it's human readable-you won't believe this shit....
http://www.foxnews.com/robots.txt

"User-agent: *
Disallow: /printer_friendly_story
Disallow: /projects/livestream
#
User-agent: gsa-crawler
Allow: /printer_friendly_story
Allow: /google_search_index.xml
Allow: /google_news_index.xml
Allow: /*.xml.gz
#
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_search_index.xml
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_news_index.xml"

explicit allows.....

I often find disallows to be the neatest part of some websites.

it's human readable-you won't believe this shit....
http://www.foxnews.com/robots.txt

"User-agent: *
Disallow: /printer_friendly_story
Disallow: /projects/livestream
#
User-agent: gsa-crawler
Allow: /printer_friendly_story
Allow: /google_search_index.xml
Allow: /google_news_index.xml
Allow: /*.xml.gz
#
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_search_index.xml
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_news_index.xml"

explicit allows.....

I often find disallows to be the neatest part of some websites.

it's human readable-you won't believe this shit....
http://www.foxnews.com/robots.txt

"User-agent: *
Disallow: /printer_friendly_story
Disallow: /projects/livestream
#
User-agent: gsa-crawler
Allow: /printer_friendly_story
Allow: /google_search_index.xml
Allow: /google_news_index.xml
Allow: /*.xml.gz
#
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_search_index.xml
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_news_index.xml"

explicit allows.....

I often find disallows to be the neatest part of some websites.

http://www.foxnews.com/google_news_index.xml

Murdoch is so intent on blocking Google News that his site automatically generates the feed necessary for the import.

Wait.. I think I missed something.

He knows about robots.txt.

See this story (On one of his own sites): http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,573329,00.html where it is mentioned.

Paid subscriptions is his plan.

He has to eliminate search engines because he wants to move news to a subscription basis. But he knows he can never be successful at that as long as anyone else provides advertiser supported free access.

So its all talk. He knows it would be suicidal to make this move alone, and is trying to drum up support among all the big news providers.

But even THAT would not work when local newspapers and TV stations put news on line, because Google would simply index those remaining free providers, which often provide a more complete story anyway.

The world has changed, and Rupert still thinks he's selling newspapers on the corner.

I guess you did not bother to actually check the search results, right?

Because I can't find any report about a real virus in the wild.

I wonder if you didn't do the same you accuse GP of not doing. The second result for http://images.google.nl/search?q=osx+virus+in+the+wild is Mac users face first OS X virus in the wild. Now anyone who knows what they're doing shouldn't get infected. As New MacOS X trojan/virus alert, mostly a non-event says it takes some clicking and seems to be a "proof of concept". Now Tech Q and A: Are Macs Vulnerable to Virus Attacks? is an interesting read.

Falcon

Ooh, don't get the idea I'm a shill, for MS, Linux, or anybody else and don't like Macs. I'm typing this on my MacBook Pro and of the 7 new computers I've owned it's the best.

Gl with Rand and Ron Paul or a Alan Grayson (D), Jesse Ventura.
Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) repots showed the US state and federal interest in you.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/23/fusion-centers-expand-criteria-identify-militia-members/
You can join Steve Bierfeldt a Ron Paul worker who was detained At St. Louis Airport as he had campaign cash on him.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3394970594491846292
You want to go up against the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement? Have a recorder on you at all times and be ready to join the no fly list.

The most obvious counterexample to the "AI" nonsense is to consider that, back around 1800 or any time earlier, it was obvious to anyone that the ability to count and do arithmetic was a sign of intelligence. Not even smart animals like dogs or monkeys could add or subtract; only we smart humans could do that.

Interestingly, in recent years, many animals have been found to be able to perform simple mathematical tasks.

Dolphins:
http://www.apa.org/monitor/sep05/marine.html
Monkeys:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,317526,00.html
Dogs can do calculus:
http://www.sciencenewsforkids.org/articles/20031008/Feature1.asp

Sounds like the ideal input device for something like this!

The upper stage was not a real upper stage.

Which, after watching this video, makes me wonder how the upper stage is supposed to behave. I noticed it spun off axis after separation. That seems a little strange to me.

Note: Yes, I watched it on Fox News. I've noticed that they actually have decent coverage of NASA.

>> whether you mean media that the majority considers a reliable source

Stop complaining. Here is your reliable source reporting it too: here you go: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,569748,00.html

More children have died from it in the last 3 months then die all year from seasonal flu. That's 'off season'

That's a very disingenuous statement.

First, it is implying that the H1N1 virus is going to pick up during the flu season. There's no reason whatsoever to believe that this is the case. The flu season typically does follow certain seasonal trends, but that's not true for new strains.

Second, the flu season normally lasts about five months, so if it dies out on schedule, it will have killed about half again more kids than the normal seasonal flu. And probably far fewer people over 30.

WHen you consider 32 thousand die from seasonal flu in a vaccinated populaces, you begin to get the picture of how large the risk is.

That's also disingenuous. The majority of those deaths are typically in the elderly, whereas in this strain, the elderly are showing significant immunity to H1N1. I'm not expecting a staggering death toll from this flu season. It may be elevated, but it certainly is not worthy of the amount of fear it is causing.

The mortality rate, last I checks was 1% and rising. It's over 2% in India.

I don't know where you're getting your numbers, and I'm not familiar with the medical situation in India, but in the U.S., the mortality rate is estimated at about 0.1%, not 1%. About one death per thousand cases. For those who aren't familiar, that's actually a little on the low side for seasonal flu. Now admittedly if we get a strong seasonal flu strain on top of that, it'll be a double dose, but for the moment, it's looking like it will probably be a relatively mild flu season, contrary to what you're saying.

Call me when you see a flu strain with 10x the normal death rate or when it has lasted more than six months without the infection rate dropping. Until then, as far as I'm concerned, this is all just bullshit fear mongering.

Trust me when I say they aren't getting anywhere soon in Western Europe.
They try now and then by shipping propaganda books to libraries and other tricks like that. Fortunately, those are usually handled swiftly and efficiently.

Too late, in the hands of the enemy already: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,569218,00.html

So, Slashdot Entertainment, Slashdot Idle, will be gone.(1) lolcats will be exterminated. Twitter will flutter away quietly. 4chan will have imploded. FoxNews will have outfoxed themselves with a false prediction of the collapse of the intertubewebnet (off by 30 days at that!), and the newsroom will spend the following days blaming the liberals, but no one outside the newsroom will know due to the demise of the Internet. (3) :)

    New industries will boom. People will rediscover interpersonal interaction. Bars will thrive on singles night (as a million lonely Slashdotters hit the streets in their pathetic attempts to get laid, that will fail on or off the 'net.) (5)

    I wouldn't stress too much. The future has already reported in to say the Internet is alive, well, and serving it's designed purpose. (6)

Footnotes:
1) It went poof, and everyone moved on peacefully
2) This space was intentionally left blank.
3) This actually has been happening for 2 weeks, but no one has noticed. Check back in 16 days.
4) 404 - Footnote not found. The FRL you requested was not found. Please check the number and dial again.
5) Who am I to argue with a Slashdot story on the subject?
6) Confirmed report from the relatively distant future

For taking an inane pseudostory as proof of something.

It's a bit difficult to see how anybody could make a profit off mandatory vaccination of health workers. There's an extreme shortage of N1H1 vaccine, so any that actually gets made is going to be sold and used. This is just lame conspiracy mongering, the kind that mentally challenged right-wing pundits come up with on a daily basis.

Of Boeing's commercial planes, all the information I can find indicates that only the 777 and the upcoming 787 Dreamliner are fly-by-wire - while clearly they're moving in that direction, it's far from being only the 737 that's not. And even there, Boeing and Airbus have radically different philosophies about the implementation. Airbus imposes hard limits on what the pilot is allowed to do (potentially contributing to several crashes), while Boeing imposes soft limits/warnings, but allows the pilots to have ultimate control and override the computer when necessary.

I suspect (but do not know) that once we see the actual emails there's no way on earth anyone with an IQ above retarded would believe it was real. Have you ever seen one of these campaigns? Even imbeciles know they're fake.

I wouldn't be so sure of that. Do you remember this story?
Or how about this one?
I don't contest that Toyota's tactics are shady at best here, but like the old saying goes: "Make something idiot proof, and someone will build a better idiot"

As people have pointed out several times, http://www.foxnews.com/robots.txt contains the following:

User-agent: *
Disallow: /printer_friendly_story
Disallow: /projects/livestream
#
User-agent: gsa-crawler
Allow: /printer_friendly_story
Allow: /google_search_index.xml
Allow: /google_news_index.xml
Allow: /*.xml.gz
#
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_search_index.xml
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_news_index.xml

So now we just need a cracker to track down every robots.txt on News Corp's servers and change them to disallow Google's robot from spidering the site.

That way we, the readers, get what we want (Karma/poetic justice), Murdoch gets what he says he wants (Google won't 'steal' his content), and Google get what they want (a way to wash their hands of responsibility, when Murdoch goes nuts and files suit for deindexing his sites).

So, this is my silent plea to the crackers (or hackers if that'll placate their ego) of the world: Give News Corp what they want - a robots.txt that stops Google from indexing their sites.

The best bit is that it could easily take weeks or months for the people running the sites to notice the change. All they'll see is a decline in traffic (big or small).

As people have pointed out several times, http://www.foxnews.com/robots.txt contains the following:

User-agent: *
Disallow: /printer_friendly_story
Disallow: /projects/livestream
#
User-agent: gsa-crawler
Allow: /printer_friendly_story
Allow: /google_search_index.xml
Allow: /google_news_index.xml
Allow: /*.xml.gz
#
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_search_index.xml
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_news_index.xml

So now we just need a cracker to track down every robots.txt on News Corp's servers and change them to disallow Google's robot from spidering the site.

That way we, the readers, get what we want (Karma/poetic justice), Murdoch gets what he says he wants (Google won't 'steal' his content), and Google get what they want (a way to wash their hands of responsibility, when Murdoch goes nuts and files suit for deindexing his sites).

So, this is my silent plea to the crackers (or hackers if that'll placate their ego) of the world: Give News Corp what they want - a robots.txt that stops Google from indexing their sites.

The best bit is that it could easily take weeks or months for the people running the sites to notice the change. All they'll see is a decline in traffic (big or small).

As people have pointed out several times, http://www.foxnews.com/robots.txt contains the following:

User-agent: *
Disallow: /printer_friendly_story
Disallow: /projects/livestream
#
User-agent: gsa-crawler
Allow: /printer_friendly_story
Allow: /google_search_index.xml
Allow: /google_news_index.xml
Allow: /*.xml.gz
#
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_search_index.xml
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_news_index.xml

So now we just need a cracker to track down every robots.txt on News Corp's servers and change them to disallow Google's robot from spidering the site.

That way we, the readers, get what we want (Karma/poetic justice), Murdoch gets what he says he wants (Google won't 'steal' his content), and Google get what they want (a way to wash their hands of responsibility, when Murdoch goes nuts and files suit for deindexing his sites).

So, this is my silent plea to the crackers (or hackers if that'll placate their ego) of the world: Give News Corp what they want - a robots.txt that stops Google from indexing their sites.

The best bit is that it could easily take weeks or months for the people running the sites to notice the change. All they'll see is a decline in traffic (big or small).

User-agent: *
Disallow: /printer_friendly_story
Disallow: /projects/livestream
#
User-agent: gsa-crawler
Allow: /printer_friendly_story
Allow: /google_search_index.xml
Allow: /google_news_index.xml
Allow: /*.xml.gz
#
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_search_index.xml
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_news_index.xml

Notice the sitemap section, they are directly telling Google what news they have

User-agent: *
Disallow: /printer_friendly_story
Disallow: /projects/livestream
#
User-agent: gsa-crawler
Allow: /printer_friendly_story
Allow: /google_search_index.xml
Allow: /google_news_index.xml
Allow: /*.xml.gz
#
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_search_index.xml
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_news_index.xml

Notice the sitemap section, they are directly telling Google what news they have

User-agent: *
Disallow: /printer_friendly_story
Disallow: /projects/livestream
#
User-agent: gsa-crawler
Allow: /printer_friendly_story
Allow: /google_search_index.xml
Allow: /google_news_index.xml
Allow: /*.xml.gz
#
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_search_index.xml
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_news_index.xml

User-agent: *
Disallow: /printer_friendly_story
Disallow: /projects/livestream
#
User-agent: gsa-crawler
Allow: /printer_friendly_story
Allow: /google_search_index.xml
Allow: /google_news_index.xml
Allow: /*.xml.gz
#
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_search_index.xml
Sitemap: http://www.foxnews.com/google_news_index.xml

But Murdoch's brand of news is quickly becoming more discordant with the American political environment than the others. The Wall Street Journal, for example, has always been a decent read* until Rupe got his hands on it. Now its editorial section isn't even worthy of wiping asses. I hope that more and more Americans are quickly falling out of favor with Australian-style right-wing bullshit**.

* I am leftist scum.
** To their credit, FoxNews posted this article and its follow-up when no other mainstream media did. Kudos Rupe, now let's hear a little more truth and noone will get hurt ;)

There would definatly be more material in a power source, but unless you are like this guy He's a boyscout you'll be fine.

They've done numerous studies that say you're wrong. Holding the phone is an additional distraction, but there is still a significant difference between talking on a cell (hands free or otherwise) and talking to a passenger. For one, your passenger can say "watch out!" if you lose focus and start to drift; your phone cannot. For another, people need to focus more on phone calls; the fidelity isn't as good on either end so they need to focus on hearing and being heard more than in an in person conversation. You know all those people who talk 20 decibels louder than normal on a cell, even though no recent cell phone benefits significantly from the additional volume? They've focused on the call (and being heard) so much that they forget to self-regulate. If they can't regulate the volume of their voice (a task related to the conversation), why do you think they'll be able to drive effectively?

Once you find an app that interests you, it just takes one click to acquire it and have it installed on your iPhone.

One click. Oh, and then enter your password. Which better be secure, since it's linked to your credit card number. And a good secure password includes upper case, lower case, numbers, and symbols randomly interspersed, making it a pain in the ass to enter into the iPhone. The app is free? Apple doesn't care, they damn well want your password.

As far as the customers are concerned, the iTunes App Store is a smashing success.

My first generation iPhone is perfectly capable of recording low frame-rate video. Apps have been developed to do exactly that. Where exactly do I download them? Oops. I don't get to, Apple refused to let them ship.

iTunes for Windows is festering crap, and the ITMS on the iPhone itself sucks for following a podcast. I need a dedicated podcast tracking and downloading system. Hey, there's an app for that! Oops, denied. But Apple kindly changed their mind, and simply required the developer to remove all of the useful functionality and turning it into a crippled streaming solution..

I'm a big fan of text adventure games, and I loved that iPhone Frotz could download games from the IFArchive. Oops, Apple disagreed and the functionality had to be removed..

I'd dig an e-book reader that gave be easy access to everything in Project Gutenberg. Apple's okay with that, so long as "everything" means minus historically important books about sex.

I sure would love an app to give me a better interface to Google Voice! Rejected. Remote control of a bittorrent client (not bittorrent on the phone itself, mind you). Rejected. I'm an adult, maybe I'd like some immature but "adult" apps. Rejected.

I'm a customer, and as far as I'm concerned the iTunes App Store a bland mush, not a smashing success. I'm coming up on the end of my contract with AT&T, and I'll be getting something different, something that serves me, not Apple and AT&T. I'm looking at the Android options and the Pre. I was hearing good things about the Pre, but this makes me very wary.

Reminds me of a guy who died last year at this time on the Bonneville Salt Flats attempting the same thing. Can you imagine flying off a motorcycle at 239 MPH? Insanity.

Flying off, no problem. The road rash when you hit the ground, ouch! The fact that you're being scraped over salt, owie owie owie!

Reminds me of a guy who died last year at this time on the Bonneville Salt Flats attempting the same thing. Can you imagine flying off a motorcycle at 239 MPH? Insanity.

There's been waaay too many documented cases of people buying guns (and I mean big guns, like assault rifles) legally in the US with their God-given 2nd ammendment right and smuggling them to the drug cartels here.

When you say "and I mean big guns like assault rifles", it pretty much shows that you know nothing about firearms and US laws.

The articles you link to all cite the "90% of guns traced to US" lie. 90% of the guns that are submitted for tacing are from the US. Only a small number of guns are submitted for tracing, because there's no point in submitting AKs from China and North Korea with no serial number to the ATF for tracing.

Fully automatic guns (pull the trigger and they rattle off bullets) require a federal license with large yearly fees and an anal probe from the BATFE. They are rarely sold here and are exceptionally expensive. Even the gangs here don't buy them legally here. They smuggle them from overseas - it's way cheaper. I'm behind a censor here, but google "BATFE" and "class III license" to see what it takes to buy a machine gun.

What the ill-informed such as yourself call "big guns - like assault rifles" are military-looking guns that have been altered so that they fire one bullet at a time. To make them or import them here, they must not be alterable to fully automatic fire.

The articles you quote suggest a flood of guns from the US using faulty statistics, then go on to list a bunch of confiscated weapons that you cannot easily buy here. You can't get grenades and rocket launchers here. If they are able to smuggle those in from the third world, why would they pay US prices for rifles that aren't even full-auto?

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/04/counting-mexicos-guns/

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2009/04/02/myth-percent-guns-mexico-fraction-number-claimed/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/apr/16/barack-obama/Obama-claims-90-percent-guns-used-Mexico/

Lets see Free vs Paid, I know which one I trust more.

Yes I do think the left has a much better record. Especially when it comes to public dissent.

Clinton had non-screened town hall meetings throughout his presidency, where he took questions from everybody.

Bush had screened fund raising events composed primarily of supporters, while any opposition was at a 'free speech zone' 3 to 5 miles away, or if you try to represent yourself as supporters, but then have the wrong bumper sticker on your car, then you get unceremoniously ejected. Even Fox news reported on this. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,153720,00.html

With Obama, you again have non-screened town hall meetings, and people think it's cool to bring a weapon. And if you have the proper paperwork for that gun, they let you stay.

And yet you specifically mention public dissent.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-435233/Children-banned-playing-tag-school-playground.html

and
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,295165,00.html

and
http://www.exrx.net/Questions/Tag.html

You mean this?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,519699,00.html

Or this?

http://www.startribune.com/local/east/16671951.html

It didn't happen in New Zealand. Probably because our police officers aren't armed in their regular duties.

I'm sorry, you are not allowed to imply that science employs faith.

In fact, science is so skeptical of itself, it changes when the evidence presents itself. It's like comparing an adult who learns from their mistakes with a toddler who insists that he's always right, regardless of the facts.

Inherent in all of science is "as far as we know." So, as far as I know, someone who has studied medicine is aware of a majority of the maladies that can affect my child. Because he's using methodologies that have been, for the vast majority of them, proven in labs and in studies. They have been removed of anecdotal experience, and tested with repeatable, verifiable results that anyone else is free to question. This method of thinking has delivered to us the modern world. The mystical belief in the supernatural had some philosophical high points, but did not improve the lives of anyone but the top of the clergy. In tens of thousands of years, it gave us almost nothing. Only when we threw out the assumption that God existed, and that everything had a plan, and began to think for ourselves and stop trusting hearsay like miracles, did society evolve beyond the society that the Greeks had thousands of years ago.

Faith is when you read some nonsense like killing a bird on an alter and dipping it in other bird's blood can cure a man of leprosy. Faith is taking your daughter with acute diabetes to someone who has no medical training, watching her die a slow and painful death while they babble white noise to zero effect, and then claiming that it was God's will that they're such stupid fucks that they didn't take their daughter to a hospital.

I have run out of patience for the religious. It is time they take their fairy tale nonsense to their private homes, and stop inflicting it on the world just because they're afraid of dying.

>>>Perhaps they value the look of their current roofs?

It always amuses me how people bend-over backwards to justify stupid economic decisions. Is your reason really worth the extra $60,000 (about 3 years of labor) per home? No. Besides they make solar panels that look identical to traditional shingles, so the excuse isn't even valid. LINK - http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,285652,00.html

Now, that's something you didn't see on the BBC.

Gee thanks for that opinion Glenn Beck. I think the only ones seen as an enemy are those right-wing zealots that say Obama was born in Keyna and that do those Tea Bag parties and disrupt town hall meetings.

If the Republic is going to fall, it is not just the Obama administration, but every administration for the past hundred years or so.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,177380,00.html

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/27509

Rather it be used to metabolize drinks than to be Hep'd away through unprotected buttsex like his last one.

The Jewish mafia fails again!