Slashdot Mirror

It depends on who's figures you are reading and which media you are listening to.

How about years and years of killing that have been going on in Israel by Hizballah and Hamas terrorist organizations?

The Arab view is that it was Western guilt over the death of 6 million Jews that led to the creation of Israel. It involved displacement of local Arabs and Palestinians and they are still pissed over it. I don't blame them. Besides, the ratio of the numbers dead in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict runs at 6:1 (thats 6 palestinians dead for each Israeli casualty). You may want revise your position that it is Israel that suffers from Hamas bombs. 'Terrorism', i.e., wanton destruction of civilian lives happens both ways. Its an acquired skill that both the sides have had a lot of time to hone.

Hizballah and Hamas terrorist organizations

Hizbollah and Hamas that are known only as terrorist organizations to Americans are popularly known as resistance movements and social organizations in the non-American parts of the world. At slashdot I would expect you to be a little more balanced in your approach to world affairs. For example, Hezbollah runs schools, hospitals, and provides Medicare coverage to the poor in Lebanon.

use civilians AND UN folks as living shields on the battlefield

Thats an old ploy of the Israeli army as well. In war neither side is good. Read the reports by the UNHCR and the Red Cross. Wilfull shooting at kids by Israeli soldiers is often blamed by popular media to be a Palestinian 'strategy'. Read this at the Amnesty International website and not this.

As a sidenote, make a regular habit of visiting the english version of Al-Jazeera [http://english.aljazeera.net]. You may find that it is the wrong point of view - but when half the world follows the 'wrong' point of view it is no longer 'wrong' - it is 'relevant'.

Boardman countered that presidents since James Monroe have issued statements of interpretation to accompany laws, and that every president since Dwight D. Eisenhower has issued statements reserving the right not to execute sections of laws that may contradict the Constitution. By her accounting, Bush has issued such statements on 110 laws, compared with 80 from Bill Clinton, as many as 105 from Ronald Reagan and 147 from George H.W. Bush in a single term. But President Bush issued multiple statements on many of those laws for a total of 750, and it is unclear how many statements the other presidents issued.

But the session also concerns countering any influence Bush's signing statements may have on court decisions regarding the new laws. Courts can be expected to look to the legislature for intent, not the executive, said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas., a former state judge.

"There's less here than meets the eye," Cornyn said. "The president is entitled to express his opinion. It's the courts that determine what the law is."

But Specter and his allies maintain that Bush is doing an end-run around the veto process. In his presidency's sixth year, Bush has yet to issue a single veto that could be overridden with a two-thirds majority in each house.

"The president is not required to (veto)," Boardman said.

"Of course he's not if he signs the bill," Specter snapped back.

They also said that Saddam had WMD and that the invasion of Iraq wasn't for the oil.

1) Iraq DID have WMDs. See FoxNews.

2) If the invasion of Iraq for really for the oil, then why is it over $75/barrel? Sure, this is also due to the unrest in Lebanon/Isreal, but it was over $70/barrel prior to that. See Chron.Com

This explaines the internal fear of fangs.

Hey, were you perhaps the guy that invented the Goose-Poop-Scooping Machine? Cause I'm sure it would take a lot of v0dka to think that one up!

A new report from Symantec security researchers contends that Microsoft's much-awaited Vista operating system could harbor a range of vulnerabilities that would make it less secure than previous iterations of Windows.

Wow! Interesting .... now M$ will use Xen to access the Linuxistan, where as RHEL and SuSE will use Xen to get to the Windoze land through M$... nice one Peter!

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,204121,00.html

The article said airports and other installations. Why wouldn't this be useful for protecting part of a city? Israel has had over 80 rockets fired at over the last couple of days, and with many at the city of Haifa today. I suspect Israel is thinking of protecting cities along the border.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=2 188501 Says 100 rockets so far
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/13/mideast/ index.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,203253,00.html

The "Religion of Peace" has struck again! Muslims have bombed trains in Bombay, India. Hundreds are dead.

Know your Enemy! Islam is the Enemy! Destroy All Islam!

Fuck Mohammed in the ass. Piss Be Upon Him.

Apple hires only people who are passionate about what they do

But are they as passionate as this sales clerk who just wanted to sell a yo-you?

Hannity is in the commentary side of the business. Rather was allegedly in the hard news side of the business.

Dan rather is nowhere near as biased as anybody on fox news.

No doubt it was his dispassionate search for the truth that blinded him to the pathetic forgeries in the Memogate/Rathergate scandal. A pity they didn't have a little more ideological and intellectual diversity there to speak truth to power and hopefully avoid that train wreck. They weren't so much unbiased as unhinged.

THE ARGUMENT over whether the national press is dominated by liberals is over. Since 1962, there have been 11 surveys of the media that sought the political views of hundreds of journalists. In 1971, they were 53 percent liberal, 17 percent conservative. In a 1976 survey of the Washington press corps, it was 59 percent liberal, 18 percent conservative. A 1985 poll of 3,200 reporters found them to be self-identified as 55 percent liberal, 17 percent conservative. In 1996, another survey of Washington journalists pegged the breakdown as 61 percent liberal, 9 percent conservative. Now, the new study by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found the national media to be 34 percent liberal and 7 percent conservative.

Over 40-plus years, the only thing that's changed in the media's politics is that many national journalists have now cleverly decided to call themselves moderates. But their actual views haven't changed, the Pew survey showed. Their political beliefs are close to those of self-identified liberals and nowhere near those of conservatives. And the proportion of liberals to conservatives in the press, either 3-to-1 or 4-to-1, has stayed the same. That liberals are dominant is now beyond dispute.

THE ARGUMENT over whether the national press is dominated by liberals is over. Since 1962, there have been 11 surveys of the media that sought the political views of hundreds of journalists. In 1971, they were 53 percent liberal, 17 percent conservative. In a 1976 survey of the Washington press corps, it was 59 percent liberal, 18 percent conservative. A 1985 poll of 3,200 reporters found them to be self-identified as 55 percent liberal, 17 percent conservative. In 1996, another survey of Washington journalists pegged the breakdown as 61 percent liberal, 9 percent conservative. Now, the new study by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found the national media to be 34 percent liberal and 7 percent conservative.

Over 40-plus years, the only thing that's changed in the media's politics is that many national journalists have now cleverly decided to call themselves moderates. But their actual views haven't changed, the Pew survey showed. Their political beliefs are close to those of self-identified liberals and nowhere near those of conservatives. And the proportion of liberals to conservatives in the press, either 3-to-1 or 4-to-1, has stayed the same. That liberals are dominant is now beyond dispute.

THE ARGUMENT over whether the national press is dominated by liberals is over. Since 1962, there have been 11 surveys of the media that sought the political views of hundreds of journalists. In 1971, they were 53 percent liberal, 17 percent conservative. In a 1976 survey of the Washington press corps, it was 59 percent liberal, 18 percent conservative. A 1985 poll of 3,200 reporters found them to be self-identified as 55 percent liberal, 17 percent conservative. In 1996, another survey of Washington journalists pegged the breakdown as 61 percent liberal, 9 percent conservative. Now, the new study by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found the national media to be 34 percent liberal and 7 percent conservative.

Over 40-plus years, the only thing that's changed in the media's politics is that many national journalists have now cleverly decided to call themselves moderates. But their actual views haven't changed, the Pew survey showed. Their political beliefs are close to those of self-identified liberals and nowhere near those of conservatives. And the proportion of liberals to conservatives in the press, either 3-to-1 or 4-to-1, has stayed the same. That liberals are dominant is now beyond dispute.

THE ARGUMENT over whether the national press is dominated by liberals is over. Since 1962, there have been 11 surveys of the media that sought the political views of hundreds of journalists. In 1971, they were 53 percent liberal, 17 percent conservative. In a 1976 survey of the Washington press corps, it was 59 percent liberal, 18 percent conservative. A 1985 poll of 3,200 reporters found them to be self-identified as 55 percent liberal, 17 percent conservative. In 1996, another survey of Washington journalists pegged the breakdown as 61 percent liberal, 9 percent conservative. Now, the new study by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found the national media to be 34 percent liberal and 7 percent conservative.

Over 40-plus years, the only thing that's changed in the media's politics is that many national journalists have now cleverly decided to call themselves moderates. But their actual views haven't changed, the Pew survey showed. Their political beliefs are close to those of self-identified liberals and nowhere near those of conservatives. And the proportion of liberals to conservatives in the press, either 3-to-1 or 4-to-1, has stayed the same. That liberals are dominant is now beyond dispute.

THE ARGUMENT over whether the national press is dominated by liberals is over. Since 1962, there have been 11 surveys of the media that sought the political views of hundreds of journalists. In 1971, they were 53 percent liberal, 17 percent conservative. In a 1976 survey of the Washington press corps, it was 59 percent liberal, 18 percent conservative. A 1985 poll of 3,200 reporters found them to be self-identified as 55 percent liberal, 17 percent conservative. In 1996, another survey of Washington journalists pegged the breakdown as 61 percent liberal, 9 percent conservative. Now, the new study by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found the national media to be 34 percent liberal and 7 percent conservative.

Over 40-plus years, the only thing that's changed in the media's politics is that many national journalists have now cleverly decided to call themselves moderates. But their actual views haven't changed, the Pew survey showed. Their political beliefs are close to those of self-identified liberals and nowhere near those of conservatives. And the proportion of liberals to conservatives in the press, either 3-to-1 or 4-to-1, has stayed the same. That liberals are dominant is now beyond dispute.

THE ARGUMENT over whether the national press is dominated by liberals is over. Since 1962, there have been 11 surveys of the media that sought the political views of hundreds of journalists. In 1971, they were 53 percent liberal, 17 percent conservative. In a 1976 survey of the Washington press corps, it was 59 percent liberal, 18 percent conservative. A 1985 poll of 3,200 reporters found them to be self-identified as 55 percent liberal, 17 percent conservative. In 1996, another survey of Washington journalists pegged the breakdown as 61 percent liberal, 9 percent conservative. Now, the new study by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found the national media to be 34 percent liberal and 7 percent conservative.

Over 40-plus years, the only thing that's changed in the media's politics is that many national journalists have now cleverly decided to call themselves moderates. But their actual views haven't changed, the Pew survey showed. Their political beliefs are close to those of self-identified liberals and nowhere near those of conservatives. And the proportion of liberals to conservatives in the press, either 3-to-1 or 4-to-1, has stayed the same. That liberals are dominant is now beyond dispute.

A Lodi, Calif., man convicted of supporting terrorism for attending an al-Qaida training camp in Pakistan three years ago. His father pleaded guilty to charges of lying to customs agents about smuggling money to finance the terrorist training.

The FBI learned of the plot from someone the defendants tried to recruit, authorities said. The FBI then arranged for an informant of Arabic descent to pass himself off as an al-Qaida operative.

Batiste met several times in December with the informant and asked for supplies and $50,000 to help him build an "Islamic Army," the indictment said.

Officials described the group as a distinct threat to national security and, at the same time, as something akin to the gang that couldn't think straight.

For the most part, authorities framed the case as one against a "homegrown cell" of terrorists and said the seven could have inflicted great harm.

According to the indictment, Batiste, 32, called his men "soldiers" in an "Islamic Army" that would wage a "full ground war."

He said he wanted to "kill all the devils that we can," officials said, and that he wanted most of his group to attend al-Qaida training.

#NYTimesSelectWritersOnly :)

Did the New York Times' exposure of the SWIFT program jeopardize the tunnel bombing investigation? What the New York Times Has Wrought.

A report at Fox says that the terror plot disrupted by the FBI was directed not at the Holland Tunnel, but at the PATH train system.

"Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do."

No, but they can be funny!

There is nothing gained by making inflamatory statements

Yeah, I mean seriously, you could lose your cat!

Hello! You want to believe they don't exist sooooo much don't you! Stop singing the party tune!

When will you liberals (and I'm assuming you are liberal here, although you'll probably claim to be 'moderate' or something) listen to the recent reports (6/21/06)... They HAVE found large caches of WMD's, Sarin gas and other chemical weapons. What you really want is an excuse to de-legitamize the war, so you ignore it. Or wait, it comes from FOX News so it must just be hot air... Right.

The mainstream media just does what it always will, be impatient and not wait for the evidence to come to light, claim they don't exist and when the news comes that they really do, just don't report so as not to have egg on their face. I wouldn't be surprised, if, after the report is declassified, the New York Times puts the correction way way back on the very back page in small print. That's how they always do it anyway.

Links:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html

It is well-settled in constitutional law that a warrant is not required to obtain bank records. Your post is completely ignorant to this fact.

Someone may wish to inform congress of this fact because several congressmen, including one quoted in the fair and ballanced (tm) Fox News article you link to below. I'd like to see some evidence that my bank records are not subject to the same protections that other evidence collected against me would be. I'm not saying you're not correct but not even Stuart Levy mentions that fact when defending this program. If what you say is true, that would be an easy trump card for them to play in defending this program.

Funny how the anti-Bush left has no problems with my tax dollars being taken away by the government and redistributed. It's just my money's privacy that they care about? So my privacy interest in my finances is more important than my property interest therein? What nonsense.

There is not just a conern about "your money's privacy" there is a concern about your and my privacy in total. Levying a tax is not the same as snooping through your financial transactions and it's very prejudicial to suggest otherwise. These two things are apples and oranges.

And it has been reported that Congress did, in fact, have oversight of this program. AP reports that Congress was briefed. In fact, several members of Congress called newspapers to plead with them not to publish it (do a simple Google news search for crissakes). Seems the members of Congress aren't too quick to stand up and admit to being briefed until they do some polling on it. - Victory is born of 1000 fathers; defeat is but an orphan.

Yes, I see that congress was informed. In the article you site, it says:
"He (Snow) said Congress had been briefed on the program."

Note that it doesn't say what agency of with authority over the White House is checking to see that they're carrying out this program in a manner that is contitutionally compliant because, in this case, briefed means that the White House is telling them what they're doing but no one is able to check their statements against the facts, just like in the domestic wiretapping program. Briefed does not equal oversite. Oversite means that someone in charge is watching and verifying they're doing their jobs properly and honestly.

Also, I'd like to point out that I did do a Google search on the topic. I was entirely unable to find any statements leading me to believe that any members of congress asked the press not to run the story. I was, however, able to find plenty of ink about how the White House asked them not to run the story. From the very article you pointed us to:

"Treasury Department officials spent 90 minutes Thursday meeting with the newspaper's reporters, stressing the legality of the program and urging the paper to not publish a story on the program, McManus said in a telephone interview.

The New York Times and Los Angeles Times quoted their editors as defending their decision to publish the financial data tracking effort despite being asked by the administration to withhold publication."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200733,00.html

"But he (John Snow) was unhappy that the program's existence was revealed in news accounts. The Bush administration tried to talk reporters out of running the story."
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?story Id=5507145

Last I cheked, neither Treasury Secretary John Snow nor "Treasury Department officials" were congressmen or agents answering directly to congress.

I seriously think some of you either 1) want to lose this struggle against terror or 2) are incredibly naive about the fact that al Qaeda wants to nuke your as

It is well-settled in constitutional law that a warrant is not required to obtain bank records. Your post is completely ignorant to this fact.

Funny how the anti-Bush left has no problems with my tax dollars being taken away by the government and redistributed. It's just my money's privacy that they care about? So my privacy interest in my finances is more important than my property interest therein? What nonsense.

And it has been reported that Congress did, in fact, have oversight of this program. AP reports that Congress was briefed. In fact, several members of Congress called newspapers to plead with them not to publish it (do a simple Google news search for crissakes). Seems the members of Congress aren't too quick to stand up and admit to being briefed until they do some polling on it. - Victory is born of 1000 fathers; defeat is but an orphan.

I seriously think some of you either 1) want to lose this struggle against terror or 2) are incredibly naive about the fact that al Qaeda wants to nuke your asses (all of your asses, even the appeasers, as Canada learned). I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume the latter.

It's hard enough to beat these guys; how sad that we have to fight the left every step of the way.

They did find 500 WMD's in Iraq and announced it just last week. CNN refused to cover the story along with other liberal outlets. It's pretty funny that someone in the senate could hold a press conference, annouce something like that, and it doesn't get covered by the US press.

The weapons were a clear violation of the peace treaty Hussain signed in 1991. The war was justified.

As you say, Mod me down all you want. It's still true.

I'm suffering from a severe case of cognitive dissonance. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,199695,00.html Those of us with room-temperature IQs are perpetually assured that there is overwhelming evidence for Darwinian gradualism in the fossil record. So, after reading the news release linked above, I asked myself, "Self, why is this big news?" I guess I just don't get it. Why has the missing link in bird evolution just been found, when I have been assured for years that there is overwhelming evidence in the fossil record that the enigma of bird evolution was already solved? Sigh. I'm apparently too stupid to understand Darwinian logic. Filed under: Intelligent Design -- GilDodgen @ 10:23 pm

As opposed to what? Should I link to RealClimate.org and use the highly quoted and totally accepted "Hockey Stick" which we now know is basically a giant crock of sh_t?

The Hockey Stick is on the web, and for ten years no one decided to question its veracity. Except of course for McKitrick and McIntyre for which they were roundly and soundly criticized for daring to question the "truth" of the Holy Hockey Stick.

Now it turns out that they were right. Mann hid his methods and data, from a publicly funded study, until forced to reveal them in what almost came down to an act of Congress.

John Daly was just an average guy, who was struck by the screaming about rising sea levels, when he lived next to the sea level marker left in New Zealand in the 1800s. The fact that the sea level is now below this mark (which is carved in solid stone) is a very telling thing. The fact that the largest rise in sea level shown by satellite data is 0.03mm/year is also well below the 1.2cm/year the IPCC promised us in 2000 is also extremely damaging to the GCC crowd, but they hide that as well.

Those IPCC studies are on the web too. Why don't you question them with the same veracity that you complain about my sources? All the climate data on John Daly's page are linked to the sources and have references. That's better than anything on Mann's site, where they regularly throw out things like "because we say so" (paraphrase) and delete posts that question them.

Just my $0.02 worth. Not meant as a troll, just me calling it as I see it.

Oklahoma's Spyware Bill dies a quiet death.

What do you expect from a bunch of dumb Okies? I'll look on the bright side: When their computers are so infected with malware as to be unusable, they won't be able to go to Republican hate sites.

Lenovo denies ditching Linux . . . 'Customers of the recently introduced Lenovo 3000 units still won't have a preloaded option, however, because the small and midsize business customers that are the targets for those units have many different requirements, he said.'"

More like, "because Lenovo would rather not pay full retail for XP."

Mars rover escapes again.
Isn't it interesting how the lion's share of the cool space-related stuff is unmanned? Even more reason to kill the Shuttle program.

RIM CEO speaks out against unlimited wireless . . . "unlimited bandwidth use in the wireless world is needed because access to the network is what spurs innovation."'"
Access to the network is what spurs people's Crackberry habits. I'd really like a toke off of whatever he's smoking.

Microsoft LiveMail gets ads. . . . Similar to Google's Gmail
Next, they'll lobby Congress to make it illegal to use anything but LiveMail. Don't forget, Google hates America and Linux supports terrorism.

FSF anti-DRM campaign expands.
I'm sure it will be least as successful, if not timely, as the GNU HURD project.

I was surprised that the article didn't mention the Kevin Flanagan case, which involved Bank of America, outsourcing, and this 'train your replacement or no severance' policy.

In 2003, Mr. Flanagan, a programmer for BofA, was told that his job was being outsourced and that he had to train his (Indian) replacement to receive severance. (Some news reports say he was fired after refusing.) He went into the parking lot and shot himself.

The Kevin Flanagan Case
U.S. Tech Workers Bear Brunt of Immigration Policy (1st graf)
Techies see jobs go overseas (graf: "Suicide Blamed on Layoff")

I just closed my bank account with them. I had to do it anyway (moved to an area with no BofA branches within 60 miles) but I made sure to tell the agent the OTHER reason why. They can rot in Hell.

But white people did not fly planes into the WTC and Pentagon. You can be sure that if they had, the ACLU wouldn't be standing up for the white people getting profiled at airports.

Oh, please.. this stereotyping of the ACLU is so tired. They came to Rush Limbaugh's defense. They've defended Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, and general white Christians who want to distribute religious material in school. The ACLU stands up for civil liberties, no matter whose are at stake.

They're in desparate need for a ministry responsible for PR, perhaps a Ministry of Propaganda?

They already have that.

A few states have already begun tracking pedophiles via GPS - see this Fox News story about it.

FTFA -
"Many states are initiating programs that track registered sex offenders using Global Positioning Satellites, or GPS, sometimes for life. GPS can track the exact location of the offenders at all times, making it easier for law enforcement to ensure that they're abiding with the terms of their release.

It sounds like an efficient system: Authorities can keep track of dangerous sex offenders without having to keep them in prison at taxpayers' expense."

While I'm not defeding pedophiles (surely it's painted that way - "If you don't want GPS on pedos, then you're with them!"), where do we go next? GPS tracking for drug offenses? DUI? And what happens when people can track these GPS recievers? Scary stuff - what ever happened to paying your debt to society once you got out of jail?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,193652,00.html

In Virginia, the Death Penalty for Gambling
Monday, May 01, 2006
By Radley Balko

About a month ago, I wrote a column about efforts in Congress to ban Internet gambling. There are lots of specific problems about those bills. But the broader issue is troubling, too: Why does our government insist on policing our personal lives for bad habits?

Because there is almost never a complaining victim in vice crimes, law enforcement offers must go to extraordinary lengths to investigate and prosecute these crimes. This leads to all sorts of other problems, including invasions of privacy, entrapment, and police corruption.

The sad case of Salvatore Culosi provides a recent, vivid illustration of the folly of vice laws. Culosi (as irony would have it, he was named after a police officer) was a 37-year old optometrist in the Washington, D.C. suburb of Fairfax, Virginia. According to friends, Culosi was a wealthy, self-made man. He was easygoing and friendly, a guy who enjoyed his success.

He was also a small-time gambler. Culosi and his friends regularly met at bars in the area to watch sports, and frequently wagered on the outcomes of games. The wagers weren't insignificant -- $50, $100, sometimes more on a given afternoon. But the small circle of friends also had the means to back up their wagers. No one was betting the mortgage, here.

As one friend of Culosi's told me, "To Sal, betting a few bills on the Redskins was a stress reliever, done among friends...none of us single, successful professionals ever thought that betting $50 bucks or so on the Virginia-Virginia Tech football game was a crime worthy of investigation."

Apparently, it was. Fairfax police detective David J. Baucom met Culosi in a bar one evening last October, befriended him, and was soon making wagers himself. According to those close to Culosi I've spoken with, it wasn't long before Baucom began upping the ante, encouraging Culosi to wager larger sums than what the friends were used to. Baucom would later report in an affidavit that he'd wagered close to $30,000 with Culosi over a three-month period, and had lost nearly $6,000.

Baucom eventually encouraged Culosi to wager at least $2,000 in a single day, the lower threshold under which Culosi could be charged under state law with "conducting an illegal gambling operation." On January 24 of this year, Detective Baucom assembled the Fairfax County SWAT team, and marched off to Culosi's home to arrest him.

According to press accounts, police affidavits, and the resulting investigation by the Fairfax prosecutor's office, Baucom called Culosi that evening, and told him he'd be by to collect his winnings. With the SWAT team at the ready just behind him, Baucom waited outside Culosi's home in an SUV. As Culosi emerged from the doorway, clad only in a t-shirt and jeans, SWAT officer Deval Bullock's finger apparently slipped to the trigger of his Heckler & Koch MP5 semiautomatic weapon, already aimed at the unarmed Culosi.

The gun fired, releasing a bullet that entered Culosi's side, then ripped through his chest and struck his heart, killing him instantly.

It only got worse from there. This month, Culosi's parents called a press conference to release details of their own investigation into their son's shooting. They found that police waited more than five hours to inform them of their son's death, denyin

Funny thing about the eminent domain rulings, in particular the New London case. The conservatives, i.e. Scalia and Thomas oppossed the ruling, but Ginsberg and the liberal cliche, including O'Conner, I believe, supported it. Exactly the opposite of this decision.

You think wrong. From Fox News even:

WASHINGTON -- Cities may bulldoze people's homes to make way for shopping malls or other private development, a divided Supreme Court (search) ruled Thursday, giving local governments broad power to seize private property to generate tax revenue.

In a scathing dissent, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor (search) said the decision bowed to the rich and powerful at the expense of middle-class Americans.

> Knowing what we now know about how Eason Jordan's CNN played patty-cake w/ Saddam
> in the run-up to the war, you have the gonads to cite them about that issue???
> Why don't you just cite a random Democratic Underground moonbat, they have
> the same amount of credibility.

Fox News says the same thing as CNN, so you might want to take a look at the evidence instead of wrapping yourself in a coccoon of self-delusion.

Folks, this is what you get for using anti-computer software.

Well, here is the summary from a fox news article (emphasis mine)

Rush Limbaugh must submit to random drug tests under an agreement filed Monday that will dismiss a prescription fraud charge against the conservative commentator after 18 months if he complies with the terms.

So, you're wrong about that.

Personally, I think the government has no business in our chemical intake.
I'm against the investigation against Mr. Limbaugh.
I think it's funny and ironic that he was caught in the same machine that he fought to justify, but I'm still against it.

I'd like for our government to respect everybody's privacy. I fight against government growing its power as I can. That doesn't stop me from laughing at someone who gets caught up in something I disapprove of when they have lobbied for it.

Google's software has been coming preloaded with Dell computers for about 3 1/2 months now, but was only a trial period, a "test" if you will. Now it looks like it is an official, permanent policy.

Poor deluded moonbat.

No, it is pretty well established as historical fact that UBL was directly associated with groups receiving direct US aid.

In the course of researching my book on Bill Clinton and bin Laden, I interviewed Bill Peikney, who was CIA station chief in Islamabad from 1984 to 1986, and Milt Bearden, who was CIA station chief from 1986 to 1989. These two men oversaw the disbursement for all American funds to the anti-Soviet resistance. Both flatly denied that any CIA funds ever went to bin Laden. They felt so strongly about this point that they agreed to go on the record, an unusual move by normally reticent intelligence officers.

So what happens when you get struck by lightning and all electrical systems go down? Oh, right, you crash.

just ask Sen. Kennedy

...Creative just filed a lawsuit against Apple regarding the iPod.

Doh!

Apple lucked out. Creative can't get an injunction "just because" which could have been a serious blow to Apple's sales even if Creative ultimately lost the case.

That's it!

The real threat isn't coming from the tens of thousands Islamist extremist terrorists trained in Afghanistan by Al Qaeda, in Saddam's Iraq, and their associates (minus the captured ones). No!

The 9/11 attacks, the attack on the USS Cole, the Bali bombings, the Madrid bombings, the London bombings, the shoe bomb attempt, the US embassy bombings in Africa, the attacks and bombings in Saudi Arabia, the bombing in Jordan, the attacks in the Philippines, the Beslan attack, the dirty bomb plan, the plan to attack the soccer stadium in the UK, the plan to attack Heathrow, the 19 person ring just broken in Michigan, the hundreds of Hezbollah operatives in the US, including the recent Hezbollah Mexican border smuggling ring broken, and the rest all show its not the terrorists that are the problem!!

The real threat is that *cough* fantasy *cough* cabal in the White House which the "insiders" on Slashnut know are secretly planning to ignore the next election with mass destraction. (How this will actually work, nobody explains. The Constitution limits the term in office and provides for succession.) Meanwhile, outside Mom's basement (or with more meds), the rest of us see them trying to detect and stop the next terrorist attack, prefereably before they can use a salvaged anthrax or chemical weapon from Saddam's discards, or maybe even start a nuclear Jihad with a little help, or simply send a suicide bomber to a crowded mall.

Lets reach over into one of the Evolution v. Creation debates and grab Occam's Razor. Which way do you think it cuts here?

I think I understand the impulse behind William F. Buckley's statement that he would rather be governed by the first 2000 names in the Boston phone book than by the Harvard faculty. It seems to require a certain degree of sophistication to engage in certain forms of idiocy.

Providing the government a necessary defensive tools it needs to fight terror from within falls somewhat short of creating a police state, don't you think? The narcissists on the left will howl at *any* perceived incursion on their rights even though tens of thousands of innocent citizens might be murdered otherwise.

Instead, the Attorney General has repeatedly asserted that laws governing the gathering of intelligence data, even domestically, are not within the purview of Congress to issue, and that the executive branch can simply disregard them...

Here we go. Alberto Gonzales is a fascist! Bush is a liar! Fire Rumsfeld! Yawn. I for one appreciate the prosperty they have brought to our great nation, and the heroic foreign policy they have pursued.

Well, that is what you read in the New York Times, or see on CNN. If their polls were correct Al Gore would be President. What you started as a thoughtful, though flawed, argument has decended into a mindless partisan rant. Shame on you.

Providing the government a necessary defensive tools it needs to fight terror from within falls somewhat short of creating a police state, don't you think? The narcissists on the left will howl at *any* perceived incursion on their rights even though tens of thousands of innocent citizens might be murdered otherwise.

Instead, the Attorney General has repeatedly asserted that laws governing the gathering of intelligence data, even domestically, are not within the purview of Congress to issue, and that the executive branch can simply disregard them...

Here we go. Alberto Gonzales is a fascist! Bush is a liar! Fire Rumsfeld! Yawn. I for one appreciate the prosperty they have brought to our great nation, and the heroic foreign policy they have pursued.

Well, that is what you read in the New York Times, or see on CNN. If their polls were correct Al Gore would be President. What you started as a thoughtful, though flawed, argument has decended into a mindless partisan rant. Shame on you.

Providing the government a necessary defensive tools it needs to fight terror from within falls somewhat short of creating a police state, don't you think? The narcissists on the left will howl at *any* perceived incursion on their rights even though tens of thousands of innocent citizens might be murdered otherwise.

Instead, the Attorney General has repeatedly asserted that laws governing the gathering of intelligence data, even domestically, are not within the purview of Congress to issue, and that the executive branch can simply disregard them...

Here we go. Alberto Gonzales is a fascist! Bush is a liar! Fire Rumsfeld! Yawn. I for one appreciate the prosperty they have brought to our great nation, and the heroic foreign policy they have pursued.

Well, that is what you read in the New York Times, or see on CNN. If their polls were correct Al Gore would be President. What you started as a thoughtful, though flawed, argument has decended into a mindless partisan rant. Shame on you.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120268,00.html

Maybe I don't read the papers, but i do read the news online and in places not accessible to many here. Thousands of pounds of pre-Gulf War Stock remains in the bunkers at Al-Muthanna and Khamisayaa. Everything from mustard gas to cyclosarin to VX-2. Terrorists have used, albeit probably unknowingly, chemical munitions as IED's. Why was this not more widely reported? I leave that to your speculation. http://www.google.com/search?q=sarin+iraq+ied http://odci.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_2004/chap5_an nxF.html http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.html http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4997808/ http://www.katc.com/Global/story.asp?S=1873019&nav =EyB0NBHX ...

No more Soda will be in Elementry and Middle Schools.
  America's largest beverage distributors have agreed to halt nearly all sales of sodas to public schools -- a step that will remove the sugary, caloric drinks from vending machines and cafeterias around the country.
  I guess America is serious about not being the sickest.

I remember when PointCast hit our network - every dingdong was running it to look 'kewl', instead it just sat there sucking up our (then) expensive bandwidth day & night.

Later on we became a "PointCast Partner" which never seemed to amount ot much.

What I want is a combination of news.google.com headlines & After Dark's Headlines module, just to keep me on my toes of real-news vs. fake-news (aside from Fox News)

I'm with you, brother! Why should we trust the opinion of anyone outside of approved opinion channels. When I receive political wisdom, I want it from an unbiased source so I can decide for myself. Just to be clear, I'm the decider. I decide what's best. They're the reporter (or in this case, the opinioner).