Slashdot Mirror

I agree, there is a problem here.
I think it is quite scary that people consider "good news" is supposed to come from reuters or google news in blurt form "without witty banter".
That is not good news, that is insipid, and usually uninteresting information! Whatever happened to investigative journalism, well argued opinion pieces and editorials!
Contrast articles on the guardian for example and stuff found on google from AP or reuters, or even the online edition of BBC news (which is becoming more boring by the day following the iraq "sexed up dossier" controversy, in fear of ever offending anyone...).
Sports of course is quite another matter, although I would actually argue that just seeing the highlights is not as interesting as seeing how a whole game progressed, say, in football (soccer). Cricket of course is an exception here, as the game can last a few days :-)
No, really, reducing news to "raw information" has something inherently thought-killing to it; beyond the most basic factual info you would have lost a whole universe of interpretation and debate.

A lot of what you write is either false or nonsense.

US foreign policy has done great harm in the Middle East, especially its policy regarding Israel, and the economic sanctions against Iraq (which killed a half a million children).

First of all, Iraq was under UN sanctions, not US sanctions.
Second, to the extent that the Iraqi people suffered under the sanctions, it was largely Saddam's doing as he siphoned off enormous amounts of money from the oil for food program to build up his military and build his opulent palaces. I hope that it isn't going too far to hold him accountable for stealing the money intended for food, medicine, and other essentials which Saddam then used to try and buy North Korean missiles? Or is that wrong? Doesn't the national government of dictators have any responsibility for its actions that adversely effect the people? Oh, and that figure of 500,000 children is a fiction as well.
Third, I think that most informed people realize that it enrages some Arabs, including those living in Palestine, that we do not stand idlely by while they commit Genocide, a stated goal of several Palestinian organizations, but the Jews have been put through one real genocide in the last century (6,000,000 documented killed in one country alone, oppression and pograms in others), don't you think that is enough? The Palestinians could have had peace at Oslo, but Araft couldn't have peace unless it was built upon the bodies of the Jews. The whole situation can largely be reduced to: If the Arabs stop fighting there will be peace, if the Jews stop fighting there will be no more Jews.

Mounting anger in the Middle East fuels terrorism, and our government uses this to justify the Patriot Act, the rights violations perpetrated in the name of the "War on Terror", and to excuse ..... etc. etc. etc.

That is quite a parade or horribles you have there. You are fundamentally mistaken if you believe that there is more than a couple of Arab nations which the US could teach much of anything about torture to. When it comes to Abu Ghraib, what we did was childs play compared to what Saddam did. Saddams minions amputated limbs, filled massed graves, starved children, threw people into shredding machines, and all manner of other atrocities. Although it may seem to be too fine a point to some, Saddam authorized, encouraged, and rewarded his torturers. Torture of the most vicious kind was state policy under Saddam, and Saddam was know to have participated from time to time. The US is investigating and punishing those who abused and performed acts of torture. Any claim of moral equivalence is wrong and foolish. The idea that this is either a plot to, or will lead to, the US being a "fascist state" is farcical.

On the path that it is on, our government can never hope to end terrorism. It will only learn how to effectively terrorize its own citizens. Our founders offered a different path: with checks and balances to keep our government in line, and the kind of respect for the independence of other countries that would allow us to make peace with all the peoples of the Middle East, thereby depriving the terrorists of the hatred and anger that fuels them. Without popular support, terrorists become unpopular criminals that anyone would turn in.

You fundamentally misunderstand the problem. Completely. The problem with Al Qaeda is that we are not a Muslim nation. Read bin Laden's letter to America to see his demands. There will be no peace with them, we have two choices: 1. Become a Muslim nation and put in place all of the laws and practices that he demands, or 2. Subdue or otherwise kill the majority of the terrorits until they lose their taste for war against the US.

I was talking about this to some people today, actually. Recently, there was a poll where voters preferred the idea of having Bush flipping burgers at their barbecue, and having Kerry teach their children. Which is microcosmic of what the differences between Bush and Kerry are in fact. Bush seems like he would be a funny guy to have over for lunch, despite the fact that he could be an asshole at times and generally was close-minded, uneducated, loud and obnoxious. Kerry, on the other hand, would be a stuck-up prick of a guest, with his nose high in the air, subtly critcizing your choice in wine. There is no doubt about it, Kerry is a jerk-off (which is of course why websites like this were made).

But as far as job qualification goes, he's got it in spades over Bush. And what is ultimately more important (seeing on how our presidents of the last few decades have been nothing more than symbols, like the Queen of England), the people Kerry would surround himself with and would be making the policies would be infinitely better than Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Rice and the bunch.

That is exactly one of the major points in that new book "Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror", written by an anonymous senior US intelligence official (now thought to be Michael Scheuer).

The book claims that bin Laden may strike the US before November to get the public to rally around Bush, as the anonymous official is "very sure [the terrorists] can't have a better administration for them than the one they have now" (the Bush Administration). Read more at this Guardian Article.

I am currently working on a web site with CSS driven menus. To get IE to work, we have to override event handlers in Javascript to get IE to behave properly.

I too feel your pain! Not only that, if you want the CSS to validate properly the "behaviour" thang in the IE the CSS hover hack is non standard so will make the W3C validator barf. So you (still) have to do browser detection, but for the CSS instead of the HTML! I've had to hack and slash to get my home page working any where near reasonably. Even then, I got it working ok in IE5, looked at it in IE6 and it's ridiculously different. In case you are wondering all the HTML pages validate perfectly, as do the CSS. So they should not look fundamentally different!

As far as CSS goes, great idea. How about *someone* implementing it correctly? Even Mozilla (which is far better than IE) does a lousy job occasionally (for example font manipulation is non existent). For a prime example of rubbish CSS handling, go to any page on my home page in Mozilla and do "print preview". For some reason it barfs on the drop caps (of course IE doesnt *do* the drop caps anyhow). Moz formats them fine in screen view but not in print preview, (the CSS just hides the columns and widens the content part for printing). If I want it to avoid looking totally stupid I have to get rid of the drop caps. Bah!

Speaking of Mozilla (4.78) it's not even all that stable, for instance it crashes when visiting The Guardian

Aaargh! I feel like going off on a rant again.... Time to go home!

Linkage:

Le Tour

BBC's Le Tour page

The Guardian's page has excellant recaps

Sports Illustrated's page

ESPN

OLN has the DAILY TV SCHEDULE

8:30-9am ET LIVE Pre-Race Show
9-11am ET LIVE Coverage
12pm-2pm ET Re-Air of Live Coverage
2:30-4:30pm ET Re-Air of Live Coverage
5-7pm ET The Roadside Tour
7:30-8pm ET Eastern Prime Time Pre-Race Show
8-8:30pm PT Pacific Prime Time Pre-race Show
8-10:30pm ET Eastern Prime Time Expanded Coverage
8:30-11pm PT Pacific Prime Time Expanded Coverage

Any other link recommendations?

Billy

The true nature of the "Black Death" was long a mystery, but early in the 20th Century, after doctors had found and described bubonic plague in India, experts jumped to the conclusion that a more virulent form of that disease, endemic in rats and transmitted to humans by their fleas, was the real culprit.
This was a comforting conclusion, because it meant it was a bacterial disease with a complicated life cycle, easily contained by hygiene and antibiotics. But it never actually made sense, because the standard treatment for the Black Death, tried and tested over three hundred years, was to quarantine affected families and villages for forty days. That could not have worked if it were carried by rats, which do not respect quarantines. So two years ago Professors Christopher Duncan and Susan Scott of Liverpool University suggested in their book, Biology of Plagues, that the Black Death was really an Ebola like virus, a haemorrhagic fever transmitted directly from person to person.

Actually, the mistake is classifying the black plague as bubonic plague. (a very common misconception because of what they have taught us in schools)
I saw a program where they explained why the black plague of late middle ages couldn't have been the bubonic plague.
The black plague simptoms and "modus operandi" was far more related to the haemorrhagic plague than bubonic plague.
A fast google search rendered these items:
Black Death blamed on man, not rats
Bubonic plague didn't cause the Black Death
But im sure that if you look further, you will find more info.

Why do overlook the Weapons of Mass Destruction In Israel ?

Regards,
Kilgore Trout

Details here. They were trying to freeze the money of an existing customer which by law he is entitled to on demand.

"This also shows why as soon as they are in power, they invent a war in order to provide more government money to their big contractor buddies (Halliburton, KBR, Enron, etc.). Sure, the webserver expenditures are only a small part of it, but it shows how completely the GOP has been bought and paid for by large corporations."

I doubt Enron has been profiteering in Iraq. I certainly haven't seen any news suggesting that. Bechtel would be a better example.

Its interesting to note that the CPA has actually spent a small fraction, 2 percent, of the $18+ billion Congress allocated to rebuild Iraq. A link.
I imagine Halliburton and KBR are raking in lots of money from the military's budget which is separate from this $18 billion reconstruction fund so your statement of "more government money for their big contractor buddies" is still true. KBR cashes in on every American war and have since at least Vietnam when KBR was Brown and Root.

As far as Iraq's reconstruction it appears the U.S. has instead been spending or locking in Iraq's current and future oil revenue. Before the U.S. transfered power they'd spent or locked in $19 billion out of $20 billion dollars in Iraq's oil fund.

The CPA argues that they are just slow to spend the U.S. tax dollars, ramp up time, security problems ....blah....blah...blah and it will gain momentum but Iraqis have noticed that the CPA has been spending their oil revenue unfettered by these problem.

I imagine American's take this news with mixed emotions. On the plus side I imagine most American's would rather Iraq rebuild itself using its oil wealth instead of American tax dollars.

Then again the Bush administration has had big rhetoric about its commitment to rebuilding Iraq and in critical areas like electricity, security, sanitation and health care its proving to be somewhat empty rhetoric. Lengthy blackouts are still routine more than a year after the invasion. The rhetoric was similar in Afghanistan and was largely not matched by actual money or rebuilding.

Assuming Iraq's oil revenue is largely going in to the pockets of American contractors like Halliburton this suggests, though I'm not saying proves, that the U.S. did in fact steal Iraq's oil revenues which is also something Bush adminstration rhetoric said it would not do.

Maybe its just me but I think the U.S. should be spending U.S. tax dollars on contracts to U.S. companies in Iraq, and Iraqi's should be spending Iraq's oil revenue on Iraqi companies and making sure their people are employed which would be the single biggest stabilizer possible there. No country with 30% unemployment is going to be happy or stable, especially when those unemployed people see American contractors running all over their country, taking most of the work, and raking in six figure salaries.

<grouse>

Amen.

Every ./ user should be using bugmenot by now. And every person who whines about subscription required should be using and promoting bugmenot! I don't think there's anything wrong with the NYTimes asking for registration. I think it's wrong that you slackers are complaining about it, rather than showing them the futility of trying to gather information this way.

It's similar to people who protests against copyright laws, but aren't actively distributing copyrighted material. The only way to beat the system is to BREAK it. If you aren't being civily disobediant, you are supporting the law.

</grouse>

Finally, as regards the article itself:

But the politics surrounding open-source software do not always fit neatly into party categories. The people who work on software like the Linux operating system, the Apache Web server and others are an eclectic bunch of technologists. "You'll find gun nuts along with total lefties," Linus Torvalds, the creator of Linux, said in an e-mail message.

So the real point here is that support of open source has nothing to do with political ideology?

"It may be that the populist-versus-establishment dynamic plays out as Democrat versus Republican in this election," Mr. Weitzner said. "But the open-source movement is a populist phenomenon, enabled by the Internet, and not a partisan force in any traditional sense of politics."

So, the article says CLEARLY that open source is not a stricly republican or democrat favorite.

Eric Raymond, a leading open-source advocate, writing in his online "Jargon File," described the politics of the archetypal open-source programmer, whom he calls J. Random Hacker, as "vaguely liberal-moderate, except for the strong libertarian contingent, which rejects conventional left-right politics entirely."

And of course Libertarians are further right on the political line graph than republicans, and they are big supporters of OSS. So OSS views actually have NOTHING to do with your political party?

This story is pure and simple propoganda. The headline and opening paragraphs make it seem like republicans are against open source. It would be like saying Democrats are against gay marriage just because John Kerry is The reality is that politics, like OSS decisions are all about choice. In this case, one person chose their platform of choice. For example, This Repbulican introduced legislation in Texas which seeks to ensure that free/open-source software is given a level playing field when competing with proprietary products in state agencies There was a /. article about it a year ago, but damned if I can find it now.

That doesn't mean all republicans are pro OSS either. It just means that

OSS is prefered by everyone who gets to know it

the NYTimes is pro-Kerry

if you must read the Times, read the whole article.

Sometimes (pun intended) the reporting is good, but the headlines are rarely written by the reporters who know the story. Editors write headlines, and they write the headline that will get the most people to buy the paper. They slant them as per their personal choice and perception as to wh

The ratio of 1:1.618 is known as the Golden Ratio

Mikey Moore is to the world of politics what crapflooding trolls are to Slashdot discussions.

Presuming you want to inform yourself (rather than protect yourself from insights that might contradict with your current opinions), I'd recommend starting to read more (by all means continue to read whatever if anything you're currently reading regularly).

The background/big picture:

Read:

• Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media (there's also a film, well worth your time, again, if you're interested in informing yourself).
• The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money & Power, a Pulitzer-prize winning book on the oil industry by Daniel Yergin. This is a must if you're to understand world politics, especially U.S foreign policy.
• John Pilger for interesting real news from around the world. Also take the time to read what he's written in the past.

Once you've done the above, you'll probably understand the need for finding good sources of daily news. Try any of the BBC news outlets and for example The Guardian. The Guardian also runs a news service regarding the news media itself, at media.guardian.co.uk (free registration required). For example, MediaGuardian runs a continuous special report on Iraq - the media war.

Sorry for the wakeup-call.

"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you".

-- Don Marquis

Mikey Moore is to the world of politics what crapflooding trolls are to Slashdot discussions.

Presuming you want to inform yourself (rather than protect yourself from insights that might contradict with your current opinions), I'd recommend starting to read more (by all means continue to read whatever if anything you're currently reading regularly).

The background/big picture:

Read:

• Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media (there's also a film, well worth your time, again, if you're interested in informing yourself).
• The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money & Power, a Pulitzer-prize winning book on the oil industry by Daniel Yergin. This is a must if you're to understand world politics, especially U.S foreign policy.
• John Pilger for interesting real news from around the world. Also take the time to read what he's written in the past.

Once you've done the above, you'll probably understand the need for finding good sources of daily news. Try any of the BBC news outlets and for example The Guardian. The Guardian also runs a news service regarding the news media itself, at media.guardian.co.uk (free registration required). For example, MediaGuardian runs a continuous special report on Iraq - the media war.

Sorry for the wakeup-call.

"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you".

-- Don Marquis

Mikey Moore is to the world of politics what crapflooding trolls are to Slashdot discussions.

Presuming you want to inform yourself (rather than protect yourself from insights that might contradict with your current opinions), I'd recommend starting to read more (by all means continue to read whatever if anything you're currently reading regularly).

The background/big picture:

Read:

• Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media (there's also a film, well worth your time, again, if you're interested in informing yourself).
• The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money & Power, a Pulitzer-prize winning book on the oil industry by Daniel Yergin. This is a must if you're to understand world politics, especially U.S foreign policy.
• John Pilger for interesting real news from around the world. Also take the time to read what he's written in the past.

Once you've done the above, you'll probably understand the need for finding good sources of daily news. Try any of the BBC news outlets and for example The Guardian. The Guardian also runs a news service regarding the news media itself, at media.guardian.co.uk (free registration required). For example, MediaGuardian runs a continuous special report on Iraq - the media war.

Sorry for the wakeup-call.

"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you".

-- Don Marquis

Bush went to war in Afghanistan for an oil pipeline. Hey, it's a lie, but you know, that's just an insignificant nitpick.

Oh! Yes, that's a lie

Yes, citizens' rights is a concern, however, refer to a comment I have posted previously, It's 2004 People.

I think you underestimate the repressiveness of the Chinese government. Let's not forget that this is the same government that massacred hundreds or thousands of pro-democracy protesters in front of CNN's cameras. And, for the 15th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre, they shutdown access to the Square and 'disappeared' activists!

here

or you could just google for Acclaim and gravestones

This browser warning page thoroughly trashes MSIE, but every phrase is linked to a news article that uses the exact same verbiage in order to demonstrate that it isn't just anti MS FUD - It's the honest truth. It's designed and maintained for webmasters to deliver to the IE-using visitors to their webpages. You can read the source code for some more information about that. In case you're curious, here's a paste of the text and links that it has - This should prove quite effective with anyone you're trying to convince to stop using IE:

Your web browser - a version of Microsoft Internet Explorer - may not function properly on this website, and could have a large number of problems that allow hackers to hijack it with viruses. These viruses could be used by criminals to secretly take over your computer, download child-pornography, or to commit acts of terrorism and fraud. You may automatically update it now with Microsoft's available patches, however, there is a possibility that a necessary patch will not be available due to Microsoft's somewhat sluggish development schedule.

The US Department of Homeland Security strongly suggests that you stop using Internet Explorer immediately.

There are several standards-compliant web browsers that you may use instead of Internet Explorer. Please install one of them as a replacement.

• Opera [Download Now]
• Mozilla [Download Now]
• Netscape [Download Now]
• K-Meleon [Download Now]

If you suspect that your computer is already being used for criminal activity, it is critical that you seek help from a computer professional in your local area. You may also try one of the free web-based virus scanners that are available.

terminology of liberalism and peace hijacked by Palestinian warmongers

The Palestinians dont spend 3 Billion American dollars a year on weapons of mass destruction, missiles, satellites, nuclear weapons, helicopters and submarines

Some warmongers.

As ever you ammericans are behind the times on this! The Guardian published a similar article a couple of months back: The Role of Play.

My personal favorite idea for a political game would be a god game with the whole world instead of a city. You would play the UN,WTO and other global orginisations. Missions might be things like: "Feed the world", "Eliminate Poverty", "Stop Climate Change" but I've a feeling these might be a bit tricky.

Atlantic Monthly They regularly link to past stories in order to give better historical reference to current news items. I think the earliest story they have that mentions Saddam Hussein is from the late 1950's.

Harpers Yet another independantly owned journal that's not afraid to piss off thier advertisers.

The New Yorker Not independant, but has a long tradition of actually checking their facts. Great comics (understated, yet twisted, humor).

I also read my hometown newspaper every day, plus the New York Times on Sundays, and I scan BBC News, Google News, and The Guardian world news online daily. Plastic is good for getting an idea of what (somewhat educated) people think of the goings on in the world, and B3TA is a somewhat effective cure fore too much awareness of world events.

I also get The National Security Archive newsletter in my email about once a week or so.

For tech, I mostly read Linux Journal, SysAdmin, and occasionally Doctor Dobbs Journal.

Of course I always read The Debian Weekly News and /..

plus, occasionally,
Guardian Weekend (who don't seem to have a specific site)
Esquire

Fundamentally, though, I want well-written, beautifully illustrated stories about fast cars and I'm happy! I don't ask for much :-)

Well as the AG of the US, Ashcroft is in charge of the Justice Department and along with his boss, Dubya, is ultimately responsible for the policies that drive such decisions. So it's perfectly fair to bring up his name in an article relating to the actions of DoJ.

Fine I won't make fun of the fact that he believes in Jesus, but can I still make fun of his fear of calico cats, fear of the breast of Justice , the ritual annoiting in cooking oil for every office he takes or for his musical stylings?

You don't need to impeach him; you just need to stop DC supermarkers from stocking cooking oil around his next swearing in ceremony. As we all know, Ashcroft is such a religious nutcase that he literally has himself annointed with oil, he'd never get sworn in, and we'd be rid of him once and for all.

Hmm.... but then who would spend 8,000$ on drapes to cover up naked statues, run scared from Calico cats, try and stop states from implementing their voter-approved euthenasia laws, or crack down on elderly pot smokers? Do we really want him gone? :)

I'm not sure the stereotype is "from nowhere." Take a look at what some Brits have to say on the subject:

Until the NHS started up, and before the availability of fluoride in toothpaste (or water), our British teeth were spectacularly ugly. Look at any film footage of average Britons before about 1945, and weep. The standard of living of the contemporary American probably afforded them better dental care; and, I suspect, a certain cultural austerity would have meant that corrective procedures such as braces would be regarded by us Brits as extravagance and vanity.
- Simon Gilman, London UK

I think Simon Gilman has put it best. Having spent my first 20 years in America and 14 years since living in the UK, I find that the average Brit is satisfied with teeth that might be crooked, stained, even slightly rotten, if they aren't causing much discomfort to their owner. Average Americans have much higher standards of expectation in the state of their dental health -- regardless of whether they have to pay for dental treatment or not, they feel very strongly that good teeth are a wise investment in looks and health. Many visits to the dentist by average Brits happen only after something has gone horribly wrong with their teeth, whilst Americans take an actively preventative approach with semi-annual dental checkups and intervention before any problems become severe. As a result of the greater amount of attention that Americans pay to their teeth, they are far more likely to notice and comment on the state of other people's teeth.
- Wendy James, London UK

And this is just too funny not to include:

I don't know about the States, but here in Mexico the common phrase to describle 'wonky' teeth is 'dientes ingles' (English teeth).
- Iain Pearson, Mexico City Mexico

It tells me that the site is heavily biased (they even describe themselves as "opinionated", and that they "tell you what we really think and believe about what's happening in the world"), and therefore NOT "news". (Yes, by this standard, I would also probably discount FoxNews.) Do you have other sources, or is this the best you can come up with?

How about this interview with David Kay or this overview of his final report or CNN's coverage, or this detailed report that discusses some of the reasoning behind David Kay's findings. I would have gladly linked to Fox News as well, as these official findings are virtually "unspinnable", but I can't find any Fox News coverage of Kay's final report (it may exist, I'm just saying I couldn't find it with Google - please point it out if you come across it). If you'll recall, Kay's initial, interim report also found no evidence of the type of WMD stockpiles or activities that Bush and Powell claimed we would certainly find in Iraq. However, Kay expressed great optimism that the alleged WMD would indeed be found (this was well covered and emphasized on Fox News) and attributed his lack of evidence to, in essence, timing, as there was still much work ahead at that point. Kay later stated that his initial optimism was based on the same erroneous, disproven "intelligence" that was eventually presented as justification for the invasion of Iraq. David Kay was not the only weapons inspector to carry out the task of finding Iraqi WMD. Remember Hans Blix? I've heard quite a bit of typical, hateful, conservative vitriol spewed in his direction, but I have yet to hear a factual criticism of his professional credentials or a substantive accusation of bias against him. Here is a summary of his findings within the rather enlightening context of current events. There are also the findings of Scott Ritter to consider. Even more despised than Hans Blix, the factual content of his work in Iraq and, again, his professional credentials, have not been effectively challenged. Here is an article he wrote in which he mentions his findings on Iraqi WMD among other topics and an interview in Time magazine in which they ask him some of the "tough" questions (i.e. weak and unsupported personal attacks, as is the Republican habit) his critics have raised. If you want more detailed sources on the findings of any of these weapons inspectors, Google is your friend. I challenge - no, I *defy* you to produce even one credible source (judging from your comment about Fox News, I think we more or less agree on the meaning of "credible") that contradicts the findings of these weapons inspectors. If you can't produce such a counterpoint, you are left with no rational conclusion but to accept that the Bush administration either incompetently or willfully misled the American people and the entire world by claiming that Saddam Hussein posed a threat to the United States when, in fact, he literally had no capability to attack us.

Where shall I begin? How about allowing his sons to torture Iraqi citizens? How about re-routing rivers, to punish villages that spawned political enemies? How about using chemical weapons on Kurdish people in the north? If you think for a moment that allowing such actions to go on unchecked is none of our business, then you're more of an animal than the worst Bush-basher thinks of Bush and the rest of his administration. There are, of course, other reasons involved, but if you need me to tell you what they are, then you haven't bo

To me - painting free walls is just 'doing a big painting - probably with spray cans'. Big Deal.

Tagging an illegible nickname on a wall beside a road is just. well. scrawling your name on something. Big Deal.

Dropping an image / word / phrase into a strange context which is thought provoking or even just plain funny is a much bigger deal to me. SImple silhouettes, slogans, even a simple 'cock and balls' can be beautiful if well placed. Be it on a blank wall, over someones 'grafiti art' or on the tits of the wonderbra chick.
I've seen a copy of one of Steve Bells cartoon from the Guardian sprayed on a railway siding on the SAME DAY it was published.

Grafiti is good - but blandomatic grafiti sucks.

Insugents seek Saddam's chemical weapons. -- CIA has found chemical weapons in Iraq.

Story 1 about bin Laden and a possible Saddam connection, Story 2

Al-Qaeda and Iraq, Atta and Iraq, Sarin and Mustard gas in Iraq.

As well as the fact that Saddam killed a million of his own people, plus the number of UN resolutions he was in violation of.

Washington Post -- "Moore has publicly indicated his goal is to impact this election."

CNN International -- "Of course it isn't a fair and balanced look at its subject matter, but it is good filmmaking."

The Guardian (UK) -- "According to legend, Fahrenheit 9/11 was made to topple George W Bush and thereby save America from the grip of an evil tyrant."

New York Times -- "Mixing sober outrage with mischievous humor and blithely trampling the boundary between documentary and demagoguery, Mr. Moore takes wholesale aim at the Bush administration, whose tenure has been distinguished, in his view, by unparalleled and unmitigated arrogance, mendacity and incompetence."

MTV -- "Are [the facts Moore presents] impenetrable on their own, or are they manicured to fit Moore's own motivations?"

They're exempt from FTC enforcement because they come under the FCC's jurisdiction. The FCC issued a ruling that requires companies under their jurisdiction follow the Do Not Call list too with the same penalties.

As that stupid two minute thing has kicked in, here's another joke shamelessly copied from Guardian Talk's Haven's Any Good Jokes thread:

An American tourist in London found himself needing to take a leak something terrible.

After a long search he just couldn't find any public bathroom to relieve himself.

So he went down one of the side streets to take care of business.

Just as he was unzipping, a London police officer showed up. "Look here, old chap, what are you doing?" the officer asked.

"I'm sorry," the American replied, but I really gotta take a leak." "You can't do that here," the officer told him. "Look, follow me."

The police officer led him to a beautiful garden with lots of grass, pretty flowers, and manicured hedges. "Here," said the policeman, "whiz away."

The American tourist shrugged, turned, unzipped, and started pissing on the flowers.

"Ahhh," he said in relief. Then turning toward the officer, he said, "This is very nice of you. Is this British courtesy?"

"No," retorted the policeman. "It's the French Embassy."

The producer from hell

The North Korean dictator Kim Jong-il has a passion for cinema. But he could never find a director to realise his vision. So he kidnapped one from the South, jailed him and fed him grass, then forced him to shoot a socialist Godzilla. Now, for the first time, Shin Sang-ok tells the full story of his bizarre dealings with - and eventual flight from - the world's most dangerous dictator.

I guess you think that children of only-Spanish-speaking parents who live in English-speaking countries never learn English either, right? Under your theory, if the only English they heard outside their Spanish-speaking home used "explicit lyrics," as you put it, when they spoke English would they replace those explicit terms with more genteel Spanish equivalents or would they instinctively seek out a dictionary to learn the English equivalents? Or is your theory silly? I am not even going to argue with (b), it's obviously untrue.

For a more in-depth rebuttal, have a look at some of the science that's been done in this area, for instance the story of introduction of television into Bhutan.

Blah blah blah.

Read this and weep.

Now, because you want to pretend you're some expert in this field (hint: By what you said you're clearly a wannabe) let me absolutely rip to shreds every last thing you said. And then some. Because I do consider myself an amateur going on expert. And, if you're the only competition, I'd a God in this field.

From this expert source:

#1. Beta Hi-Fi had a nice 60 Hz hum. What a piece of shit. VHS ORIGINAL and Hi-Fi didn't have that pathetic problem. Even a first year high-school electronics student knows how to filter 60 Hz hum. One series capacitor. Since the audio isn't even balanced, it can even be a cheap 'n nasty polarized electrolytic. We're talking $0.02 here people, if that, and Sony was too bloody cheap to put it in. And these are the people you look up to for quality.

#2. A slightly damaged Beta tape could ruin your stereo speakers if played at high volume (note "tape damage"). That's sweet. Again, we're talking a few pennies spent on some clamping diodes (or, better yet, some REAL filter circuitry) or filtering capacitors. How *cheap* can you get?

The rest will come from this handy guide (I hope it isn't too complicated for you):

#3. Luminance horizontal resolution (equiv.):

Beta: 250
VHS: 240
% Difference: 4%

#4. Luminance vertical resolution:

Beta & VHS: 576 -- 0% difference

#5. Luminance signal to noise ratio:

Beta: 48 dB
VHS: 43 dB
% Difference: (I am too lazy to work out logs today) about 180%

#6. Horizontal colour (chroma) equivalent resoultion:

Beta: 45
VHS: 40
% Difference: 21%

#7. Chroma vertical resolution:

Beta: 240
VHS: 200
% Difference: 16%

#8. Sound.

0% difference between Beta and VHS.

Let's average everything out now.

(4 + 0 + 180 + 21 + 16 + 0) / 6 = 36% difference.

Now, let's assume the truth, that people won't notice a few sparklies on their TV (especially in 1980, when the picture travelled to the TV modulated on channel 3 through cheap 'n nasty coax):

8.2% difference.

And next time think twice about posting so late to squeeze your comment in before the Don't Post timer runs out just to make yourself look smart. Because:

a) You're clearly not as smart as you think you are (or at least not smart enough to research before you go blathering off about things). A smart person would have given that proof first, rather than let me tear it apart to my benefit first.
b) Corollary: There's always smarter people than you and I out there.
c) You can't beat how often I check slashdot.

Now, HAND now, you hear?

I'm pretty sure that anyone who can afford to my theater chains are rich.

One of the investors is The Carlyle Group.

The story blurb mentions several articles, not just the Apple PR:

"According to Steve Jobs other services were shifting only 50,000 tracks a week in Europe before the launch."

In that linked article, the interviewer mentions renegotiation, confirmed by Jobs:

'NM: You've gone back to renegotiate with the labels after the first year. Have attitudes changed towards you?
SJ: "Oh sure. Absolutely."'

Apple has revolutionized music retail, undermining the giant retail stores which themselves had wiped out most smaller, local record stores. Through a combination of convenience and pricing. Where's a definitive statement of the actual profitability of the new music retail business Apple is creating?

There is also some evidence that insanely binary human logic doesn't stand in the way of success.

So why exactly would they want to open this up, and help other companies sell devices?

Folks have often argued that they should at least open it up in areas where Apple doesn't yet have a market. They key word people are forgetting when they make this argument is yet.

Again, how is it in Apple's interest to let other companies piggyback onto Apple's extremely difficult (legally, technically), barely-profitable venture that is the iTunes Music Store?

When reasoning along this line Coca-Cola isn't the right organization to focus on. Instead, consider how the sugar-industry has used some pretty heavy-handed tactics when trying to get the WHO to suppress a report which, amongst other things, stated that "sugar should account for no more than 10% of a healthy diet." Keeping information from people of health problems with their products would make one complicit in problems related to how people use their products.

Here's far more than you ever wanted to know.

It's a good read, but the short answer is they are virgins every time they have sex and they "all will have appetising vaginas"

Sounds like a great story to tell a virgin boy. Once I'd had a few dozen virgin, I'd really start to crave a real women.

Acceptable risk? Guess you've never lost a family member to stray fire have you? Would you claim acceptable cost then?
Acceptable risk is a retarded US Military saying.
It's like you sitting in front of your TV and saying 10,000 dead Iraqi civillians and 5,000 dead Iraqi militari personnel is an acceptable cost. Ask the families of those 15,000 people.

This is the same George Monbiot who thinks the world would be better if airplanes had never been invented?

.....But the age of cheap oil is over. If you doubt this, take a look at the BBC's online report yesterday of a conference run by the Association for the Study of Peak Oil.(5)
The reporter spoke to the chief economist of the International Energy Agency, Fatih Birol. "In public, Mr Birol denied that supply would not be able to meet rising demand ... But after his speech he seemed to change his tune: 'For the time being there is no spare capacity. But we expect demand to increase by the fourth quarter by three million barrels a day. If Saudi does not increase supply by 3 million barrels a day by the end of the year we will face, how can I say this, it will be very difficult. We will have difficult times.'"
The reporter asked him whether such a growth in supply was possible, or simply wishful thinking. "'You are from the press?,'" Birol replied. "'This is not for the press.'" So the BBC asked the other delegates what they thought of the prospects of a 30% increase in Saudi production. "The answers were unambiguous: 'absolutely out of the question,' 'completely impossible,' and '3 million barrels - never, not even 300,000.' One delegate laughed so hard he had to support himself on a table."(6) And this was before they heard that two BBC journalists had been gunned down in Riyadh......

source

Not only has KoB provided the emails of government officials to make our opinions known about the bill, but also humorously alluded to the fact that Cheney is still involved with Halliburton. And, of course, he's denied it all along.

Either way, al Quaeda doesn't want us in Saudi Arabia (never mind that we are there with the permission of the Saudi government, and that we would have to leave whenever they tell us to).

1) Saudi-arabia is a dictatorship. Not even a very benevolent one. Torture and random assassination of political enemies is commonplace there.
2) A LOT of saudis hate the american presence there. Putting soldiers on someone else's holy land is not a smart move politically.
3) You've just admitted al qaeda is blowback. Shouldn't that make you more critical of current US policies in Iraq and the middle east in general, given that they are creating a fresh generation of terrorists hellbent on attacking america?

Check your facts, friend. bin Laden has been linked directly with the bombing of the US embassies in the African continent (Kenya and Tanzania) in 1998, and there may be connections with the bombing of the USS Cole in 2001.

I've got news for you: there is no such thing as pure evil. Every terrorist group has their own agenda. Sometimes those agenda's coincide, sometimes they don't. In the case of Iraq, it has been demonstrated that Bin Laden tried to get Saddam on board, and Saddam just never got back to him. After all, what could Bin Laden offer Saddam? It's not like Saddam ever showed any intention of wanting to kill americans just because they're americans. If you're curious about Bin Laden's agenda, read this. Bin Laden goes into quite some detail (a little too much even), explaining his reasons for hating america, and explaining what his political aims with al qaeda are (the answer to question 2). So, no, before Gulf War II there was no credible indication of cooperation between Saddam and Bin Laden. If there was, they would have found it already.

I have a good friend of mine that re-enlisted in the National Guard this past January, knowing full-well that he might get called to go. He's been in "an undisclosed location" (aka Baghdad) for about a month now. He believes he's there to help the Iraqi people, and I think he is, too.

Nobody here is claiming the people who enlist here go over there with the intention of doing evil. The reality though is that Iraq is a mess, and the US presence on the ground is really not helping matters. I don't blame the soldiers and contractors in Iraq, they're only doing their job. I blame the bush administration for lack of planning and lack of insight into Iraq. They screwed it up, they should pay the price, not the people on the ground giving their lives trying to help people.

To see the way that these al Quaeda zealots work against people who are trying to help others is completely disgusting. They have no respect for human life whatsoever, and to perform their tricks in the name of their god is (i think) an insult to Muslims the world over.

Like the way Bush uses God to excuse his policies is an insult to christians the world over?

By dehumanizing al qaeda you make it ok to treat whoever you believe to be a part of it as non-human or sub-human. We've seen the pictures of what that kind of attitude leads to. If you want the moral high ground, you've got to stick to the facts, and not let your emotions and hate get in the way.

Sometimes they even go back into office and continue to make a significant salary. Moonlighting can pay very well for some people.

Of course the Greens are mostly anti-technological progress.

Really? Who is pushing alternate energies, wind power, solar technology etc.? Whose electorate is the most likely to be "online" (78 percent)? Or do you mean their hostility towards a 60s technology that turned out to have incalculable risks and where still no one knows where to put the highly radioactive waste with a half-life of ten thousands of years? That cost US government and population at least half a trillion dollars?

Or is it their refusal to allow corporations like Monsanto insane profits (from bio-patents) from increased use of pesticides (by e.g. marketing herbicide-resistant genetically engineered maize, and plants that produce pesticides themselves)?

But if your in england you can be shot for carrying one.

As opposed to the nonsense you hear John Gibson spew which has been independently judged to be failing to observe "respect for truth", which you can read about here.

You want evidence? OK how about This and this

Don't believe the stories? Well check out the pictures here and tell me with a straight face that this is not typical of America, especially given the treatment of detainees at Guantanimo bay that was introduced into Abu Ghraib by General Geoffrey Millar here