Could you explain something a little further? This has to do with relativity.
Let's start with Y's Tale. You state that X gets that urge to get away as far as possible (sometimes, it's never fast enough!) and does so. His watch says 9:30 for him while her watch says 10:00. I assume she stood still for an hour while he traveled for an hour, but for him it was only half an hour due to his speed. This I understand. However, let's move onto X's tale.
You then state that Y traveled rapidly to the right and only half of a half hour (15 min) passed for her and that her watch says 9:15. However, in the last tale, her watch had said 10:00. So what I want to know is this. Is her watch saying 9:15 from Y's perspective, or from X's perspective? If it's from Y's perspective, shouldn't it say 10:15 instead, since it's relative to her?
I have enough of a fundamental grasp on this stuff to know that I don't have a well enough fundamental grasp. Ugh. Excuse me while my brain explodes. Thanks for the original post though. I really enjoyed it and the diagrams did help! (The humor was great as well):)
It's not the job of these head honchos (even though Gates isn't really chair anymore) to bash the other guy. I don't blame him - I wouldn't want to be a chair either after the whole Ballmer incident.
Thank you, thank you. I'll be here all week. (For better or for worse.)
That information also does not need to be there. My name and e-mail address are on a need-to-know basis. I don't label my underwear, so I most certainly don't need to label my music tracks.
Here's a better question: How does having my full name and e-mail address watermarked into a file benefit Apple? It serves me no purpose; I already know who I am. So why does Apple need to embed this information into DRM-free music? And if Apple isn't putting this out to help the RIAA hound you if your song file somehow got leaked onto a P2P server, then why would they do this? They have absolutely no logical reason to do this whatsoever. If I wanted to personalize my music track, I would do it myself.
Based on your logic, you could argue that it was okay for Sony to install rootkits on people's computers. It's as simple as that - if it doesn't need to be there, then it shouldn't be there.
Have you looked at the date on that link? 1940. Good job with the karma-whoring, buddy. You might also want plagarizing an article that actually uses dated language.
For the record, BMI was not founded last fall. It's been around since 1939, which is an eternity in radio. Not to nitpick, but technically the article is correct. It's dated 1940 and states that BMI was founded last fall, which would have been 1939, as you stated. I may have read your statement wrong and you were just reiterating what the article said.:)
Oh and regarding SoundScan - you're on the right track. Your coworker was referring to BDS, which is owned by Nielsen, whom also happens to own SoundScan. While SoundScan tracks data through barcode sales and other means (the data is then fed to Billboard Charts, which then determines airplay on the radio), BDS does the actual airplay tracking.
It's more of a shock than anything else. The majority of people living today were raised in a society where there weren't thousands upon thousands of cameras recording our every actions. Some people may truly not care about being photographed and filmed every time they walk to the local bank, or their local "sex toy" shop, but it is the THOUGHT that we are being watched that troubles others. Any action you commit that others may interpret as being a threat could land you in trouble because some guy reviewing tapes mistook your wallet as a remote detonating device.
Furthermore, the transition from a few cameras to a few thousand cameras to a few thousand talking cameras, and finally, to spy drones just shows what a slippery slope this really is. Next up? RFID implants into humans. A line has to be drawn at some point. We elect officials to protect us, but we also need to tell them when they are crossing the line. I always assume, naively, that the government has the best of intentions, but when public safety rests on their shoulders, they will always try to find a way to be perfect at the expense of our privacy.
There is hope for the British - if they are NOT smitten with these laws, then they can stop being apathetic and start voting those that want to do away with the excessive intrusion into privacy. Not having ANY cameras is most likely irresponsible. However, having cameras near sensitive locations (mass transportation, high-security buildings, banks) rather than every street corner would be ideal. If, however, they welcome these laws, then it shows that a democracy does work.
The #1 rule of being in public (Score:5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 21, @01:56PM (#19210887) In public, you have no right to privacy. If that's the case, you should have posted under your own name.
That's more like 'per hadron'. Ask your electricity supplier to bill you per hadron... If I did that, I would be really broke!! Oh wait, you said hadron. Nevermind.
The only "problem" you apparently have with Republicans is that they don't like to let Democrats get away with violating the law in order to further a communist agenda. Followed by
If you'd take off the tinfoil hat, you brain might breathe better. Oh, the irony.
Lies you say... People like to throw around that term. I'd like you to cite one example where the administration knowingly deceived the American public. Just because you say he lied doesn't make it so. Well, passing off a forged document stating that Iraq was attempting to purchase yellowcake uranium from Niger after having the authenticity of the document disputed would count as knowingly deceiving the public. What's more is that during the 2003 State of the Union speech, Bush stated "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." Remember those sixteen words? He mentioned this anyway despite warnings from the CIA and the State Department that the allegation was not substantiated.
Sure, Bush claimed ignorance and being "duped" by the intelligence community, but if I claimed ignorance every time something went wrong at my job, or even worse, claiming ignorance when it costs thousands of American and Iraqi lives, infrastructure, and just general mass chaos, then there is a good chance that I would no longer be employed. If we assume the best and take the argument that Bush did not knowingly deceive us and was just the messenger to bad intelligence, then there needs to be accountability. If the intelligence community is going to be the scapegoat, then I have yet to see any accountability other than George Tenet receiving a medal to go along with a nice retirement package.
We elected the President to the highest position in America. He is the most powerful man in the world. He can create and dissolve bureaucracy with a few simple phone calls. Simply claiming ignorance is not what people in his position should be allowed to do.
Telling us that he has a plan in place for Iraq was a deception. Claiming that American Troops would be showered with roses, as opposed to roadside bombs, after the ouster of Saddam is not a plan. It is relying on a grossly dangerous assumption. Telling us that billions of dollars would go towards rebuilding Iraq when it was given to American contractors whom have bilked the Government continuously was deceiving. Claiming that he wanted Osama Bin Laden "dead or alive" and then diverting the majority of U.S. troops to Iraq from Afghanistan was deceiving. And if he was not being deceptive, then his plan failed, and we need a new person on the job.
I will give Bush credit where it is due. He did try to take a different approach towards the Middle East when what his predecessors tried to do did not work. I will give him credit for not seeming rattled after 9/11, in which the aftermath could have been much worse without strong leadership, such as the total collapse of our economy. Libya discontinuing their WMD program, despite ongoing human rights issues, is a positive step. But those (and other) positive outcomes can not cover-up incompetence of the whole administration. The continued missteps spread out over the last six years, coupled with cover-ups and denials just shows me that our country cannot afford another person like Bush in power. This goes for both Republicans and Democrats. We're too late in the presidency to even talk about impeachment (President Cheney is NOT a desired outcome, not even for a minute.), so all we can do is become smarter voters and not just vote based on our alliance.
We can argue or even ignore everything that I said, but whether Bush knowingly deceived us or was "in the dark" like the rest of us does not change the outcome of the situation. And for those that want to counter with "Well Clinton did the SAME THING" - Clinton is not in office any more and Bush ran on the platform that he would bring higher standards to the Executive Office.
As vague as that sounds, it seems as if the Wii will require an official hardware change to support any DVD playback. Still, another source shows that a tool was released sometime in January that will allow you to read and write to the Wii's DVD drive via serial port on a linux computer. This should move us a step closer to getting DVD playback without the need of a mod chip or buying a brand new Wii 2.0.
Companies like Oracle and SAP pretty much take on large corporations, military, and local / federal government projects. You'll never see Jack & Jane's diner using Oracle 10g to store their customer information. Oracle would be overkill and they would never even be able to afford an enterprise license, let alone the hardware and training to support it.
These entities bounce thousands and thousands of transactions daily - most of which occurs concurrently - and have hundreds of users behind the controls, each with their own roles and credentials. MS Access and MS Excel would never handle that. Even SQL Server would lag behind the performance of companies like Oracle and SAP just on the database side, and without the applications, CRM, ERP, or supply-chain support. Furthermore, a lot of the business solutions that they provide take accounting, financial, and government business rules and laws into account. Again, a spreadsheet would never do this.
The design of the GUI, however, does leave much to be desired...
SAP is a name, not an acronym. For those who don't know what the name stands for, the full name is Systeme, Anwendungen und Produkte in der Datenverarbeitung ("Systems, Applications And Products in Data Processing") Taken from this Wikipedia document, they changed their name to just plain SAP AG in 2005.
Enjoy your socialism, outrageous taxation, and your innovative "bread line" approach to health care (when available). Fair enough, although you do choose where you live. They obviously like their system and we obviously like ours. If not, we move.
I will say this, our outrageous health care costs / poor quality and multiple systems of taxation are nothing to sneeze at either. Ever try to go to the E.R. in the middle of the night in the U.S.? Unless you're dying, you'll be filling out paperwork and waiting in the lobby all night until they get you a bed. We shouldn't sit here and go "Well the Europeans are worse, so, we'll stay with the status quo."
And what about insurance - auto or health? You spend your entire life paying for auto insurance (and unless you want public transportation to be the only way you get around, you don't really have much choice) and the minute SOMEONE ELSE rear ends you, you get your premiums raised or coverage dropped outright because the company views you as a risk, regardless of fault.
Bottom line - Europeans have their own issues and we have plenty of our own. We're both at the mercies of our own systems.
I'm amazed at how people who don't speak Farsi keep on bringing the "wiped off the map" misinterpretation. Go learn some basic Persian and get back to me.
Indeed..."eliminated from the pages of history" is much better than "wiped off the map."
Between that, the Holocaust(-denial) conference, and other rhetoric, I can see one would think Iran shows absolutely no hostility to the existence of Israel or the Jews in land they believe should be occupied by neither. You're (conveniently) forgetting that the man who says all this holds no real power in Iran. Ahmadinejad holds the title of President, and nothing more. The real person to be afraid of is Supreme Leader Khamenei, who has denied wanting to destroy Israel and has rejected stockpiling Weapons of Mass Destruction by issuing a Fatwa. In one short breath, Khamenei could remove Ahamdinejad from his post and relieve him of all duties.
"Eliminated from the pages of history" can mean many things. Knowing Farsi simply does not allow you to define it. You have to read the ENTIRE SPEECH in its context to understand what the point was and understand the usage of the text in historical and cultural context. Not rough translations from pundits who wouldn't point to Iran on a map if it pissed all over them.
Ahmadinejad has the same job as Dick Cheney - to go out and make the un-politically correct threats that the leader does not want to make. The parallels between the two jobs are just ironic. Just reading through the comments on/., though, it seems that people are more comfortable with the notion of Iran being wiped off the map or bombed back into the stone age. So, what's the difference? Violence begets violence.
The translation could also mean elimination through a natural progression through time and history, much like other empires and civilizations were "forgotten". While Rome was sacked by Germanic tribes, it was greatly weakened over time due to the disparity of its socio-economic conditions.
However, seeing as how the mere mention of Israel provokes knee-jerk reactions in certain people, I can understand the sudden hysteria and the urge to rattle sabres.
"Jerusalem must/will vanish from the pages of time"/"Jerusalem must/will be wiped off the map"
To-MAY-to/To-MAH-to Cute response, but try not to lose sight of the facts. Ahmadinejad has ZERO power in Iran while the Supreme Leader Khamenei is still alive and relinquishes control. Ahamdinejad can say anything he wants, actually, but none of it holds any weight while he has to still answer someone above him. In fact, it was Khamenei who came out and denied what Ahamdinejad had said. Furthermore, it was he whom issued a Fatwa that stated that stockpiling nuclear weapons is against Islamic law.
Listening to me, you'd think I support the Iranian government or something. It is quite the opposite. I would like nothing more than to see the current government in Iran to lose power and for democracy to return to the people. But it pains me even more to read ignorance and war mongering being spewed in place of facts on/. of all places.
There are Jews in the Iranian parliament. Sorry to burst your bubble little guy. Try again.
And Marouf was a Kurd in Saddam's government. So? You missed their point. Completely. You had said in an earlier post:
The US has been openly anti-racist in its policies for the last 50 years. In Iran, being a Jew is essentially a crime in and of itself. If you're going to break down someone else's post line by line, then at least try to be a little consistent and factual. According to the Christian Science Monitor: Jews in Iran Describe a Life of Freedom.
The problem with your quote is that you made it sound like Jews in Tehran are shot on sight, which is not true. I've been to Iran and can attest that it is not illegal to be Jewish and to live in Iran. (I'm neither Jewish nor Muslim, but have seen Jews in Iran living quite well.) This does not negate Iran's negative campaign against Israel (and vice versa).
Furthermore, to have Jews in parliament in Iran is quite unheard of. Interestingly enough, Iran has had Jews in its parliament well before America has had Muslims in its House of Representatives. And America actually tries to censor its racists.
Let's remember here that the reason 9-11 happened was because of intelligence failings
Funny, your intelligence is failing and I don't see any more 9/11's happening. Yes, 9/11 is largely attributed to an intelligence breakdown of great proportions. Intelligence analysts failed to connect dots and various forms of law enforcement agencies never shared their intelligence with one another.
You don't see more 9/11's happening because such an attack on the U.S. with that kind of precision and scope would take YEARS of planning. In fact, 9/11 was not an overnight job. The nut jobs who carried out the attacks spent most of the 1990's planning out the attack. If nothing else, the war in Iraq has stirred even more tension amongst radicals and non-radicals alike, placing a big, fat bullseye on America. And this is before we even get to Abu Gharab and the Haditha massacres.
Do you really think that America can stay in Iraq indefinitely and kill off every so-called terrorist? I would say that another 9/11 is highly unlikely to happen due to the complexity, certainly not because of this foolish war that has angered even our own supporters overseas.
The irony is that the country that had the most to gain from our incursion against Iraq was Iran.
I know you shouldn't feed the trolls, but Mr AC - you are an imbecile if you cannot see that we are going through a repeat of what happened a few years ago.
* GWB is talking up how Iran might soon have nuclear weapons. c.f. Saddam's fabled WMDs.
* Dodgy evidence is appearing (this laptop which contains plans for a nuclear device ENTIRELY IN ENGLISH with no notes in farsi!) c.f. dodgy stories about Saddam trying to obtain yellowcake from Niger which subsequently turned out to be BS.
* He is drawing different conclusions from intelligence than his own intelligence agencies (for example saying that the Iranian government is providing weapons to "insurgents" in Iraq)
* Troops are moving to the gulf despite no war having (yet) been declared. c.f. Iraq buildup. And let's not forget --
This won't even put a dent in the M$ office suite installed base,... It absolutely won't, because Google Apps is based towards services provided by Exchange. It includes:
Start page Gmail Google Talk Google Calendar Google Page Creator
Now Docs & Spreadsheets (and the future-rumoured coming of presentation viewer) would be a whole different story. And you are correct with your assessment, locally installed apps work just as well without network connectivity, unlike the online service Google offers.
Although I don't believe that you would "lose" your document if you lost network connectivity. It seems like you would lose your document if your browser crashes. You certainly wouldn't be able to upload to the web or share with anyone else (the biggest "selling" point), but you should be able to save a local copy. I haven't tried this though -- if anyone else who uses Google Docs & Spreadsheets would like to chime in and let us know whether or not your document goes poof when your network connection dies, I would really appreciate it.
Slashdot Mirror
Could you explain something a little further? This has to do with relativity.
:)
Let's start with Y's Tale. You state that X gets that urge to get away as far as possible (sometimes, it's never fast enough!) and does so. His watch says 9:30 for him while her watch says 10:00. I assume she stood still for an hour while he traveled for an hour, but for him it was only half an hour due to his speed. This I understand. However, let's move onto X's tale.
You then state that Y traveled rapidly to the right and only half of a half hour (15 min) passed for her and that her watch says 9:15. However, in the last tale, her watch had said 10:00. So what I want to know is this. Is her watch saying 9:15 from Y's perspective, or from X's perspective? If it's from Y's perspective, shouldn't it say 10:15 instead, since it's relative to her?
I have enough of a fundamental grasp on this stuff to know that I don't have a well enough fundamental grasp. Ugh. Excuse me while my brain explodes. Thanks for the original post though. I really enjoyed it and the diagrams did help! (The humor was great as well)
Thank you, thank you. I'll be here all week. (For better or for worse.)
That information also does not need to be there. My name and e-mail address are on a need-to-know basis. I don't label my underwear, so I most certainly don't need to label my music tracks.
Here's a better question: How does having my full name and e-mail address watermarked into a file benefit Apple? It serves me no purpose; I already know who I am. So why does Apple need to embed this information into DRM-free music? And if Apple isn't putting this out to help the RIAA hound you if your song file somehow got leaked onto a P2P server, then why would they do this? They have absolutely no logical reason to do this whatsoever. If I wanted to personalize my music track, I would do it myself.
Based on your logic, you could argue that it was okay for Sony to install rootkits on people's computers. It's as simple as that - if it doesn't need to be there, then it shouldn't be there.
For the record, BMI was not founded last fall. It's been around since 1939, which is an eternity in radio. Not to nitpick, but technically the article is correct. It's dated 1940 and states that BMI was founded last fall, which would have been 1939, as you stated. I may have read your statement wrong and you were just reiterating what the article said.
Oh and regarding SoundScan - you're on the right track. Your coworker was referring to BDS, which is owned by Nielsen, whom also happens to own SoundScan. While SoundScan tracks data through barcode sales and other means (the data is then fed to Billboard Charts, which then determines airplay on the radio), BDS does the actual airplay tracking.
About Nielsen BDS
And this site mentions both SoundScan and BDS:
SoundScan and BDS
Furthermore, the transition from a few cameras to a few thousand cameras to a few thousand talking cameras, and finally, to spy drones just shows what a slippery slope this really is. Next up? RFID implants into humans. A line has to be drawn at some point. We elect officials to protect us, but we also need to tell them when they are crossing the line. I always assume, naively, that the government has the best of intentions, but when public safety rests on their shoulders, they will always try to find a way to be perfect at the expense of our privacy.
There is hope for the British - if they are NOT smitten with these laws, then they can stop being apathetic and start voting those that want to do away with the excessive intrusion into privacy. Not having ANY cameras is most likely irresponsible. However, having cameras near sensitive locations (mass transportation, high-security buildings, banks) rather than every street corner would be ideal. If, however, they welcome these laws, then it shows that a democracy does work. The #1 rule of being in public (Score:5, Insightful)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 21, @01:56PM (#19210887)
In public, you have no right to privacy. If that's the case, you should have posted under your own name.
Sure, Bush claimed ignorance and being "duped" by the intelligence community, but if I claimed ignorance every time something went wrong at my job, or even worse, claiming ignorance when it costs thousands of American and Iraqi lives, infrastructure, and just general mass chaos, then there is a good chance that I would no longer be employed. If we assume the best and take the argument that Bush did not knowingly deceive us and was just the messenger to bad intelligence, then there needs to be accountability. If the intelligence community is going to be the scapegoat, then I have yet to see any accountability other than George Tenet receiving a medal to go along with a nice retirement package.
We elected the President to the highest position in America. He is the most powerful man in the world. He can create and dissolve bureaucracy with a few simple phone calls. Simply claiming ignorance is not what people in his position should be allowed to do.
Telling us that he has a plan in place for Iraq was a deception. Claiming that American Troops would be showered with roses, as opposed to roadside bombs, after the ouster of Saddam is not a plan. It is relying on a grossly dangerous assumption. Telling us that billions of dollars would go towards rebuilding Iraq when it was given to American contractors whom have bilked the Government continuously was deceiving. Claiming that he wanted Osama Bin Laden "dead or alive" and then diverting the majority of U.S. troops to Iraq from Afghanistan was deceiving. And if he was not being deceptive, then his plan failed, and we need a new person on the job.
I will give Bush credit where it is due. He did try to take a different approach towards the Middle East when what his predecessors tried to do did not work. I will give him credit for not seeming rattled after 9/11, in which the aftermath could have been much worse without strong leadership, such as the total collapse of our economy. Libya discontinuing their WMD program, despite ongoing human rights issues, is a positive step. But those (and other) positive outcomes can not cover-up incompetence of the whole administration. The continued missteps spread out over the last six years, coupled with cover-ups and denials just shows me that our country cannot afford another person like Bush in power. This goes for both Republicans and Democrats. We're too late in the presidency to even talk about impeachment (President Cheney is NOT a desired outcome, not even for a minute.), so all we can do is become smarter voters and not just vote based on our alliance.
We can argue or even ignore everything that I said, but whether Bush knowingly deceived us or was "in the dark" like the rest of us does not change the outcome of the situation. And for those that want to counter with "Well Clinton did the SAME THING" - Clinton is not in office any more and Bush ran on the platform that he would bring higher standards to the Executive Office.
(I just couldn't resist!)
With respects to the Wii, most information regarding any DVD-playback within the U.S. date back to November of 2006, where it was stated that "...Even though software will be used to enable DVD-Video functionality, it apparently 'requires more than a firmware upgrade' and cannot therefore be implemented through the WiiConnect24 network."
As vague as that sounds, it seems as if the Wii will require an official hardware change to support any DVD playback. Still, another source shows that a tool was released sometime in January that will allow you to read and write to the Wii's DVD drive via serial port on a linux computer. This should move us a step closer to getting DVD playback without the need of a mod chip or buying a brand new Wii 2.0.
Wii DVD Tool - Firmware read/write
Here is another article regarding DVD playback for the Wii:
DVD Playback for U.S. Wii Coming
Companies like Oracle and SAP pretty much take on large corporations, military, and local / federal government projects. You'll never see Jack & Jane's diner using Oracle 10g to store their customer information. Oracle would be overkill and they would never even be able to afford an enterprise license, let alone the hardware and training to support it.
These entities bounce thousands and thousands of transactions daily - most of which occurs concurrently - and have hundreds of users behind the controls, each with their own roles and credentials. MS Access and MS Excel would never handle that. Even SQL Server would lag behind the performance of companies like Oracle and SAP just on the database side, and without the applications, CRM, ERP, or supply-chain support. Furthermore, a lot of the business solutions that they provide take accounting, financial, and government business rules and laws into account. Again, a spreadsheet would never do this.
The design of the GUI, however, does leave much to be desired...
...the article posted right after this one was titled Organism Survives 100 Million Years Without Sex.
I must be new here.
I will say this, our outrageous health care costs / poor quality and multiple systems of taxation are nothing to sneeze at either. Ever try to go to the E.R. in the middle of the night in the U.S.? Unless you're dying, you'll be filling out paperwork and waiting in the lobby all night until they get you a bed. We shouldn't sit here and go "Well the Europeans are worse, so, we'll stay with the status quo."
And what about insurance - auto or health? You spend your entire life paying for auto insurance (and unless you want public transportation to be the only way you get around, you don't really have much choice) and the minute SOMEONE ELSE rear ends you, you get your premiums raised or coverage dropped outright because the company views you as a risk, regardless of fault.
Bottom line - Europeans have their own issues and we have plenty of our own. We're both at the mercies of our own systems.
"You are about to hit F1 to continue, [Cancel], or [Allow]?"
Indeed..."eliminated from the pages of history" is much better than "wiped off the map."
Between that, the Holocaust(-denial) conference, and other rhetoric, I can see one would think Iran shows absolutely no hostility to the existence of Israel or the Jews in land they believe should be occupied by neither. You're (conveniently) forgetting that the man who says all this holds no real power in Iran. Ahmadinejad holds the title of President, and nothing more. The real person to be afraid of is Supreme Leader Khamenei, who has denied wanting to destroy Israel and has rejected stockpiling Weapons of Mass Destruction by issuing a Fatwa. In one short breath, Khamenei could remove Ahamdinejad from his post and relieve him of all duties.
"Eliminated from the pages of history" can mean many things. Knowing Farsi simply does not allow you to define it. You have to read the ENTIRE SPEECH in its context to understand what the point was and understand the usage of the text in historical and cultural context. Not rough translations from pundits who wouldn't point to Iran on a map if it pissed all over them.
Ahmadinejad has the same job as Dick Cheney - to go out and make the un-politically correct threats that the leader does not want to make. The parallels between the two jobs are just ironic. Just reading through the comments on
The translation could also mean elimination through a natural progression through time and history, much like other empires and civilizations were "forgotten". While Rome was sacked by Germanic tribes, it was greatly weakened over time due to the disparity of its socio-economic conditions.
However, seeing as how the mere mention of Israel provokes knee-jerk reactions in certain people, I can understand the sudden hysteria and the urge to rattle sabres.
To-MAY-to/To-MAH-to Cute response, but try not to lose sight of the facts. Ahmadinejad has ZERO power in Iran while the Supreme Leader Khamenei is still alive and relinquishes control. Ahamdinejad can say anything he wants, actually, but none of it holds any weight while he has to still answer someone above him. In fact, it was Khamenei who came out and denied what Ahamdinejad had said. Furthermore, it was he whom issued a Fatwa that stated that stockpiling nuclear weapons is against Islamic law.
Listening to me, you'd think I support the Iranian government or something. It is quite the opposite. I would like nothing more than to see the current government in Iran to lose power and for democracy to return to the people. But it pains me even more to read ignorance and war mongering being spewed in place of facts on
And Marouf was a Kurd in Saddam's government. So? You missed their point. Completely. You had said in an earlier post: The US has been openly anti-racist in its policies for the last 50 years. In Iran, being a Jew is essentially a crime in and of itself. If you're going to break down someone else's post line by line, then at least try to be a little consistent and factual. According to the Christian Science Monitor: Jews in Iran Describe a Life of Freedom.
The problem with your quote is that you made it sound like Jews in Tehran are shot on sight, which is not true. I've been to Iran and can attest that it is not illegal to be Jewish and to live in Iran. (I'm neither Jewish nor Muslim, but have seen Jews in Iran living quite well.) This does not negate Iran's negative campaign against Israel (and vice versa).
Furthermore, to have Jews in parliament in Iran is quite unheard of. Interestingly enough, Iran has had Jews in its parliament well before America has had Muslims in its House of Representatives. And America actually tries to censor its racists.
Funny, your intelligence is failing and I don't see any more 9/11's happening. Yes, 9/11 is largely attributed to an intelligence breakdown of great proportions. Intelligence analysts failed to connect dots and various forms of law enforcement agencies never shared their intelligence with one another.
You don't see more 9/11's happening because such an attack on the U.S. with that kind of precision and scope would take YEARS of planning. In fact, 9/11 was not an overnight job. The nut jobs who carried out the attacks spent most of the 1990's planning out the attack. If nothing else, the war in Iraq has stirred even more tension amongst radicals and non-radicals alike, placing a big, fat bullseye on America. And this is before we even get to Abu Gharab and the Haditha massacres.
Do you really think that America can stay in Iraq indefinitely and kill off every so-called terrorist? I would say that another 9/11 is highly unlikely to happen due to the complexity, certainly not because of this foolish war that has angered even our own supporters overseas.
The irony is that the country that had the most to gain from our incursion against Iraq was Iran.
* GWB is talking up how Iran might soon have nuclear weapons. c.f. Saddam's fabled WMDs.
* Dodgy evidence is appearing (this laptop which contains plans for a nuclear device ENTIRELY IN ENGLISH with no notes in farsi!) c.f. dodgy stories about Saddam trying to obtain yellowcake from Niger which subsequently turned out to be BS.
* He is drawing different conclusions from intelligence than his own intelligence agencies (for example saying that the Iranian government is providing weapons to "insurgents" in Iraq)
* Troops are moving to the gulf despite no war having (yet) been declared. c.f. Iraq buildup. And let's not forget --
*???
*PROFIT!
Sadly, I'm not joking.
Bravo - insightful AND funny, yet, it did not require the use of an "In Soviet Russia, Police train you!" joke.
Start page
Gmail
Google Talk
Google Calendar
Google Page Creator
Now Docs & Spreadsheets (and the future-rumoured coming of presentation viewer) would be a whole different story. And you are correct with your assessment, locally installed apps work just as well without network connectivity, unlike the online service Google offers.
Although I don't believe that you would "lose" your document if you lost network connectivity. It seems like you would lose your document if your browser crashes. You certainly wouldn't be able to upload to the web or share with anyone else (the biggest "selling" point), but you should be able to save a local copy. I haven't tried this though -- if anyone else who uses Google Docs & Spreadsheets would like to chime in and let us know whether or not your document goes poof when your network connection dies, I would really appreciate it.