Slashdot Mirror

Does your food contain DNA? Why aren't there mandatory warning labels for foods containing DNA?

The freaking data already proves climate change is happening. Parts of Miami that aren't usually under water are now under water a lot. The US seems to be the only government where "la la la, I can't hear youuu!" actually decides policy for the whole country...

Here is a hint: its not the side whose govt. ignorantly but willingly set up the 791 "no-go" zones where Islamic law is the secular law for the sake of keeping the peace, which it did not get by the way.

You mean the 791 complete fabrications by Fox News?

No-Go zones do not exist and Fox News has publicly apologized for making them up.

One of many references

Leftists are lazy, often histrionic personality disordered, and use fascism to achieve their political goals when their opponents don't acquiesce. Case in point:

http://www.science20.com/scien...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

http://news.investors.com/poli...

To be clear, them unfriending you is just an example of censorship and shutting down discourse when it suits them, which is a classic tool of fascists.

Chattanooga lost their credit rating did to overwhelming debt from their government broadband attempt

No. This, at least, is unsubstantiated FUD.

From Forbes.com:

In fact, contrary to Stephenson’s claims that municipal broadband hurt municipal credit ratings, S&P just upgraded the Chattanooga public utility’s bond rating, stating, “The system is providing reliable information to the electric utility on outages, losses and usage, which helps reduce the electric system’s costs.”

A quick google search of Chattanooga and broadband turned up multiple articles agreeing that their local internet deployment has been a roaring success, particularly in bringing a new wave of business and revenue to the city.

Not every city is successful, but that's no reason for states to prohibit them from trying, if nothing else to give the monopolists an incentive to improve their crappy race-to-the-bottom service.

Until the 1990s, Iraq had perhaps the best university system in the Middle East...

And what happened in August, 1990?

Anyone? Anyone?

Iraq invaded Kuwait, which lead to the destruction of most of the Iraqi Army, massive damage to the economy and infrastructure, and harsh international sanctions that Saddam magnified the effect of by diverting money intended for food and medicine to buying weapons and building many large, expensive palaces.

From your article:

Iraqi universities began their decline in the 12 years after the 1991 Gulf War. As the international sanctions regime cut off journal subscriptions and equipment purchases, academic salaries fell precipitously, and 10,000 Iraqi professors left the country. Those faculty who remained were increasingly closed off from new developments in their fields.

The terrible situation Saddam created was made even worse by the Islamists and insurgents.

Killings lead to brain drain from Iraq - 17 Apr 2006

The head of Arabic studies at Baghdad University was shot 32 times when his car was ambushed on the way to work.

Abdul Latif al-Mayah was murdered after he had appeared on al-Jazeera television. Police described the killing as "professional".

In Ramadi, the president of the university, Abdul Hadi Rajab al-Hitawi, was dragged from his home and bundled into the boot of a car. A ransom demand was received a few days later.

  Both men are among the growing number of intellectuals to be targeted in Iraq, a phenomenon that is resulting in an unprecedented brain drain as those who can move abroad increasingly do so before they or their families join the list of their colleagues killed or kidnapped.

At least 182 academics have been killed since the invasion in 2003 and there have been many more kidnappings and murder attempts.

And it is not just university professors who are being targeted. In the past four months alone 331 school teachers have been murdered and nine medical workers were killed in a single day in the northern city of Mosul last month.

(Mosul? That rings a bell: Isis executioners 'kill gays by hurling them off roofs' in Mosul )

Professionals Fleeing Iraq As Violence, Threats Persist - January 23, 2006

Exodus is not new to the country. Iraqis who could flee Saddam Hussein's repressive rule did: Poor Shiite Muslims sneaked across the border into Iran, and Sunni Arabs crossed the mountains into Syria or the desert to Jordan. People often waited years for permission to attend a seminar or do business in another country and then would disappear there. Hussein began holding such people's families hostage to guarantee their return.

Many of those émigrés flooded back into Iraq when Hussein fell. But the country's instability and daily regimen of violence have made some reconsider their return. Others who stayed throughout Hussein's rule are finally saying goodbye to their homeland now.

Except for Rand Paul.

If you meet anybody from India ask him "What Is Your Caste?"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

In kindergarten, I walked over a mile to/from the school every day unaccompanied. So did all the other kids in the neighborhood.

I walked to and from school in kindergarten. Google Maps says it was a little bit over a half-mile. The only issue that came up was on the first day of school, when not knowing what the buses were all about, I ended up on one. It didn't take long to get that straightened out, and it only happened once.

I suspect the events described in TFA are a consequence (not necessarily unintended) of our hyperlitigious society...consider, for instance, the sledding bans that have been popping up like metastatic tumors all over the place lately, or that you can't get someone to build you a pool with a diving board.

A Congressional rider attached to an unrelated bill outlawing such activities within the District. Kind of how like Maryland's Andy Harris inserted language to block DC's marijuana legalization.

I wouldn't lay this on Reagan. His mistake in this regard was to not treat the other politicians of the day like terrorists, and refuse to bargain with them in any way whatsoever. Instead, he treated them with respect and compromise, and bargained for the security of the border (in law) in this one-time deal. Which no administration since has attempted to faithfully execute, and the budget axemen have attacked relentlessly. Dishonorable wretches. In fact, even though Reagan signed it into law, the bill was written and sponsored by a Republican and a Democrat in congress - it was a bipartisan effort at the time.

Now it's treated as the historical context for capitulation to illegal immigration, instead of the cleansing and dressing of the wound it was meant to be.

This article provides some pretty good coverage.

I've not see any vote selling things reported on,

Then let me help you in in this very difficult search.

though it's trivial to prove how you voted. Yes, even today, with secret ballots.

You will have to be a lot more specific for your assertion to carry any weight.

> and is a living poster child for rational thought

While I am all for this talk show, I hope it doesn't go to the guy's head.
He actually has a history of saying really stupid shit. Generally he just makes up quotes.
At first I thought it was one of those half-truths that ditto-heads and their ilk find so appealing, but then I googled it myself and there are more than a couple of examples. Like:

Here’s what happens. George Bush, within a week of [the 9/11 terrorist attacks] gave us a speech attempting to distinguish we from they. And who are they? These were sort of the Muslim fundamentalists. And he wants to distinguish we from they. And how does he do it?
He says, “Our God” — of course it’s actually the same God, but that’s a detail, let’s hold that minor fact aside for the moment. Allah of the Muslims is the same God as the God of the Old Testament. So, but let’s hold that aside. He says, “Our God is the God” — he’s loosely quoting Genesis, biblical Genesis — “Our God is the God who named the stars.”

The Washington Post

And if he did go you'd complain that he wasnt somewhere else putting out some other fire.
That's how the game works: the President has a million things to do on any given day, so no matter what he does, you have 999,999 other things to blame him for not doing.

http://www.bloomberg.com/polit...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

Let’s dispense with this specific question with no more than the attention it deserves: It would have been all but insane for President Obama to participate in a march, in public, in a foreign country, with a couple million people around him. The security requirements necessary to protect him make it impossible. The Secret Service has to do an extraordinary amount of work and planning for him to drop by Ben’s Chili Bowl a mile from the White House; the idea that with a couple of days notice he could walk through the streets of Paris in an enormous throng of people is absurd.

There was also an attempted NAACP bombing, but no one cares about that.
there was also 2000 killed in Nigeria, but no one cares about that either.
We're presently in tremendously important trade talks with India, but that's also not important.

At least unless Obama had gone to France, in which case you would be blaming him for:
a) ignoring terrorism within our won country
b) ignoring terrorism in Africa
c) ignoring the needs of our economy by leaving a valueable trade partner in the middle of talks

False witness is also omission, turkeyfish. Presidential memos have the same effect and Obama has used them prolifically.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

And, WaPo's take on it, just in case you think USA Today is a Koch toady..

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

I guess the Senate race did have completely different numbers. Interesting: http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

most rich donors actually support the Democrats over the Republicans, it just does not get reported because only 7% of journalists are Republican and most journalists who contribute to politicians give to Democrats

There's really no mystery here and it's no conspiracy with secret handshakes and secret meetings; the press in the US is largely concentrated in big liberal cities and these people all live and breathe in the resulting ideological/cultural bubbles while the very rich (also generally concentrated in those big liberal cities) often get that way via government-enabled crony capitalism and revolving doors between big government and big business.

Regarding witch hunt by right wing politician: http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

They forget that North Korean government is really an organized criminal syndicate with a huge military and slave labor base.

And Kim and pals work hard to make sure people keep on forgetting it.

Do you personally know what Kim Jong Un has been up to? He has been in power only about 2 years and aside from propaganda photos, nobody knows really what he has being doing in that time, especially Westerners. Citizens of the DPRK don't even know how old he is. The only evidence giving a glimpse into his personal policies or beliefs is that he probably is quietly pushing reforms and experimenting with capitalism. He lived in Switzerland (probably) and has visited other capitalist countries. Turning a country around, especially one like North Korea, takes time. It is foolhardy to judge the man based on the almost nothing we know about him personally.

Seems Islam is mostly crazy fanatics.

The correct figures, based on the 2013 Pew Research Center report, are 88% of Muslims in Egypt and 62% of Muslims in Pakistan favor the death penalty for people who leave the Muslim religion.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

But remember that it's a "religion of peace"!!!

They denounce it all the time. For some reason it almost never gets reported in the press.

BULLSHIT.

Majorities of Muslims in Egypt and Pakistan support the death penalty for leaving Islam

Violence and murder in response to insults and slights against Islam is widely and strongly supported by Muslims.

Period.

lol you think taxi medallions is a small business http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

And yet, of all the major religious groups, muslims are the least likely to favor killing civilians.

How can these two things both be simultaneously true? Turns out what matters isn't the answers so much as the questions. The question that Pew asked in 2007 was often taken as suicide bombings to defend their community. And how many Americans of any religion think targeted strikes are morally acceptable in order to defend american lives? (After all a suicide bombing is the ultimate targeted strike) Even if it is on the other side of the planet where there are no americans? Turns out, more than 50%.

You can't protect or refuse to criticize muslim extremists merely because they share your faith. When non-muslims have legitimate grievances against muslim extremists then moderate muslims need to side with the non-muslims.

But they do! Everywhere except, apparently, in stories reported by the mainstream media. Gotta keep fear alive.

First of all the attack on the Pakistani schools would not count since the victims were muslim. the non-muslim v muslim element is not present.

Second I'm not referring to PR statements to the western media and other western venues that the extremists will never read or care about.. I'm talking about the local papers explaining that some attack was wrong and counter to islam, that extremist justifications and teachings are counter to islam; I'm talking about the local imams preaching these things in the local mosques; etc. That is where extremism used to be stopped.

Read this http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

Rent seeking is the problem.

You can't protect or refuse to criticize muslim extremists merely because they share your faith. When non-muslims have legitimate grievances against muslim extremists then moderate muslims need to side with the non-muslims.

But they do! Everywhere except, apparently, in stories reported by the mainstream media. Gotta keep fear alive.

I thoought the title of the previous post would lead people to google it. Nonetheless here is an example among others :

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

How do you watch live sports?

With my drone!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

The point is, it is very doubtful that the WaPo or any other similar papers, who have vowed to not publish material contrary to Global Warming Consensus, will print opinions that clearly contradict the prevailing AGW narrative despite the author's impeccable credentials.

I don't believe it's happened yet even though both are rather prolific authors.

Here's a lesson in scientific method. You form a hypothesis that the Washington Post won't print opinions by Judith Curry or Roy Spencer. You can test that hypothesis by searching for their names in the Washington Post. In fact, they do. Here's the first of a large number:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

Coleman is simply an awful choice to discuss this issue. He lacks credentials, many of his statements about climate change completely lack substance or mislead, and I’m not even sure he knows what he actually believes.

To begin, Coleman hasn’t published a single peer-reviewed paper pertaining to climate change science. His career, a successful and distinguished one, was in TV weather for over half a century, prior to his retirement in San Diego last April. He’s worked in the top markets: Chicago and New York, including a 7-year stint on Good Morning America when it launched. If you watch Coleman on-camera, his skill is obvious. He speaks with authority, injects an irreverent sense of humor and knows how to connect with his viewer.

But a climate scientist, he is not.

[..]

On CNN, he said this consensus is manufactured by the Democratic party’s funding of research with preordained results. “If you’re gonna get the money, you’ve got to support their position,” Coleman said. “Therefore, 97 percent of the reports published support global warming.”

Nevermind that multiple, independent scientific assessments (e.g. the Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change – which just released a new report Sunday, the U.S. Global Change Research Program, and the National Academy of Sciences), from institutions and scientists around the world, have reached this conclusion based on multiple lines of evidence. Coleman’s attack seems more political and (per his claims of a global conspiracy) delusional than based on substance.

(Further, a small point, the Democrats alone do not control funding of climate science.)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

It goes on.

Point is:
a) he is not ignored by media
b) he is as ignorant of the topic as you are

The most comprehensive recount was a $1 million effort sponsored by the Associated Press, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, CNN, St. Petersburg Times, Palm Beach Post, Washington Post and the Tribune Co., which owns papers including the Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune, Orlando Sentinel and Baltimore Sun. That press recount, the big one, found that Bush still won, even without the military votes.

Hoist on your own snobby petard. The very study you mention is the one showing Gore winning a statewide recount under any scenario. Of course the chickenshit press buried that behind two pages of talking about how Bush would have still won if Gore's legal team had gotten their way in the recount, which again is irrelevant as he wasn't the one recounting the votes.

So are you going to move on from your fools mate and deal with the fact that Gore won Florida, or just retreat deeper into your anti-vaxxer denial?

... about a "failed" hard drive is valid for the government to use so as far as I'm concerned it's perfectly legit for the rest of us.

Well, the FCC has banned the sale of receivers capable of operating in cellular bands in the USA (never mind how trivially easy it is to bypass this feature).

No it hasn't. It regularly signs off on cellular equipment, it just requires a license to use it. They've also approved the use of IMSI catchers. It's unlicensed devices that the FCC has banned.

Now, that's not to say that the use of these devices is entirely appropriate, and there are examples of cases where their use has been potentially illegal, but that doesn't make the devices themselves illegal.

The real point you should be talking about is how a routine traffic stop made it all the way to the Supreme Court.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

Its hard to trust the reports of an organization that said 2013 was the fourth warmest year on record:

http://thinkprogress.org/clima...

While at the same time we had record breaking cold temps and huge growth in the polar ice caps:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

Planned Parenthood does not perform mammograms. (Unless they started doing it since late-2012.)

I can't believe any FISA request was ever turned down. Basically, I thought the purpose of the FISA act was to suspend the constitution. What went wrong?

What went wrong? Apart from the too obvious naure of your karma whoring? (I guess I'll take that over lying.)

Secret court says it is no rubber stamp; led to changes in U.S. spying requests

The chief judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, Reggie Walton, told members of Congress in a letter that the court’s internal records show that more than 24 percent of government requests for recent warrants had “substantive” modifications in the wake of court review.

The FISA Court Is Tougher Than the Media Says - October 18, 2013

You’ve probably read 20 or more times that the FISA Court approves more than 99 percent of the government’s applications for foreign surveillance orders. What few media have mentioned—and none has emphasized—is that the court often bounces applications and demands modifications before approval. It does so precisely because the application process is not adversarial and secret. As Judge Walton noted, the 99 percent figure does “not reflect the fact that many applications are altered prior to final submission or even withheld from final submission entirely, often after an indication that a judge would not approve them.” Those of us with inside knowledge have long known, and publicly said, that the FISA court scrutinizes the government’s applications with special care, but the data to prove it have been missing. Now we have them.

But the media have not reported an obvious comparison. How many federal and state applications for search-and-seizure warrants are modified before being granted? How many are denied? Knowing that would tell us a lot about how tough the FISA court is on the government.

In fact, the FISA Court looks tough when compared to the way federal district courts handle wiretap applications under Title III, as the federal law is known. Even if you stick with the misleading 99 percent figure, the approval rate for Title III wiretaps is higher. From 2008 to 2012, courts refused to grant only five wiretap applications among 13,593 applied for. That’s an approval rate of 99.96 percent. You can find that comparison in Judge Walton’s letter—it’s in footnote 6—and the information has always been available through the Administrative Office of the United States Courts for any journalist who isn’t afraid of numbers. But you won’t find it in the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, or any other news outlet. Bashing the FISA court is too much fun to let numbers get in the way.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/30/AR2008043003415.html pretty much sums up why there really is no such thing as a non-combat branch of the Army.

http://www.livescience.com/105...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

Probably because it has some basis in fact.

Some conservatives seem to hate him just for being a smart black guy who is associated with science.

I don't know anyone who feels this way. And I read a lot of conservative blog stuff, and none of the top conservative bloggers feel this way.

However, the top conservative bloggers have pretty much written Mr. Tyson off as a self-important troll.

His version of Cosmos seems to be as much about trashing religion as it is about science. Right in the first episode of his version of Cosmos there was a weirdly slanted retelling of a historical incident, as if he had to go out of his way to slam religion.

http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/historians-of-science-poke-holes-in-new-cosmos-series

Just recently the blogs were mocking him for his tweet speculating that the Bill of Rights would probably have had 12 things in it if humans had 12 fingers. The actual history is so easy to check and clearly he didn't bother. (There were actually 12 Amendments proposed, and after the debate 10 of them got passed. Hey, maybe if humans had 10 fingers only 10 Amendments would have been proposed and 8 passed? Um...)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/12/23/if-we-had-12-fingers-i-wonder-whether-the-bill-of-rights-would-have-been-12-amendments-long/

But the thing that catapulted him to prominence and made everyone write him off as a troll was when a blogger started trying to track down the actual history of stories Mr. Tyson said had happened to him. In one story, he said that he was serving on a jury, and he smugly pointed out that the amount of drugs at issue in the case was listed as a trivially tiny amount; but worse was his claim that George W. Bush invoked astronomy in an effort to be religiously divisive. The blogger couldn't find any evidence that these stories actually happened, and found persuasive evidence that they were fabricated. Then, when he was called on this, Mr. Tyson doubled down. Finally, he issued a non-apology apology.

http://thefederalist.com/2014/09/16/another-day-another-quote-fabricated-by-neil-degrasse-tyson/

http://thefederalist.com/2014/10/02/neil-tysons-final-words-on-his-quote-fabrications-my-bad/

I must confess that before the above-listed events occurred, I considered myself a Tyson fan. Looking back, I knew very little about him, other than that he seemed to know a lot about science and seemed to be able to communicate it. Now, having read those stories, he seems to me more like a self-promoter who is using science as his "in" to make people pay attention to him.

P.S. If you have any actual evidence to support your claim, that some conservatives hate Mr. Tyson because he is "a smart black guy who is associated with science," please provide this evidence. URLs to hateful blog posts would be a good start. You get a gold if you can find a top conservative blogger (Drudge, Ace of Spades, Hot Air, Michelle Malkin, etc.) who holds this position; but I'll still give a bronze if you can find anyone.

Two of the top results from google search "Congression oversight NSA"

"Obama says NSA has plenty of congressional oversight."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

"The Obama administration, the intelligence agencies and their allies in Congress had made an all-out push to quash the amendment after it unexpectedly made it past the House rules committee late on Monday"
http://www.theguardian.com/wor...

I'm sure you'll say some BS like "I never said that the other side was better" but the fact is, you ignored the democrats and neo-libs in your post altogether.

It is a very good way to stop anyone talking about what was actually in all the released internal documents though. While the media's been all over this stupid N. Korea angle, where are the reports about the actual scandals in the released documents?

Oh, I don't know.. everywhere, actually. Unless you are implying you know something that we don't, if so you should just say it.

http://www.cnet.com/news/13-revelations-from-the-sony-hack/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/sonys-hacked-e-mails-expose-spats-director-calling-angelina-jolie-a-brat/2014/12/10/a799e8a0-809c-11e4-8882-03cf08410beb_story.html
http://www.theverge.com/2014/12/18/7417891/google-condemns-sony-project-goliath
http://time.com/3625326/sony-hack-files/
etc.

Violence against police is why police react so forcefully.

Uh-huh. Why, just look at the violence from this unconscious asshole! Why, that threatening way he got thrown from the car when it rolled over at highway speeds - Heck, even I felt intimidated by him, just watching the video!


People who are compliant tend not to get shot.

Right - They just get tased, pepper-sprayed, and/or choked out for shits n' giggles.


The only good cops know they have a camera trained on them (and can't just smash it and harass the photographer), period.

Yes, if only the cop had a camera during the Michael Brown stop, then I suppose his killing would have looked more like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Don't forget, the cops in that case knew they were being filmed. Here's another case where cops disgracefully killed someone when they knew they were on film. He had a weapon, but was at such a distance that he posed no threat at all ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?... ) And another one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Any time that cops are in a store, they know they're being filmed on security cameras. Here's another "heroic" action by the cops, committing what any sane human would consider to be murder while they know that they are being filmed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

And of course don't expect some of the footage not to go "missing" ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/... ), and don't expect the footage to even be released ( http://www.citylab.com/crime/2... ). And even if it goes to a grand jury, don't expect the District Attorney not to knowingly put a liar on the stand and throw the case: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Obviously this is all anecdotal and not "scientific" compared with the study in the summary, but it should be clear that this problem of police violence is not going to be completely solved until the cultures of "shoot first and ask questions later" and "protect each other" within law enforcement are changed.

They did when Bush was president
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt08...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

Except that I'm a european socialist, and I actually like Cuba. Are these guys ignorant conservatives too?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

Not that I agree with the WaPo's ideas that much, they say that the cuban "regime" was falling before Obama "bailed it out", but that's just false, it wasn't going to fall anytime soon, and Castro's successor has already been picked. Obama simply realized that the US strategy failed.

That's because the next time it won't be with carpet knives.

No, it's because hijacking of airplanes ended on 9/11. Unless you can get more hijackers than passengers onto a plane (or at least enough hijackers to physically overpower the passengers) it can no longer work. It only worked before because passengers figured if they just went along all would end well and they would be - at worst - inconvenienced. That changed on 9/11/2001.

There have been people try to hijack planes since then. Here's one story:

http://news.investors.com/ibd-...

6 people tried to hijack a plane - 4 of them survived. I probably don't have to explain it but the other 4 didn't exactly "meet their objectives" if you know what I mean.

Here's a guy who actually had a gun on the plane - I think he was the one who's life was saved by the police who stormed the plane after it landed. He had boiling water thrown on him before the beating:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

Again, he had two guns, it didn't matter.

Hijacking was ruined by Mohammed Atta and friends 13 years ago. Since then we had the shoe bomber (failed) and Smokey the Terrorist who set fire to his own penis (brilliant) before being subdued by the other passengers. Even on Flight 77 over Pennsylvania on 9/11/2001 the passengers found out what was going on, but the hijacker was able to ditch the plane before they breached the cabin door. The sap that they had left out to keep an eye on the passengers was burned with boiling water and beaten with a fire extinguisher - keep that in mind in case you have stupid hijacking friends and they want to lock you outside the cabin.

Not in Massachusetts: http://www.washingtonpost.com/...