Slashdot Mirror

I'm sorry, that's incorrect.

The current administration has secretly authorized the NSA to break the law by warrantlessly monitoring all of us [Americans] that are making extraterritorial phone calls .

If conducting international business or having a chat with friends & family outside the country (perhaps Canada or Mexico) constitutes seditious behavior worthy of summary warrantless monitoring, then count a very great number of Americans under suspicion. A fishing expedition of the sort that the 4th Amendment was meant to prevent.

EPIC, EFF and other Slashdot faves take umbrage to this unconstitutional behavior by the executive administration of the US government, as do I.

The GOP is going to use the survey results to propose redistricting that will tip the balance of the legislature towards the right. See gerrymandering, Texas, and DeLay.

You should check your "facts": http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A244 03-2004Jul2.html/.

The Coalition Press Information Center in Baghdad said in a statement yesterday that the 122-milimeter rocket rounds, which initially showed traces of sarin, "were all empty and tested negative for any type of chemicals."

A FrontPage mag article? I decided to go out and find a slightly more credible source that FPM and when I typed VAAPCON into google all I got were far-right blogs which picked up the talking points from the local repub HQ and were spouting it accordingly.

Anyway, if you want to know about what was REALLY going on with "VAAPCON" you can read it here. You respect the Washington Post as being legit, right? It turns out that the Republicans have just been using a selective half of the sentence to justify illegal wiretapping by saying Clinton did it, but only to foriegners who were not protected by the constitution. The people who were talked about in VAAPCON, as referenced by a DOJ link in another reply to this, were properly warrented under FICA.

Stop these misleading talking points that border on flat out lies. All it does it further alienate people from politics and hurt the American political system.

What records does the Postal Service keep? What records of public telephone usage are available. What about cash withdrawals from banks, or POS cash transactions from retailers. The list could go on and on.

Then there are going to be DB's bought on the black market. The Wahington Post's blogger, William Arkin discussed one of Able Danger's mad forays into that market:

According to military sources familiar with the Able Danger legal side, the effort stepped over the line when LIWA contractors purchased photographic collections of people entering and exiting mosques in the United States and overseas. One source says that LIWA contractors dealt with a questionable source of photographs in California, either a white supremacy group or some other anti-Islamic organization.

Connections will be found, but their actual credibility will remain in doubt, and there will be no such thing as an individual's privacy.

All because of a government so arrogant, self-centered and incompetent, they didn't see 911 coming.

We are talking about a reporter that several months ago thought the American Association for Retired Persons is (and I quote) "America's most dangerous lobby." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic le/2005/11/15/AR2005111501308.html I suggest you read his current article in terms of his credentials and roles within Newsweek. Then read some of his previous positions and decide whether you feel he is credible.

I would like to pose this question to Slashdot readers. Whatever facts you dispute, there definitely will be a lot more Chinese and Indian engineers than American in the future. It is reasonable to assume they will use their native languages more and more as time progresses and non english speakers form the majority of their audience.

What is your reaction if Chinese or Hindi replace English as the primary documentation language, or that the latest open source technologies may only be available to those capable of understanding Asian languages?

I'd love it too. But you see, the Olympics want broadcast, over-the-air exposure. Nevermind that ESPN and ESPN2 are both available in roughly 90 million households in the US.

But I could definately ESPN Classic, perhaps even ESPNU (lots of college athletes in the games). Perhaps the biggest improvement for olympic coverage would be using ESPN Deportes (not that I speak spanish, but I think it would be a great move).

Don't forget regular highlights/updates on ESPN News

Not to mention, you'd get three HD channels available for use, too - ABCHD, ESPNHD, ESPN2HD.

Not likely anytime soon (well, obviously, with the NBC contract...)

Also Interesting to consider how much NBC paid for the Torino games (613 million) vs NFL deals.. 1.1 Billion/year for ESPN's MNF. NBC, 600 million a year. Fox: 712.5 million a year. CBS: 622.5 million a year.

This might have something to do with it.

U.S. Strikes Iraq for Plot to Kill Bush ~6/1993

Considering that weapons systems are the only place where R&D funding is going up in the government, are you sure this is pure tinfoil hat? Here's a prime example from just this past week. Witness the drooling dweeb's recent visit to colorado where he was going to be touting the new "war on the addiction to oil". RIGHT BEFORE he got there they were laying off alternative energy researchers. Sensing a PR disaster they quickly rehired them, but...they still have cut funding for the entire department there.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic le/2006/02/20/AR2006022001717.html

The loons in his admin only have serious money for the war machine and halliburton and KBR to buid new "relocation camps" and to keep on data mining to surveil the population. Do you have any idea what they pay grunting jock mercenaries in iraq? They call them "security contractors". How about upwards of a grand a day? For what, look at Iraq now, it's a total disaster. Bungled to start with and they have gone downhill since then. BUT they admit to 200 BILLION a year and some researchers estimate it could hit two TRILLION before long in over all expenses.

Look at what they do and where the money goes, the parent post is a lot closer to reality then your lame "tinfoil hat" comment.

I don't need a "serious refutation" untill you can offer a serious argument.

Ah, but you haven't offered any refutation. While you may dispute any of the specific points I have made, or challenge the credibility of any of the sources I cite (e.g. you might, for all I know, think CNN is run by the Illuminati and prefer I find something on the same topic from your hometown paper), you have not done so. Further, while you have disagreed with me you haven't offered any substantiation for your position, such as it is.

Just to refresh your memory, all you've offered so far is articles which have very little to do with the point you're trying to make. You'd have the same degree of relevancy if you linked to articles about McDonalds finding out that their fries have more fat than previously thought. And then claimed that Bush knew and lied about the "high fat situation".

This is, flatly, a lie, as anyone who cares to follow the links can see. I made a clear-cut series of statements and I sourced every one of them. While there are certainly better sources for all of them (I believe the actual text of Bush's signing statement, for example, is still on the whitehouse.gov web site somewhere), I see no point in spending half an hour using Google to gild the lily.

While we may hold the "chief executive" responsible for the actions of subordinates, we certainly do not do so when it is clear subordinates were acting against the directions given. Otherwise we'd never get anything done because nobody in their right mind would ever want to be in charge of anything. The training given to military on everything from racism prvention to rules of engagement, the geneva conventions, and the escalation of force model, far outweighs anything you'd ever see civvie side. Every member of the military is at all times fully aware of how much force he or she is authorized to employ, and in what fashion.

And there, in a nutshell, is the problem. The Geneva Convention you refer to is considered "quaint" by this administration; the rules of engagement are precisely what McCain was calling on them to abide by, and by their very refusal to do so they undermine the system you describe. I have no doubt that, as you state, every member of the military is at all times fully aware of how much force he or she is authorized to employ, and in what fashion. The problem is that, according to their commander in chief that now includes what most of the civilized world would call torture.

Claiming that Bush should be held responsible because some ass-clowns did what they KNEW was wrong is just ridiculous. You may as well hold him responsible when some grumpy old Sgt. goes home at the end of the day and beats his wife. Don't be stupid. Unless you can prove that the personnel in Abu Gharib were authorized to do what they did, you have no case.

There actions so far as I know did not cause organ failure, which means the Bush administration holds them to be legal. And, if you recall, (sourced in the same article), they also maintained that "torturing suspected al Qaeda members abroad 'may be justified' and that international laws against torture 'may be unconstitutional if applied to interrogation' conducted against suspected terrorists."

So I'm not sure how they were supposed to "know" that it was wrong when their commander in chief does not.

And while we're at it, your inability to research anything, or understand points of view which you disagree wit

"it's anticompetetive when the system is designed to detect competing software and prevent it from running properly. Until the second case is true, this is all bullshit and these lawyers need to find a new hobby."
-bluefoxlucid

Umm, you don't use Norton software, do you? http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2006/02 /microsoft_antispyware_deleting_1.html

Wow, its almost as if the ISPs were trying to say that people would have to pay more if they wanted thier packets routed with a high standard for delivery time. Where have I heard that recently?

The US currently does not reprocess spent fuel.

Currently true, but hopefully not soon

I'm not certain, but the other metadata is verifiably accurate (or plausible) and they removed the images, and when someone asked them about Roland, OK, the town name. That's very convincing to me.

This is a current article in the washington post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic le/2006/02/21/AR2006022101947.html?referrer=email& referrer=email/

Here is the US code relevant:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/us c_sec_18_00000794----000-.html/

" 794. Gathering or delivering defense information to aid foreign government
(a) Whoever, with intent or reason to believe that it is to be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation, communicates, delivers, or transmits, or attempts to communicate, deliver, or transmit, to any foreign government, or to any faction or party or military or naval force within a foreign country, whether recognized or unrecognized by the United States, or to any representative, officer, agent, employee, subject, or citizen thereof, either directly or indirectly, any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, note, instrument, appliance, or information relating to the national defense, shall be punished by death or by imprisonment for any term of years or for life, except that the sentence of death shall not be imposed unless the jury or, if there is no jury, the court, further finds that the offense resulted in the identification by a foreign power (as defined in section 101(a) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978) of an individual acting as an agent of the United States and consequently in the death of that individual, or directly concerned nuclear weaponry, military spacecraft or satellites, early warning systems, or other means of defense or retaliation against large-scale attack; war plans; communications intelligence or cryptographic information; or any other major weapons system or major element of defense strategy."

If the NSA is reclassifying these docs, there's a chance at least one would give away at least one identity, making the publishing of it an offense punishable by any length jail term or death.

Her finances are going to be just fine. Did you see her picture? That's professionally done promotional photo, not a candid by some hack ABC photog. I'd lay money she'll get a few dozen job offers, and probably a few marriage proposals out of the deal. She could probably even start up an email-etiquette advice column in some legal rag.

This was such a non-story on a slow news day. "bla bla bla"? So what? I've seen much worse.

Heck, maybe they should move Shaquille O'Neal over from his spokesman's job to CEO spot and really rename the company Radio-Shaq. He's more educated than this idiot Edmonson. He actually graduated from LSU with a bachelor's degree and he also got an MBA.

Doh!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo /2006/02/16/PH2006021601512.jpg

Don't even bother with the meta-data -- just View Image then View Source.

He likes wearing his gold bling, too: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo /2006/02/16/PH2006021601523.html

...and yet...

why does Deputy Donglittle get free happy endings, and I have to foot the bill? I want my taxpayer subsidized spurt too!

So now pornography is a homeland security issue?

according to the administration, yes it is

Information about domestic spying must be kept confidential... Oh, but here's the name of an active CIA operative.

Your national security "spider senses" are failing you.

Apparently you don't see the damage in releasing the list of names (for publication?) of people who have been under surveillance when communicating with known agents of a terrorist organization with a goal of killing 4,000,000 Americans, and that has already killed thousands. (You don't suppose they will escape, go into hiding, change their communications methods, figure out how to avoid future detection, or attack early, do you?) So, for the possibility of real harm to national security: don't care.

On the other hand, you do seem greatly concerned about the career of a woman known to be a CIA employee* who for years made the dangerous trek through traffic to CIA headquarters where she used her influence to help get her husband a CIA assignmnet after which he conducted a public campaign to lie to the American people and the media, in what was an apparent attempt to sway the policy of the American government. And nobody who actually knows is saying who the whistle blower is, although some people have their suspicions. So for a matter with no genuine effect on national security, or even what was possibly a positive one: it's an outrage.

If you were really worried about disclosures regarding the CIA that damaged national security, you would be outraged about the exposure of the CIA's movement of prisoners by air. Ongoing operational cover blown. Damage: real. Mention: zip.

It looks like it's time for you to recalibrate your national security spider senses. They only seem to tingle when you sense a way to damage the administration, not for things that could actually undermine national security.

* "operative" seems a little high flung for a desk job in DC, where she had been for years, don't you think?

... gather evidence against massage parlors by paying for and receiving oral sex. Policing sexuality is clearly a "tricky" business, i guess. Does anyone else see these stories as another sign that the U.S. is headed toward the kind of twisted Christian theocracy Margaret Atwood describes in The Handmaid's Tale?

See Washington Post article to read about the Spotsylvania police "beat".

The picture is no longer linked from the article, but with the post here the damage has been done.

• here ,
• here and
• here .

The picture is no longer linked from the article, but with the post here the damage has been done.

• here ,
• here and
• here .

The picture is no longer linked from the article, but with the post here the damage has been done.

• here ,
• here and
• here .

The picture is no longer linked from the article, but with the post here the damage has been done.

• here ,
• here and
• here .

I like how in the Building a Botnet graphics, the use images of old Macs.

I don't think this particular botmaster's going to have much luck...

DN

Huh. If agents know their conversations might be tapped they will find ways of coding their communications. Pretty rational reason to keep the program secret. The statement you made was the irrational one.

Wow, I'm impressed. I'm impressed your lungs didn't shut down when your one brain cell was tied up in typing this.

Okay, I'll presume you're sitting down, since I don't think you can stand and read at the same time: The US has spied on calls before, and people know that. I know, this must come as a total shock to you, there there. Go read about Echelon. Osama might have learned we were tapping his phone calls when we tried to blow him up using his phone to track him, back in 1998.

So, to sum up: ssh! Grown-ups are talking!

Those people jailed at Guantanamo Bay are also there for their ties to terrorism, not because they were simply anti-American

Don't twist the truth here by pointing out protesters who've been jailed. They were jailed for breaking specific reasons,

American citizens have a right, in fact a responsibility to always be aware and in fact question what the US government is doing.

According to the Washington comPost, "men in Japan salivate over Reno".

Maryland comptroller wants cute intern tail

This isn't the first time Ehrlich has tried to re-open debate issues involving putting your trust into machines. [washingtonpost.com]

But on a more serious note... this article mentions nothing about annonymity. The type of paper trail that they seek would essentially mean that they would have to keep track of your voter ID and who your choice was. While I think it would be paranoid to assume that they would actually go back and try to figure out who voted for who, it does undermine the idea of a secret ballot.

I think what they really need to work on more is enhanced security and a more accurate verification system. That would ensure that you are indeed a unique registered voter without having to log who you voted for. If they can be sure of who the vote is coming from, then they can assume the vote is indeed accurate.

... you should think "nuclear".

Fact: the US gets transportation primarily from oil, and power primarily from coal.
Fact: the oil will run out before the coal does.
Fact: nuclear power is more expensive than coal power
Fact: hydrogen can be used directly for transportation, but coal can't
Fact: shifting the transportation energy requirement onto coal-fired plants (coal -> power -> hydrogen) will mean the consumption of A LOT MORE coal

Conclusion: when oil hits $60/barrel and stays there, people will start wanting to build nuclear plants to allow the shift of some portion of the power and transportation sectors to hydrogen.

Oh, wait, that's already happened.

Bonus points if you hit the lawyer :)

"Fuck yourself," said the man who is a heartbeat from the presidency.

In fact, if you look at the screenshot from the Washington Post story, you'll see that the Post's computer was using the Netcraft toolbar, and that the red "Risk Rating" bar indicates a risk rating of 10 - the highest possible risk. Even though the SSL certificate and ChoicePoint "identifier" didn't flag the site as suspicious, the Netcraft toolbar did.

Last week's Washington Post had a very interesting aticle about this Eden and Evolution . It didn't try to verify or dispute the fact of evolution, but instead showed why fundamentlist religious folks have a big problem with evolution. And like many debates in society, it takes more than 10 seconds to get the point, so we end up just yelling past each other.

The religious right's big beef is that the theory of evolution really takes away man's special place in the universe. Evolution opens up the possibility that sentient life is something that just happened here on earth with no divine intervention. Evolution demonstrates that life could pop up in many places in the universe; given a stew of the right elements and physical conditions and enough time, life is inevitable.

Most non-religious or religious liberals (I'm a Unitarian Universalist, a denomination as theologically liberal as you could possibly imagine) think the fundamentalist's big problem is that evolution contradicts the first myth in the Bible (or whatever creation myth your religion professes). But religious folks have been very quick to switch from a literal translation to a more metaphorical one when the science demonstrates the facts. "The Earth does not move" (repeated a dozen times in the Bible) may have put Galileo under house arrest, but I doubt any Christian would fight the teaching of the heliocentric model of the solar system. What made that shift possible was the telescope; it not only easily showed other small systems at work that showed how the earth and the sun dance, but more recently (the last 50 years) has served as a time machine in astrophysics. Even most religious do not really believe all creation popped up ex nihilo in 144 hours (well, that's the first creation story; the one starting at Gen 2:4 isn't as time specific). In biology, there are dozens of well-documented recent observations that show speciation and other long-duration actions that are predicted by evolutionary theory--this is why "micro-eveolution" has been given as a reasonable possibility by some fundamentalists.

The key is to realize that people who truely believe in revealed knowledge aren't swayed by arguments from fact; they've been told that the scientific establishment is another source of revealed knowledge and the scientists really have no greater basis to really explain what's going on. At times scientific experts haven't been helpful to the novice public (too much cable news, which pits one crazed extreme opinion yeller with another extreme yeller, doesn't help). And some things, like string theory, really are mostly conjecture, and perhaps using a term like "string framework" may clear the air a bit. (And no, I'm not ready to debate string theory! It does explain many things, but one can fiddle the math to make it explain things way out of it's scope also.)

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Reel that back in.

Suicide does not have a significant effect on population. Not only that, most developed countries including Japan are having to deal with the prospect of a shrinking population. In fact, they call it their biggest problem.

The solution to the world's problems is never allowing people to suffer.

Here in the Washington, DC area, they are considering a tied road system where you would have the option of paying more to travel in lanes with less traffic. The more traffic on the roads, the more you pay, and the less traffic, the less you pay. Sounds a lot like what the ISPs want to do.

That may be the real agenda behind the excitement about "holocaust denial". "Holocaust denial" is a nutty position and easy to oppose. Noise there helps to distract attention from real issues that affect Israel, like "should the US supply weapons to Israel" or "should something be done to reduce AIPAC's influence on Congress and the Administration".

There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can't take part, you can't even tacitly take part, and you've got to put your bodies upon the gears, and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus. And you've got to make it stop.

The Washington Post published one that, while not exactly what you're requesting, is in the same gist:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/opinion/ssi/i mages/Toles/c_02072006_520.gif

Call him a troll if you want, but he's right. See here (never mind, article has apparently been removed. It was from September of last year.)

"Federal auditors said Friday that the Bush administration had violated the law by purchasing favorable news coverage of President Bush's education policies, by making payments to the conservative commentator Armstrong Williams and by hiring a public relations company to analyze media perceptions of the Republican Party."

Last year, a FAKE news report was broadcast that essentially praised Bush's Medicare drug benefit plan. It ended with the "reporter" saying "From Washington, this is Karen Ryan reporting."

Earlier this year a new FAKE report was broadcast, talking about the benefits of the No Child Left Behind plan.

How does it end? "From Washington, this is Karen Ryan reporting."

When the first video came out, The Daily Show had a segment about it in which they exposed the fact that there is no reporter named Karen Ryan working for any media outlet in either Washington, D.C. or the state of Washington. These reports were fabricated and funded by the U.S. government. The first was made by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and the second by

more articles: #1, #2 (which identifies Karen Ryan as a government contractor who produces and narrates the videos), #3 (which has a picture and background on Karen Ryan)

There were also several "town hall meetings" where obvious plants in the audience asked Bush questions. Example: An episode of The Daily Show featured an excerpt from one such meeting. A child no older than eight asked Bush what policies he was putting in place to help fight the war on terror. Children that young do not ask those questions.

Call him a troll if you want, but he's right. See here (never mind, article has apparently been removed. It was from September of last year.)

"Federal auditors said Friday that the Bush administration had violated the law by purchasing favorable news coverage of President Bush's education policies, by making payments to the conservative commentator Armstrong Williams and by hiring a public relations company to analyze media perceptions of the Republican Party."

Last year, a FAKE news report was broadcast that essentially praised Bush's Medicare drug benefit plan. It ended with the "reporter" saying "From Washington, this is Karen Ryan reporting."

Earlier this year a new FAKE report was broadcast, talking about the benefits of the No Child Left Behind plan.

How does it end? "From Washington, this is Karen Ryan reporting."

When the first video came out, The Daily Show had a segment about it in which they exposed the fact that there is no reporter named Karen Ryan working for any media outlet in either Washington, D.C. or the state of Washington. These reports were fabricated and funded by the U.S. government. The first was made by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and the second by

more articles: #1, #2 (which identifies Karen Ryan as a government contractor who produces and narrates the videos), #3 (which has a picture and background on Karen Ryan)

There were also several "town hall meetings" where obvious plants in the audience asked Bush questions. Example: An episode of The Daily Show featured an excerpt from one such meeting. A child no older than eight asked Bush what policies he was putting in place to help fight the war on terror. Children that young do not ask those questions.

The Washington Post also has an article on this

Some day, I'll remember to put the break tags in my first posting of the day. /yawn

Could this actually mean that well intentioned christians are actually beginning to crawl out from under the thumb of the right-wing extremists like Dobson, Robertson, Bush, etc? I know this is only a small beginning and may be offering false hope, but at least its better than the complete lack of any hope for American socieity I'd been feeling recently.

The leaders said a poll they commissioned of 1,000 evangelical Protestants showed that two thirds were convinced global warming was taking place. Additionally, 63 percent said the United States must start to address the issue immediately and half said it must act even if there was a high economic cost.

Recently, both the Wheaton College student newspaper (this is a prominent Christian school near Chicago) and Chicago Tribune ran stories about the age of the earth in Christian colleges. Now, controversy in Christian colleges is not new. Nor is young-earth versus old-earth a new conflict in the church, for it's been with us for over two centuries. But, as the author of the Tribune article implied, this conflict might be getting worse.

So why is there a conflict? The rub comes from the fact that although 44-47% of the population seems to believe in something resembling young-age creationism, probably more than 90% of Christian colleges and their professors do not. With the exception of Seventh Day Adventist colleges, it's virtually impossible to find young-age creation taught at denominational colleges (Southern Baptist, Presbyterian, Nazarene, etc.), and some, such as (Southern Baptist) Baylor University, won't even teach Intelligent Design. The Christian colleges which teach young-age creation are few and far between.

For example, among the nondenominational colleges, the only regionally accredited Christian colleges where you can get a young-earth-oriented biology major that I know of are (listed with increasing size): Bryan College (Tennessee), Grace College (Indiana), Master's College (California), Cedarville University (Ohio), and Liberty University (Virginia). And, if you want a young-earth geology major ... well, you're simply "out of luck."

As an example, the Tribune article mentions three biology majors at Olivet Nazarene College who entered the school as creationists, but who are now theistic evolutionists. As a further example, the Wheaton College newspaper shows the results of a student survey (42% of the students responded) which showed that whereas 47% believed in a young earth before entering Wheaton (the same percentage which Gallup finds for the population at large in its polls), only 27% believed in a young earth by the time of the survey. The same survey indicated that Wheaton professors were a greater influence on their age-of-earth belief than their parents were!

Don't Forget:

The IRAQ Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), was staffed by many young but loyal republicans who had no applicable experience.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A48543-20 04May22?language=printer

Wash Post story is titled:
In Iraq, the Job Opportunity of a Lifetime
Managing a $13 Billion Budget With No Experience

I had no idea I was also "U.S. Representative Jan Schakowsky, a Chief Deputy Democratic Whip" (as referenced in the GGP post), I guess it was me on my U.S. Representative web site that compiled that list of quotes from the administration. Otherwise, if I wasn't also Jan, then I wouldn't have been "The only person making inferences...". Nevermind the fact that I am also obviously slashdot user "NMerriam (15122)", as it was s/he who made the original comment. Damn, I must be schizophrenic. Thanks for the info!

You have inferred that Bush is just about the worst person on earth

Actually, no. I have simply inferred (to you and you alone I guess, as it was not my original intent) the W "is just about the worst [president] on earth". It that case, I'd have to agree with myself (but which myself? the Jan myself, or the NMerriam myself? Fuck, this is confusing).

which you know isn't true

Actually, none of the me's are positive about that point.

and you can't offer any support for that argument

(Neverminding the fact that that was not *my* argument) You are so right, I offered absolutely no support for that argument what-so-ever. Silly me, I thought we were talking about W's (and HIS administrations) references to the Iraqi's footing part of the bill. I apologize. Excellent use of the NeoCon-ish-ness "demean your critics, divert the debate and ignore the issues", well played!

I have showed you concrete numbers, yet the OBVIOUSNESS of everything still isn't getting into your skull.

To paraphrase W (and yes, I lived in Texas) - "There's an old saying in Tennessee... well, it's an old saying in Texas, I believe also in Tennessee. Actions [pauses] speak louder then [pauses] government documentation on a National Development Strategy authored more then 2 years after the invasion was 'complete'". Shouldn't that have been done BEFORE the invasion? Or at least very soon there after? Or am I a "dick" to assume some leadership in a war that "we" "choose".
Have there been elections? Yes. Have they represented the population? Depends on if your a Sunni, Kurd or Shiite. We've killed 30,000 of them (W's numbers, not mine), is that considered progress? Guess that depends on if your PWT, KKK, or NeoCon.

You're not even a very smart liberal man, why bother?

I enjoy a bit of intellectual masturbation every once in a while. Besides, since I don't go to church, I don't have a clergy thinking for me, so I guess that makes me more dumber two.

Some guys can hold their ground, but I've reduced you to this? Sad.

Let's take score, shall we?

You referenced 1 document authored by the Republic of Iraq, Iraqi Strategic Review Board, Ministry of Planning and Development Cooperation to support your position.

I referenced the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, The Guardian, The Associated Press/Ex-President Jimmy Carter, The Washington Post, CNN, San Francisco Gate, and U.S. Representative Jan Schakowsky's website (which itself references NYT, Reuters, The Washington Post, House Budget Committee, Congressional Testimony, CNBC, White House Press Briefings, House Committee on Appropriations Hearing on a Supplem

ILikeRed writes to tell us the Washington Post is reporting that Verizon is becoming much more vocal about internet firms using "their" lines to do business without paying extra. From the article: "The network builders are spending a fortune constructing and maintaining the networks that Google intends to ride on with nothing but cheap servers," Thorne told a conference marking the 10th anniversary of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. "It is enjoying a free lunch that should, by any rational account, be the lunch of the facilities providers." This, as lawmakers are approaching new legislation that could let telcos charge internet companies much more for the use of high speed connections.

Of course, the rebuilding effort was never a high priority for W.

Bush (and by this I mean Rove) is very, VERY good at inference. Sentences for "...9/11...", "...Al-Qaeda..." and "...Saddam..." being back to back in countless speeches. Did he ever *SAY* they were connected? No. Did he repeatedly infer that they were, absol-fucking-lutly! But that's not the same as catching him in a lie, now is it? No, no it is not.

Funny, but Clinton's Iraq approach seems to have been much more effective (in hindsight). There were no WMDs, now were there? Saddam was completely isolated and more or less starved of funds (save the Aussies and their oil-for-wheat scandal going on right now).

More then anything, Bush has been a divider. Half the country hates him, half loves to re-elect him. He has started the first global holy war in more then a century. He has swelled the ranks of terrorists. He has burned thru all of the global pro-American sediment we enjoyed in the days following 9/11. He has stressed that we do not have to follow the Geneva conventions!? Freedom of speech has been limited during his tenure. Check and balances have been avoided (some, like former president Carter say illegally) at his explicate direction. He has lied (or changed his criteria, if you want to spin it that way). He has spent nearly a trillion (that's with a 'T') more then his predecessor ($400+ billion surpluses turned into $400+ billion deficits). By the time he leaves office, he will have added more then 3 trillion to the national debt (and that's being generous, it'll probably be nearly 4, or just about double when he started).

Now, this is a bit unfair as he was at the helm while America suffered one of it's most high profile disasters, and more money would have been spent by anyone in the office at the time. But for a man who comes from a party that believes in small government and smaller government spending, he has done most certainly the opposite (but Halliburton is up 10 fold).

This part of American history will be looked back upon in the same way the McCarthy trials are, with a moral disgust and the question of how in the hell could that have been let to happen. We used to make fun of the Russians for "papers please" for travel within their own country, and were appalled that this African dictator or that Eastern European police state were violating the Geneva conventions, and said "that would NEVER happen here" when news reports told of countries who lock up their own citizens without trial and without charge. That was 1980-1990's America, yet in America 2k...

America has lost her way.