Slashdot Mirror

And to all of you out there saying, "Boo hoo, Kerry lost. Get over it." How is it that Democracy in America is being hijacked, and you don't seem to give a shit?

(1) I do give a shit, (2) I do not think that Democracy in America is being hijacked. The only people that seem to be screaming about any hijacking are the left-wing Kerry supporters. I think that if anything, the Democrat Party may be being hijacked. Think about that, and what it means for America if they can pull it off.

I have abolutely no problem putting my life on the line for the American citizen's right to speak their mind. Kerry wants you to think that he stands for that, but he doesn't. I doubt he ever has. Would you do the same thing, even if it means my right to speak my mind grinds your teeth like fingernails across a chalkboard? If you're serious about what you said, I doubt it.

You do a lot of name calling, but when the shit hits the fan you show your true natures.

Yeah... About that. Let's talk about "true colors". I noticed that in the weeks before the election, there were a lot of problems where Bush's campaign offices were getting stormed by Kerry supporters, and Bush's campaign offices were getting looted... No problems with Kerry's offices. I wonder why? Maybe because at the heart of the matter, people that have no problem breaking the law, simply because it is being done against someone they consider "evil", tend to support Kerry?

Unless of course you're a young woman who's been raped and wants an abortion. Need more government there. Oh, and hot man-on-man monogamy needs more government too. Did I forget steam cell research? Yes, I did. Need more government there as well.

I believe, however, that these issues, although important, mask much more fundamental problems with how the technology is deployed and the general failure of electoral management to reform itself through the effective use of technology. There are long term solutions but these are immaterial in terms of the present election because it's far too late to change.

Tomorrow's election will, therefore, feature the use of some e-voting technologies within the constraints of traditional electoral management and, in all likelihood, demonstrate some of that combination's weaknesses during this process. In my opinion, however, the total actual impact these security weaknesses have on the final vote counts is likely to be insignificant in the more important contests. What will be far more significant is the leverage these few real problems give conspiracy theorists to allege that much more consequential, but uncaught, frauds also took place. Fundamentally a small, but real, problem can become a national crisis if it lends itself to exploitation by people with agendas - and that's what I'm afraid will happen to e-voting on the day after tomorrow.

In that scenario Democractic losers across the country contest Republican electoral victories by asserting that security weaknesses in electronic voting were illegally exploited to their opponent's benefit and their loss. The resulting firestorm of media protest would then cast a shadow over legitimate electoral victories and discredit the electoral system because the security weaknesses allegedly exploited are real, even if the exploits are generally not.

Suppose, for example, that Mr. Bush wins by a narrow margin - a few percent in the overall popular vote with the issue even closer in one or two key states. In that situation the democrats seem unlikely to simply concede, preferring instead to launch hundreds of lawsuits at least some of which will ultimately be decided by judges balancing the unprejudiced, and genuinely expert, testimony of people like Dr. Rubin to the effect that exploitable weaknesses exist against the accused's assurances that no cheating took place. In this situation electoral management doesn't stand a chance: the traditional media will hold them guilty before the trials start and at least some judges, however well intentioned otherwise, will be forced to conclude that reasonable doubt exists as the legitimacy of the election results.

So what can be done? Absent a landslide Republican victory (or a kerry win) there's probably nothing you can usefully do except refuse to be caught up in the rush - just trust that the system will muddle through.

There may, however, be something the President can do - it's a classic hail Mary pass idea which may be really dumb, but which I'd like to toss out for comment.

Sir Arthur Conan-Doyle told a Sherlock Holmes story in which the big clue was that the dog failed to bark. In the same vein there's a missing "60 Minutes" special you need to think about in terms of that dog not barking.

In this case there seems to be reasonably good evidence that some captured North Vietnamese and VietCong papers naming John Kerry and earthed at the Vietnam War Archives held by Texas Tech University in Lubbock, are genuine. So far no third party has authenticated them, but they are said to show that both

You are no longer allowed to pray for your candidate at your church. Welcome to communism.

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ ID=41145

The portion released seems to contain a backhanded but solid endorsement for John Kerry. So one is immediately reminded of the responses reported by The Guardian to its Operation Clark County letter-writing campaign. Does Osama bin Laden read the newspapers, or does he merely depend on directions from his god? And now the editorial staff at LeMonde (obviously not reading English papers, probably also godless) have delivered the French kiss of death to Kerry's hopes.

The Abu Hafs al-Masri Brigade, in claiming responsibility for the Madrid train bombing, went for the other candidate:

"A word for the foolish Bush. We are very keen that you do not lose in the forthcoming elections as we know very well that any big attack can bring down your government and this is what we do not want.

"We cannot get anyone who is more foolish than you, who deals with matters with force instead of wisdom and diplomacy.

"Your stupidity and religious extremism is what we want as our people will not awaken from their deep sleep except when there is an enemy.

"Kerry will kill our nation while it sleeps because he and the Democrats have the cunning to embellish blasphemy and present it to the Arab and Muslim nation as civilisation.

"Because of this we desire you [Bush] to be elected."

But that was written way back in March, long before Operation Clark County, and by a group only loosly associated with bin Laden. I think that the more recent bin Laden effort is rather more cleverly designed.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/29/bin.lade n.transcript/
Alternate translation:
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ ID=41192

One of them became a Governor and ran for President!

Yes, let's review:

1. Enron http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2002/tst012802.ht m and http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2001/tst121701.ht m and http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/4/23 /133051.shtml,
2. Global Crossing http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/2/15 /154416.shtml,
3. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ART ICLE_ID=33024,
4. Tyco (http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/02_5 1/b3813001.htm,
5. WorldCom (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A2311-20 02Jun29,
6. Adelphia Communications (http://www.usatoday.com/money/media/2004-07-09-ri gas-timeline_x.htm),
7. the list goes on and on.

As you say, it was a historic economic impact. We're still feeling the consequences of it today.

The United States isn't a huge social welfare program. President's don't create jobs. If you'd quit swallowing that Leftist Damnocratic Propoganda long enough to take a look at what's really going on, you might not be so ignorant of the facts.

Fact is we're coming out of a recession which was brought about by bad Clinton Economic Policies, and then exacerbated by the attack of 9/11/01, which flushed upwards of 500 billion dollars out of our Economy.

This post is especially ignorant ...

Yes, your post is especially ignorant. Take the time to read the links and do some discovery for yourself, and quit swallowing propaganda, and even you too can learn the truth about our current Clinton Inspired economic woes.

Are you proud to be honored in Ho Chi Minh City as a North Vietnamese hero with your portrait prominently displayed?

But the same applies. Good gravy, look at the modern Middle Eastern countries that we count among our friends. Read the Quran or Old Testament. They're not exactly feminist tracts (and the Law of the Prophets is actually worse than the Quran). There's little point in playing a historical or geographically placed game if you want to pretend that it's just San Francisco circa 2004 with a little more sand.

Thanks for the lead into my next comment. Next time, just use Yahoo Search to find the article.

Indeed, Chinese agents are enterin the USA from Mexico.

If you hate what is happening to our nation, the USA, then join me in writing the following on the November ballot.

president: Bill O'Reilly
vice-president: Tammy Bruce

At first, there was talk among the press of simply ignoring "photo ops" as not newsworthy. But the press caved in. That was the beginning of the end of political reporting.

Today, Bush's press conferences are scripted. Ari Fletcher, the White House press secretary, tells Bush which reporters to call on. Some, although not all, of the reporters ask only planted questions. The whole process is controlled by the White House, not the press.

The overall effect is that there is no moment left in American politics when the President has to answer hostile questions. Even in the recent debates, that was avoided. Read the rules.

It's not out of context, Edwards said this just the other day in a speech. Nevermind that it's only embryonic stem cells that Bush opposes, and his only action is to withold Federal money for research on this type of stem cell only. Also, as noted in the article, adult stem cells show the most promise for spinal research.

Pretending that it's some sort of insane promise about the future is idiotic

I don't have to pretend...Edwards said "We will stop...". Partisan speech prose or not, that's just stupid to promise.

--trb

You have to wonder how anyone can utter - let alone believe - something so demonstrably wrong as "violence doesn't solve anything" or "an eye for an eye leaves everyone blind," or any other pacifist platitudes. These are the moral and intellectual equivalents of "the earth is flat." In fact, it is easier to show that violence solves many evils than it is to show that the earth is round.

It was violence that destroyed Adolph Hitler and Nazism. Only violence. Not talk. Not negotiations. Not good will.

It is violence used by police that stops violent criminals from murdering or otherwise hurting innocent people. There are many innocent men and women alive today solely because some policeman used violence to save their lives.

It was violence that ended slavery in America. Had violence not been used against the Confederacy, the United States would have been cut in half, and millions of black men and women would have remained slaves.

The list of moral good achieved by violence is endless. -- Denis Prager

The normal people are so food-deprived, there are claims of cannibalism in the North. Screw satellite pictures: technology is the least of North Korea's people's problems.

Thank you for your informative post; too bad it was modded flamebait. Here are some links for those who reckon it's "flamebait" to point out that starving people probably don't give a shit about their country's "intelligence warfare capability".

Failure of Imagination, of course! The current administration had an Agenda the day it hit the oval office,

Granted, but it's not like previous administrations were that much more creative.

and has been executing that Agenda ever since. The 9/11 incident was a speed bump I'm sure, and forced them to invade Afghanistan before they could proceed to their Real military goal. (Take a look at: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/conventions/repub lican/features/platform.00/#53 and focus on the 5th and especially 6th paragraphs. Read more and get more scared.)

I'm not too scared, Iran would be the next step in the neo-con playbook, but it seems like bush is distancing himself from them. Iran won't be permitted to have nuclear weapons, if the US doesn't attack Isreal will. The US is about to sell Israel "bunker buster" bombs that could be used in an attack in Iran.

Iraq had been blowing off the UN and weapon inspectors for some time. Even during the Clinton years. The fact is, the members of the UN who voted against taking action in Iraq did so for their own interest. France and Russia were both in on the food for oil scam. China was seeking to limit US power. About the only country I think might have been honestly against the war in Iraq was Germany. It was obvious that Saddam was defying the UN, and action should have been taken. On top of that, even putin admits that Saddam was planning terrorist strikes on the US.

Given that base, "execute plan regardless of facts," and what do you expect. It is a distinctly unimaginative administration - they've got their Agenda, and they're executing it. Incidentally, 9/11 also gave them the pretext and acceptance of "fuller measures" to aid law enforcement, too.

The patriot act applies laws that were already on the books used to fight Drug Dealers and Mafia Members to terrorists. The only difference is politicians won't defend drug dealers or mafia members, but they will defend Terrorists.

Democratic/Liberal $126,849,747 $120,331,891
Repub/Conservative $17,381,731 $18,948,145

Conservatives probably see articles like the following and start sniffing around for conspiracy. Whether a conspiracy exists or not. I'm starting to see a common thread amongst conservatives of boycotting orginizations that even hint liberal ideals. As a conservative myself I see a large movement away from the major media by most of my conservative friends around the nation and world due to "media bias" and its presentation of liberal ideals. (I'm probably redudant here.)
The advent of the internet, blogs, and talk radio allow this to happen. It saddens me because I feel that there hasn't been substantive debate in over a decade because both "new" and "old" media has bias and both camps are clinging on to the media that shares their views and shuns out the opposition.

I'm longing to have a healthy debate about issues rather than a shouting match where both people leave mad feeling more "right" than when they began.

Article
Article

Conservatives probably see articles like the following and start sniffing around for conspiracy. Whether a conspiracy exists or not. I'm starting to see a common thread amongst conservatives of boycotting orginizations that even hint liberal ideals. As a conservative myself I see a large movement away from the major media by most of my conservative friends around the nation and world due to "media bias" and its presentation of liberal ideals. (I'm probably redudant here.)
The advent of the internet, blogs, and talk radio allow this to happen. It saddens me because I feel that there hasn't been substantive debate in over a decade because both "new" and "old" media has bias and both camps are clinging on to the media that shares their views and shuns out the opposition.

I'm longing to have a healthy debate about issues rather than a shouting match where both people leave mad feeling more "right" than when they began.

Article
Article

This is not the first time that Google has imposed some censorship over its search engine. Check out this article at WorldNetDaily: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTI CLE_ID=26819

When Google started out, they seemed to be a refreshing alternative to other larger corporate sites. Google is now becoming part of corporate America. With that, we can expect to see a more "tame" Google geared toward minimizing the making of waves for the purpose of maintaining investor confidence and ensuring a steady profit.

Is it "selling out"? Perhaps, but I think that this is the sort of thing that we can expect as a company expands and grows.

Damn YANKEE IMPERIALIST BASTARDS!! Can't we pass a few UN resolutions against the US?

You betcha! In fact, it's being worked on right now by French President Jacques Chirac.

Chirac feels bad that France has had a several hundred year history of being an abusive colonial power (which continues today with the oppression of peoples in French Guiana, for instance) and is demanding all western nations pay perpetual repirations to the poor of the world.

Imagine the justice in taking half of the take home income of every Canadian, EU, US, Japanese and South Korean citizen and giving it to deserving governments of poor people in Chad, Saudi Arabia, the Phillipines, Indonesia, China, etc. We all know how overpaid the Western Europeans are - when measured to the actual work they perform, they're the richest yet laziest in the world! Maybe this will get those fat Germans and obnoxious French off their asses and take only two months of vacation (or be poor and understand the misery they've caused through their tyranny throughout the 20th century, as well as now with arms sales to dictators).

Maybe the Canadians should have to give the rest of the world their free health care, at Canadians expense. Why should they get cheap drugs and free medical attention when even US citizens cannot? Maybe they'll have to quit drinking all that beer and instead help the world's poor. Think of it this way - all that beer they don't drink will pay for more health care for deserving people of the world, and they Canadians will pay for it through the money they save from alcohol's health ills! Free health care for the world!

And don't get me started on the rich Japanese. Think USA has class disparity? You haven't been to Japan. All Japanese are rich compared to the poor Indonesians, North Koreans and Chinese they raped, murdered and oppressed. About time they pay to help those people after all that harm.

Yes, the French President is really onto something with this world tax. Let's just make sure he doesn't slip out the back door with Oil for Food billions in his pocket before he pays his tax!

Clickable link

"I was in Cambodia, sir. I worked along the border," O'Neill is heard telling Nixon in a conversation that was taped by the former president's secret recording system. The tape is stored at the National Archives in College Park, Maryland.

In an interview Wednesday with The Associated Press, O'Neill did not dispute what he said to Nixon on June 16, 1971, but he insisted he was never actually in Cambodia.

"I think I made it very clear that I was on the border, which is exactly where I was for three months," O'Neill said of the conversation. "I was about 100 yards from Cambodia."

If we really want to stop crime, we need to put cameras where we all know the serious crime takes place.

That is the office buildings of public officials. We also need to tap their (OUR taxpayer dollar paid for) phones. Over night the dirty dealing and back rubbing would stop. No more BJ's in the oval office. We could even link the cameras in air traffic controllers to watch as they ignore planes that switch off there transponders and deviate from course for 20-30 minutes before they crash into the WTC. Hey, but what's with letting three or four planes all go AWOL. Not like George doesn't support going AWOL. (and he cares enough about our troops, not to attend even one funeral.)

To bad they have this thing about letting the American public know the truth about WMD's. That would have been neat to see that briefing for replay. The ability to trace this info to the source (or lack thereof) and actually hold them accountable for the 1,000 US soldiers that have died. These really are the people that need the cameras put on them because the fate of all our live are held in their hands. How long will it be before the world decides that Americans are the real threat to life and need to be controlled. If the American people won't hold elected official accountable, then somebody will have to.

What ever became of the security tapes around the Oklahoma City Federal building. These tapes hold the smoking gun of Timothy McVeigh in the last moments before the bomb blew. But they were never released due to national security.

Our government has been running amuck. We need to pull out the magnifying glass and put the cameras on them that can't be turned off. These cameras should be streamed on the net and recorded for later viewing. We also need to remove our public officials right to privacy anywhere they go so they can't make deals 'out of the office'. Just like a teenager that gets into drugs, they will loose any right to privacy, they have, because we know they can't be trusted. There has been to much trust in this country of our elected officials for way to long.

Kinda like how Kerry does too?

I don't often participate in Slashdot discussions when politics is involved; for what reasons, I'm not sure. However, I feel that you have made some factually incorrect points, sir. Whether you know this or not is not my concern, rather giving proper information is.

The swift boat stuff was all concerned actions 30+ years ago. Did Kerry tell recent lies about those actions? I don't think so -- all the fact checking I've seen supports Kerry and says the swift boat gang are liars.

In fact Kerry has lied about href="http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=K erry+V+device&btnG=Search+News">his service

Even though President Bush's records have come to be something of a hinderance to his re-election campaign, my research on Senator Kerry has shown that he is far more apt to take liberty with his service record to be all things to all people. Therein lies John Kerry's major flaw: He wants to be on both sides of the fence--a decorated war hero and an anti-war advocate.

Posting anonymously, because the popular view on slashdot seems to be more liberal and libetarian, and I'm a bit more of a conservative geek than that.

"On O'Reilly anyone expressing their views to forcefully will have their microphones cut or ask to "Shut up" in a stunningly unprofessional way. "

This is complete BS. I've seen O'Reilly quite a few times, and the only times he's cut someone's mike is when either (a) they were passing off completely unsubstantiated lies or (b) they were completely dodging O'Reilly's questions.

And then about CNN - you don't think it's a conflict of interest for Carville and Begala to work directly for the Kerry campaign _and_ be on TV? The fact that you can point out one instance of Fox News doing the right thing and CNN doing the wrong this doesn't mean it's an epidemic. Are you sure you're not just ignoring the times when CNN is unethical?

'They don't have a Hannity telling you "180 more days before George Bush gets relected". You can't do that in journalism, one ought to say "180 more days for the 2004 election".'

Except that Hannity is not a journalist. Hannity & Colmes is a right-wing/left-wing slugfest. Period. Hannity pulls for the right and Colmes pulls for the left. I don't see the problem here.

""Where WMDs found in Iraq?""

Yes. The fact that you aren't aware of them just means that you don't pay enough attention. The fact that Fox News watchers probably have other sources of news as well (other than Fox or the traditional media) is not what the traditional media wants. For information on Iraq's WMD finds, see here and here, not to mention the WMD that were shipped to Syria and used in an attempted assassination of King Hussein of Jordan.

""Is there a connection between Iraq and 9/11 ?""

Yes! Hussein Al-Hussany, who helped McVeigh in the OKC bombing, was a member of the Republican Guard, and after the OKC bombing went to work for Logan national airport. Hussein Al-Hussany sued Jayna Davis for slander for publishing reports about this, AND LOST. Ramzi Youssef, one of the ones who carried out the first WTC bombing, was being employed by Iraq at the time.

Anyway, it's a long connection, but the imminent connection is between the larger war on terror and Iraq, and between Iraq and Al-Qaeda, which noone denies exists.

Of course, the people who don't believe network news don't come up with the same answers as the people who do, but that doesn't make their answers wrong. What can I say but look up the facts and check them yourself.

Dick Cheney said no such thing. Go read the transcript, and not the report from the Associated Press. Yes this Associated Press.

AP Version:
"If we make the wrong choice, then the danger is that we'll get hit again and we'll be hit in a way that will be devastating from the standpoint of the United States."

Actual not-edited-for-political-purposes quote:
"If we make the wrong choice, then the danger is we'll get hit again and we'll be hit in a way that'll be devastating from the standpoint of the United States, and we'll fall back into the pre-9/11 mind-set that these terrorist attacks are criminal attacks and we're not really at war."

So reading the Vice President's words, in context, one can easily see that Cheney was not saying "a vote for Kerry is a vote for Al Qaeda", but he was stating that Kerry would not respond as Bush has. One can argue whether or not that's a good thing, but it is *not* what you (and the mainstream media, including FoxNews) are accusing.

Given that John Edwards was first to jump on this comment, taken out of context, I now know everything I need to know about John Edwards.

As to your other complaints, if 200+ vets come together to voice their opinion about a candidate, who are you to say they're wrong?

The RNC wants people to know that Kerry is the wrong choice. You expected them to go easy on him? You must be new here.

As to the alleged smear on McCain, obviously it's not that big of a deal, since McCain spoke on Bush's behalf at the RNC. In fact, he spoke quite well. Go to the iTMS and download the speech.

So what, Rush is dating Kagan. That doesn't make her a conservative any more than marrying James Carville made Mary Matalin a liberal. When the Washington Post reported on the story, they described Kagan as "part of the liberal media axis and a feminist -- but, then again, opposites attract."

And Pat Buchannan, who worked at CNN, casts Judy Woodruff as a liberal.

I'm not sure if Bush wants to protect American jobs by preventing outsourcing, but this article says the Republican party outsources their call centers for fundraising, and this article denies it. I don't know whose version to trust.

I'm not sure if Bush wants to protect American jobs by preventing outsourcing, but this article says the Republican party outsources their call centers for fundraising, and this article denies it. I don't know whose version to trust.

Nixon vs. Kennedy

Getting Illegal Immigrants to vote

more

Double-voting Snowbirds

more of same from 2000

A Christian ministry advising parents about the content of popular movies says its not surprised by a Harvard University study finding films within the same rating class are getting raunchier, noting it made the same discovery four years ago.

ChildCare Action Project Movie Ministry indicates the Harvard data echoes its own findings from 2000. The Harvard study, released last month, shows content of movies with specific ratings is getting stronger, meaning a film rated PG-13 today likely would have received an R rating several years ago.

Researchers looked at films released between 1992 and 2003. The study found more sex and violence in later PG movies and more of the same, plus more profanity, in PG-13 movies. It also found R-rated movies contained more profanity and sex.

Today's PG-13 movies, it was found, are inching toward what R-rated movies looked like in 1992.

Even films rated G were found to have more violence, especially in animated features.

The CAP Ministry notes it scrutinized films for eight years using a specific set of standards and mathematical formulae. The group's statistical analysis found PG-13 movies consistently including more objectionable elements as the years went on, leading the researchers to coin the rating "R-13."

"In the first five years the percentage of R-13 movies more than quadrupled (an increase of 459 percent) which says in the year 2000, 450 percent more of the PG-13 audiences were fed R-rated programming than in 1996/7," the Christian research said.

Researchers from both CAP Ministry and Harvard noted the movie rating system used by the Motion Picture Association of America, or MPAA, is too general.

Said CAP Ministry founder Tom Carder: "The CAP Analysis Model could replace the MPAA. And the CAP Analysis Model provides it objectively, not vulnerable to mood and preference subjectivity so you can be in a better position to have the information you need to make an informed moral decision whether a film is fit for your kids (or yourself)."

Read more

A Christian ministry advising parents about the content of popular movies says its not surprised by a Harvard University study finding films within the same rating class are getting raunchier, noting it made the same discovery four years ago.

ChildCare Action Project Movie Ministry indicates the Harvard data echoes its own findings from 2000. The Harvard study, released last month, shows content of movies with specific ratings is getting stronger, meaning a film rated PG-13 today likely would have received an R rating several years ago.

Researchers looked at films released between 1992 and 2003. The study found more sex and violence in later PG movies and more of the same, plus more profanity, in PG-13 movies. It also found R-rated movies contained more profanity and sex.

Today's PG-13 movies, it was found, are inching toward what R-rated movies looked like in 1992.

Even films rated G were found to have more violence, especially in animated features.

The CAP Ministry notes it scrutinized films for eight years using a specific set of standards and mathematical formulae. The group's statistical analysis found PG-13 movies consistently including more objectionable elements as the years went on, leading the researchers to coin the rating "R-13."

"In the first five years the percentage of R-13 movies more than quadrupled (an increase of 459 percent) which says in the year 2000, 450 percent more of the PG-13 audiences were fed R-rated programming than in 1996/7," the Christian research said.

Researchers from both CAP Ministry and Harvard noted the movie rating system used by the Motion Picture Association of America, or MPAA, is too general.

Said CAP Ministry founder Tom Carder: "The CAP Analysis Model could replace the MPAA. And the CAP Analysis Model provides it objectively, not vulnerable to mood and preference subjectivity so you can be in a better position to have the information you need to make an informed moral decision whether a film is fit for your kids (or yourself)."

Read more

And hadn't been a small asteroid, then I could be dead now, and in heaven reading slashdot, and not know about it.

I think this is a bit of a non-story. So this is the closest observed asteroid that hasn't actually hit us

The funny thing is if this had hit us it wouldn't have made the news, unless it had hit someone famous, and only if they were doing something scandalous at the time.

The wierd electrical fires in Sicily were more interesting.

Not to burst your bubble, but that explosion was equivalent to 5,000 pounds of TNT (approximately equivalent to a 0.0025 KTon nuke). There is no way you could carry 4,800 tons on a Ryder truck.

Contrast the 0.0025KTon explosion at Oklahoma City with a 1.4KTon explosion from the U.S.S. Richard Montgomery and you may understand why people are a bit concerned. It is 560 times as powerful.

No kidding! conspiracy theorists are already having a field day And senators are alredy trying to lift the restriction on foreign-born people becoming prez.

That seems to suggest there were other WMDs. Coulda sworn they haven't found any...

From the article: The chip can't be removed, but will be deactivated after Macedo's term as attorney general expires, he said.

Now, did Mexico implant 160 government employees with non-removable chips at the behest of the Bush Administration?

According to Fox News (emphasis orthogonal's):

WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration announced Tuesday [6 July 2004] that it has resumed sharing a wide range of financial information with Mexico with the aim of trying to catch money launderers (search), drug dealers and terrorist financiers.

In April, the United States had suspended sharing such information with Mexico, dealing a blow to cross-border crime fighting, which had resulted in the arrests of several high-profile drug lords.

The U.S. government did so after sensitive information provided by the [U.S.] Treasury Department's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network was leaked by Mexican officials. After the suspension, the network outlined a set of steps that Mexico should take before the United States would agree to resume information-sharing.

The Treasury Department said Tuesday that Mexico has since taken steps to safeguard sensitive financial information it receives from the United States and other countries.

The ends do not justify the means. Not now, not in 20 years. Falsely accusing a country of various crimes in order to invade and then rebuild them in your own image is abhorrent.

"You can't get worse journalism/misrepresentation than [CNN]"

to make sure supply meets demand COM.

Rumor has it executives from Digital::Convergence have been meeting with Bush administration officials. Could a proposal to re-activate the 'Cat' as a mechanism for tracking every taxpayer be in the works? Imagine a government and big business ploy to track every consumer/taxpayer with a barcode on their physical person!

Certainly barcoding each tax return would be nonunique; with a social security number uniquely identifying a filer. Could a more intrusive human barcode be in the works? In 1999, the USPTO issued a patent for an invisible human barcode. Armed with millions of CueCats, tax men and merchants worldwide could track the movement of money (and people!).

According to MoveOn.org (and posts on AlGoreDemocrats.org), Michael Moore has been circulating a draft of a script to follow Sicko (currently in the works about the US medical system) called 'Beep This' which exposes the Bush administration's bar code plans with Digital Convergence. Rumor has it part of Microsoft's DoJ settlement with the Clinton Justice Dept. involved Microsoft's endorsement of bar coding plans already under consideration. Of course, Kerry's big business connections (including campaign contributions from major chinese barcode manufacturers) doesn't look good either.

Perpetual indebtedness of corporations to their investors is not a sustainable economy. Treating investments as permanent entitlements instead of loans is the primary cause of the periodic stagnation and instability of our economy.

That's simply untrue -- it's one of the reasons why we have one of the best economies in the world. It's not perpetual indebtedness, it's partial ownership. Where is the indebtedness? We've already established that the stocks are not paying dividends -- so 99% of shareholders don't get a paycheck from their shares (you didn't miss that, did you?). Nobody is in debt to anyone. All this is, is a type of partial ownership. The company can buy back those shares if they want to. I think you're misunderstanding how things really work. And as far as not creating a sustainable economy, it's worked pretty well for 200 years...in fact, thus far, it's arguably been the best economic success story in history.

The government only becomes inefficient when corporations get their grubby little fingers into it. Things like municipal utilities, communications, health care... these kinds of things need to be heavily regulated by the government. Historically, deregulation and privatization has only increased costs and hurt consumers.

Is there a certain feeling -- maybe something you smell or just feel in your gut when you're really wrong? Have you ever worked for a private company on government contracts? Have you ever seen the bureaucratic mess that our government creates on a daily basis? I have. Do you know why the government hires private businesses to make things work for them? Let me give you a hint, it's not special interest groups pressuring the government. It's because government does things more expensively, and do not provide services adequately -- the federal government doesn't have any reason to do things better or cheaper. Federal employees do just enough to squeeze by. See, when companies compete for the government's business, there is incentive to provide the best possible service, for the lowest cost. If they don't provide, they're fired and their contract is rebid amongst the industry. The federal government is like the biggest business in the country (especially in that they're the largest employer in the country). Problem is -- they don't really have a specialty -- they just do general stuff. There is also no competitive incentive to do a better or cheaper job. Let me give you an example: Do you know how many federal employees were fired in 2001? 434. 434 employees were fired from the largest business in the country. Hell, smallcap companies dismiss more than that for performance in a year. This is just laughable. Read the article and think about it -- ask yourself why the largest business in the country only dismissed 434 employees for performance in 2001. While you think about it, remember that it ain't because our federal workers are more competent than everyone in the private sector.

The whole reason why we have a communications infrastructure in this country -- private innovation. A private indivudual saw a need, dreamed up an idea, and got other private investors to help them build a telecom network. Healthcare is another. If you can swing it, we have the best healthcare in the world. Know why? Because private practices have incentive to provide the best care there is. Private doctors have incentive to develop new medical procedures and drugs and profit from them. If they don't, the practice down the street (with the brand new MRI machine) will get their business. It might not be the fairest, but it is the best in the world, hands down. Don't believe me? Go to a country with socialized care for everyone and tell me about your experience.

Nothing of the sort. The investors can profit any amount that's mutually agreed

You do realise that George Bush also gets his instructions to kill bad people direct from God as well.

Not to mention the US Generals who believe they're on a holy mission against Muslims.

Let me turn now to chemical weapons (CW). In searching for retained stocks of chemical munitions, ISG has had to contend with the almost unbelievable scale of Iraq's conventional weapons armory, which dwarfs by orders of magnitude the physical size of any conceivable stock of chemical weapons.

For example, there are approximately 130 known Iraqi Ammunition Storage Points (ASP), many of which exceed 50 square miles in size and hold an estimated 600,000 tons of artillery shells, rockets, aviation bombs and other ordinance. Of these 130 ASPs, approximately 120 still remain unexamined.

As Iraqi practice was not to mark much of their chemical ordinance and to store it at the same ASPs that held conventional rounds, the size of the required search effort is enormous.

The Washington Times reports military officials have uncovered about 8,700 weapons depots and continue to find new ones. They estimate the weapons depots in Iraq contain between 650,000 and 1 million tons of arms, which are believed to be a source for anti-coalition forces.

First off, I want to say that if Michael Moore had information about Abu Ghraib before it came out on the news, it was his civic duty to bring it out to the public. No, Michael Moore did not do that because HE IS OUT TO MAKE MONEY! He will put anything on screen, even if it's an out and out lie, just so he can make money. See the article on slate:

Slate

Also, it is said the Mr. Moore says that the Bush government is so in bed with the Saudi's....well if that was so, how come we had to move our headquarters to Doha, Qatar?? It definitely was not a decision the miltary would have made! Why reestablish airbases in Qatar when you had everything all setup in Saudi? Also, if your opposed to the war, why talk about not having enough troops? Did you not say moments before the war you want them to NOT send troops? Also, it is INSULTING to the American soldiers he so dedicates the movie to that he had this video of the happeings at Abu Ghraib and did not bring it out in the proper way. The WHOLE army was not involved at Abu Ghraib. It was simply a few bad apples who overstepped their authority. It has been said that Hezbollah, one of the biggest terrorist and ANTI American (left or right) groups out there are willing to put up their own money to get this movie shown in the UAE!

Farenheit 9/11 a hit with Hezbollah

If Mr. Moore so cares about our troops, then why is he painting our whole military in a extremely bad light. Does he have any idea what this would do to undermine our efforts? How this movie may so inflame the terrorists??

Read this World Net Daily article...theatures are saying no to this film in droves.....todate only 417 theaters are showing Fahrenheit 9/11.

Thaters say no

Also, about his previous movie, Bowling for Columbine, he suggests in that movie that gun problems in schools are rampant yet he misses the facts. The facts have pointed out before Columbine, school violence is going DOWN not UP! It's just reprehensible what he's doing here. I support his freedom to say what he wants, but what he's said in this movie and others he's made has been SLANDER!

First off, I want to say that if Michael Moore had information about Abu Ghraib before it came out on the news, it was his civic duty to bring it out to the public. No, Michael Moore did not do that because HE IS OUT TO MAKE MONEY! He will put anything on screen, even if it's an out and out lie, just so he can make money. See the article on slate:

Slate

Also, it is said the Mr. Moore says that the Bush government is so in bed with the Saudi's....well if that was so, how come we had to move our headquarters to Doha, Qatar?? It definitely was not a decision the miltary would have made! Why reestablish airbases in Qatar when you had everything all setup in Saudi? Also, if your opposed to the war, why talk about not having enough troops? Did you not say moments before the war you want them to NOT send troops? Also, it is INSULTING to the American soldiers he so dedicates the movie to that he had this video of the happeings at Abu Ghraib and did not bring it out in the proper way. The WHOLE army was not involved at Abu Ghraib. It was simply a few bad apples who overstepped their authority. It has been said that Hezbollah, one of the biggest terrorist and ANTI American (left or right) groups out there are willing to put up their own money to get this movie shown in the UAE!

Farenheit 9/11 a hit with Hezbollah

If Mr. Moore so cares about our troops, then why is he painting our whole military in a extremely bad light. Does he have any idea what this would do to undermine our efforts? How this movie may so inflame the terrorists??

Read this World Net Daily article...theatures are saying no to this film in droves.....todate only 417 theaters are showing Fahrenheit 9/11.

Thaters say no

Also, about his previous movie, Bowling for Columbine, he suggests in that movie that gun problems in schools are rampant yet he misses the facts. The facts have pointed out before Columbine, school violence is going DOWN not UP! It's just reprehensible what he's doing here. I support his freedom to say what he wants, but what he's said in this movie and others he's made has been SLANDER!

I'll try to be brief, because this is getting silly. ;)

I wouldn't argue that Saddam Hussein deserved to remain in power. But I don't believe that any single nation has the right to unilaterally depose a foreign regime. If Bush wanted to depose Saddam he should have made an honest case for that on its merits. Instead he made a case based on deceit and threats. You can say that Bush "never claimed Iraq had anything to do with 9/11", but the spin was pretty clear to me, and it had the desired effect. Even if Bush did the exact same thing as Clinton, I didn't protest against Clinton because I thought he was acting from noble motives, whereas to me Bush simply reeks of bad faith.

Without commenting on the truth or falsity of the theory, there are those who believe that the destruction of TWA flight 800 was a terrorist act and that the September 11, 2001 attacks occured on the scale they did so as to make it impossible to deny the involvement of the terrorists.

Even if you don't believe that TWA 800 was a terrorist bombing covered up by the Clinton Administration, you should consider the idea that the enemy reaction to being denied publicity might be to make it impossible for them to be denied, doing so at an even greater cost in life.