Slashdot Mirror

...and skipped right over the fact that Hillary would be talking about nothing but WMD's if they had actually been found in Iraq. Because the reason she hasn't been president the last 6+ years is her vote to invade Iraq.

To stop Saddam from using/possessing WMD's.

As to JEB Bush, it is hard to imagine him coming out touting wmds found in Iraq, when his own brother did not do so as President.

Clown. Shoes. Iraq is why Democrats took back Congress in 2006, and Republicans across the country took a beating in 2008. Do explain why everyone from the Bush family and the Bush Administration wouldn't be talking about these discovered WMD's if they vindicated W's war.

I wont hold my breath, because you'd first explain the workings of a perpetual motion machine before you could square that circle.

Oh, I don't suppose it occurred to you that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is unlikely to want to bring attention to the fact that ISIS came into being on her watch.

You do know that Hillary was at State, and not the Pentagon, right? The Hillary that was all set to "obliterate" Iran back in 2008? The Megathatcher would have re-invaded Iraq two years ago to fight the monster her boss's administration created.

When I did a Google search of her comments about ISIS, her statements were mostly supportive of Obama's strategy

Too bad you stopped your Goolgling. Because yes, the USG under Obama did create ISIS, by arming, funding and training extremists to fight Assad. Echoing the strategy of the first modern right-wing president, Carter, who funded the proto-Taliban in Afghanistan to provoke the USSR into stating what American Exceptionalists would call a "humanitarian intervention".

But that's the ever-present problem for right-wingers: the only legit criticism of Democrats comes from the Left.

when in fact the primary justification given at the time was Saddam's refusal to abide by the agreement he made at the end of the first Gulf War.

Agreements which entirely revolved around...Saddam's WMD's. Like I said, clown shoes.

It is interesting that the Huffington Post does not use the "degraded over time" argument.

What's interesting is that your own link never mentions WMD's, or Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Because it's not a weapon of mass destruction if it's incapable of causing mass destruction.

Because it's not a weapon of mass destruction if it's incapable of causing mass destruction.

Because it's not a weapon of mass destruction if it's incapable of causing mass destruction.

Because it's not a weapon of mass destruction if it's incapable of causing mass destruction.

Repeated so it might sink in this time, even through the clown shoes.

Yes, I am uncomfortable with the use of "doxing" to mean de-anonymizing a libeler, when there are innocent victims of doxing.

Get used to it, cause doxing refers to what's done, not the motivation. For example, "murder" is someone kills someone else, be it by accident, pre-mediated, etc.

In addition, whe he did falls entirely within the current definition of doxing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing). IE:

Doxing is the Internet-based practice of researching and broadcasting personally identifiable information about an individual. The methods employed to acquire this information include searching publicly available databases and social media websites (like Facebook), hacking, and social engineering.

The very first method is searching publicly available information!

"Innocent victims of doxing"... is that supposed to be like "but think of the children!" Doxing is what it is. Whether the result is good or bad is subjective and unrelated to the definition of doxing.

Yes, I am uncomfortable with the use of "doxing" to mean de-anonymizing a libeler, when there are innocent victims of doxing.

Wireless charging is like Digital Turnip Twaddling. It takes advantage of mistakes people are likely to make.

I'm surprised that an ad for an Ikea table would generate any approval, even among people who like to think they are superior.

http://open.salon.com/blog/gor...

'“Our background is the music industry, where we represented American musicians for 20 years,” says Michael Solomon'

If you know anything about the music industry and sleaze therein, then you have probably heard about (or even experienced) how artists and musicians are constantly being taken advantage of and ripped off by the music industry. From Led Zeppelin, to Michael Jackson.

More info:

Courtney Love
Michael Jackson

Ok, perhaps they are not the most morally sound individuals - but their points are true nonetheless.

While I can understand what the article is getting at, I'll stick to handing out my own resumes, thank you.

How Hitler Defied The Bankers?
http://open.salon.com/blog/gor...

I guess it depends on how much everyone learns from history or example. Of course, it's been joked that those who study history are condemned to watch others repeat it... :-(
http://www.historyisaweapon.co...

Those changes to Germany came from the values of a 1930s/1940s USA.
http://www.salon.com/2010/08/2...
"How did Germany become such a great place to work in the first place? The Allies did it. This whole European model came, to some extent, from the New Deal. Our real history and tradition is what we created in Europe. Occupying Germany after WWII, the 1945 European constitutions, the UN Charter of Human Rights all came from Eleanor Roosevelt and the New Dealers. All of it got worked into the constitutions of Europe and helped shape their social democracies. It came from us. The papal encyclicals on labor, it came from the Americans."

But, sadly, that USA and its values effectively no longer exist 70-80 years later. Today's USA has different values -- some are better (less racism and sexism overall, more respect for the environment), others are worse (less respect for workers, the "two-income trap", policies that promote a greater rich/poor divide, and more meddling in other nation's affairs which may produce profits for some connected few but produces huge costs for the whole USA let along the disrupted countries).

The real issue may be, like Gandhi is claimed to have said when asked by a journalist: "What do you think of Western civilization?", he said, "I think it would be a good idea."
http://quoteinvestigator.com/2...

At this point, as US citizen, I'm much more concerned about what the US government does both abroad and at home (including stuff like supporting a repressive Saudi Arabia, other actions abroad that make terrorist blowback more likely, domestic cage-like "free speech zones", domestic rulings saying border patrols can operate in a constitution-ignoring way up to 100 miles inland, etc.) -- than what people in the Middle East cradle of civilization do. And I remain always aware there are large numbers of nuclear weapons still ready to fly on short notice...
http://politics.slashdot.org/s...
http://www.salon.com/2015/01/2...

So, what will it take to civilize the USA? A basic income might be a start...

I guess it depends on how much everyone learns from history or example. Of course, it's been joked that those who study history are condemned to watch others repeat it... :-(
http://www.historyisaweapon.co...

Those changes to Germany came from the values of a 1930s/1940s USA.
http://www.salon.com/2010/08/2...
"How did Germany become such a great place to work in the first place? The Allies did it. This whole European model came, to some extent, from the New Deal. Our real history and tradition is what we created in Europe. Occupying Germany after WWII, the 1945 European constitutions, the UN Charter of Human Rights all came from Eleanor Roosevelt and the New Dealers. All of it got worked into the constitutions of Europe and helped shape their social democracies. It came from us. The papal encyclicals on labor, it came from the Americans."

But, sadly, that USA and its values effectively no longer exist 70-80 years later. Today's USA has different values -- some are better (less racism and sexism overall, more respect for the environment), others are worse (less respect for workers, the "two-income trap", policies that promote a greater rich/poor divide, and more meddling in other nation's affairs which may produce profits for some connected few but produces huge costs for the whole USA let along the disrupted countries).

The real issue may be, like Gandhi is claimed to have said when asked by a journalist: "What do you think of Western civilization?", he said, "I think it would be a good idea."
http://quoteinvestigator.com/2...

At this point, as US citizen, I'm much more concerned about what the US government does both abroad and at home (including stuff like supporting a repressive Saudi Arabia, other actions abroad that make terrorist blowback more likely, domestic cage-like "free speech zones", domestic rulings saying border patrols can operate in a constitution-ignoring way up to 100 miles inland, etc.) -- than what people in the Middle East cradle of civilization do. And I remain always aware there are large numbers of nuclear weapons still ready to fly on short notice...
http://politics.slashdot.org/s...
http://www.salon.com/2015/01/2...

So, what will it take to civilize the USA? A basic income might be a start...

Fellow readers, beware of astroturf comments.

We know that the big companies hire agencies to send fake letters of support to government agencies, letters purported to come from everyday people in support of whatever the big company wants to do at the time.

We also know that the big companies hire agencies to send fake letters of support from politicians that support whatever the big company wants to do at the time. We know that political campaigns do the same thing.

I've been interested in ghostwriting/astroturfing for awhile now. It seems reasonable that if a company has enough money to mount a fake grassroots campaign, then some of that money would be put towards shaping public opinion on public boards.

Especially a highly popular board frequented by all the smart people in the country.

Looking at one previous article about network access I can't help but get the impression that people are reaching around backwards to make their point. The plight of all those poor, twisted arguments brings a tear to my eye.

Really - watch the commentary on these articles and see if any of the arguments seem weak or contrived.

We may be infested with astroturfers.

While it does match the marketing lingo, the word "exponential" has specific mathematical meaning which does not even come close to your advertising driven use of the word. I fully realize that advertising and marketing regularly abuses definitions and often use words exactly contrary to their real meaning (I am thinking specifically of the word "literally" recently.). It is really a shame that people on the "News for Nerds" site use the same incorrect terminology and buzz words. One could at least qualify their use of marketing terms so that us real math/science oriented people are not left wondering if anything else stated is truthful enough to read.

So in the spirit of my personal crusade for accuracy and desire for the use of correct terminology how about using "20% growth" instead of abusing the definition of "exponential"? If you really need to use the word "exponential" can you say "exponential over 5+N years"? Hell, I'll compromise and agree with "doubling every 5+N years" which sounds pretty good as well.

Unfortunately, there is always someone the marketing soap box abusing our languages which makes it easy to fall into their ways. My soap box is pretty short lived, and I'm hopping off now.

Anonymous: "Problem I had with the show is that they often did the same thing 'Faux News' did, just with the opposite leaning."

Calling out hypocrisy, bullshit and blatant lies doesn't necessarily make you a liberal :)

Jon Stewart vs. Fox News: 10 brutal takedowns that have us missing him already

Something like, oh busting into the mayor's place and shooting his dog?

meerling was describing the implications of the system setup, as any engineer should, and used the term "Death squad" to describe the predicted outcome. It doesn't seem to be far off, as shooting people seems to be a startle reflex for US police. It's not like this in my country, and it doesn't need to be in yours either. The first two of the following links describe a baby and a toddler being shot by police. The third makes the point that when police are given military gear, they start behaving like soldiers, instead of the civilians that they are. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/he... http://www.salon.com/2014/06/2... http://www.popularmechanics.co...

Can you give an example of swat being used to apprehend a non-violent person?

Sure. Sal Culosi. He's a long way from the only one, it's epidemic. Read pretty much anything by Radley Balko to learn more.

Are you fucking stupid or have you been living under a rock? Yes, it absolutely is legal for a husband to rape his wife in India.

http://www.salon.com/2014/05/15/marital_rape_is_officially_legal_in_india_partner/
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/asia-pacific/india/140512/marital-rape-officially-legal-india
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/10824964/Rape-in-marriage-not-a-crime-Indian-court-rules.html

Go read and learn something, kid.

Politics, especially the kind with any real influence is one big gray mass of corruption. It takes a specific kind of person to make any headway in the business. The 'honest' ones sit on the bench or get the bums rush. Sorry, but your 'nuance' is bullshit, just another part of the charade to keep the game going. That is the objective, not to win, not to lose, just stay in the game. And I'm not 'bummed out' about anything. I just find it funny/sad when people standing on the beach tell me there's no water, and then give me shit every time I point out they're soaking in it.

Are you referring to Obamacare and suggesting that no Republican ever tried to foist it on the whole country?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...
(yes, he was a republican)

http://www.salon.com/2013/10/2...

Nixon never really got anywhere with it though -- he had to resign the office. BUT, republicans have wanted to foist this forced subsidization of the private insurance companies crap on us for decades. Now they got it thanks to our Demoplicans.

I don't know why people keep calling it Obamacare, it's Nixoncare. http://www.salon.com/2013/10/2...

Today's democrats make Nixon look like a pot smoking hippie -- they've managed to engage in more war than he did, more massive surveillance than he did, and give away more money to private corporate interests than even GWB managed to do.

There are studies that show that women are less likely to speak up when outnumbered by men. So if the most successful teams were ones where everyone contributed equally, it seems like those groups would tend to either have more women so that women are more willing to speak up, or no women at all (assuming that men are all likely to contribute in that environment).

http://www.salon.com/2012/09/2...
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01...

You know who has trouble with "bad cops?" The people who don't respect authority in the first place. The people who have done things that harm others and the society at large. My daughter will never be in a confrontation with the authorities - never become a Michael Brown - because she has been raised to understand the need for the police and for keeping the peace (as much as I can teach her).

Your daughter will be in confrontation with authorities if, say, her house gets SWATed on a false charge (because an unreliable informant pointed at it), or simply because they got the wrong address or the wrong door. She won't get a chance to say "yes sir, please and thank you", because she won't be asked - the first thing she'll know is when her door is blown off the hinges with a shotgun and a flashbang comes in. Maybe it lands into her baby's crib, too. Maybe she gets a limb or two broken when they put her face down into the floow. Best case, they will only shoot the dogs and mess up the room with the entrance before they figure out something's wrong and leave (with no apologies and no compensation for damages).

Or perhaps she'll be driving around with a couple thousand dollars in cash, that she won in a lottery, and gets stopped by cops because they'll claim she's speeding (but really because she's cute). And when they see the money they will claim that such a large amount in cash is suspicious, and arrest it as proceeds from drug sales, because they get to pocket a good part of it for their PD (i.e. to buy more toys like MRAPs and .50 BMG sniper rifles for themselves).

If she is black, it might get even more interesting. For example, during a routine traffic stop (for which she needn't do anything wrong, they might just be randomly pulling people over) an officer will ask her for ID, and she'll reach for her pocket because that's where the wallet is... and get shot point blank because the officer thought she's reaching for the gun. Because that's what he thinks of first when he sees a black person reach for their waist.

Or maybe she'll get arrested on an outright false charge just because she happens to come across a cop who "just hates niggers, that is all".

FYI, all of the above is not a figment of my imagination. It's all real stories that happened right here in USA with different people. The chances of something like that affecting your daughter are still orders of magnitude higher than the chances of being killed by a terrorist. So rather promoting more surveillance state, you might want to talk to your representative in Congress about police militarization first.

stop and frisk was highly successful

Nope. See http://www.salon.com/2015/01/1...

...in 2013, Bloomberg and Kelly ... would oversee a massive decrease in the tacticâ(TM)s implementation, with under 200,000 stops recorded â" less than a third the number from just two years before. The result: crime continued to fall.

the second amendment speaks of redcoats and muskets

No, actually, neither word is found anywhere in the Bill of Rights.

then there is the whole *well-regulated* part: trianing, proficiency, responsibility, level headedness *BEFORE* you get a gun.

If we read the 1st Amendment the way you propose we read the 2nd, then your Freedom of Speech would also be limited — to Petitioning the Government. And only for Redress of Grievances. And only after a cool-off period. And only using the medium in existence back then — not on radio, TV, or the Internet.

As things stand, however, we consider selling pornography on the Internet and the publishing of bomb-making instructions to be protected by the 1st Amendment...

the second amendment is nothing at all like the dirty harry fiction

Huh? I think, you got carried away...

I don't see any of them creating "a well regulated militia"...

If we read the 1st Amendment the way you are proposing we read the 2nd, your right to Free Speech would likewise come with the following restrictions:

• Only if your speech petitions the Government — addressing anybody else is not covered and is subject to regulations.
• Only if the petition is for Redress of Grievances — for example, neither pornography nor bomb-making instructions would be covered.
• Only if the medium you chose for your speech existed, when the Bill of Rights was written — anything said on radio, TV, or the Internet is not covered.

Is that your proposal, or are you going to suggest, we apply self-inconsistent set of rules, when reading the Bill of Rights?

Didn't Microsoft 8K BASIC borrow heavily from DECUS BASIC, a copy of the source code Gates obtained from a DEC users group. ref ref ref

-1, Flamebait? Obviously someone with mod points has no sense of humor. This is why people jokingly refer to Fox News as "Faux news:"

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2...

http://www.businessinsider.com...

http://www.alternet.org/news-a...

http://mathbabe.org/2012/04/21...

http://foxnewsboycott.com/fox-...

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t...

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t...

http://www.salon.com/2013/10/1...

The Beach Boys released two copyright-extension sets...

That's not true. "The Beach Boys" didn't release anything. The rights to their work were stolen in the 1960s by their manager and sold to A&M records:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...
A&M is owned by UMG:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U...
The largest Music publishing company in the world who's owned by Vivendi:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V...
Who's worth nearly $50 billion, and has profits in the $3 billion/yr range...

and you wonder why copyright laws get changed in their favor... lol

When arguing about copyright law, always keep in mind... the people that "own" these copyrights are almost never the artists or their families. Business own then and the attempts to extend copyright into perpetuity has absolutely nothing to do with rewarding the creator of the music. It has to do with extending what was usually a theft from an artist, into a theft from mankind as a whole.

Watch the following movie for more details on that side of the business:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A...
I don't like 30 seconds to mars, but that movie matches what many of the musicians/bands I've met have said about the industry.

And here's an article written by Courtney Love 15yrs ago... and it's also pretty much dead on:
http://www.salon.com/2000/06/1...

The real pirates are the music labels.

While North Korea is hardly a beacon of consumerism, there are plenty of TVs and DVD players in the country. It's not even forbidden to own them. While it's illegal to modify them to receive anything other than state-sponsored broadcasts, in some areas homes will even have two TVs, one official (for receiving propaganda) and one bootleg (to pick up South Korean broadcasts). DVD smuggling is common. If DVDs came raining down from the heavens, especially closer to the border regions, the people would be able to use them.

Troll my behind — respond giving examples to the contrary: a link to a dire prediction made 10-15-20 years ago, and a link showing it materializing within 10% of the predicted "bad"...

You really ought to include links when you say that kind of thing. Like this one, which quotes James Hansen in 1988, saying the West Side Highway in New York would be underwater. And " there will be tape across the windows across the street because of high winds." And " the droughts can get more severe and you’ll have signs in restaurants saying 'Water by request only.”

Don't worry, I'm sure President Obama won't sign this bill.

http://www.salon.com/2014/02/2...

http://offgridsurvival.com/liv...

http://offthegridlive.com/abou...

There you go.

Suspecting and Knowing are 2 different things.

Not in this case. While we weren't aware of the extent of their torture ("brutal/enhanced interrogation" my ass, it's torture), we did know they were doing it (at least since 2010, but perhaps earlier). They (namely Dick Cheney, but others as well) just played it off as "enhanced interrogation", as though they were Jedis hand-waving the American public.

Sadly, it seems that worked. Despite the atrocities that are Guantanamo and waterboarding, there were only a few (very loud) voices calling for charges against those who authorized them. Sure, some guys got roped in when the Guantanamo thing first broke, but the facility is still up and running. And, sadly, I doubt anyone will be taken to task over this; maybe some low-level nobodies in an attempt to placate the few angry mobs, but no one that actually made decisions.

It's kind of like the whole NSA thing. We had bits and pieces, knowing enough to know that they were doing some sort of illegal data gathering, but until the Snowden documents didn't know the details or scope of what they were doing.

That gave me some hope for the world.

Your hope comes easier than mine, then. That the officers were okay with sessions in the first place is highly disturbing to me, and only "some"/"several" were actually disturbed after it happened for a few days.

sort of takes the romance out of it
more on that
alright, if you're not trolling you deserve a letter grade off that project

Links from that search you posted:

http://www.salon.com/2013/06/2...

Faced with the near-term catastrophe of climate change and the planet-poisoning effects of fossil fuels, is the environmental movement changing its tune on nuclear energy? It’s not a new question, and let’s be clear that the short answer is still no – or mostly no. You can’t find one major environmental organization, from activist groups like Greenpeace to mainstream conservation groups like the Nature Conservancy or the National Audubon Society, that has come out publicly in favor of nuclear power.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/1016079...

Currently, support for nuclear power among most environmentalists is tentative at best. But at least a few voices within the movement insist that soaring global demand for energy makes it imperative for climate change advocates to fully embrace atomic power.

http://www.voanews.com/content...

The four scientists say the risks of expanding nuclear energy are much smaller than those of continuing to rely on fossil fuel power plants, which they say treat the atmosphere "as a waste dump."

U.S. environmental advocacy group, the Natural Resources Defense Council, rejected the letter's emphasis on nuclear power. Spokesman Bob Deans says the world gains nothing from "substituting one set of environmental nightmares for another."

Interestingly, with the exception of the top link or two that shows a very minor environmental group or small numbers of environmentalists in favor of nuclear, most links demonstrate that the environmental movement is still very much anti-nuclear.

House Republicans pass bill forbidding scientists from advising the EPA on their own research :

H.R. 1422, which passed 229-191, would shake up the EPA’s Scientific Advisory Board, placing restrictions on those pesky scientists and creating room for experts with overt financial ties to the industries affected by EPA regulations.

The bill is being framed as a play for transparency: Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Texas, argued that the board’s current structure is problematic because it “excludes industry experts, but not officials for environmental advocacy groups.” The inclusion of industry experts, he said, would right this injustice.

But the White House, which threatened to veto the bill, said it would “negatively affect the appointment of experts and would weaken the scientific independence and integrity of the SAB.”

In what might be the most ridiculous aspect of the whole thing, the bill forbids scientific experts from participating in “advisory activities” that either directly or indirectly involve their own work. In case that wasn’t clear: experts would be forbidden from sharing their expertise in their own research — the bizarre assumption, apparently, being that having conducted peer-reviewed studies on a topic would constitute a conflict of interest. “In other words,” wrote Union of Concerned Scientists director Andrew A. Rosenberg in an editorial for RollCall, “academic scientists who know the most about a subject can’t weigh in, but experts paid by corporations who want to block regulations can.”

Plus he has a net worth of over $12 million, he'd get more from the interest than all the rest of that stuff put together.

That's peanuts. As I said above, Billy Tauzin got $2 million a year from the drug industry after he let them take as much as they want from the Medicare fund in the Prescription Drug Bill.

GWB got $15 million from speeches, but he's got a long way to catch up with Bill Clinton, who got $100 million.

As the parent said, if Obama pleases the right people, he can make a lot of money after his term expires. This writer http://www.salon.com/2013/07/1... is cynical enough to believe that there's a quid pro quo.

Or as Bill Moyers said: Maybe Obama hasn't sold out. Maybe he's just one of them.

How can one not scoff when we've heard in the 1980s that by 2010 NYC'ers were going to be up to their knees in sea water?

Here's a reference for that. We were still getting those predictions in 2001.

Ahh, the 'X isn't a problem because Y is a worse problem' dismount.

And your MRA language puts in the same group as this guy: http://www.salon.com/2014/11/1...

(enjoy the guilt by association; I'm sure you've used a few times):

"All [models] in our ensemble predict that [the United State's] mean CAPE will increase over the 21st century, with a mean increase of 11.2 percent per degree Celsius of global warming,"

To back up that point, It's been demonstrated recently that our climate models our wrong.

Here's a prediction from 1988, that part of New York would be underwater before now:

“The West Side Highway [which runs along the Hudson River] will be under water. And there will be tape across the windows across the street because of high winds. And the same birds won’t be there. The trees in the median strip will change.”

Generally, the ACLU does in meat-space what the EFF does in cyberspace.

BS. Once, a decade ago, I donated enough to ACLU to warrant sending me a membership card. Still have it somewhere. Guess what? 2 weeks later an invitation to subscribe to a disgusting far-left magazine showed up, sent to the same "tagged" address as what I gave the ACLU. It had a picture of the then-President in shackles on it — showing today's President that way would've been a national scandal.

Do you suppose, the USSR or Cuba, that American Left love some much, were any better on LGBT rights, than the US is today?

Having aligned themselves so solidly with the Left — and outright communists among them — indeed, having concentrated on the nonsense like "LGBT rights", they've lost the hearts and minds of the rest of us...

"Let what sink in? The fact that 3 guys defrauded banks for a cool billion dollars each? "

try 800 trillion... makes these guys look foolish to only steal a few billion...
http://www.salon.com/2012/07/14/banks_biggest_fraud_ever/

"The fact that a company with a large fan base is getting sucked under?"

it happens aol had a huge fanbase too but not many are sad it's gone.

" The fact that this will have a chilling effect on the PC market?

any worse than apple saying they can no longer build ipod classics? the pc market is mainly swindlers anyways. $5,000 for a calculator... they swindled quite a few people in the upgrade cycle and making hardware crap and load crappier software that abandons the four basic freedoms required for truly free software...

"Obviously the banks blew it by not noticing the fraud occurring, yet tax payers will drawn in to fix the banks. Tax payers should really be hot about this. I really hope these guys get burned, or at least flow right into a long brisk term in "Federal Pound me in the Ass Prison"!"

1. talk is cheap. on the other hand the US has kinda stood on the opposite side of fascism and stalinism for a pretty long while now. politics will be politics but some things are still true.

35 countries where the U.S. has supported fascists, drug lords and terrorists

. I'm surprised you could even type such tripe with a straight face.

2. morality is a tricky thing, and something we're now finally fleshing out. I certainly don't believe we're more moral, but it does sound good no? :) our enemies certainly view us as such. We've been the great satan for a while now, but they hate you too :)

No, most people actually don't view your country as such. They see you as an amoral, imperialistic bully.

3. dictatorships also proclaim that food makes you less hungry, what's your point?

That your claims are bullshit. As much so as North Korea proclaiming itself to be a Democratic Republic.

4. I can't laugh that long. which allies do you think will leave... because of the espionage? lemme know.

You can't laugh hard enough about something even US officials agree with?

http://online.wsj.com/articles...

Mr. Kerry acknowledged the countries have been through a "rough period," after leaked documents from the fugitive former intelligence contractor Edward Snowden showed the U.S. National Security Agency monitored the German leader's cellphone.

And that's before you get into strained ties with Brazil, France, etc.

Yep.

Nobody with a brain cell takes that moonbat rag seriously. Your moniker is not inaccurate.
Comparing a dozen or two christian abortion-clinic bombers (who are scumbags, yes) to hundreds of thousands of deranged muslims (ISIS, Boko Haram, Al Qaida, Al Nusra, Taliban, etc.) who are raping and beheading thousands and thousands of perfectly innocent people, even their own kind, is a douche move at best with a clearly biased agenda.

Yep.

Ultimate logic fail!

So are you saying that because some non-Muslims react violently against people they disagree with then that means that Muslims don't do it? If I can find a non-American who don't pays taxes would that prove that all Americans pay taxes? Think about it!

Yep.

How odd that today's Democrats (*) are perfectly aligned with Nixon on just about every issue conceivable:

http://www.salon.com/2013/10/2...

Who has actually benefited from ObamaCare? That would be the for-profit private insurance industry to which Obama sold out even while continuing to say he supported the public option.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

(*) not to be confused with people who are liberals.

The Sports-Industrial Complex is Bleeding America Dry

Sure, you do. All the time. Of course if you happen to live in a country in which Christianity is the dominant religion that impacts the lives of such atheists you would expect the most common topic to be Christianity. Or do you really expect people to criticize the things that don't impact their lives instead of the things that do?

If "you never hear these people criticizing any other religions" how did they get lablled islamaphobic? Amazing that they could do that without criticizing other religions - http://www.salon.com/2013/03/3...

And debates such as
Christopher Hitchens vs Tariq Ramadan
Sam Harris vs Reza Aslan
are illusionary?

No.

http://www.salon.com/2014/06/2...

preeminent misogynist theory is that women are born with physiological differences that make them naturally less inclined toward the field

"The difference is, females in general are much more interested in what you can do with the technology, than with just the technology itself," says Harvey Mudd President Maria Klawe

It certainly doesn't take much of a leap of faith to agree with Barbara Ericson, a senior research scientist at the Georgia Institute of Technology, when she says that "Boys fall in love with computers as machines; girls see them as tools to do something else."

When the people actually doing something about getting girls into computer science say things like that, it certainly sounds like they believe girls aren't naturally inclined toward the field, at least not the way boys are.

(And why do you deny physiological differences? Are you a TERF?)