Slashdot Mirror

The ones who support terrorism were and always will be, the fringe. On the edge and a minority.

Look at Sheikh Qaradawi, he's watched by millions on Arab TV. He's a modern and I think Western scholar, and respected by LOTS of people.

Al Azhar, the top scholars in Islam, condemned Bin Laden's call for war. Grand Sheikh Mohammed Sayed Tantawi said September 11 was wrong and against Islam, and showed everyone that Bin Laden had no credentials and wasn't a scholar.

However, 18 months later, the US declares war on Iraq. They've alienated the Islamic community (assuming they hadn't already by Bush's unconditional pro-Israeli stance that makes Clinton a saint in comparison), which was its best hope. The same sheikh now says it's a "binding Islamic duty" to resist an American attack. Religious leaders are realigning to echo that.

Islam commands people to never fight except in self defense. Well, people say fighting in Iraq is self defense against invasion.

The Washington Post released a shocking report, but nobody really paid attention during Christmas season.

Now we have the death of 2 afghan prisoners in US custody, ruled a Homicide from "blunt force trauma"[Beating] by the Army investigators. This is the first kind of fatality in US custody, since the US government officially states it does not "torture" people.

Now that Sheikh Muhammad has been captured, the newspapers are debating the ethics over whether it should be legal to torture him for information. Israel's and our official policy is to not torture anyone, even if there's a hidden ticking bomb somewhere. However, this doesn't stop them from getting shipped-- I mean "rendered" to the custody of Jordan, Morocco, Egypt, and Pakistan, who do perform that.

Such efforts were successful in the past; in 1995 an Al Qaeda agent was arrested in the Phillipenes. They knew he was in on a major operation, but they didn't know what. So they tortured him the old fashioned way, breaking his ribs and burning his testicles. After two weeks he broke, and revealed the plan to hijack 11 planes. Of course, a poll on AOL's front page voted 70% Yes to using some form of torture. Editorials aren't so rosy either, one says we should kill terrorists and smear them with pig fat so they won't get into heaven somehow.

I seem to remember the philosopher Nietzche who said "Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster." That means we shouldn't sink to their level or worse. Who would be the barbarian then? We seem to be ignoring the "innocent until proven guilty" law, even though it's better to let ten guilty men walk free than let one innocent one suffer. The US will never officially condone any cruel or unusual punishment, but Israel taught them that sleep deprivation, chaining in uncomfortable positions, harsh lights, and interrogation by women will usually yield results.

May I remind you that Saddam tortures children in front of their fathers to make them confess. That's horrible. However, I'm a bit worried about Sheikh Muhammad's two young sons, 9 and 7, being arrested by the CIA and flown to America to help pressure their father to confess. Of course, the US won't deny that the man himself is being subject to "Stress and duress" right now. "Let's just say we are not averse to a little smacky face. After all, if you don't violate a prisoner's human rights some of the time then you aren't doing your job?" said a CIA officer, admitting they honed their interrogation techniques since Vietnam.

The Washington Post released a shocking report, but nobody really paid attention during Christmas season.

Now we have the death of 2 afghan prisoners in US custody, ruled a Homicide from "blunt force trauma"[Beating] by the Army investigators. This is the first kind of fatality in US custody, since the US government officially states it does not "torture" people.

Now that Sheikh Muhammad has been captured, the newspapers are debating the ethics over whether it should be legal to torture him for information. Israel's and our official policy is to not torture anyone, even if there's a hidden ticking bomb somewhere. However, this doesn't stop them from getting shipped-- I mean "rendered" to the custody of Jordan, Morocco, Egypt, and Pakistan, who do perform that.

Such efforts were successful in the past; in 1995 an Al Qaeda agent was arrested in the Phillipenes. They knew he was in on a major operation, but they didn't know what. So they tortured him the old fashioned way, breaking his ribs and burning his testicles. After two weeks he broke, and revealed the plan to hijack 11 planes. Of course, a poll on AOL's front page voted 70% Yes to using some form of torture. Editorials aren't so rosy either, one says we should kill terrorists and smear them with pig fat so they won't get into heaven somehow.

I seem to remember the philosopher Nietzche who said "Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster." That means we shouldn't sink to their level or worse. Who would be the barbarian then? We seem to be ignoring the "innocent until proven guilty" law, even though it's better to let ten guilty men walk free than let one innocent one suffer. The US will never officially condone any cruel or unusual punishment, but Israel taught them that sleep deprivation, chaining in uncomfortable positions, harsh lights, and interrogation by women will usually yield results.

May I remind you that Saddam tortures children in front of their fathers to make them confess. That's horrible. However, I'm a bit worried about Sheikh Muhammad's two young sons, 9 and 7, being arrested by the CIA and flown to America to help pressure their father to confess. Of course, the US won't deny that the man himself is being subject to "Stress and duress" right now. "Let's just say we are not averse to a little smacky face. After all, if you don't violate a prisoner's human rights some of the time then you aren't doing your job?" said a CIA officer, admitting they honed their interrogation techniques since Vietnam.

The Washington Post released a shocking report, but nobody really paid attention during Christmas season.

Now we have the death of 2 afghan prisoners in US custody, ruled a Homicide from "blunt force trauma"[Beating] by the Army investigators. This is the first kind of fatality in US custody, since the US government officially states it does not "torture" people.

Now that Sheikh Muhammad has been captured, the newspapers are debating the ethics over whether it should be legal to torture him for information. Israel's and our official policy is to not torture anyone, even if there's a hidden ticking bomb somewhere. However, this doesn't stop them from getting shipped-- I mean "rendered" to the custody of Jordan, Morocco, Egypt, and Pakistan, who do perform that.

Such efforts were successful in the past; in 1995 an Al Qaeda agent was arrested in the Phillipenes. They knew he was in on a major operation, but they didn't know what. So they tortured him the old fashioned way, breaking his ribs and burning his testicles. After two weeks he broke, and revealed the plan to hijack 11 planes. Of course, a poll on AOL's front page voted 70% Yes to using some form of torture. Editorials aren't so rosy either, one says we should kill terrorists and smear them with pig fat so they won't get into heaven somehow.

I seem to remember the philosopher Nietzche who said "Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster." That means we shouldn't sink to their level or worse. Who would be the barbarian then? We seem to be ignoring the "innocent until proven guilty" law, even though it's better to let ten guilty men walk free than let one innocent one suffer. The US will never officially condone any cruel or unusual punishment, but Israel taught them that sleep deprivation, chaining in uncomfortable positions, harsh lights, and interrogation by women will usually yield results.

May I remind you that Saddam tortures children in front of their fathers to make them confess. That's horrible. However, I'm a bit worried about Sheikh Muhammad's two young sons, 9 and 7, being arrested by the CIA and flown to America to help pressure their father to confess. Of course, the US won't deny that the man himself is being subject to "Stress and duress" right now. "Let's just say we are not averse to a little smacky face. After all, if you don't violate a prisoner's human rights some of the time then you aren't doing your job?" said a CIA officer, admitting they honed their interrogation techniques since Vietnam.

The Washington Post released a shocking report, but nobody really paid attention during Christmas season.

Now we have the death of 2 afghan prisoners in US custody, ruled a Homicide from "blunt force trauma"[Beating] by the Army investigators. This is the first kind of fatality in US custody, since the US government officially states it does not "torture" people.

Now that Sheikh Muhammad has been captured, the newspapers are debating the ethics over whether it should be legal to torture him for information. Israel's and our official policy is to not torture anyone, even if there's a hidden ticking bomb somewhere. However, this doesn't stop them from getting shipped-- I mean "rendered" to the custody of Jordan, Morocco, Egypt, and Pakistan, who do perform that.

Such efforts were successful in the past; in 1995 an Al Qaeda agent was arrested in the Phillipenes. They knew he was in on a major operation, but they didn't know what. So they tortured him the old fashioned way, breaking his ribs and burning his testicles. After two weeks he broke, and revealed the plan to hijack 11 planes. Of course, a poll on AOL's front page voted 70% Yes to using some form of torture. Editorials aren't so rosy either, one says we should kill terrorists and smear them with pig fat so they won't get into heaven somehow.

I seem to remember the philosopher Nietzche who said "Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster." That means we shouldn't sink to their level or worse. Who would be the barbarian then? We seem to be ignoring the "innocent until proven guilty" law, even though it's better to let ten guilty men walk free than let one innocent one suffer. The US will never officially condone any cruel or unusual punishment, but Israel taught them that sleep deprivation, chaining in uncomfortable positions, harsh lights, and interrogation by women will usually yield results.

May I remind you that Saddam tortures children in front of their fathers to make them confess. That's horrible. However, I'm a bit worried about Sheikh Muhammad's two young sons, 9 and 7, being arrested by the CIA and flown to America to help pressure their father to confess. Of course, the US won't deny that the man himself is being subject to "Stress and duress" right now. "Let's just say we are not averse to a little smacky face. After all, if you don't violate a prisoner's human rights some of the time then you aren't doing your job?" said a CIA officer, admitting they honed their interrogation techniques since Vietnam.

Come on, grow up - war is no video game.

Okay... I'll bite.

Our entire argument to the UN for attacking Iraq was a resounding "we know they have WMD, but unfortunately, we can't give you our evidence," and the public PR machine has been spewing a nonstop "Saddam supports terrorists and has WMD," all with zero hard proof given. Given his history, I hardly doubt that Saddam has chemical and biological weapons... but I would have rather seen a more compelling argument than a "Iraq has them... trust us." The US populace seems to disagree with me, dashing your assertion that the American people require more than FUD to take people seriously. We used FUD to start a war.

If perhaps I've missed something, I'd be quite happily corrected, should you choose to provide links. I'd love to see the proof we had before attacking that Iraq has/had chemical/biological weapons. Thus far, the best evidence I've seen is, as one comedian put it "we know they have WMD... we have the receipts," as seen in greater detail here, indicating that we ourselves supplied WMD to Iraq.

Don't get me wrong... I shed no tears for Saddam, and I fully support the guys stuck fighting right now. I just wish we had more to go on than "trust us."

Yeah regime change!
Here,

Bush, the closest thing to fascist we've ever had.

Just remember what it was like 3 years ago: Economy was good, we had jobs, the President was brokering peace between Israel and Palestine, and our biggest worry was that the President had consentual sex with his adult intern. Oh my.

Today: Economy is crashing, > 6% unemployment rate is common in urban areas across the country, we're in a questionable and bloody war for oil, the same people who bolstered Saddam into power are in control today, Israel and Palestine aren't even on the map, the Bush administration is silencing political critics, and the government wants to investigate your private life to make sure you are not a terrorist, headed by Big Brother himself.

So much has been lost in just 3 years.

But he's backing up his assertions with outside, third party sources. All anonymous. Hmm...

Trust factor: zero. Probablility of this guy trying to make a buck off of a controversial subject: very good.

Post a link suggesting that this guy was anything but a profiteer, trying to make a buck by bringing down a target that many others wanted to see fall. Go ahead - the Googlewashing of "Fortunate Son" made it practically impossible for me to find out anything about the book or him, other than the vast collection of people I group with the "Michael Moore" hyper-anti-conservative croud.

Yes, it mentioned his sadomasochistic sex club leadership role. The article was actually about the incompentence and inexperience of the current weapons inspection team, presumably an effort to prevent the US from having a rationale to go against Iraq.

His personal life may be none of our buisness, but his lack of any current credentials to be a weapons inspector is. And that's what the article was actually about. But I shouldn't really expect the dirty peacnic croud to actually read a newspaper, should I?

Oh wait, that's passe' now. Move along.

Go Eastasia! Beat Eurasia!

"If the US military is still engaged either in Iraq or some other the Middle Eastern country by that time," an unnamed senior State Department official told Hersh, "the President has privately expressed his wish to postpone the 2004 presidential elections both for national security reasons as well as to avoid sending out any wrong signals about our commitment to the war on terrorism".

He already seems to think they are actively aiding the Iraqis by spreading propaganda, and this surely won't help sway his opinion.

O'Reilly (Bill) is a piece of shit that should be flushed off the air before he poisons us all with his ultra-conservative trashtalking.

Whatever happened to spreading the truth?

You can thank George Bush for the war atrocities committed in your name (and with your tax money (unless you're rich -- then it's a freebie).

Read this, folks. This is funny.

When antiwar demonstrators gathered outside the Fox News building in Manhattan, the network's outdoor news zipper replaced its headlines with taunts:

"War protester auditions here today. . . . Thanks for coming!" And: "How do you keep a war protester in suspense? Ignore them." And: "Attention protesters: The Michael Moore Fan Club meets Thursday at a phone booth at Sixth Avenue and 50th Street."

Unfair and unbalanced? "I thought I'd have some fun with it," says Fox zipper-writer Marvin Himelfarb, a former Hollywood screenwriter. "I couldn't resist."

Ya, there definitely isn't an ejectable cabin now. The article that I read mentioned that its a good idea to implement one, however, it would be very difficult. Some googling did reveal another article that discusses an ejectable cabin idea, its found here.

The Washington Post has an article today looking at military technology in use in the current war in Iraq to try to figure out which military toys of today will become the next big civilian toys of tomorrow... WWII gave us duct tape; the 1991 Gulf War gave us GPS and Humvees; what's next? This synthetic vision technology is something the Post reporter didn't talk about, but maybe should have.

Taken from a larger context, spam is just another facet in life from which emerges attempts to control our behavior.

A glaring example brought forward by the war in Iraq is the ceaseless barrage of sloganeering one faces these days. Some of it in favor of the war, some against. Some more coordinated than others.

How much remains when the content added to bend our will is removed? How much from the war news, from life in general?

I'm sick of it. Life is complex enough without having to move about in a cloud of misleading information.
No wonder everyone is half nuts these days. GIGO.

Actually, no, no it isn't.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A522 41-2002Dec29.html

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/88244_sean24 .shtml

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/publications/iraq gate/iraqgate.html

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2 003/03/02/IN123519.DTL

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/01/17/iraq.chemical.su it/

Defend your viewpoint, ass!

The english version of the Al-Jazeera TV's website was online since Monday. The adress is:
http://english.aljazeera.net

I could see it on Thursday and now it is gone. Washington Post has a article about a hack attack. Apparently the name of the website does not resolve.

What i found very suspicious are these imposter sites:
http://www.aljazeerah.us/ and http://www.aljazeerah.info/
Only the latter has a little headline that the website is not connected in any way to Al-Jazeera TV.

These sites can be easily confused with the original site and it already happened.
Imagine something like foks.news in a arab country without a clear statement that it is not us media.

ps: I already submitted the story about the imposter sites but slashdot did not post it. That's why i am posting it here...

Also, anybody cannot just be held without council.

Now if we are talking about US citizens on US soil, with out a warranty and right to council, then you would be entirely correct, such behavior would be entirely unconstitutional.

Tell that to Jose Padilla, a U.S. citizen arrested in Chicago, now rotting in a South Carolina naval brig without trial or counsel. (The DoJ is appealing a federal judge's order that he receive counsel; see here and here.) He is being held based solely on the word of the President that he is a terrorist; no public trial has been held and no evidence against him has been presented. This precedent is dangerous; the next person to be so treated could be you!

Wow 750 infected and 22 dead. How about the millions dead from AIDs? This study says that after 22 years of education 14.7 percent -- one in seven -- of gay and bisexual black men ages 23 to 29 become HIV-positive each year. Since the discovery of AIDS -- first reported in a 1981 government health bulletin as a strange form of pneumonia -- there have been about 750,000 reported cases in America. Nearly 450,000 of those patients have died.

The Washington Post reports that world wide there are now 42 million people living with HIV infection and by 2010 there will be between 50 million and 75 million cases of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection in India, China, Ethiopia, Nigeria and Russia alone.

Why was AIDs not decleared a contagious disease back in 1981 and infected people quaratined? Were the rights of a few worth more than the rights of 75 million?

and here is more

and a nice picture on top of it of our dead boys here

and more here

I just hope those cocksuckers still yelling for more WAR enlist themselves to go fight since their pussy opinions got us their WAR in the first place. Time to be a man and fight for what you believe in, right? Fucking retards.

before some stupid shit comes and lectures us about how Iraq supposedly has chemical weapons, I would ask 'where are they?'. Since Iraq would have used them by now if they had them.

... but which article am I supposed to read?

This article shows how he uses gorillas to fight his war for him! How horrible! PETA is being deployed this very minute.

The Washington Post discusses the origins of the term.

It's not about the country. It's about being a member of the world community. Iraq is a soverign nation. now that the bush administration has bumbled its way across the ideal of sovereignty, no nation can feel safe.

So sovereign must mean always right in your eyes? What must Saddam do to ever justify taking the guy down?

How about using VX gas--the most deadly chemical weapon on earth--against his own people is OK...because Iraq is a sovereign nation.

Dumping thousands of gallons of oil--several times more than the Exxon Valdez--into the Persian Gulf after Gulf War 1 is okay--because Iraq is a sovereign nation.

Lighting up hundreds of oil wells, causing untold environmental damage was okay--because Iraq is a sovereign nation.

Violating all 18 of the UN sanctions--need I mention Resolution 1441 passed unanimously? And in Resolution 1441 it said disarm or suffer grave consequences (Did you think grave consequences meant--more time for the inspectors?). Anyway, all this is okay--because Iraq is a sovereign nation.

Trying to assassinate George H.W. Bush in 1993 was okay--because Iraq is a sovereign nation.

How about cutting
up your own minister of Health into pieces and giving them to his wife. Is that okay? Of course it is--because Iraq is a sovereign nation.

Yup, I guess we're the bad guys, aren't we? You make me sick if you believe the crap the left shoves down your throat. For crying out loud, think man! Use your friggin' brain. This guy is a madman. Watch the news. Ignore the vomiting communists in San Francisco and see the Iraqis celebrating in the streets that the Americans have come to remove this modern-day Hitler from power.

Mark my words, political scientists will be studying George W. Bush's presidency. Not because he was rash and didn't care about the world. No, because he did what was right. Bit the bullet, didn't pass the buck, and made the hard choices that made the world a better place for the whole world.

Oh, by the way. . . Boycott France.

DOW HAS BEST WEEK SINCE 1982...

DOLLAR HITS MULTI-MONTH HIGHS..."

OIL PRICES PLUNGE... with US crude at $26.30. This puts it at about the same price back during the heating oil crunch of 2000. Business Week figures that even the recent spike in oil prices will not lead to a recession, because of usage cutbacks & OPEC surplus.

GOLD DROPS BELOW $330... where it was back in december. And even at the recent peak, it's lower than it was in 1995, the start of the boom.

In about a month, the war will be over. Not only will we have thrown out a bloody dictator (freeing his citizens from harm), but we open up their nation for economic progress. Not only will we rebuild what we've destroyed (which if you've noticed, a strong effort is being made to keep this minimal), but we will upgrade them to modern technology. Power plants, water systems, industry, hospitals, roads... all of this means american jobs & products. With embargos removed, Iraq can produce at it's true output, flooding the oil market (destroying whatever little power OPEC & the saudi's have left) and the free markets win. Everyone benefits, the economies boom, and life goes on!

(On a personal note as an Electrical Engineer, my company's 2002 average was a 3.5% pay raise plus a 4% bonus)

The story to me seems the opposite. Web sites are handling this quite well. The BBC is WFM currently. No big slowdown.

More to the point, both NY Times and WashingtonPost.com are serving huge images on their home page. MSNBC, FOXNEWS and CNN also seem to have no problem keeping up with my broadband connection.

And they have been quite responsive.

They are even serving up video and audio.

Seem prepared to me.

Currently, around 53% of Britons support the war. Your U.S. numbers are pretty close, though.

then why did oil futures drop?

Apparently the phrase comes from the name of a book by two DoD consultants, Harlan Ullman and James Wade.

Here's the online version of the book.

Another article about it.

And yes, it seems to be a modified form of Blitzkrieg.

IIRC, administration officials admitted that the documents (pertaining to nuclear issues) were indeed forged, but claimed that they were duped along with everyone else. 5 minutes of fact-checking would have revealed that, but we all know that an ounce of perception is worth more than a pound of truth...

Well, lets start with the dossier that Powell submitted to the U.N., it's a fake.

Remember that bit of evidence linking Iraq to nuclear weapons, oh yeah, it's a fake as well.

Those "great" tips our folks have been giving the inspection team? All that cool intel we have about trucks with mobile labs and sneaky shit going down, ummmm, it's garbage.

Shit, I could spend all day doing this. Our government has been busted time after time. They are liars. Period. However, now that we're at war, I support our folks over there fighting. Our president is a complete bullshit artist and his team of jackasses will, hopefully, go far far away after the next election. But I hope the people on the ground and in the air do what they have to do and get home safely.

My lack of logic has been exposed by 'WTF' dude-speak.

Read this to see how the NSC (folks who are in charge of counter-terrorism for the US) feel about this move by the Bush administration.

You could argue that this is "Stuff that matters", aside from the already mentioned fact that the other sites will probably not take the pounding like slashdot will (like, say, the Washington Post Dispatch Page, which is already slowing down)

I'll see your herring and raise you a swordfish in #twoweapon combat.

A senior military official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said military intelligence was picking up signs and "circumstantial evidence" that Saddam and his senior leadership were either incapacitated or out of communication with battlefield commanders. It was too early to say if they were killed or wounded.

"We are seeing no coordinated response to our first attack," the official said. "It's little things here and there. Some individual commanders are hunkering down while others are launching small attacks and setting fires."

Military officials "believe it is significant that there is a lack of coordination and significant resistance to what we did," the official added.

Some Texans actually think that Texas = world. Please, don't feed their inflated egos. :-) (just kidding, I have friends from there)

Gov. Bush had no obligation to please the French or the Finnish or whoever was bellyaching around the world.

Open Rant to Anti-Bush Protesters

Saddam Hussein tortures and executes thousands of people without trial every year. Why do you people never complain about him? We've heard your tirades for years on end about the death penalty in Texas, but we've heard nary peep against the Butcher of Baghdad. And you display nothing short of joyous zeal over the 40 million babies that have been exterminated in America since Roe v. Wade. Your ilk protests with all your might against the Bush-led rescue mission to depose the Hitler of the 21st century, put an end to genocide and persecution, break up a terrorist-supporting regime, liberate an entire country of suffering victims, destroy huge amounts of weapons of mass murder, and bring increased stability to the Middle East and the world.

Oh, but some convicted criminals in Texas weren't quite deserving of the death penalty. Maybe so -- it's a legitimate debate, but DO NOT PRETEND to be enraged over civil rights violations and angry at Bush because "he executed" those people.

And what about China? Libya? Egypt? Somalia? Rwanda? Ramallah? Venezuela? Syria? Central America? Unspeakable torture and mass executions with kangaroo courts or no trials at all go on all over the world. Your silence is deafening, and your hypocrisy is towering. Why is your condemnation reserved for the U.S.A., the preeminent pioneer and stalwart supporter of human rights in the world? If you hate Bush's politics (conservatism) or his faith (Christianity), just be forthright and say so. But please cease and desist with this farce of phony moral outrage. Your partisanship is totally transparent. There's no sense in denying it. I have nothing against partisanship, but come out and say what you're really about.

I believe that President George W. Bush will go down in history as one of the most courageous champions of liberty and human rights of all time. He commanded U.S. troops to defeat the Taliban in Afghanistan. After the American victory, Afghans celebrated in the streets, women threw off their burqas, and schools resumed. Now, democracy and capitalism are flourishing there. I believe that the same kind of thing will happen in Iraq. Iraqis had begun to move toward democracy before Saddam Hussein's reign of terror derailed the progress that the country was making. Bush will get them back on track to growing into the kind of country they have been wanting to be.

But to you, Bush is the bad guy; he's the dictator and terrorist. You've turned reality on its head. Anyway, it's not Bush's job to make the world happy. He was elected to represent the views of Americans, especially those who voted for him, and abide by his oath of office. He's doing his job exceedingly well.

Sly jokes aside, where is the proof of that?

here

A review of thousands of declassified government documents and interviews with former policymakers shows that U.S. intelligence and logistical support played a crucial role in shoring up Iraqi defenses against the "human wave" attacks by suicidal Iranian troops. The administrations of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush authorized the sale to Iraq of numerous items that had both military and civilian applications, including poisonous chemicals and deadly biological viruses, such as anthrax and bubonic plague.

Well at the risk of seeming like a conspiracy theorist, I could only find this one article, courtesy of Google News - UPI link didn't work for me.

Wasington Post

Um, you are aware, that Japan and Germany had democracies (in the case of Japan a parliamentary monarchy) before the World War? Both countries where relatively prosperous nations before and after the war.

And do you know, what effort the allied forces and especially the US goverment put into rebuilding these nations after the war?
You are aware, that Japan and Germany both faced another threat, the Soviet-Union, which united the people of both countries with the US?

Not to mention, that both Germany and Japan attacked first and the people where aware of the consequences that would have.
OTOH, the reasons for the current war are not as clear as those where in WWII or at least in the previous Gulf War. At least in the eyes of most parts of the world, as represented by their Foreign Minister in the Security Council, and including General Schwartzkopf.

It's an interesting point. Why, in fact, are they needed? Clearly, the "conventional" weapons possessed by the US far outstrip that of the next 15 most heavily armed nations on the face of the planet.

I also wonder why chemical weapons are "bad" while 21000 lb anti-personnel explosives and fuel-air bombs are ok.

I also wonder why, if inspections are "nothing," ("we can't stand by and do nothing ... the consequences of inaction are worse than the consequences of action"), that the administration has not consented to foreign inspectors into US military facilities (yes, I am serious about it. Since it's part of a call to war, he ought to be prepared to put serious, cards-on-the-table action behind that characterization or withdraw it).

I'm dead serious about this. The US is the only nation to have actually used nuclear weapons in a war, and they have never had an explicit "no first use" policy for nuclear weapons. The "Nuclear Posture Review" (begun in June 2001, bits of which were leaked in Jan. 2002) suggests the US ought to keep the option to use nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear armed opponent open [link ]. Kim Jong Il may be nuts, but put that picture together with the "axis of evil" speech, and do you wonder why he's trying to get nukes?

Who wants to bet the stock on this comapny is about to skyrocket when they get all the contracts to rebuild Iraq. Hey, they've grabbed billions of dollars of tax funded contracts already.
http://chart.forbes.com/graph.asp?symbol1=HAL

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/ar ticles/halliburtonprimer.html

Who wants to be Cheney and Bush have a whole lot of stock in that company? I love it when war profiteers are in charge... wait... No... no I don't. Those are my tax dollars and my friends going to war.

I hope the Iraqi troops surrender, the UN survives and now that he's being cornered and offered no way out, I hope Saddam doesn't unleash any weapons of mass destruction that he might have.

Newsflash: Americans just don't care about much of anything!

Too bad other game manufacturers won't follow suit and make their older titles available for (legit) download.

Well, there's a good reason:

For an analysis of game companies & financing in general.

There's an article here about local game companies in Tucson releasing old games for free.

Man, I loved those games. I lost the disks years ago. This is definitely worth buying again. This link points to an interesting interview on the subject of retro-games making a come-back.

Besides, everyone will pay their state's sales tax before long!

Non-USians: none of this applies to you. Or maybe not.

Bottom line: open-source is probably not going to be disqualified by any state's acquision law, even the loopholey "gimme-my-kickback" kind.

No, I think that the battle lies in the hearts, minds, and committee-meeting agendas of acquisition and technical bureaucrats at all levels of government, Texas included. "Consider open source" needs teeth or else it will get the "We considered it a bad idea" treatment.

Notable quote from this article: "At the same time that we're preventing pollution in the United States, we're shifting the problem to somebody else," said Ted Smith of the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, an environmental advocacy group. "It's being exported and doing harm."

A Car for the Distant Future...

Yeah, and as soon as Reagan lowered the taxes for the rich, he raised the taxes on the working class, not to mention more of the jobs went to mexico. Oh, it boosted the economy all right, for the rich, a lot of small companies closed down in the 80s because of Reaganomics. Oh, what do you mean by "Smaller Government", if you mean less programs for the poor "Education, Social Security, etc" then yes, he, cut those as well.

IMO, the Conservative Republicans want to get rid of programs for the poor and give everything to the rich. If the Tax Cuts that Dubya's proposing is a guaranteed success, then why is Greenspan, the democrats, and even the moderate Republicans are against the Tax Cut? Most of the Rich are, as I said before, are very stingy when it comes to money. They hold onto it as if they only have a few dollars, that is, IMHO, why the Tax Cut will just put us into a deeper debt, just like the Reagan/Bush Era. The National Debt wasn't even $1 Trillion until Reagan got into office, and when bush Left Office, it was around $4.5 Trillion.

Went up $1 Trillion to $5.5 Tillion under Clinton, just 1/3 compared Reagan. But now under Dubya, in just 2 years, the national debt went up by $1 Trillion. Like I said in my previous post, in order to keep the deficit down, he will raise taxes to the working class & to small businesses, he will also cut funding to Public Education.

Also, if you would have read my previous post, I said that Bush gave several corporations Billions of dollars, none of which were in silicon Valley, the only "Tech" company that Dubya has been interested in is Microsoft, and that is to have the Anti-trust ruling in their favor, also, deregulations left and right isn't helping either. And when we go to war, that's going to have fuel prices Skyrocket, and will have the following effects
1. Not as many Americans will go on trips this summer, thus, more people will be laid off and there will be less jobs
2. Price of goods will skyrocket, thus, people will spend less, and again, more layoffs

And of course more layoffs mean Less money going into the economy, and of course, that leads to more layoffs & makes it harder for new businesses to start up. No new businesses in Silicon Valley, like I said in my previous post, Silicon Valley will continue to decay. States will have less money in their budget, so they will have no choice but to cut social services, including education. IMO, if Bush get re-elected in 2004, then He will get us out of the recession all right, right into a Depression, and once we're there, there is no way of getting out. Just my $0.02 Worth.

John Wilcox

P.S. To the moderators, If you disagrees with me, Don't just simply mod me down, tell me why you disagree with me.