Slashdot Mirror

No, it wasn't about WMD, nor can you back up your claim that it ever was supposed to be all about WMD.

It's about this.

There are posters in this thread who are obviously disappointed that W and the boys captured Saddham. That's sad.

No, it wasn't about WMD, nor can you back up your claims that it ever was supposed to be all about WMD, or that it was illegal in any sense.

It's about this.

There are posters in this thread who are obviously disappointed that W and the boys captured Saddham. That's sad.

No, it wasn't about WMD, nor can you back up your claim that it ever was supposed to be all about WMD.

It's about this.

There are posters in this thread who are obviously disappointed that W and the boys captured Saddham. That's sad.

Keep in mind folks that this has absolutely nothing to do with September 11.

So I guess you missed this little tidbit.
"The most conclusive evidence comes in a highly detailed list of intelligence reports revealed last month in the Weekly Standard. Senior Iraqis were said to have traveled to Sudan in the mid-1990s to teach bin Laden's operatives how to make sophisticated truck bombs. Terrorists subsequently used such bombs to hit targets in Saudi Arabia and at two U.S. embassies in Africa. "

It's the war on Iraq that was started many years ago by the father

Ahh...it comes into focus now. You believe that Bush Sr. invaded Iraq before Saddam went over the border into Kuwait. And got many, many other countries to go along with him. Gotcha.

What you said is largely true, except the part about Cheney not benefiting from his involvement with Halliburton, as mentioned above in the grandparent post: "Vice President Cheney has a financial interest in Halliburton."

I don't think his stock options were an issue at all until the haters started seeing massive conspiracies in everything this administration does. All congressmen own stock, so it is easy to form conspiracy theories, especially when it fits the purpose of extremists. But before you accuse the vice president of that level of corruption, shouldn't you have something better than, well, ...nothing? Anyone who knows anything about the bureauacracy and heavy oversight involved, the idea of pushing a billion dollars with a single phone call is laughable.

You didn't mention the alcholic personalities of Bush and Cheney. The grandparent post gave links to their DUI records. Basically, Republicans are, in general, more out of touch with their feelings than Democrats. So Republicans tend not to notice alcoholic personalities:

Well you may be right about conservatives and libertarians being less emotional and therefore more logical, but I don't see how that keeps us from noticing 'alcoholic' personalities. After all, it was the Democrats who insisted throughout Clinton's presidency that character didn't matter and that in any case he was a good guy at heart. Then, on the way out of office Clinton gave out a string of very undeserved pardons to hardened criminals including a drug kingpin, all of whom had recently contributed huge amounts of money. After all the lies liberals were still stunned! And it is conservatives who for 10 years were dismayed at the dismantling of the CIA and our military, and Clinton's determination to make a legacy for himself at Oslo by trusting a known terrorist named Yasser Arafat.

Absense of deep or sophisticated thinking (If anyone has any information about George W. Bush showing evidence of sophisticated thinking, please write to me.)

Have you ever read anything to come out of any conservative think-tank (Cato, Heritage Foundation, Hudson...)? Liberals like to think they are so smart, that only they should be allowed to spend your tax dollars and they alone have the good of the country in mind. The truth is liberals consist largely of the under-educated (those w/o a hight school degree vote 70% democrat) and the over-educated (university professors vote 85% democrat). A strong majority people in the 'middle,' those with a high school or 4-year college degree vote Republican. So don't mistake a lot of thinking with a lot of quality thinking, especially when the only ones who agree with your conclusions are the idiots who couldn't graduate high school.

Polarized thinking (Bush's "you are either with us or against us" is an example. Another example is his statement, "Look my job isn't to try to nuance. I think moral clarity is important... this is evil versus good.")
Rigid thinking.

Here are two interesting articles:
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20031025-11101 1-1361r.htm
and http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/dhenninge r/?id=110004388

Lying

Name one lie, you lying liar. Watch me pick it apart as either outright false or simply a harmless exaggeration.

Anger ("... why is Bush so eager to engage in violence and so incapable of explaining why?" See the Sept. 24, 2002 American Politics Journal article and Addiction, Brain Damage and the President -- "Dry Drunk" Syndrome and George W. Bush )

The party of Dean wants to point fingers at President Bush on of all things, anger??!!! Your likely candidate (the Lord is kind) came out of nowhere through a campaign based entirely on hatred and vitriol. Presid

Orrin Hatch is the type of a**hole who gives all Republicans a bad name.

But there's also a lack of parallelism here: Republicans constantly get shit for the actions of these buffoons, but is the senior blimp from Massachusetts, the infamous Teddy Kennedy, ever called on the evil things he stands for?

You're right, Ted Kennedy just gets the George Bush (Sr.) Award given to him for his outstanding service. Still comes back to republican corruption. In any regard, much of the problems we're having are due to republicans controlling all major branches of the federal government and the press more concerned about Michael Jackson than they are about the multitudes of Bush administration scandals that have gone un/under-reported.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18,1998.

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Joe Lieberman (D-CT), John McCain (Rino-AZ) and others, Dec. 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."

Thus we behold the latest right-wing meme. This attempted rebuttal of this poll has shown up throughout the media, including a letter to the editor in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, and posited by Tony Blankeley of The Washington Times this morning on NPR's The Diane Rehm show. Using the same example of (paraphrased) "Bush didn't personally claim an imminent threat from WMDs, though most liberals think he did."

There's apparently no evidence that GWB made that exact claim, so believing that he did gives you a "misperception." But there was plenty of (mis)information circling around, including the famous British memo about Iraq being able to deploy WMD's 45 minutes after Saddam might order it. It's certainly possible that people might believe those words came from Bush himself, rather than advisors or pundits, which is technically mistaken. But the essential perception remains accurate: The US and UK administrations, led by Bush and Blair, used the idea of WMD's being used sometime in the near fute as a justification for the war.

Compare that to the misperceptions that were polled.

(1) Evidence found for link between Iraq and Al Qaeda
(2) Evidence found of WMDs in Iraq
(3) Positive world opinion about Iraq war

Either there was a link betwen Al Qaeda and Iraq, or not. WMD's were found, or not. The world has a positive opinion of the Iraq war, or not. No selective parsing of who said what when.

To use a favorite right-wing term, this type of painful parsing (like the meaning of "slog") to make words mean what you want them to mean, seems positively "Clintonian."

You really are far, far, off base. [snip] Iraq is far better now than it was before the war. Better yet, this time next year they will be far, far better off than they are now. Additionally, they can more than likely expect the same trend to continue for years to come.

OK, where do I begin? First off - I'm amazed and somewhat scared at your current image of what life in Iraq is like. Secondly, I'd like to mention that all linked sites are googled for, none are my favourites or anything like that. I'm personally getting most of my news coverage from the BBC, FYI, but I'm having trouble with their website, so I can't reference anything there. However, I figured you'd want proof, so google was used to get me relevant links. Some of the articles/issues were new to me.

Imagine a place where basic social order has broken down. This is Iraq. No government to pay wages, no workers to do essential tasks in a human society. Complete turmoil. There are still problems with drinking water in many places; due to equiptment that has been poorly maintained, as you yourself point point out. The war and lack of engineers working (who'll pay them and give them replacement parts?) has pushed the system to breaking point, a system we weakened ourselves (I'm a bit skeptical on this one, i.e. delibarate targeting).

Coming out the other end, sewage is also a massive problem. Not only do the above issues affect drinking water, they also have a big problem with rivers of raw sewage around in cramped living conditions. Disease is the last thing you want when you have a completely destroyed health system. Having no refuse facitlities also causes many problems, not least of all disease carrying vermin.

The lack of maintence is not Saddams fault, it never was, it is due to the international sanctions, which has been commonly acknowledged for a long time. They could not import the parts to fix the systems. They couldn't manufacture them, as the equiptment to make piping etc is the same stuff you use to make weaponry, and the sanctions have denied them that as well. It's now down to charities to help rebuild this system, as well as collaliton forces. Sure, you can pat yourself on the back that water and sewage will soon be superiour to pre-war levels, but remember why the system was poor in the first place. I'm sure all the dead children and vurnerable people who have died as a result of your glory will be lining up to thank you if there was an afterlife.

Police are scare and crime is at extraodinary levels. Car jacking, kidnapping, rapes, murders and theft plauge every city. Citizens are scared to roam the streets, travel at night is a dangerous proposal. Cars are only used in emergency, unless you want armed gangs taking them from you.

Most peoples savings have been rendered useless. The most popular large denomination note, the 10,000 dinar, is not accepted anywhere, due to mass forgery on stolen printing machines. Coinage is the only acceptible payment for anything. However, this is fortunatly changing, as a new currency has been introduced a week or so ago. This will take a while (til January they reckon) to become universal, but it leaves serious issues with folk who have literally become pennyless. People have to eat, feed children, pay bills and live. With so many workers not getting paid

If you are suggesting the factual farce that is Bowling for Columbine as a source for your critical thinking on this subject, we can safely ignore your logic. And yes Doomdark, Terrorists are looking to use atomic material. And calling the one nation that allows the most foreign immigration "xenophobic" is plain stupid. If we feared and distrusted other countries as your surmise, we wouldn't welcome their citizens to our country in overwhelming numbers.

The Washingtion Times is reporting that the Chinese are using this launch to spy on the USA. From the story, there was military intelligence-gathering satellite and an IR camera with a resolution of 1.6 meters, that's only 5 feet!!! Read the story for more. And just because the Chinese didn't say it was on there doesn't mean it wasn't!

The Washingtion Times is reporting that the Chinese are using this launch to spy on the USA. From the story, there was military intelligence-gathering satellite and an IR camera with a resolution of 1.6 meters, that's only 5 feet!!! Read the story for more. And just because the Chinese didn't say it was on there doesn't mean it wasn't!

"If you don't like their politics, kill them."

That is the least sophisticated way of relating to other people. No money for fixing things, or making things better in advance, and billions for violence.

For all those in the U.S. who wanted a war: Was killing Arabs as satisfying as you thought it would be? Are you happy with the cost? Is $1,000 per second and $4 billion per month okay with you? Did you have no other plans for the money that comes out of your pocket?

The U.S. has a long history of aggression in the Middle East. But when Arabs also decide that aggression is a way to solve problems, is that totally different? Should Arabs be happy to be killed by such superior people as Americans? Should they be grateful that the Americans, who believe they know what is right for the world, are forcing them to learn American political convictions?

And we think Gore would be better?

We should not relinquish control to the UN period.

Isn't somebody in the Defense Department actually taking a strong look at this crap? I don't care if you use SCO, just avoid Microsoft with my Country's Defense systems.

I'm starting to wonder if the Terminator's SkyNet was a Microsoft product?!

Error in your sig. Should read:

"There is a terrorist behind every Bush." And in front of, and to the side of him and his business associates. Weapons and petroleum give the easy profits. But there is no need for weapons unless someone can be found to be an enemy.

For all those in the U.S. who wanted a war: Was killing Arabs as satisfying as you thought it would be? Are you happy with the cost? Is $1,000 per second and $4 billion per month okay with you? Did you have no other plans for the money that comes out of your pocket?

The U.S. has a long history of aggression in the Middle East. But when Arabs also decide that aggression is a way to solve problems, is that totally different? Should Arabs be happy to be killed by such superiour people as Americans? Should they be grateful that the Americans, who believe they know what is right for the world, are forcing them to learn American political convictions?

"Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore yesterday defied a court order...on the grounds that God's law supercedes state and even federal law."

That page states that 20% of offenders jailed by states are there for drug offenses. this page states that more than 50% of federal prisoners are in jail on drug offenses. Neither one gives percentage of local inmates (county, city, etc.) Not sure where you get "half that number" from. The point is, in an era of budget deficits, we're still spending tens of billions of dollars every year fighting "the war on drugs", and it doesn't appear to have effected the supply of drugs at all. Perhaps we would be better off trying to lessen the demand side of the equation. All the criminal drug sellers could be put out of business tomorrow if legal sellers were undercutting their prices (although yes, drug users would still commit crimes).

Offering e-mail recipients "free pornography" if they download a software program. The program often provides the pornography, but only after the user's computer dials a 1-900 number to an overseas location, racking up hundreds of dollars in phone charges.

"Pump and dump" stock schemes, in which a spammer sends e-mails touting a certain stock and encourages people to buy it. The stock's value goes up, and spammers sell it at a profit.

Accepting payment for an item without sending it. Spammers bet that someone buying Viagra or pills for the enlargement of body parts would be too embarrassed to call the police or Better Business Bureau.

Of course, if there was ever need for proof that there's a sucker born every minute, just check out this quote from the Wired article:

There was a picture on the top of the page that said, 'As Seen on TV,' and I guess that made me think it was legit.

John.

This doesn't surprise me. Mainly because labels, distribution and media conglamorates are so concentrated and dominant now that they can claim they are primarily responsible for the demand for an artist and therefor justify getting a piece of everything, including the traditional performance royalties (otherwise known as blood, sweat and tears). Unfortunately they are right.

A good example are the concerts that Clear Channel stations put on in their markets, often wildly superior to comparable tours or shows. CC can ask almost any band (and name their own price if one at all), even one not on tour to play a festival for one of their stations and most commercial artists know turning them down is the kiss of death. It's one thing to turn down a show in one market. It's another thing to turn down a CC station and piss off a company that controls 60-80% of the major radio stations nationwide.

And things have only gotten worse with the recent relaxation of media ownership restrictions.

We should not be surprised. The only alternative artists have left at this point is the Internet.

At this point, most of what you see/hear in the major media is formulaic and bland anyway. What I think is interesting is that P2P networks in my opinion are more threatening to the music industry not because of copyright/piracy issues but because they can introduce the public to non-corporate music that doesn't suck.

Kids go to school hungry...

Bullshit. Poor people in the USA are more likely to be overweight than to be starving to death.

Europe does lack American style "Freedom Of Speach." There's nothing wrong with the European model, it's just that most Americans woulden't put up with it, it's too damn letigious to open your mouth in Europe.

Just last week and Italian food-reviewer decried McDonald's food as ashitty food - and guess what, the Italian McDonald's compay is suing him for $25 million (USD) for his statments: more info

German libal laws are so strict, that you might as well not say anything controversial if your wan't to remain outside of the courts.

Just my $.02 worth (0.0178 EU)

You know, I was just talking about this over coffee with my good friend Bill Brown. He runs a tour of New York's security cameras, so that protesters such as myself can easily point out the cameras and mock them. I've been going on this tour every week with Dr. Brown, and every time he has even more incisive insights.

As a very famous cybersecurity researcher, I feel that I am highly qualified to talk about Homeland Security. My deep knowledge of computers -- which came with no formal training, just my own intelligence -- can easily be applied to solving real-world security problems. My award-winning research has led to landmark decisions in the field of security.

I have the right to control every aspect of my identity, both in "interspace" and in "meat-space." When someone takes a picture of me in the real world, I have every right to walk up to that person and shout at them until they agree to delete the picture from their "mini-hard drive card" or burn the film in front of me. I know that most of you don't have to deal with these issues on a daily basis, but of course most of you are not prominent cybersecurity researchers such as myself.

Visit my web site -- do revisit, I've added a lot lately. And oh yeah, down with Michael Sims, who stole the Censorware Project from me as if it were candy and I were a baby! I'm not a baby.

"What involvement would that be? Just to remind you, there was an embargo on Iraq and the contracts passed were just that, contracts. Until the sanctions were lifted, and then what? Nothing done was illegal. "

Really?

"Unfortunately the US has such power it can make anything the truth today, and you through your bad joke are participating. "

Oh grow up. You wouldn't be upset if there wasn't some truth to what I was saying.

Nations outside of the West have no qualms whatsoever in using nuclear force against us. For example, in 1995, the Chinese threatened to drop a nuclear bomb on Los Angeles. Please read "Chinese general told threat against U.S. unacceptable". The Chinese have proactively obtained sensitive information about our military technology and national security. They intend to undermine our society. Please read " Military secrets on sale to China" and "Spy Suspect Led an Active, Prominent Life".

Remember these famous words: "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." Let us not forget our obligations to our fellow citizens in the West even if we are "geeks".

France did offer precisely this - they'd use their influence as P5 members to drop the sanctions, in exchange for TotalFinaElf getting sweet deals on Iraqi oil, and Saddam did jump.

However, the only dead russians and french in the country (if there were any) were there providing military support to Saddam's regime. I doubt the french and russians have many big fans in iraq right now.

Very true; one Iraqi commented (as a picture of Chirac was treated to the same as Hussein's portraits have been) that French and Russian people would not be safe in Iraq for another 20 years.

Finally, the greed motive doesn't work out too well as US support for the war goes. But, it does work as a reason that the french and russians opposed the war (their oil companies were making a killing under saddam and oil-for-food).

Absolutely. France was set to benefit even more from the lifting of sanctions - Hussein had promised TotalFinaElf lucrative oil deals in exchange for that - and were already profiting heavily from illegal arms sales such as this). It's France and Russia who were abusing the UN for control of Iraqi oil, not the coalition!

And this is based on what facts and years of experience in economics? How about all the republicans who have voiced opposition to the tax cuts or allen greenspan's recommendation the tax cut is foolish and inappropriate given the current economic conditions. Does the president really think he knows better than 100's of experts who collectively have several hundreds years of experience with economics. For god sake, read both sides of the story and think for yourself. How about article by business week, usa today, capitalist mag, abc news, or washington times. there are articles for and against the tax cuts. Tax cuts are only good when spending is kept in check as others have stated. Trickle down economics doesn't work as the 80's proved. Finding a good balance is tough, and luckily the president has to convince the senate and congress.

The reason Saddam has been "idle" when it comes to threatening neighbors is because he's been contained since Desert Storm. You can bet that if he had been allowed to annex Kuwait back then, he'd have picked up one or two more countries by now.

Maybe you've got a nuke in your basement. Maybe you don't. After we level your house then we'll know for sure.

Now we'll have to wait and see if the WMD claims pan out. If Saddam's history of lies and deception is any example, we're almost certain to find evidence.

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20030405-9682133 5.htm

" Hint: The minority is sometimes right"

yes, sometimes the minority is right. When it comes to science though most of the time the minority is wrong. In this case the minority seems to mostly consist of crackpots and business types so take that for what it's worth.

"I see more credible proof for a lot of things _besides_ humans heating up the earth than for it - and I'm _against_ using oil."

After 9/11 all air traffic stopped for three days. the lack of contrails created a measurable difference in a whole host of environmental factors. If nothing else this proves beyond any reasonable doubt that humans impact the climate. Start your research here.

If you still think humans are incabable of effecting the atmosphere then you are truly misguided.

"Oh, and no - my country is not fully a US puppy."

Good for you. Is it one of the "coalition of the willing/bribed/threatened"?

Where's any proof that Iraq has funded Terrorism?

areal photos of camp

terrorist links

more ammo

washington times article

links to Al Qaeda

Is that enough? or do you need more?

maeryk

Roadmap for War on Iraq and the New American Empire brought to by:

Elliott Abrams , Gary Bauer
William J. Bennett, Jeb Bush
Dick Cheney , Eliot A. Cohen
Midge Decter, Paula Dobriansky
Steve Forbes , Aaron Friedberg
Francis Fukuyama, Frank Gaffney
Fred C. Ikle, Donald Kagan
Zalmay Khalilzad, I. Lewis Libby
Norman Podhoretz, Dan Quayle
Peter W. Rodman, Stephen P. Rosen, Henry S. Rowen
Donald Rumsfeld , Vin Weber, George Weigel, Paul Wolfowitz

xyzzyxyzzyxyzzyxyzzyxyzzyxyzzyxyzzyxyzzyxyzzy

The Washington Times has still more details.

If Muhammed Atta drank double-mocha latte's at Starbucks on a daily basis, and I order the same thing, does that make me a terrorist?

Do you shop at a grocery store that has higher prices than most but then gives you "savings" if you use their "rewards card?" That's a great scam. You aren't paying much (if any) less than I am at another store, and you're giving them customer data for free. They track your buying patterns and sell the info. Yes, it's unpopular as hell on /., but you've got to admit it's opt-in as hell.

Of course, not all the data gets sold. A lot of it gets given to Ashcroft. Things that he'd have a damn hard time getting a warrant to sieze are getting handed to him by companies that see your private information as an asset of theirs. Of course, it is- you opted in. Just hope that you don't like (or have company coming that likes) the same food Atta liked. Make sure you don't rent the same movies he saw, either. No, it won't make you a terrorist, but it will make Ashcroft suspect that you are one. We've got people in custody; citizens being held without being charged. Ashcroft hasn't even told us who most of them are. They don't have access to lawyers (I'm still trying to find a downside to that one). If you don't mind all that, then by all means, opt in. If it isn't your idea of what the Constitution says ought to be happening, or even if you're worried that a bad person might smoke the same brand of cigarettes that you do, then try to help.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center has a nice page listing ways the companies get (and how they profit from) your data with tips to protect yourself.

I would like to see the U.N. step in and make an effort to teach American school children some basic facts about life outside the U.S.

Good luck. The U.N. is about as worthless as a bent dick. The U.N.'s inability to enforce ANYTHING is why Saddam was able to boot out the inspectors in the 90s and proceed to flip-off the rest of the world for last several years.

The problem here is that Saddam Hussein is a psychopath of the first degree. Unfortunately his regime *should have* been toppled during the last military conflict, when it would have been appropriate. We're now in the unenviable position of trying to convince the rest of the world that doing it now is better than doing it later.

One thing people fail to understand is that it was never the objective of the U.N. weapons inspectors to be able to find all of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. At approximately the size of California, Iraq is a big area, and it's not that difficult to hide anything. Such a goal is utterly laughable. The U.N. inspectors were merely meant to verify that Saddam had destroyed the prohibited munitions. That essentially boils down to: "Where were your weapons? Did you destroy them? Okay then."

The United States needs to drop the pretense that Iraq's weapons of mass destruction are the issue, and just topple his regime based on the fact that he's a sadistic nutbag.

And fuck France - we know why they're opposed to the war.

[Posted anonymously because you guys are a fucking liberal lynch mob.]

You know I just replied to another post derailing the ignorance of Americans and the lies of the American media. Germany and France have huge interests in Iraq and both helped arm Iraq (indirectly):

France and Germany protect Iraq ties

-Sean

Remember that terrorism is when civilians are the target. Here's a good definition.

Here's Iraq's ambassador to the UN defending the payout to Palestinian bombers.
Here's some additional reading material on other terrorist groups Iraq supports.

Diplomacy has been proven throughout history to do nothing to stop terrorism. Saddam is not giving up his WMD programs and he is going to do whatever it takes to hide them. The whole point of taking him out without years of additional delays is to ensure that he doesn't aid terrorists by giving them these weapons. Based off Saddam's history of actions, he would have no qualms about doing this.

I was wrong about the comma. Leave it in if you're going to keep the sig. :)

-Lucas

By definition Fox is a centrist network. The center is where most people are and most people agree with Fox.

From the Washington Times:

Fox averaged 1.2 million viewers a night in 2002. CNN attracted 898,000 and MSNBC 382,000. Ratings at Fox's two chief rivals fell 8 percent and 24 percent, respectively.

Disagreeing with Fox does not make a person right or wrong but it does mean they are either left or right of center (in the U.S.).

In Washington, DC, there are a large number of red-light cameras, and now speed cameras. My wife found out that the speed camera OCR works just fine. Twice in a week. $200 per violation. The tickets were mailed several weeks after the violations.

The picture we got in the mail had the car and an enlargement of the rear plate. The counter on the picture was in the tens of thousands. Needless to say, DC is now collecting over $10 million per year in revenue this way.

My impression is that there is a combination of computer OCR pre-processing and human checking. At $200 per violation, a couple of checks by the human eye is totally affordable.

Really?

Or does the 10-3 clinch it for you?

Yes, I suppose "banned" wasn't the right word. But my main point remains, they are overturned more than any other court (better than the CNN reference).

What it looks like is this particular court likes to waste time making bizarre judgements and giving the SCOTUS some comic relief.

Anger over broadband limits

Why's my cell phone melting?

NCTA Weighs In on IP Telephony

FBI Seeks Hacker of eBay Users' Info

Labels battle to hold onto DMCA win

Western Digital to Launch 10,000rpm Desktop HDD 11th Feb

On the trail of a stolen Tablet PC

Game on for cable

Mail-order drug suppliers under gun

Two panels to monitor Pentagon's spy project

In Europe, Microsoft faces tough sell

Intel to discuss Manitoba and GPS efforts at IDF

More unrest seen among tech workers

It's a shame the Crusader program was cancelled. The company that was delivering them, or involved heavily in them, or something was based in my homestate (MN), so it was made into a big deal in the local papers. (And yeah I know it's the washington times, you'll live. It was the first google link I could find with "crusader" and some form of "cancel" in the title.)

Is It Time to Move to Canada?

What a real mate would tell Bush

Beating the drums for justice: Calls for Bush's impeachment for 9-11

USA Oui! Bush Non!

Between Bush, Bin Laden & Hitler

German leader links Bush's 'style' to Hitler's

Judging war crimes, then and now

He sounds like ye has the same spirit as the lawyers in this article that are ambulance-chasing the Bush Administration, from the front of the ambulance. See my log or web page for more comments toward them.

For once, I can say that we sure could use FEWER lawyers (by individual choice, not government edict) and MAYBE they would spend their time on important things instead of this nonsense. Idle hands and all...

The Oracle says: Saddam Hussein has a Bacon number of 3.

Saddam Hussein was in Saddam Hussein: Defying the World - A Visual Biography (1990) with George Bush
George Bush was in Last Party, The (1993) with Sean Penn
Sean Penn was in Mystic River (2003) with Kevin Bacon

It's not all that glamorous. There is rampant corruption in all levels of the government and industry, women still have very little access to good jobs, racism and a lot of other things that need to be fixed. Trade and technology are all fine from an armchair perspective, but try to go there and sell a product. Its a whole different ball game if you're a foreigner.

Friends of mine in the US Govt would laugh about how the Korean students would spend most of their year in front of the embassy.. half the year throwing rocks and the second half of the year applying for student visas.

California claims that approximately 61% of the school budget is spent on "classroom instruction", a catchall category that seems to include some items not directly related as well as other items that seem logically connected to classroom instruction. Even using this generous figure there is almost $110,000.00 per year, per classroom, per year left over after the cost of classroom instruction.

Poe's book condenses the research of Kleck and Lott into a more palatable format, while combining it with his own research and observations. An excellent read. Lott has statistically shown that in states with more liberal concealed-carry laws, crime rates against persons drop significantly. This is offset by a slight increase in property crimes in these locations, which is only rational & definately preferable to confrontational crimes. Kleck's research shows that guns are used legally and defensively to stop crimes anywhere between 800,000 to 2 million times per year. Gun control advocates estimate around 200,000 such uses per year, which is still more than enough to show the positive impact.
Larry Elder's writing style is a bit too conversational at times, but that stems from his main job as a radio talk show host. Although I don't agree with everything he wrote in the aforementioned book, Chapter 10 is right on target. Either way, the book is an excellent read.

The most notable book from the Gun Control advocate side was Michael Bellesiles' (formerly of Emory University) book "Arming America", however, he has been thoroughly discredited (Note: The linked article is very tongue in cheek, but nonetheless details his downfall at the hands of his equally liberal but intellectually honest peers.)
Now the Gun Control Advocates have nothing. Why? Because they have to lie. There are many who say in this thread, "The sides are equally valid, you can't have an unbiased analysis." This is wrong.

Gun control advocates must rely on distortions or outright lies to prove their point, because the facts are not behind them.
This is a harsh statement, but I will defend it anecdotally. My opinions I've formed from the aforementioned books, and from such sites as packing.org and guncite.org, and from the occasional spot check of their accuracy. If you want supporting documentation for my opinions, look to what I've already given you.

1. Gun control advocates often cite "Gun deaths" when talking about the need to control guns. The assumption is that by removing the most efficient means to cause death, the deaths will not occur. What they don't tell you is that about half of the "Gun deaths" are suicides. While this is tragic, the dedicated suicidal person will often use the most abrupt way to end their lives available. Guns are efficient at this, so they are used often. Compare that with Japan- a nation with almost no Gun Homicides- yet three times the suicide rate of the United States. Cultural differences aside, the means available to commit suicide do not affect the suicide rate.

2.When Gun Control advocates speak of all the children who die each year to gun violence, they include inner-city gangbangers as old as 24. While their deaths are tragic as well, they cannot be honestly compared to the suburban nuclear family with two responsible adults, actual children (ie, at most 18 years old), and a handgun for protection. If you look at gun homocides and accidental deaths for children under 14, you'll find that far more children drown in swimming pools than die to guns.

3. With any variety of "Gun Deaths" included, Doctor's mistakes kill far many more people each year than firearms. Their utility, however, is unquestionable, so we allow their presence despite how often they kill people. The utility of guns is not so obvious, even with the 800,000 legal defensive of guns each year that Kleck estimates, because most of the time, a shot isn't fired, and it isn't reported, because the citizen is afraid of running afoul of the confusing labrynth of gun laws in any particular state- and they've already solved the situation.

Well, I think I've written enough for now. I've cited most of my sources in this thread, or the threads I've linked to above, so don't ask me to defend them, as I already have.

That being said, I enjoy debate and will reply promptly to any intelligent reply/challenge.

Gun Control is hitting the bullseye

Some groups of interest:
Jews for the Preservation of Fire Arm ownership
(remember the Warsaw ghetto uprising!)
Second Amendment Sisters
Pink Pistols
(Gays for Gun rights. They rightfully need to defend themselves from some of the morons wandering around this nation. The Matthew Shepard incident would have been a footnote in the local police dossier if he had been armed and able to defend himself.)
www.packing.org
(Concealed Carry information for all 50 states)
Sorry for no links, but you all know how google works.

Indeed, I really want to know why they did this - accidental or if not then why.

I want to know if they did this. It's really hard to take a class action lawyer's word for it. Is there a screen shot somewhere?

Palestinians are fighting for freedom. Immigrant Israelis are fighting for power.

To be specific, shouldn't you say "Palestinians are blowing up busloads of civilians for freedom"? What about the money? Don't forget to mention that.