Slashdot Mirror

ou've got to wonder why the folks on the right who care so deeply about individual freedom of choice and despise government intrusion in personal affairs are such big fans of the war on drugs.

Because drug use has such detrimental effects on society. Witness the issues with meth, squatters taking over people's homes, general neglect of both property and person. Perhaps the judge in this case summed it up best:

âoeYou liked drugs. For that, your children suffered. They suffered terribly.â

Considering how much noise the right makes about a woman having an abortion (which is odd considering it is about individual freedom of choice), it would stand to reason they wouldn't want drugs because of the suffering they incur.

How does the fact that the US government lied tell us whether Saddam had or did not have WMD?

Simple: various intelligence agencies warned that Chalabi was lying and the Bush Administration propagated the lie. That's how we know that the lies meant Saddam didn't have WMDs. Or did you not hear the memo that he fabricated his supposed evidence?

Now the next lie. To keep the armaments industry going, the USA is going to purchase F35 planes, state of the art dinosaurs. Yes, the plans will have the greatest and most sophisticated electronics, but a single unmanned drone plane at 1/1000th the cost could do the same job, with much less collateral damage.

You need to seriously reexamine your logic. The fact that the US lied or was lied to does *not* indicate that Saddam was WMD free. There were people lying and guessing on both the pro and anti WMD sides, none of this lying or guesswork is evidence of anything. Only boots on the ground by outsiders could prove things one way or the other. Ideally that would have been UN weapons inspectors receiving full cooperation from the Iraqi government. Regrettably Saddam didn't like that plan.

"After several months, Saddam started to talk. There were no longer weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, he said, although the capability to build them remained. But Saddam said he kept up the ruse that those weapons still existed to preserve his power and protect Iraq against Iran, which Saddam viewed as his country’s biggest threat. Not even senior leaders within his government knew that there weren’t any weapons, Piro said."

http://www.phillyburbs.com/news/local/the_intelligencer_news/fbi-agent-saddam-interrogation-was-unique-historic-opportunity/article_6306f1c9-b9c0-5fc7-b4ff-398cf04ad103.html

Saddam had both air forces and artillery. They merely were restricted in their operations as part of the post Gulf War 1 cease fire, which also brought in the UN weapons inspectors. With a clean bill of health from these inspectors the UN and US would have left and Saddam would be free to rebuild his WMD capabilities.

From Saddam's FBI interrogation:
"After several months, Saddam started to talk. There were no longer weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, he said, although the capability to build them remained. But Saddam said he kept up the ruse that those weapons still existed to preserve his power and protect Iraq against Iran, which Saddam viewed as his country’s biggest threat. Not even senior leaders within his government knew that there weren’t any weapons, Piro said." http://www.phillyburbs.com/news/local/the_intelligencer_news/fbi-agent-saddam-interrogation-was-unique-historic-opportunity/article_6306f1c9-b9c0-5fc7-b4ff-398cf04ad103.html

Thanks to another contributor to a related thread:
"The U.S. military spent $70 million ensuring the safe transportation of 550 metric tons of the uranium from Iraq to Canada, said Pentagon spokesman Brian Whitman."
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/07/iraq.uranium/

How does the fact that the US government lied tell us whether Saddam had or did not have WMD?

Simple: various intelligence agencies warned that Chalabi was lying and the Bush Administration propagated the lie. That's how we know that the lies meant Saddam didn't have WMDs. Or did you not hear the memo that he fabricated his supposed evidence?

You need to seriously reexamine your logic. The fact that the US lied or was lied to does *not* indicate that Saddam was WMD free. There were people lying and guessing on both the pro and anti WMD sides, none of this lying or guesswork is evidence of anything. Only boots on the ground by outsiders could prove things one way or the other. Ideally that would have been UN weapons inspectors receiving full cooperation from the Iraqi government. Regrettably Saddam didn't like that plan.

"After several months, Saddam started to talk. There were no longer weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, he said, although the capability to build them remained. But Saddam said he kept up the ruse that those weapons still existed to preserve his power and protect Iraq against Iran, which Saddam viewed as his country’s biggest threat. Not even senior leaders within his government knew that there weren’t any weapons, Piro said."
http://www.phillyburbs.com/news/local/the_intelligencer_news/fbi-agent-saddam-interrogation-was-unique-historic-opportunity/article_6306f1c9-b9c0-5fc7-b4ff-398cf04ad103.html

Here is another link for you collection. http://www.phillyburbs.com/news/local/the_intelligencer_news/fbi-agent-saddam-interrogation-was-unique-historic-opportunity/article_6306f1c9-b9c0-5fc7-b4ff-398cf04ad103.html

Our governments certainly lied but they did not know what Saddam had. Not until there were US/UK boots on the ground did we really know one way or the other.

Sorry, but no. Many other foreign countries had a look at the evidence and they voted "no WMD". Only US lapdogs went along (coalition of the willing), everyone else took a pass. So people were able to tell "one way or another".

You are confusing "no evidence he has any" with "evidence he has disarmed". The two are not the same. In the first case, the case these countries support, there is still a question. The truth is that not even senior people in Iraq knew Saddam had no WMD. Here it is from Saddam himself:

"After several months, Saddam started to talk. There were no longer weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, he said, although the capability to build them remained. But Saddam said he kept up the ruse that those weapons still existed to preserve his power and protect Iraq against Iran, which Saddam viewed as his country’s biggest threat. Not even senior leaders within his government knew that there weren’t any weapons, Piro said."
http://www.phillyburbs.com/news/local/the_intelligencer_news/fbi-agent-saddam-interrogation-was-unique-historic-opportunity/article_6306f1c9-b9c0-5fc7-b4ff-398cf04ad103.html

It's not a subject I know much about. Can you point me in the direction off the documentary? Thanks in advance.

Saw it on TV, did some googling ...

"After several months, Saddam started to talk. There were no longer weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, he said, although the capability to build them remained. But Saddam said he kept up the ruse that those weapons still existed to preserve his power and protect Iraq against Iran, which Saddam viewed as his country’s biggest threat. Not even senior leaders within his government knew that there weren’t any weapons, Piro said."
http://www.phillyburbs.com/news/local/the_intelligencer_news/fbi-agent-saddam-interrogation-was-unique-historic-opportunity/article_6306f1c9-b9c0-5fc7-b4ff-398cf04ad103.html

I have a dream, that one day all the little factual posts on Slashdot will not be marked troll because of the color of the moderators politics.

Charge of racism offensive to Obamacare critics

Louisiana state Sen. Karen Carter Peterson last week took to the chamber’s floor to declare opponents of President Barack Obama’s “signature legislative achievement” are motivated by race.

“I have talked to so many members both in the House and the Senate, and you know what? You ready? You ready? What it comes down to? It’s not about how many federal dollars we can receive, it’s not about that. You ready? It’s about race,” Peterson said. “I know nobody wants to talk about that. It’s about the race of this African-American president.”

After Calling Obamacare Critics Racist, LA Legislator Says 'I Didn't Call Anyone a Racist'

Mainstream Scream: Martin Bashir accuses Obama scandal critics of racism

Are Obama's critics racist? Jimmy Carter thinks so

A Modern Timeline of Liberals Claiming That Opposition to Obama = Racism

There is plenty more that could be posted on this topic.

My problem with the cameras is they are a guilty until proven innocent item. Fighting bad tickets is simply not something I like to do on my days off or worse during my work. I've had two moving violations in my life. One was a bad speed radar ticket. It's not like I am the guy collecting tons of tickets. It won't take many automated screwups to get me to the point of endangering the operators of the highway bandits, especially when they are wrong or corrupt.

url:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/7043325/Driver-parked-in-front-of-speed-camera-gets-tickets.html>

Several people fought an automated ticket with the GPS records. Radar said ticket. GPS with a base accuracy of 0.1mph said innocent. The proven false positives are way too common. http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20001248-38.html http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20080712/NEWS/807120355 http://www.phillyburbs.com/news/local/courier_times/courier_times_news_details/article/28/2009/november/10/pa-man-using-gps-to-fight-speeding-ticket.html I carry a GPS and record the track as a regular activity if I have to drive through some parts of town. Most non technical people are unable to use this defense. In some cases, the court has rejected the evidence as they know too little about it. Can you say unfair trial?

One of our radio personalities got a red light camera ticket last winter during an ice storm. He literally slid through the intersection.

Due to these issues, I am simply marking red light cameras and frequent speed radar spots on my GPS as closed roads and use alternatives instead. I plan my routes to avoid them. Businesses in the area may suffer as a result. I don't know the business impact overall, but I avoid the areas.

Basically, almost all the people who actually know a thing or two about guns are on the anti-control side of the debate. When the people for gun control write laws, their experience is largely drawn from movies rather than any personal experience, so their laws end up being silly and ineffectual. They also tend to say things like this:

"As unnerving as the Fort Dix terrorism plot was, it could have been all the more worse if the weapons of choice for alleged assailants had been .50 caliber assault guns instead of AK-47s," said Assemblyman Reed Gusciora, D-Mercer.

No, it wouldn't have. In a close quarters battle (which is what the Dix guys were planning), a 50 cal is far too bulky to be usable; we should wish the terrorist were that dumb. An assault rifle, like the AK-47, is ideal for this sort of thing.

The latter are, in most cases, just doing a job as they would for any other employer, they have little individual power or discretion to apply those vast resources, and I don't see why they should be any less entitled to legal protection of their rights (including privacy) than anyone else.

If I as a private citizen make a citizens arrest, I better I be sure the person I arrest did commit a crime I can prove. Otherwise they can sue me. An off duty office does not have to worry about that though. An officer can get an out of jail free card for shooting someone, but I'll have charges brought against me if I shoot at someone, even if I can prove my or other people's lives were in danger in some places. Shoot a mugger in NYC and see if you're not arrested. Yet a bunch of officers can shoot an unarmed teen and not face any punishment.

Falcon

The DA sounds as over-zealous as the Duke Rape DA. Perhaps that DA might be trotting down the same path as Nifong: http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/61-01152007 -1053408.html

This is the guy who wanted to make it so the taxpayers had to pay twice to get weather information. We would pay for the information once through our taxes via the National Weather Service and then a second time through a private organization.

This is also the guy who said in his book that education is not the way for the poor to get out of their rut (I'm paraphrasing). Throw in the family values crap, the fact that he shafted the taxpayers for thousands of dollars and refuses to pay the money back, and that he doesn't even live in PA any more, and those are just some of the reasons why I want him out.

As I said in my Allen comment, he, Santorum, in no way represents me. In six years, I'll be voting against Casey unless he can show me he deserves to be kept.

Don't they realize that Volcanic Energy has directly caused more deaths than Nuclear Energy?

When will people learn that there is no safe form of energy?!

The volcano gods are gonna be so angered when they find out Iceland is mooching the heat. If I know my mythology, nothing (and I mean nothing) pisses a god off like free stuff for humans. We should just rename Iceland to New Pompeii right now.

A similar case happened in my area (a suburb of Philadelphia) recently. High school students were caught drinking off-campus and off-school function. While they weren't punished simply for that, they were also student athletes that had signed an agreement stating they wouldn't drink/do drugs/be a bad peron as they're representatives of the school. They were suspended from athletic events because of this. I don't think a student should be held responsible for what (s)he does on his/her own time, unless it affects the school itself (like being punished in school for breaking into the school and pissing/shitting no computers....true story from my old school). I think *this* is an example of it being handled correctly: http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/110-1104200 5-565128.html

What about:

The Ghost... Goes WEST!

http://www.phillyburbs.com/edwood/wood2.shtml

Long live Ed Wood.

When you find out, let the reporter know so she can write an equally-sensationalized follow-up:

Erika Chavez
(916) 321-1083
echavez@sacbee.com

or Google PhoneBook for a possible residential phone number.

Or, you can get her fired by scouring her past articles for errors, finding them and reporting them. It's not like the Bee doesn't hire really lazy reporters.

No, the best empires give the locals control over much of their own affairs, and give incentives to play nice.

The best response has always been the minimum of force. This includes riot control, and is why this gun is bad idea, it will just breed more hatred for american soldiers.

http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/93-07182005 -515837.html

Yes but the real picture was just too disturbing.

Big trucks do disproportionately more damage to the roads than cars. Think about it; what's more likely to crack pavement or rattle a bridge? A 1588 pound Fortwo or a 7+ ton Bad Boy?

And they want to tax based on mileage?

Well, seems like these things actually do happen?

Wonder how that news story would read if his gun had not worked as expected? But because he had a gun and used it, he saved his wife's life as well as ending the career of a serial rapist.

So who is fucking paranoid now?

Thanks for the interesting details. My town was specifically listed as one of three in Bucks County, PA slated to receive the service shortly. They say next year, we'll also be able to order TV services from them. Finally, a real competitor to Comcast. Its too bad that when the Flyers come back in '06, they probably STILL won't be carried on competing tv distribution systems.

Comcast is based in Philly and refuses to let anyone else carry the vast majority of the Flyers and Phillies games to us local folk. Part of the "benefit" of living in Comcast Country. Til then, its 3000/256, no (real) Usenet, and waiting everyday to get that threatening letter.

Powell can afford to pose as an adult in the Bush nursery, especially when his agenda can't be tested in reality while they castrate it. You might want to look into this career whitewasher's roots denying massacres in Vietnam for a living, before you subscribe to his slick public image. Read about how he covered for the My Lai massacre, as even his fans admit.

Powell has been a leader in the Republican lying industry for decades. FYI, he was the point man in the failed coverup of the My Lai massacre of Vietnamese civilians. Even an admiration fest bio points out his despicable political flackery for murderers.

OL: there is a sort of Mickey Thomson sense of fun and accomplishment on these roads to madness

http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/1-04232004- 288438.html

Examine the thread you are posting in, this subdiscussion concerns a TV news channel, not the NYT. The ISP is suing the prosecuter, check it out.

The answer is backups backups backups...

In the past year I've RMA'd 4 maxtor drives...However, I'm of the opinion that with the exception of particular cases (i.e. the IBM 60/75 GB deathstars) you'll find that failure rates are fairly consistent among manufacturers for drives at similar price points.

For every drive manufacturer, you'll find two camps...the people that say they had nothing but trouble with a certain brand, and the people who have been using the same brand for all their corporate desktops and not had a single failure.

I think it's all statistical anomolies...(i.e. some people are just unlucky or Lucky). The one thing you can count on is that regardless of what drive you get, it will fail eventually.

No, you should be stopped, questioned as to why you are going so fast, and possibly arrested.

What if I'm doing 120 because I am not cognitively aware that I am going 120? Say, I'm drunk?

So, in my drunken stupor, I get photographed, and get a speeding ticket mailed to me three to six weeks later. But that night, after the picture was taken, I also mowed down 4 pedestrians and fled the scene. Now, is it possible that someone down at traffic control will realize it's the same car? Sure, possibly.

Nice consolation for the families of the 4 dead.

Traffic cameras are a bad idea. They don't stop someone from breaking the law, they just collect fees for the government. It also seems to shift the burden of proof: the fact that your car was photographed means it was you, and now you have to take the time to prove it wasn't, rather than the other way around.

Scenario: bad mailing address attached to the license on the car. If this supposed driver had a hope of never being pulled over by a person, he could just keep on driving, no insurance, no worries about a revoked license. With cameras "making the bust," all he has to do is be hard for the cameras to locate for prosecution. Just think of the number of violations he'd have to accumulate before it became serious enough to warrant a concerted search.

Scenario: your white minivan's license plate is swapped with another white minivan's plate. Someone else does the speeding, you get the ticket, and the hassle of proving it's not your car. Think those cameras can resolve VIN numbers?

Anyway, nevermind the arguments against cameras. As long as they are keeping our streets safer, right?

Except for the six civilian deaths, the balloon bomb offensive was a failure. There were no major forest fires and no unusual outbreaks of diseases, and no panic.

> For everyone who thought that the article might
> be about AT&T's Plan 9 operating system, here's
> a link...

Sigh. I can see that some intensive re-education is in order:

Plan Nine from Outer Space