Slashdot Mirror

If you think FB has privacy issues now.... Google+ may have a lot of new accounts after the FB IPO* hits. Not that Google is any better privacy-wise, but people wanting to share their entire life online may have to choose the lesser of two evils.

* http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/technology&id=8663072

Scientists at Harvard announced the very same thing, over a year and a half ago.

Its a lie because you say it is, or because you can't believe its true? I like how you try to distract from reality by yammering on about Fox News... (who brought up Fox News? You did!)

Try ABC news, jackass.

"Even after Obama took office on Jan. 20, 2009, analysts in the Energy Department and in the Office of Management and Budget were repeatedly questioning the wisdom of the loan. In one exchange, an Energy official wrote of "a major outstanding issue" -- namely, that Solyndra’s numbers showed it would run out of cash in September 2011."

""This deal is NOT ready for prime time," one White House budget analyst wrote in a March 10, 2009 email, nine days before the administration formally announced the loan.:

This is members of the administration, not Fox News, reported by ABC, not Fox News. The DoE etc said this was a bad deal, and predicted when it would fail. The White House insisted that Solyndra get the money anyways, because Obama was pushing "green jobs" while paying off his campaign contributers at Solyndra.

Why don't you know this?

Obviously everyone involved knew that it wasn't a good deal, and everyone paying any attention at all knows that what you are calling lies are actually facts reported by the mainstream media, with Fox News nowhere in sight. Facts which apparently got right by you somehow amazingly, even though you profess to being enough of an expert on the subject to declare the deal a good one.

Now we both know that you have no fucking idea what you are talking about, yet here you are acting like an expert and having it handed to you so simply and trivially. The shit you are saying doesnt even pass a simple google search, which would have taken you all of 3 seconds. Anonymous coward must be right, you ARE sucking on the democrat sausage because you couldnt even be bothered to do a simple Google search while you knowingly just made shit up out of nothing to support your beloved party.

Stasi used radioactive spray to track dissidents
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/1313191/Stasi-used-radioactive-spray-to-track-dissidents.html

Stasi's radioactive hold over dissidents
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1100317.stm

Report: Dissidents Tracked Using Radiation
http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=81775&page=1

"The feared East German secret police routinely sprayed suspected dissidents with a radioactive solution as a means of secretly tracking them, according to a new report.
Stasi agents would then wear portable Geiger counters that would activate when a marked suspected dissident was nearby, according to New Scientist magazine.
So that targets would not hear the distinctive clicking of the counter at close range, Stasi secret police agents wore the detector strapped under one arm, while a vibrating alarm was slung under the other arm. The magazine reports that the 30-year-old invention mirrors the technology behind todayâ(TM)s pagers and cellphones. The magazineâ(TM)s article was based on a paper by leading radiation protection expert Klaus Becker."

Sir Bernard Lovell claims Russians tried to kill him with radiation
The veteran British scientist behind Joddrell Bank telescope has disclosed how the Russians once tried to kill him with radiation for tracking the Sputnik satellite.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/5362829/Sir-Bernard-Lovell-claims-Russians-tried-to-kill-him-with-radiation.html

Cell Phone Sensors Detect Radiation To Thwart Nuclear Terrorism
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080122154415.htm

No, that's up to a jury. I'm wondering if you're arguing this out of naivete or out of authoritarianism. As if cops don't already use ordinances like "disorderly conduct" as a catch-all reason to arrest whoever they want to arrest.

This story is for Canada, but legislation just made it's way through Congress making it an offense to "disrupt" an event where someone was under Secret Service protection. So, you could be protesting a BOA shareholder meeting in the parking lot of a convention center, and be charged because Jill Biden was at another event in a different room.

Stranger things have happened.

Disney movies (some of them anyway) do this too. Except first you sit through a little screen telling you that this DVD has fastplay technology. That's right, apparently just playing the damn movie is a technology now.

Strangely, the largest 'externality' you bring up us the following: if facebook ceases to exist, it will no longer provide all the benefits we have grown accustomed to. This is akin to saying that an externality of a car is that you may not be able to repair it in the future.

You've misunderstood me slightly. The externality is that due to the existence and use of Facebook, people will not be prepared for the use of other communication systems like the phone system or email. When Facebook fails those other services will also fail. Not just Facebook failing to provide service, but other services failing because Facebook fails.

Specifically; some of those other services, like the telephone system have been carefully designed to be reasonably reliable and rapid to restore even in problem situations. If Facebook leads to them not being used they won't be ready if they are needed.

The only finite negative externality that I can think of (other than green house gas emitted by FB server farms) is that some people are denied employment based on their facebook profile, although the employers that do the denying may consider this a positive externality.

There are of course lots more than that. People who don't want to be located are located because of their facebook profiles (battered women etc.). People have unprotected sex who otherwise wouldn't have. People go to parties and drink too much. People end up murdered. Let's keep this in proportion. These are normal things that come because of communication; lots of good things and lots of bad things; as such they are not Facebook's responsibility and shouldn't be when it becomes a proper common carrier.

Anyways, Facebook will likely never be the one-stop-shop for online communication. Email, blogs, twitter, and thousands of other services are growing in popularity even as Facebook continues to grow, meaning that many of facebook users are also users of G+, tumblr, instagram, etc... What this seems to prove is that people tend toward decentralization autonomously.

I hope you are right and this is why I don't think there should be specifically Facebook directed legislation now. However it's certainly something which people should study and watch. For example, if people do start relying on facebook for communication, merely pointing the dangers out to some of the bigger companies might lead to them insisting on backups being provided. However, if this does get out of control some kind of regulation might be a good idea. It certainly shouldn't be ruled out now because that would give Facebook even less incentive to behave sensibly than they already have.

On the other hand, facebook would love government regulations that dictated every policy it has and how it must be implemented. There is nothing better than a rat maze beaurocracy to stifle Facebook's next startup competitor.

Very simple to handle; "any service with more than two hundred million active users must within one year of reaching that subscriber number... "

The numbers I quoted are production number and not capacity numbers. How do you get around a 54% increase in fossil fuel based production with a 15% possible reduction in consumption?

One of the tactics the Japan has been using is to bring older natural gas and coal plants back into operation. Take a look at this article. Here is a quote.

With the loss of nuclear energy, the Ministry of Environment projects that Japan will produce about 15 percent more greenhouse gas emissions this fiscal year than it did in 1990, the baseline year for measuring progress in reducing emissions. In fiscal 2010, Japan's actual emissions were close to 1990 levels. It also raises doubts about whether it will be able to meet a pledge made in Copenhagen in 2009 to slash emissions by 25 percent from 1990 levels by 2020.

So by closing of the nuclear power plants is projected to increase overall CO2 emission from Japan by 15%.

See:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/tsa-defends-pat-year-kan-airport-16215862#.T6RGaqv2agQ

I'll summarize:
---
The grandmother of a 4-year-old girl who became hysterical during a security screening at a Kansas airport said Wednesday that the child was forced to undergo a pat-down after hugging her, with security agents yelling and calling the crying girl an uncooperative suspect.

The child's grandmother, Lori Croft, told The Associated Press that Brademeyer and her daughter, Isabella, initially passed through security at the Wichita airport without incident. The girl then ran over to briefly hug Croft, who was awaiting a pat-down after tripping the alarm, and that's when TSA agents insisted the girl undergo a physical pat-down.

Isabella had just learned about "stranger danger" at school, her grandmother said, adding that the girl was afraid and unsure about what was going on.

"She started to cry, saying 'No I don't want to,' and when we tried talking to her she ran," Croft said. "They yelled, 'We are going to shut down the airport if you don't grab her.'"
---
Massive stupidity ensues on the part of the TSA.

Now, once it becomes a widely read story, does the TSA apologize and essentially say - "We're sorry. We could have done this in a lot better, less traumatic, thoughtful and professional way?"

No, they say: "TSA has reviewed the incident and determined that our officers followed proper screening procedures in conducting a modified pat-down on the child," the agency said.

(sarcasm) Ah, what tact and professionalism. (/sarcasm)

No, IMO, these people, in general, as viewed from the pronouncements from the very top *are* thugs.

What they did was legal. But it wasn't necessary, reasonable or the way any reasonable person would handle things.
The fact that they take every opportunity to defend what's indefensible in any reasonable person's mind just show the "thug" mentality they have.

Sure, I'd guess there's quite a few nice TSA people. But the thuggishness comes from the top. I think much is the same with most police forces.

They can, so they do. And not only that, they defend their actions to the maximum.

That's the definition of a thug, IMO. "I can, legally, be a total ass, and I know that the top brass will defend my "assish-ness" to the maximum. So, FOAD, ya powerless loser!"

Perhaps your definition of "thug" doesn't include the above, but I think for most of us, the reasonable definition of a thug certainly includes this kind of attitude and behavior. And this thugish behavior is vigorously defended to the maximum by the people all the way to the top.

If we were seeing people get fired and publicly so - taking strong legal action against them, and very strongly defending the dignity of the passengers - then perhaps there'd be some argument about them being the "government's thugs." But as it is, they do most everything they do without any serious push back from anyone senior at the TSA.

In my world, that means they're doing what the TSA wants them to do - and thus, these thugs *are* government thugs.

-Greg

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2010/05/rand-paul-clarify-stance-civil-rights-act-1964/

It looks like you are lying.

It's fun

Yes, believe it or not, football can be fun. But parents, coaches, fans, the industry often take a game of physical contest and turn it into something ugly, with violence, social standing and money as its end. People should be able to choose to play football, but there is something wrong with the sport when players are targeted for hits because their concussion history makes it likely they will be permanently disabled.

“He’s had a lot of concussions,” Giants wide receiver Devin Thomas told the Newark Star Ledger. “We were just like, ‘We gotta put a hit on that guy.’” Thomas went on to praise safety Tyler Sash for landing the dizzying hit. “Sash did a great job hitting [Williams] early, and he looked kind of dazed when he got up. I feel like that made a difference, and he coughed it up.”

[1]

and with the millions of dollars they are paid, how many of them donated to research?

What? I don't understand why I need to pay for research when my employer endangers me. Example:

and with the millions of dollars coal miners were paid, how many of them donated to research? Coal mining is modern day pyramid building, they are paid to sacrifice their bodies so the industrial revolution can push us forward, not to be coddled. this is a job hazard and you have have to accept that, if it wasn't you wouldn't be paid as much.

There are over one thousand lawsuits by former football players against the league. This was covered by NPR a while ago, and it sounds like players are saying "I got hit here, in this game. I had X symptoms. Coach told me I didn't need to see the medical professional because he needed me back in the game. I now experience Y long term ailments." Regardless of the amount they are each paid, this could be compared to mesothelioma from asbestos exposure while installing installation. The NFL has deep pockets, let these players have their day in court.

Check out Shanahan's suspensions of NHL players. I will tell you right now that this is the NHL attempting to wash their own hands of similar liabilities. Three hockey players killed themselves very recently.

Look, in Roman times, people used to die building the aqueducts ... that doesn't mean we accept deaths when companies build dams to service communities. We have technology, engineering, medicine, etc to help us be better than that. We're better than we were thousands of years ago. We don't need the gladiators to die anymore. The NFL is making bank off these players -- even after the players themselves are all millionaires that squander their money within a few years of the end of their career. The courts will decide what liability the NFL must assume.

unless you want to go down the road of thought-crime.

We're already halfway there. Thought-crime charges are currently prosecutorial bonuses, but give it some time and we'll start seeing people charged and convicted without the actual criminal act.

Scratch that. Already completely there: http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=7056927

His actions were a crime only because of what was going on in his head. Had he thought other thoughts, or done what he did for any other reason, his actions would not have been considered criminal.

What the parent is talking about is an ATF registry that you can read about here: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/01/judge-upholds-atf-gun-rule-for-sw-border-states/ This is not an "assault rifle" registry. It is a registry that tracks all multiple sales (as in 2+) of semi-auto rifles bigger that .22 caliber and with a detachable magazine. The kind of rifles that hundreds of thousands of Americans own for hunting and target shooting purposes. Assault rifles, by definition, have the capability to fire in fully-automatic or burst mode. No one in the general public sells or buys assault rifles in blocks of 35 at a time in the US from a legitimate dealer. Buying an assault rifle involves a Federal Firearms License, and no US dealer is going to let that requirement slide. Gun dealers have been working with the ATF to stop straw-man purchases for a long time before this. What happened with Operation Fast and Furious, an operation launched in 2009 under Obama's administration, the ATF instructed gun dealers to allow suspected straw-man purchasers to buy weapons. They allowed over 2000 guns to "walk" and almost entirely failed to track and recover those guns, and at the same time using that failure to argue FOR the rifle registry that are now operating. There were other gun-walking sting operations run under the Bush administration, which were much smaller in scope and had mixed success on recovering the weapons.

Russian/Indian stealth fighter: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/russia-50-stealth-fighter-unveiled-air-show/story?id=14315928

Chinese stealth fighter: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703808704576061674166905408.html

You're right. the F22 was designed during the cold war. And that's the problem. The design is nearly 30 years old. Know that line about how tech just gets easier and more widespread over time? The F22 is only JUST NOW entering service....around the same time that the countries that pose the biggest threat to us are also getting their first operational stealth jets up and running.

And they aren't taking 30 years to do it.

The situation isn't different, that's a myth. You have two choices: develop the tech to stay on top of the pyramid first, or play catch up after someone else does. The Chinese and Russians aren't catching up...they have CAUGHT UP.

If you don't think we need the F22 or its ilk you are a sadly mistaken fool. F15s have structural problems now after nearly 40 years. F14s are retired. F18s dont have the same air superiority capability as dedicated platforms and are likewise old (and most of the Super Hornets are not new airframes, but upgraded geriatrics). F16s are starting to develop issues too.

CEOs can quantify their value in real dollars and that's how they get paid.

The problem with CEO pay is that this is precisely what is NOT happening. Only recently have large shareholders started to get a clue on this vast waste of their capital.

-l

Recall that F/A 18 that hit an apartment complex in Virginia Beach? No one died. If the plane hit a packed sports arena, that would be a different story entirely.

Hey, remember that time that full-size airliners crashed into buildings in a densely populated city? I'm sure knocking those things down with a missile totally wouldn't have killed a whole bunch of people anyway, sure.

It's generally harder to steal military aircraft and a similarly sized civil plane doesn't have the raw speed to cause that much damage.

Recall that F/A 18 that hit an apartment complex in Virginia Beach? No one died. If the plane hit a packed sports arena, that would be a different story entirely.

Obama has issued a veto threat.

Might as well spent a minute or two letting him know that you think he should indeed veto the bill.

Or at least go sign the petition.

Obama has issued a veto threat.

Might as well spent a minute or two letting him know that you think he should indeed veto the bill.

Obama has issued a veto threat.

[citation provided], asshole.

'Pass contraband'. But why go through all that trouble when you could just... I dunno, just use TSA employees directly

Look, In all seriousness, how do we shut these guys down, defund them, stop these asinine patdown procedures, -anything-. I have yet to hear -one- single good story about anybodys experience with these goons, and that's not a good sign about how this agency is being run. Theft of equipment, drug dealing, molesting children 'in accordance with policy', it all smacks of an agency running by the seat of their pants and at the very least having some very bad employee screening processes, let alone with the main issue of violating our freedom to be secure in our persons and free from (what is without a doubt!) unreasonable search (and seizure).

So, Mr. White Guy gets the right to follow around people with a gun,

First off, he is a Hispanic man with an interesting history:

The 28-year-old insurance-fraud investigator comes from a deeply Catholic background and was taught in his early years to do right by those less fortunate. He was raised in a racially integrated household and himself has black roots through an Afro-Peruvian great-grandfather - the father of the maternal grandmother who helped raise him.

Second, he had a concealed carry permit, so he could carry a concealed firearm, period.

Third, are you saying Zimmerman should not have called the police?

Why might Zimmerman have had an interest?

A criminal justice student who aspired to become a judge, Zimmerman also concerned himself with the safety of his neighbors after a series of break-ins committed by young African-American men.

Though civil rights demonstrators have argued Zimmerman should not have prejudged Martin, one black neighbor of the Zimmermans said recent history should be taken into account.

"Let's talk about the elephant in the room. I'm black, OK?" the woman said, declining to be identified because she anticipated backlash due to her race. She leaned in to look a reporter directly in the eyes. "There were black boys robbing houses in this neighborhood," she said. "That's why George was suspicious of Trayvon Martin."

harrass them and finally shoot them for the deadly threat of walking around while black and carrying skittles,

Carrying skittles? Do you think this is the bag? -> Zimmerman Injuries Seen in Exclusive Photo

"Walking around while black" . . . like Zimmermans great grandfather? And one more interesting bit -

“You will recall the incident of the beating of the black homeless man Sherman Ware on December 4, 2010 by the son of a Sanford police officer. The beating sparked outrage in the community but there were very few that stepped up to do anything about it. I would presume the inaction was because of the fact that he was homeless not because he was black. Do you know the individual who stepped up when no one else in the black community would?

while the black boy should have called the police.

Zimmerman did call the police - he spent a considerable amount of time on the phone with them. And yes, it would have been a much better idea for Martin, who had a phone with him and was chatting on it, to have called the police if he was worried, instead of apparently assaulting Zimmerman.

I get it, "standing your ground" is . .

Stand your ground doesn't have anything to do with this.

. . .only for your fellow Stormfront members, you racist fucker. You are so full of it, one day you gonna explode in a quite dramatic crapageddon.

Don't you claim to be a biochemist? Do you have any ability to engage in a rational, fact based discussion on this matter? You certainly haven't demonstrated that you do. You might want to talk to a counselor, you seem to have some issues.

Now facebook can monitor you even more effectively.

No, it's just the Axis partners aligning themselves for another battle.

Microsoft and Facebook have formed gang to beat on Google. This time, Microsoft paid for the ammunition, but Facebook will be pulling the trigger. Interestingly enough, there are hints that Apple may be piling on too.

http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000850.html
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/some-of-the-anti-google-tea-party-is-astroturf/6496
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-05-12/facebook-enlists-pr-firm-burson-marsteller-to-pitch-google-privacy-story.html
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/google-deflects-pr-firms-attack-gmail-privacy/story?id=13566971#.T5XZdFRUTrE
http://www.nytimes.com/1996/03/13/business/seeking-to-fix-damaged-image-apple-hires-burson-marsteller.html
http://www.burson-marsteller.com/Innovation_and_insights/blogs_and_podcasts/harold_burson_blog/default.aspx

Why can't you do your own research You'll just try to discredit this anyway.

Not only that: the non-immune kids, once you break past herd immunity numbers, become the incubators of the mutations that break out of the vaccination wall.

If the virus mutated sufficiently to get past the vaccination, then anyone would be equally likely to get the virus. From what the article says, this is about reduced effectiveness of the vaccine, not mutation of the disease. If this statement was valid, one would expect outbreaks at the level of before pertussis vaccinations were introduced.

So:
81% fully vaccinated.
11% incomplete.
8% unvaccinated.

If you'd read a little closer, you'd see these vaccination rates are for those who actually contracted the disease, not the vaccination rates for California in general. The two data elements are completely unrelated, unless all kids in California contracted the disease.

"The longer you went from your last vaccine, the greater your risk of disease," Witt told Reuters Health. At age 13, the number of cases dropped, presumably because that's the age when children are eligible for their booster shot.

Aha! The REAL pattern begins to emerge:

Broken herd immunity lets the disease in: those with incomplete vaccinations begin to be affected at higher rates than those who have received the booster shot. In essence, age 12 - due to the pacing of the booster shots - is effectively a risk zone.

Um, no. To quote the article:

Witt and his colleagues suggest that the booster seems to come too late, leaving pre-teens at an increased risk of catching pertussis.

But moving up the Tdap booster shot to an earlier age is not so easy, Clark said, and it might not fix the problem.

So, unlike you, the experts acknowledge that vaccinations become less effective over time, and that that is the root cause of the higher rate of disease for that age range. The question is, what is to be done about that. The experts don't seem to agree on what is the best option.

This is why "religious objections" for booster shots are such fucking bullshit: being unvaccinated DOES cause societal risk. We need 92% minimum coverage for herd immunity and we do not have it.

Ignoring your incorrect assumptions about the percentages, which I pointed out above, perhaps it's the attitude and equally incorrect information (as those making the "religious objections") you provide that causes people like me, who are looking for unbiased or, failing that, more balanced information to reserve our judgement of vaccinations. All I see are cheerleaders, on either side of the equation. Note that I'm not saying you're entirely incorrect, just equally as the other cheerleaders.

Here's a little further reading. ABC News: "While coverage rates for the childhood pertussis vaccine series hover around 90 percent of recommended recipients, rates for the Tdap booster are now around 30 percent, according to the CDC." So, it appears that we haven't reached the 92% min. you claim, which I haven't verified (and, given your other errors, don't take on credit), but we're also much closer than you asserted above.

People like you do nothing to promote your cause.

they don't finger fuck anyone, and you look like an ass for making it up. Stop It, You Are Not Helping. You are making people that need to be involved think people who are against are crazy assholes. You do not win support that way, and no matter how right you may be , without support nothing changes.

You, sir, obviously do not follow politics: Politicians make outrageous, nonsensical statements daily, and their constituents eat that shit up, no questions asked. Therefore, your implication that my pointing out how TSA agents are legalized pedophiles (which, BTW, is not made up) somehow damages efforts to reign their child-molesting asses in, is, in essence, complete and utter bullshit.

If anything, Asshole apologists such as yourself are the real danger here - everyone play nice, don't yell, don't make a fuss... just think of unicorn farts and rainbow burgers while the nice government agents rape your children.

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=2682730&page=1#.T43CilQo0Tw

Yes, you can call it biased... yet no liberals have ever been able to disprove it, just attack the authors without substantive arguments.

Remove churches from the population of charities and watch that figure PLUMMET.

That's just wrong. Republicans... conservatives donate a higher percentage of their income to charities than liberals; they also donate more blood and time. Paying taxes and sinking this country into a fiscal debt crisis is not "charity." If you are not making the decision, it's not "charity" and it's not "magnanimous" on your part. If you believe in Jesus then you must believe did NOT support not giving people the choice... you have to be judged on your OWN actions, not what you were forced to do. (for the record, I'm not religious, and I use this very same argument against religious people who want to control my life, too)

Who Gives and Who Doesn't.. Yes, you can call it biased... yet no liberals have ever been able to disprove it, just attack the authors without substantive arguments.

The article makes very interesting associations without any proof of causation. Just because the people in one area that happens to be primarily republican purportedly gave more than the people in another area which is primarily liberal does not at all indicate whether the people giving are republican or liberal, or rich or poor. Already that they were collecting at Macy's and Wal-Mart breaks the comparison as Macy's is a bit more expensive than Wal-Mart. It's a bullshit report. The entire thought of the rich being more generous is idiotic to start with so I didn't bother reading the second part of the article as it only confirms this and has no bearing on the conservative vs. liberal point you're making. It would have been more interesting to know if the rich who do not give are conservative or liberal but of course that would have gone against the slant of the article against 'liberals' so it wasn't included.

They use religion to back up their opinions where it is supported, and any other useful tidbit when it doesn't. Do you think Jesus would have supported the NRA?

I don't think Jesus would care one way or another about the NRA.

I want to think you're joking but I suppose that you aren't. How could Jesus, proponent of peace, father of the meek, possibly not care about the propagation of weapons that are only meant to kill? What an amazing thing to say.

Cutting school budgets to get the latest F-35 bombers that the military doesn't even want?

You're right about one thing, it's not based on religion that they do this... it's based on what's written in the constitution; based on the failure of our educational system despite the wanton amounts of money we throw at it (BTW, Bush increased educational spending more than anyone else in the previous four decades... what did he get for it? The disdain of the left, of course.).

It's not based on what's written in the constitution. It's based on pockets being filled - contractors and politicians both.

Bush got disdain because he appeared to be a complete idiot not only during times of crisis but more or less every time he opened his mouth. If he increased educational spending it was no doubt on the request of his wife but whatever. America's problems with education are not particularly financial. More money won't change that conservatives / republicans are trying to teach creationism, for example.

As far as military spending - you're right. I'm not a republican, I think they've been terrible leaders since Bush's election... but I also think democrats seem to have been inspired to one-up the terribleness.

Think what you want - I won't change your mind, I realize that the people asking the most for open mindedness are typically the most closed minded of all. But between the way liberals want to destroy this country and the way the republicans want to destroy this country, the republicans are much less "bad," even if they're not good.

I don't think that either liberals or republicans particularly want to destroy the country, but I di

Why is this moderated down? Because it is expressing a bigoted religious prejudice. Attacking education is not limited to any one of 'the three middle eastern religions', they all do it. If the argument was against monotheistic organised religion in general, then I agree with it. But when US christians point the finger at muslims I can't help thinking of the exact same kinds of acts being perpetrated by US christians. Like "...burning black churches and schools" Killing women and children. Yes I realise it is unfair to blame christianity for the actions of these individuals, but that is true for psychotic religious zealots from other religions too.

Sarcasm detected. Yes, Republicans are a cultural movement, not religious. They cater to both moral and fiscal conservatives despite obvious inconsistencies, such as Jesus helping the poor and budget cutting anything that helps poor people.

That's just wrong. Republicans... conservatives donate a higher percentage of their income to charities than liberals; they also donate more blood and time. Paying taxes and sinking this country into a fiscal debt crisis is not "charity." If you are not making the decision, it's not "charity" and it's not "magnanimous" on your part. If you believe in Jesus then you must believe did NOT support not giving people the choice... you have to be judged on your OWN actions, not what you were forced to do. (for the record, I'm not religious, and I use this very same argument against religious people who want to control my life, too)

Who Gives and Who Doesn't.. Yes, you can call it biased... yet no liberals have ever been able to disprove it, just attack the authors without substantive arguments.

They use religion to back up their opinions where it is supported, and any other useful tidbit when it doesn't. Do you think Jesus would have supported the NRA?

I don't think Jesus would care one way or another about the NRA.

Cutting school budgets to get the latest F-35 bombers that the military doesn't even want?

You're right about one thing, it's not based on religion that they do this... it's based on what's written in the constitution; based on the failure of our educational system despite the wanton amounts of money we throw at it (BTW, Bush increased educational spending more than anyone else in the previous four decades... what did he get for it? The disdain of the left, of course.). As far as military spending - you're right. I'm not a republican, I think they've been terrible leaders since Bush's election... but I also think democrats seem to have been inspired to one-up the terribleness.

Think what you want - I won't change your mind, I realize that the people asking the most for open mindedness are typically the most closed minded of all. But between the way liberals want to destroy this country and the way the republicans want to destroy this country, the republicans are much less "bad," even if they're not good.

I'm completely unbiased on the male vs female front

Well that's a pretty strong claim. On what do you base that?

You probably don't discriminate on purpose, but according t studies our impression of a person varies based on factors that we are not consciously aware of.

If makeup can make a woman look more trustworthy, and tall people earn more that short people, I'd say that people can hold biases that they're themselves unaware of. Some may be biological rather than cultural. Men have been shown to take different economic choices after being shown a photograph of an attractive women.

Given all that I wonder if you can state confidently that you're unbiased on something as ingrained in both our culture and nature as the issue of gender without actually having performed a blind test.

Unless this stalker controls a huge botnet, how much spam posts can he really make on their forum?

Do not underestimate the obsessive. Example, one dutch woman stalked a guy and called him 65000 times in a year :

"A look at the statistical breakdown of the woman’s phone-calling habits sheds light on the multiple cellphones seized in the raid of her home.
To reach 65,000 calls, the woman had to have called 178 times a day. That’s nearly eight calls an hour, 24 hours a day, seven days a week or one phone call every eight minutes, without ever stopping."

It's funny, but I don't recall that the NKVD, KGB, SMERSH, or other secret police organs of Soviet Power in the USSR worried about blood feuds from torture, or any of that. They simply tortured and killed in staggering numbers.

The KGB prison in Vilnius at The Museum of Genocide Victims

solitary confinement cell, KGB style.

Surprise!

And the Gulags?

What Were Their Crimes? Living in the Gulag Stalin World - Lithuania

The Great Terror: A Reassessment

- - - - -

Torture is ineffective and diminishes the society that condones torture. I still think that the stories that came out last decade are a big part of why American society is so psychotic today.

Some small segments of American society did become unhinged, yes, but not anything close to all of American society.

Keep in perspective that: Only Three Have Been Waterboarded by CIA The most recent of which was about 9 years ago.

Many people are also mistaken regarding what went on at Abu Ghraib. The Army put a stop to abuse by a handful of rogue soldiers who were abusing prisoners, court martialed them, and sent them to jail. All the news media really did was report the news of the Army investigation, and what had gone on. Of course it is more profitable, poltically and financially, to spin dark conspiracy theories when the reality is closer to Jackass: The Movie.

Iraq abuse photos were `just for fun'

Private Lynndie England, the woman who has become the emblem of the US' shame over the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, on Tuesday showed little expression aside from an occasional nervous giggle at a hearing to determine whether she should face the full weight of a court martial.

When first confronted with pictures of her gloating over naked and cowering Iraqi prisoners, England had shown no alarm, telling the officer who led the investigation of the Abu Ghraib scandal in Iraq: "It was just for fun."

That lack of comprehension returned to haunt her yesterday as the prevailing view of the US military -- that England and the handful of other lowly reservists charged in the abuse were rogue soldiers -- began to emerge more fully.

"They didn't think it was that serious. They were just joking around and having some fun during the night shift," Chief Warrant Officer Paul Arthur told the court.

He added later: "From the get-go, it was jokes and frustration." . . . .

If England is convicted on all 19 charges, she could face 38 years in the brig. Some 25 witnesses are to appear including Specialist Joseph Darby, the soldier who first came forward about the abuse, and Specialist Jeremy Sivitz, who was granted relative leniency for cooperating with the investigation.
Much of the prosecution's evidence is from photographs, with more than 280 images of abuse of detainees, . . . The images first came to the attention of the authorities last January.

Arthur, a member of the military CID, was at Abu Ghraib when a soldier in England's military police

Yep, and the launch failed.

Of course, even a failed launch is still valuable information for North Korea, as that is part of the whole point of such tests.

Fair enough. Of course I live in the "communist" state of Canada, where we believe in universal health care. I am not really well versed on the specifics of the American model, other than that it costs more per capita and covers a smaller percentage of Americans. Also, I don't have to worry about walking into a hospital and worrying if my insurance company is going to deny my lifesaving treatment because I forgot to cross a 'T' in my name (thankfully, there are no Ts in my names).

I'll just rely on a quick google search, with the first few hits challenging your earlier assertion regarding the coverage situation, at least as it relates to "your sides" arguments.
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2011/08/05/289117/hannity-blasts-insurance-coverage-for-birth-control-defends-viagra-that-is-a-medical-problem/?mobile=nc

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=91538

http://entertainment.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/09/10622742-bill-oreilly-viagra-should-be-covered-birth-control-should-not

I find it funny that I got roped into this. I think I'm slipping. My main point was how you started with an argument against funding fusion research, and some how you compared it to the ongoing and sexist controversy regarding women's reproductive health. Kudos. You, sir, are a grade A troll.

You really want to go there? Because Viagra coverage has been dropped pretty much all over. Not that there was anyone demanding government intervention to force anyone to cover it, anyway.

Besides, it's not me promoting it. It's the Democratic party itself. Just happens to be the most current form of vote-buying going on.

I never had health problems when I was traveling in Eastern or Western Europe but I'm sure their hospitals have emergency rooms and I'm pretty sure they won't turn you away if you have a problem. Especially if you're a citizen of a country that has socialized medicine.

Right, I never see "No-Bama" bumper stickers, or this charming one http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/03/dont-re-nig-in-2012-maker-of-racist-anti-obama-sticker-shuts-down-site/

Get off your high horse.

Very, very early x-ray machines used considerably more radiation. Over a thousand times as much, according to some.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Wellness/century-ray-machine-shows-radiation-risks-yore/story?id=13140857#.T4R5CtXe4tY

I would imagine that it is possible to find a band of time over which radiation has decreased by 100, but how useful is it as a measure? Does it really matter that an x-ray machine emits 100x less over the course of a lifetime, or even a decade? If the dosage was so great a decade ago that it is still significant in dosage calculations then that is what we should be concerned about, not what the exposure is today.

Yeah, an example of that is the recent (by recent, sometime in the last couple years) conviction of a defense lawyer for "structuring." http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=7056927

For anyone unfamiliar with the term, it's the depositing of money into an account in such a way as to avoid triggering mandatory transaction reporting for banks. It's intended as a tack-on charge for money laundering when another crime has been committed. In this case, the lawyer did nothing wrong other than "structure" his deposits. The money was earned legally and all taxes had been paid on it. He even got to keep the money after being convicted, because it was earned legally and taxes had been paid on it. He committed no crime, but because his deposits were designed to not trigger mandatory reporting requirements from the bank, he now has a criminal record.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/accused-somali-pirates-head-trial-us-court/story?id=12093415
This is one answer.

This is one of the biggest reasons for our economic situation.

Amazon pays no UK tax, General Electric pays no US federal tax, and on and on.

By propping up existing companies. governments have been investing in stagnation for the last 20 years. It's reached the point where it's very difficult to start a new company.

Jobs aren't created by existing companies, jobs are created by starting new companies and by small companies growing large.

Yes, GE and Amazon have been job creators, but that was then. Once companies have enough employees to get their job done, hiring essentially stops. Workforce numbers among established companies is, to a large extent, static.

Jobs are created by starting new companies - but how can anyone compete? It's impossible to make a product that competes with a GE product. Even if the new product is better, GE has a lower margin because it pays no taxes.

IP laws (patent issues), intrusive useless regulations, intrusive tax accounting, ambiguous laws with discretionary enforcement set the barrier to entry for starting a business today very high.

A vibrant, healthy economy has lots of churn. Businesses need to adapt or die, and propping up businesses just because they are "established" runs counter to that goal.

It's no wonder that the economy hasn't recovered in 3 years - we don't allow it to change.

Trayvon Martin's killer claims teen punched him, slammed his head into ground

SANFORD, Fla. — The controversy surrounding the shooting death of teenager Trayvon Martin took a new turn Monday when the Orlando Sentinel reported Neighborhood Watch volunteer George Zimmerman told police Martin decked him with a single punch, then repeatedly slammed his head into the sidewalk.

The Sentinel said much of Zimmerman's account had been corroborated by witnesses, according to authorities.

Trayvon Martin Shooter Told Cops Teenager Went For His Gun

In addition, an eyewitness, 13-year-old Austin Brown, told police he saw a man fitting Zimmerman's description lying on the grass moaning and crying for help just seconds before he heard the gunshot that killed Martin.

The initial police report noted that Zimmerman was bleeding from the back of the head and nose, and after medical attention it was decided that he was in good enough condition to travel in a police cruiser to the Sanford, Fla., police station for questioning. He was not arrested.

Martin's girlfriend had said in a recording obtained exclusively by ABC News that she heard Martin ask Zimmerman "why are your following me, and then the man asked, what are you doing around here." She then heard a scuffle break out and the line went dead.

Oh, and the whole fight happened on the grass.

Intesting, in light of the police report:

police report that states Zimmerman was injured and treated at the scene:

"While I was in such close contact with Zimmerman, I could observe that his back appeared to be wet and was covered in grass, as if he had been laying on his back on the ground. Zimmerman was also bleeding from the nose and back of his head. . . .

Zimmerman was placed in the rear of my police vehicle and was given first aid by the SFD.

Note - "his back appeared to be wet and covered in grass" Hmmmm Grass for the back, concrete for the head.

Besides, the police let him go BEFORE there were any eyewitness reports.

Read the police report at the link. It is clear that the police at least knew who was there as they took names. Do you think they stopped at just taking names after someone was shot?

On the contrary, he had a head wound in the police footage. I -thought- I saw one when I first saw the video, but it was obscured by the ABC news banner/watermark. Competing media outlets are claiming that ABC edited the video, but it was probably just bad luck with the placement of that banner. (much like the watermark for TMZ and others like it, they probably just use software to stick it in the same place for every video/still)

Remember that this all took place over many many hours if not days. It didn't get picked up by the media until about three weeks later.

True, but look at the numbers and it's easy to see that they are, in fact, misleading. "Occupier takes a bathroom break in the street". ONE lone asshole in a huge crowd. You want lawbreaking? Look at Kentucky after a god damned basketball game.

At least one person was shot and dozens arrested in Lexington, Ky., early this morning as University of Kentucky students celebrated the schoolâ(TM)s NCAA basketball championship win.

What began as a chaotic celebration quickly turned into mayhem overnight as a crowd of 15,000 people rioted in the streets after the Wildcats defeated Kansas for their eighth championship win. Fire officials in Lexington said they put out more than 40 fires, including a car, several mattresses, couches and piles of garbage that were ignited.

The lone gunman, who left one man injured, remains on the loose.

Battalion Chief Ed Davis of the Lexington Division of Fire and Emergency Services witnessed the shooting firsthand as he was filling out paperwork on a wreck involving a fire engine around 2 a.m. Davis told the Associated Press he heard yelling and then one man firing a gun, âoequite a few times.â

Occupy is a church picnic in comparison.

If it was a White Extremest Christian my money is on property damage, or arson at most.

Yep, everyone refers to the 168 dead from the Oklahoma City bombing as "property damage" and no one ever refers to Timothy McVeigh as a terrorist.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/oklahoma/stories/ok042597.htm
http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0106/09/pitn.00.html
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=93055&page=1

Unless you don't count CNN, ABC and the Washington Post as "MSM".

Rush Limbaugh called a 30 year-old law student a slut because she wanted her insurance to pay for her birth control -- which she is probably on so she can fuck around and not get pregnant.

On no occasion in her testimony did Sandra Fluke use herself as an example for why she felt insurance should cover hormone pills. The examples she did use were of women with polycystic ovarian syndrome or endometriosis; in none of her examples was prevention of pregnancy the purpose of the pills. Rush Limbaugh appears to have been sexually attracted to her, which is fine; what is not clear is why he needed to express his fantasies about watching her have sex to the world at large.

Read the transcript of Sandra Fluke's testimony here: http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/statement-Congress-letterhead-2nd%20hearing.pdf

Nope. Because if an aircraft needs shooting down, it's the Air Force who comes to play.

The police don't even have the equipment (good thing) to do the job.

Think again. The NYPD commissioner bragged on 60 minutes last year that New York's Finest have the ability to shoot down aircraft. NYC Mayor Bloomberg later confirmed the remarks. http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/nypd-shoot-planes-weapon/story?id=14608555

Nobody will say how they would do it, though.