Slashdot Mirror

The sad truth is that after four years of war in Syria there are few moderates left and those that do exist lack military strength. The Free Syrian Army was always a mosaic of factions and is now largely ineffectual.

The FSA, could be considered the most "moderated" group, actually showed that they are extremists, if not terrorists. Their commander ATE heart of Syrian soldier, or accused of allegedly trafficking in human organs. By no means, this organization is fighting for DEMOCRACY or FREEDOM.

Why, the West continuously claimed, Russian is bombing "moderated groups", they unintentionally reveal, BEFORE the Russian bombing, there are only 'four or five' Syrian fighters against Isis, by top general, many were deserted, or hand the armors, weapon to Al Quaeda. Or AFTER the bombing, eventually, the Defense Secretary of U.S Ashton Carter said:

However, the moderate Syrian forces “have not come under attack by either Assad’s forces or Russia’s forces.”

The Pentagon explicitly admitted their 500 million program to train "moderated" rebel is FAILED.
Where is the hell "Western-backed rebel forces" is bombed!?

You act like the US is the only one that complains about this.

http://www.techeye.net/busines...
http://www.theguardian.com/bus...
http://www.theguardian.com/bus...
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/...
http://www.scmp.com/news/world...

Heck, it has been all over the news that Europe is flipping their shit about their companies moving to tax havens and offshoring profits.

There are no international norms, all countries (except the tax havens) are bitching about this happening.

You act like the US is the only one that complains about this.

http://www.techeye.net/busines...
http://www.theguardian.com/bus...
http://www.theguardian.com/bus...
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/...
http://www.scmp.com/news/world...

Heck, it has been all over the news that Europe is flipping their shit about their companies moving to tax havens and offshoring profits.

There are no international norms, all countries (except the tax havens) are bitching about this happening.

looking forward to implementing the fix over the holiday.

The Guardian says they're pushing an update to fix it, or you can do it manually (link to Dell instructions in the bottom paragraph of the article).

indeed, this is the feeling in parts of Scotland (which is a separate country within the governance of the United Kingdom) where the BBC played a huge part in last years independence campaign. Unsurprisingly, the state broadcaster, funded by the tax payer, took the side of the "no" campaign instead of being unbiased in their reporting and this is causing huge ruptures in Scotland right now and calls are being made to revolutionise the BBC in Scotland. There has been a lot of reporting on this situation here and even before the referendum here and here.

Many in Scotland think that the BBC was a major force in swinging the vote in the final days before the referendum vote when both sides were close to 50/50 of the vote. This caused quite a few protests at BBC Scotland (although, these were played down by the state media).

Whilst it is obvious what the role being played by the BBC in NK and Eritrea is; bear in mind that it is a state broadcaster and will even attempt to exert power over residents within the UK.

If by "science" you mean creationism/intelligent design, Pi=3, genetics is wrong, evolution is a sin, and scientific theories are just "crazy ideas someguy once had that can't be proven"

You do realize that lots of religious schools, even in Texas, teach evolution even with respect to humans, teach the big bang theory, teach that the discoveries of science are not in conflict with religion, that science and religion search for answers in orthogonal fields.

FYI, genetic science and the big bang theory began with members of the clergy.

You could add 'revisionist history' to what is taught in Texas, even in public schools.
http://www.theguardian.com/wor...
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/...

What do you mean by 'visible' signs of life'? Are you even aware of which tests have been performed? Given that the planet has no molten core, no magnetic field to speak of, how do you plan on making that terraforming program sustainable?

If you contaminate the planet with life from earth, at the very least it becomes difficult to investigate life that might have evolved independently on Mars. You are also assuming that that life is "past", where it may still be active under the surface especially where water is to be found.

http://www.theguardian.com/sci...

Graboids... right.. so get Burt Gummer on the team!

What do you mean by 'visible' signs of life'? Are you even aware of which tests have been performed? Given that the planet has no molten core, no magnetic field to speak of, how do you plan on making that terraforming program sustainable?

If you contaminate the planet with life from earth, at the very least it becomes difficult to investigate life that might have evolved independently on Mars. You are also assuming that that life is "past", where it may still be active under the surface especially where water is to be found.

http://www.theguardian.com/sci...

This is coming from the country that lifted a ban on neonictonoids... http://www.theguardian.com/env...

Their "failures" are noisy and public, by design. Their many successes? Well, we're not going to hear much about them, unless somebody snitches. And for the record, Snowden and Manning gave us nothing, no smoking gun, zilch, unless you are interested in the adventures of Anna Nicole Smith... And it doesn't matter anyway. The people have spoken, and they highly approve, even more so in light of recent events. Fascism is on the march.

"If the surveillance programs don't stop terrorist attacks, there's not much use in having them (unless that's not really the reason you want them)."

But that is where you are wrong...

The (mass surveillance) by the NSA and abuse by law enforcement is just more part and parcel of state suppression of dissent against corporate interests. They're worried that the more people are going to wake up and corporate centers like the US and canada may be among those who also awaken. See this vid with Zbigniew Brzezinski, former United States National Security Advisor.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7ZyJw_cHJY

Brezinski at a press conference

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWTIZBCQ79g

Snowden on terrorism/spying.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2015/sep/25/edward-snowden-treaty-glenn-greenwald-mass-surveillance-terrorism-video

"Russia is fine provider. Soviet Union or Russia have kept contracts as signed over the terms and time of the contract, built pipelines into the West as planned and agreed on. Russian gas flowed as expected, offered and paid for. If your nation stops paying mid contract or takes gas in transit, contract is recreated to reflect new costs or currency changes. Russia is not difficult to deal with for a gas pipeline contract. Price is set, product flows as paid for."

So how much does the Kremlin pay you to spout this nonsense?:

http://www.theguardian.com/wor...

http://www.theguardian.com/bus...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/worl...

Obviously you're completely and utterly full of shit. Please stop shilling so blatantly and at least put some effort into it if nothing else.

Oh wait, don't tell me "All those instance were legitimate because gas was being stolen, or wasn't being paid for blah blah blah". Yeah that's exactly the fucking reason why Russia isn't a trustworthy gas supplier, because when it feels like price gouging you it can. Unfortunately though the instances of shut off all happened to coincide with periods where Russia-Ukrainian political relations were being strained because Ukraine had dared to vote in someone who wasn't pro-Russia as a leader. Funny that eh? What a coincidence?

Meanwhile we can pull in gas from places like Norway or Qatar, where this kind of thing never happens. So much for Russia being reliable.

"Russia is fine provider. Soviet Union or Russia have kept contracts as signed over the terms and time of the contract, built pipelines into the West as planned and agreed on. Russian gas flowed as expected, offered and paid for. If your nation stops paying mid contract or takes gas in transit, contract is recreated to reflect new costs or currency changes. Russia is not difficult to deal with for a gas pipeline contract. Price is set, product flows as paid for."

So how much does the Kremlin pay you to spout this nonsense?:

http://www.theguardian.com/wor...

http://www.theguardian.com/bus...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/worl...

Obviously you're completely and utterly full of shit. Please stop shilling so blatantly and at least put some effort into it if nothing else.

Oh wait, don't tell me "All those instance were legitimate because gas was being stolen, or wasn't being paid for blah blah blah". Yeah that's exactly the fucking reason why Russia isn't a trustworthy gas supplier, because when it feels like price gouging you it can. Unfortunately though the instances of shut off all happened to coincide with periods where Russia-Ukrainian political relations were being strained because Ukraine had dared to vote in someone who wasn't pro-Russia as a leader. Funny that eh? What a coincidence?

Meanwhile we can pull in gas from places like Norway or Qatar, where this kind of thing never happens. So much for Russia being reliable.

People using a free service _in exchange for advertisements_ is completely different.

Perhaps if it were a default opt-out system, but its not. The current default opt-in system leverages user ignorance and laziness.

Plus, isn't it true that corporate gmail DOESN'T do this type of scanning? I thought I had read that, or maybe it was only the educational version.

I think what Google clarified is that no humans are reading the email, that it is an automated process.

"Google’s ads use information gleaned from a user’s email combined with data from their Google profile as a whole, including search results, map requests and YouTube views, to display what it considers are relevant ads in the hope that the user is more likely to click on them and generate more advertising revenue for Google."
http://www.theguardian.com/tec...

To Google targeted advertising is a "feature" of their email scanning like spam and malware detection.

This was true before that Russian airliner went down in the Sinai, and ISIS so helpfully claimed responsibility.

Putin has staged terrorist acts against his own citizens before. I would not put too much credence into that airliner's disaster...

but now, w/ this Russian plane going down, ISIS kicked themselves up in the scheduler list.

Yes, and suddenly Putin no longer seems like such a bad guy, does he? I mean, invasion of a peaceful neighbor is soooo last year, we need to cooperate with Russia now, do we not?

230 Russian lives are a small price to pay for such a turn in the world's public opinion. Glory be to Mother Russia...

"Coal is worse than gas no matter how you look at it."

Except for fracked gas which has a habit of leaking, and with methane being a far more potent greenhouse gas, natural gas can actually be worse.

Satellite image shows massive gas leaks on this page:
Life around New Mexico's gas wells: how fracking is turning the air foul | Environment | The Guardian

To put it in perspective, the Police in the US have killed more civilians this year than The Tiny Penises have in France.

That's a pretty low bar, considering that deaths in the US as a result of terrorism amortizes to a yearly figure around that of deaths by vending machine.

Remember when Saddam had some complex masterplan for building chemical and nuclear weapons? And Al Qaeda were criminal masterminds? Now it is ISIL (The Tiny Penises) that have sophisticated methods that only our authorities can figure out if you give them unlimited powers.
I feel that this terror threat is vastly over-stated. Saddam was not a really threat (a little but not that much). Al Qaeda weren't really a threat (sure they killed people, but hardly enough to roll over your way of life for), and now The Tiny Pensis are a threat (no they aren't).

To put it in perspective, the Police in the US have killed more civilians this year than The Tiny Penises have in France.

Terrorists are shitty humans, but it's not enough to give up for freedom and privacy for.

I'm glad the terrorists died a violent death. I am sorry Diesel the police dog was sacrificed for these muslim turds. May Diesel rest in peace.

This article explains the difference between emoticons and emoji, emoticons being text only representations of what became pictographs in many of the early IRC and messaging clients, It would seem to me that since they are unicode, one could argue that the latter is simply an extension of the former.

If you only fight them in a war like scenario then this is correct. However, we can only win when we stop to produce young people who become willingly the tools of IS. Therefore, we have to cut the communication links of IS. And we must help those young men in school, university, and society to find another way to get recognition in life.

See also: http://www.theguardian.com/pro...

You say young men but it isn't only men.

Has to be both methods - monitor the known communications channels to identify 'at risk' youth and then help them find a different path or if they choose to stay on that path, help them meet their god face to face.

That doesn't mean that the majority of the refugees are terrorists, nor even a sizable minority, but the argument does seem to have some merit.

...to tell that someone is a prejudiced racist cunt?

If they tell you a thing like "You are an idiot if you don't imagine some terrorists are coming in with the hundreds of thousands" as if it is a rock solid argument - BEFORE any identification has taken place.
I.e. Prejudice [prej-uh-dis]
noun
1. an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason.
2. any preconceived opinion or feeling, either favorable or unfavorable.
3. unreasonable feelings, opinions, or attitudes, especially of a hostile nature, regarding an ethnic, racial, social, or religious group.

Oh and BTW, no. One of the attackers, at this time, has NOT yet been identified as a Syrian refugee.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/22a0...

Ahmad al Mohammad, 25

A Syrian passport in that name was found near the body of one of the men who detonated a suicide vest at the stadium.
Fingerprints from the body matched those of a man who entered Greece via the island of Leros as an asylum seeker in early October.
He is said to have travelled through Turkey, Serbia and Croatia on his way to Paris.

FranÃois Molins, Paris public prosecutor, said the authenticity of the passport "had yet to be verified".
Unconfirmed reports from AFP suggest that the passport may have belonged to a Syrian soldier of President Bashar al-Assad regime who was killed several months ago.

At the same time, the same passport is found at another location hundreds of kilometers away from Paris.
http://www.theguardian.com/wor...
With another guy's face in it. On another guy.

So... Why not another guy's hand at the scene too?
I mean... if we're gonna make wild unconfirmed guesses about smuggling guns (which are much easier to just buy locally), finding a refugee with a passport, already in France, and cutting off his hand there in France...
Seems a lot easier than marching across a dozen borders just to be the only non-local to blow himself up in Paris.
As far as wild unconfirmed guesses go... it seems a lot simpler.

But not in the mind of our resident prejudiced racist cunt, SuperKendall. Or his pal, gay358.
Nah... see... they imagine brown people smuggling guns and bombs across borders - cause that is what they LIKE to imagine.
That is the way they are set in their minds, and that is the way they see the world.
As racist, chauvinist, prejudiced cunts they are.

There's a group that doesn't need to meet those criteria: women. Example.

If you only fight them in a war like scenario then this is correct. However, we can only win when we stop to produce young people who become willingly the tools of IS. Therefore, we have to cut the communication links of IS. And we must help those young men in school, university, and society to find another way to get recognition in life.

See also: http://www.theguardian.com/pro...

The terrorists in the Paris attack were known to the security services.

This almost always seems to be the case: the security services don't need more mass surveillance, they need to act on the intelligence they already have; they don't need a bigger haystack to find the needles they already have in front of them.

The proposals by the British government (the civil servants behind the scenes, that is, impressing it upon the clueless "here today, gone tomorrow" politicians, who propose it to every bunch that comes along until they get what they want) are ludicrous and will be abused.

Having Mike from Bromford's internet history stored for a whole year won't help them catch a single fucking terrorist, but it will help they shut him the fuck up if he starts campaigning against Fracking in his neighbourhood once the party's donors (the Frackers) start complaining about how effective his campign is.

The UK is becoming an ever greater, scary, over-arching surveillance state. The other shoe just hasn't dropped yet for the vast majority of people.

Honey is bee puke. They have a "many bees, one cell" puking, eating and re-puking party to make it.

Beans are the reproductive vessels of plants. We're eating innocent bean plants that could have grown and thrived.

Salad leaves are cut from their living bodies.

We're not plants. Inevitably, our food involves the death and destruction of other species, or biological processes, yes, including excretion, even if it's just your bread inflated by the microfarts of yeast.

Your glass of algae still has to decompose, it just does it in your belly instead, first at the hands of your stomach acids and enzymes, then it's passed through a festering mess of bacteria. As you note, microorganisms are vicious bastards that produce all kinds of toxins, far more than macroorganisms. One man's toxin is another man's glass of Chateau Lafite...

The notion that you can somehow strive for "cleanliness" in your food is just effete pretence. Even that bag of Soylent is the product of things writhing through dirt and striving to exist before they are cut down in their prime and ground up.

I implore you to get help for your food aversion - you're really missing out on some delicious stuff.

or the good guys had the data but couldn't sort the wheat from the chaff (in which case, laws to further expand the dragnet of surveillance against the general population will reduce our security, not enhance it, by enlarging the haystack of data through which they're trying to search for the terorist needle.)

Which is exactly what happened, and has been pointed at in an editorial in the Guardian that used the exact same metaphor you did: "When the intelligence agencies are looking for a needle in a haystack, they shouldn’t be adding more hay."

Basically, it's a manpower problem, not a legal one. But every government jumps on that pretext to expand surveillance.

I do not support any government that indiscriminately kills civilians (ie Israel) and I hold my own accountable when accidents happen.

Israel doesn't make a practice of indiscriminately killing civilians, and the "investigations" making those sorts of accusations tend to have "issues".

Goldstone: You Cannot Undo a Slander
Israel’s Heroic Restraint
Scandal Rocks the U.N.
The U.N.’s Grotesque Gaza Inquiry
Another Effort to Destroy Israel

Of course they have issues as Israel has an extremely strong propaganda arm.

One might as well argue that the Israeli reports saying otherwise 'have issues'.

http://www.theguardian.com/wor...
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Now what the attacks on Paris has to do with this, I'm at a complete loss to understand.

This whole subthread started, when it was implied, that the West in general — and the US in particular — aren't any better than ISIS and is equally outrage-worthy. This incident was offered as proof of that.

My point is, it proves the opposite. We are better, because the "collateral murder" incident is clearly an outrage to most of us — with Pentagon trying to hide it — while the Paris murders are something, the enemy is proud of and publicizes it as much as they can.

You broke the country, you bought it. Get your lazy arses back in there and finish the job.

The cooler heads here didn't want to leave Iraq so early, but we are saddled with a President — whom you awarded with a Nobel Peace Prize (a stupid act, which progressives still would not acknowledge as a mistake) — who does not think, there is true evil in the world... Or, if there is, it is his own country. You can blame us for electing him, but his victory was not without your help. Twice.

At least it's not as much bullshit as Tamiflu or other voodoo vaccines that passes as medicine these days. That fiasco cost UK taxpayers a cool half-billion pounds. If homeopathy costs 1% but doesn't hurt or maim with serious side effects then it's worth the paltry cost.

There are other considerations as well. You can only fly so many sorties per day at a sustainable level over a longer term so all targets need to be prioritised against each other. RIght now the French authorities are going to be absolutely pissed so they are likely operating at the short term sprint level. Without getting additional equipment to the area and additional people to the area the step up in attacks will likely be unsustainable.

According to http://www.theguardian.com/wor... they have 12 strike aircraft currently in the area. Depending on the mission time they MIGHT be able to run 3 sorties per day with pilot swapping but the aircraft will need to be grounded for maintenance after a couple of days of that level of use.

If you look at France: They have a huge problem integrating immigrants (or at least treating them reasonable well).If you read an article like this:
http://www.theguardian.com/wor...
you have to wonder, if this is really about religion or about the youth having no future and then finding a reason for getting violent.

Ah, the old "they're just poor and misunderstood" argument. That myth has been debunked a million times by terrorism research, but it just won't die. The muslim world is full of this type of violence, and thousands of young men have joined Deash from Algeria alone. Are you claiming that Algerians in Algeria are not integrated and are marginalized by Islamophobes?

Different countries have different ways of dealing with immigration. Whatever the approach, all western countries have to deal with islamist terrorism, as well as plain old muslim antisocial and criminal behavior. This behavior is caused by the ideology, mentality and cultural values that have been imported from the muslim world. Some examples:

Forced virginity tests
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Honor killings:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Challenging authority: attacks on police, firefighters, mailmen
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Sectarianism in the classroom:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Turkish (Anatolian) thugs take over German school:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Muslim misogyny, racism, triumphalism, glorification of violence:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

PS If you'd read the Guardian regularly, you'd know it's not a credible source. They argue that Thomas the tank engine is racist. They ignore issues like this because it doesn't fit their narrative. If they can't ignore it, like these 2 major domestic scandals, they downplay the religious / ethnic aspects:

Pakistani (child)rape culture in the UK
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-eng...

Trojan Horse school scandal
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-eng...

http://www.theguardian.com/wor...

Oh dear - but better than a terrorist attack. Actually high speed trains are an easy target - I'm surprised they haven't been attacked before now

Which was why I said "Yes and no" at the start of my reply.

You failed to prove the "no" part, however.

Reducing costs? That depends on what costs you're tallying. Do you have any idea what a fully-staffed drone program costs? It ain't cheap.

Without actual numbers, this argument is meaningless. Yes, a drone is not cheap, but it is reusable and cheaper than losing one or two men — or an entire helicopter full of them — to a dangerous mission.

but stop believing that now everything is a surgical pinpoint strike with no collateral damage

I never held nor expressed any such belief.

We mistakenly kill a *lot* of people

We surely do. And in a number of cases, we should've gone and detained these suspects, instead of just shooting them — Bush's use of Guantanamo was much better, than Obama's use of drones.

But when the only thing to do is to kill a particular asshole, drones are a wonder-weapon...

It's awful what hate and fanaticism drive people to do.

Behind the dumb homicide bombers — full of hate and fanaticism — are the enablers, that provide them with explosives, training, targeting, and other logistics. And behind those are people, who pay for all that.

It is obvious, that France's Le Pen and other European "right" nationalists stand to rise enormously in the wake of this tragedy. It is also a fact, that Vladimir Putin finances these guys. Would he not be happy to see his allies gain ground — while the electorate's attention shifts away from his crimes?

In this case, the answer to the famous question: Cui bono? (who profits?), has an obvious answer.

Don't condemn the group, condemn the atrocities, the actual violation of human rights, and those who do the violating.

You're forgetting to condemn the millions of people amongst who the live, and who allow them to continue to operate, be funded, preach hate and recruit. The militant jihadis could never operate without the tacit approval of many millions of their less violent but none the less supportive co-religionists.

So lets condemn all Americans, because they allow the US government to operate, which is performing terrorist drone strikes all over the world.

The problem is, that the world is never that easy. Many people inside the areas occupied by ISIS will cooperate with ISIS just to survive. Can you blame them?

If you look at France: They have a huge problem integrating immigrants (or at least treating them reasonable well).If you read an article like this: http://www.theguardian.com/wor... you have to wonder, if this is really about religion or about the youth having no future and then finding a reason for getting violent.

OK, reality check: France is pounding ISIS in Syria right now. Yes, they (we) also pounded Lybia. Terrorists consider France an ally of the USA (which it is).

These guys are simply using terrorism everywhere, because that's the only thing they know how to do.

Sorry, but that is bullshit. France has only been bombing Syria for six weeks and these attacks were almost certainly being planned long before that. Al Qaida had plots for attacks like this broken up in Europe five years ago:

'Mumbai-style' terror attack on UK, France and Germany foiled - Tuesday 28 September 2010
CIA foils Mumbai-style terror plot on Europe with series of drone strikes on militants in Pakistan - 29 September 2010

It takes months or years to plot and prepare for attacks like this. It takes two seconds to claim that it is because of "Syria."

The members of ISIS certainly know more than terrorism. They have put at risk the government of both Iraq and Syria, presenting a serious challenge to their armies in the field. They are using terrorism in France because that is what they can do . . .for now.

The Islamist extremists want France to convert to Islam, just like they want every other country to do.

So far this year in the US the police have killed 876 people through shootings.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-...

Don't forget about the refugees who staged a protest by refusing to leave their bus after the Swedish government (who has literally run out of all space after taking in a ridiculous number of refugees and is now temporarily housing people on the floors of random government buildings) tried to relocate them to a town that was too isolated and insufficiently warm during the winter:

http://www.theguardian.com/wor...

Sorry for the horrible right wing propaganda source, but it's the best I could find.

France has been bombing terrorists in Iraq and Syria. Just last week they announced they were sending their aircraft carrier in for another tour.

Exactly right. IS is striking back at France in retaliation of France's attacks on them in Syria.

See http://www.theguardian.com/wor... for example.

Note that I'm not trying to justify anything.

With that said, I do not think that it makes any sense whatsoever to try to fight religious lunatics by killing them. These people dream of being "martyred" in battle, because they think it will secure them a better spot in their afterlife. When we think that killing the Islamists will work we are projecting rational thoughts and motivations onto people who are motivated by irrational beliefs.

If we should to do something rash here in Europe (which I'm not sure we should) internment camps like the ones the US put US-Japanese citizens in during WW2 would be a much better idea. The Islamists do like their freedom as much as the rest of us. God's powers apparently do not extend inside the walls of prisons.

As for annual physicals, I'm pretty sure that's only a thing in countries with privatised healthcare. I don't think the NHS has ever proposed such at thing.

I guess they aren't annual in the UK, but every 5 years or so...

Couple of other things you didn't mention:

1. Muslims are simply going to force the "natives" to become the minority via population control.
With Open Gates: The forced collective suicide of European nations

2. The silent majority ARE the problem.

3. Major US News Station are also part of the problem, such as Faux News. i.e. CNNi put together an award winning one-hour documentary on the use of internet technologies and social media by democracy activists in Bahrain and then refused to show it on CNNi. (CNNi "officially" give the excuse it was only "commissioned for CNN US")

On 19 June 2011 at 8pm, CNN's domestic outlet in the US aired "iRevolution" for the first and only time. The program received prestigious journalism awards, including a 2012 Gold Medal from New York Festival's Best TV and Films. Lyon, along with her segment producer Taryn Fixel, were named as finalists for the 2011 Livingston Awards for Young Journalists. A Facebook page created by Bahraini activists, entitled "Thank you Amber Lyon, CNN reporter | From people of Bahrain", received more than 8,000 "likes".

Despite these accolades, and despite the dangers their own journalists and their sources endured to produce it, CNN International (CNNi) never broadcast the documentary. Even in the face of numerous inquiries and complaints from their own employees inside CNN, it continued to refuse to broadcast the program or even provide any explanation for the decision. To date, this documentary has never aired on CNNi.

This is likely why

That may explain the UK, although honestly I doubt Charles has that much influence. But it doesn't explain the US or Canada, or anywhere else this utter bullshit gets passed off as "medicine". Some of these crap treatments are even covered under my job's health coverage. It's crazy and a waste of money, or more specifically premiums I pay.

This is likely why

Sadly, his manifesto would be endorsed by the majority of people even in the countries he hates for welcoming immigrants. We freely allow the migration of money, but, but not people. Jobs don't have to climb a border wall, cross a sea or desert or even get a visa before leaving their home country.

Countries such as the US treat corporations as people, except when it comes to national borders. We require a passport for living-breathing people but not for corporations. I've never heard of a corporation being held against its will for decades in a prison/refugee camp while its immigration status is being evaluated. Corporations needn't cross deserts or crowd onto rickety boats. They are seldom convicted of treason or Logan act violations regardless of the havoc and resentment they create as representatives of their homeland in other parts of the world.

We don't bat an eye when a wealthy businessman distorts a third-world economy with their holiday home or an expat REIT vulture fund managed by former US VP Dan Quayle acquires and ruthlessly forecloses on hundreds of properties in Northern Ireland's 6 counties. Your portfolio now "owns" land that the Irish have struggled over for generations.

Gangolf, I don't know what immigrants did to you to make you so angry. I am one of the 232 million people who live outside my birth country. If we were counted, 0th generation immigrants would be the 5th most populous country in the world, ahead of Brazil. But we are shunned and labelled as if refugee == immigrant == illegal. I'm truly surprised that you count the US as a country that is "too welcoming." As an insular isolationist, you might not be aware that US immigration policy has changed considerably since the waves of 19th and early 20th century immigrants. The US solved its 1990s boat people crisis by warehousing refugees at Gitmo. It's solving the central American crisis by building a wall and letting people die. "Illegal" is a good definition of these border policies which violate international law. Rest assured that I will never use your software until you understand more about the people who provide a convenient scapegoat for politicians and a convenient target for your hate.

Sadly, his manifesto would be endorsed by the majority of people even in the countries he hates for welcoming immigrants. We freely allow the migration of money, but, but not people. Jobs don't have to climb a border wall, cross a sea or desert or even get a visa before leaving their home country.

Countries such as the US treat corporations as people, except when it comes to national borders. We require a passport for living-breathing people but not for corporations. I've never heard of a corporation being held against its will for decades in a prison/refugee camp while its immigration status is being evaluated. Corporations needn't cross deserts or crowd onto rickety boats. They are seldom convicted of treason or Logan act violations regardless of the havoc and resentment they create as representatives of their homeland in other parts of the world.

We don't bat an eye when a wealthy businessman distorts a third-world economy with their holiday home or an expat REIT vulture fund managed by former US VP Dan Quayle acquires and ruthlessly forecloses on hundreds of properties in Northern Ireland's 6 counties. Your portfolio now "owns" land that the Irish have struggled over for generations.

Gangolf, I don't know what immigrants did to you to make you so angry. I am one of the 232 million people who live outside my birth country. If we were counted, 0th generation immigrants would be the 5th most populous country in the world, ahead of Brazil. But we are shunned and labelled as if refugee == immigrant == illegal. I'm truly surprised that you count the US as a country that is "too welcoming." As an insular isolationist, you might not be aware that US immigration policy has changed considerably since the waves of 19th and early 20th century immigrants. The US solved its 1990s boat people crisis by warehousing refugees at Gitmo. It's solving the central American crisis by building a wall and letting people die. "Illegal" is a good definition of these border policies which violate international law. Rest assured that I will never use your software until you understand more about the people who provide a convenient scapegoat for politicians and a convenient target for your hate.

The concept that a person of some given behavior is more likely to be locked up if he/she is of some ethnic origin other than white European, say, a black person, in America is incorrect.

That's just incorrect. There is plenty of evidence, shown in study after study, that shows there is a disparity in sentencing between white people and various ethnic and racial groups.
http://www.sentencingproject.o...
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB... http://www.theguardian.com/law...
https://www.law.upenn.edu/live...
https://www.aclu.org/sites/def...
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles...
So maybe you want to start your reply again, armed with this new information?

Your position seems to be that unjust sentencing disparity caused by the race of the defendant is prevalent, that your numerous links contain statements that support that conclusion, and thus my position regarding preferential treatment is wrong. If, by posting all of those links, you mean to advance some idea beyond unjust racial sentencing disparity, you didn't say so.

But sentencing is only one element or the criminal process. Who is chosen to arrest is important as well, and that's what I just pointed out. The focus of law enforcement is the first element in the criminal justice process. I gave the example of leniency given to a peaceful crowd sitting on a porch selling crack. Sentencing, however unjust, has nothing to do with that.

It would be unrealistically unwieldy for me to rebutt all the contents of all those links. It wouldn't even make sense to read them. However, the studies I'm familiar with that express your conclusion (racial sentencing disparity in general) are flawed. Please pick one, or one concept from one, that you like, and I will address it.

The concept that a person of some given behavior is more likely to be locked up if he/she is of some ethnic origin other than white European, say, a black person, in America is incorrect.

That's just incorrect. There is plenty of evidence, shown in study after study, that shows there is a disparity in sentencing between white people and various ethnic and racial groups.

http://www.sentencingproject.o...

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB...

http://www.theguardian.com/law...

https://www.law.upenn.edu/live...

https://www.aclu.org/sites/def...

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles...

So maybe you want to start your reply again, armed with this new information?

They are more likely to trade large sums of money back and forth as game counters than they are to go out and consume.

- which is wonderful. Do you know what happens when a bunch of super wealthy people are bidding for items on the market? 170 million dollar paintings

The entire idea that economy is based on consumption is intellectually retarded to the point of no redemption. The only problem is lack of production, not lack of consumption. Consumption is trivial and the less money is bidding for the existing products, the lower the prices are (items go on sale when there are very few buyers, not when people are engaging in bidding wars).

The problem in USA (and Europe and Japan and Russia and so much of Africa and Australia and South America) is lack of production, not lack of consumption. It is the people who do not produce who cannot afford to consume and the real problem is lack of savings, which prevents increased production and this problem is created by the gigantic governments of the world, borrowing and printing money, controlling prices, taxing savings out of existence.

Re "I seriously doubt such a measure would pass into law"
The NSA and GCHQ let a generation of users enjoy US based consumer operating systems that responded well to gov malware and keyloggers. After that any compiled export crypto is a junk layer. Some great busy work and a generation of legal distraction.
Re "There was a huge stink made about that as well, and as far as I know, those operations have been shut down (I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong)."
The fuss made just further covered collect it all and the ability to collect per person per US designed device.
Re 'could break into these systems and make it easier for them to effectively spy on the UK"
Hints of methods and easy network access showed up in the UK press around 2000.
"'Clean-up' police branded corrupt" (Sunday 31 March 2002)
http://www.theguardian.com/pol...
Huge amounts of secure digital information was floating around for sale from courts, police to the press or anyone with cash. ie any "government, company or individual" could buy into any secure network.