In my case I was called older than dirt on irc, back in the 90s. Now I'm contemplating my retirement:)
Could be worse. On another forum, I got called a liar for claiming to have played computer games in the late 70s. Not arcade games, actual computer games.
Glad you found it for me. I've been looking for the damned thing all week.
OK. ??
Clearly you haven't. Going around judging content by the context of a userid is ridiculous. I ridiculed the post. Ta-da. I mean you don't have to take it personally or anything.
Since I wasn't the original poster, I'm not. I was simply explaining what I would imagine someone else's reasoning to be.
Your description of the operation is false. I guess that is where your interpretation differs from mine. They let a lot more than "a few shipments" go, and they made no effort to catch the small fish or the big fish.
And, NO, stopping smuggling does not become smuggling. Smuggling is smuggling in itself. As there was no attempt to stop said smuggling, I'm not even sure what your argument really is. And I still have seen no reason to believe a field office would try such a half assed scheme without someone in Washington knowing about it. Since Holder and Obama have claimed documents about it are covered by Executive Privilege, I think my argument is stronger than yours.
And my sig is very relevant here. You are the gymnast, hoping to play down scandals of your political side. You have stated no "obvious fact" about the ATF office in Phoenix and what they don't tell Washington. Unless you work for the ATF, you know no more than I do about their inner workings. At least I'm basing my reasoning on their actions and testimony before Congress. You are basing yours on political affiliation.
The primary job of the ATF is not to smuggle guns to drug cartels in foreign countries, which is in effect what took place. Therefor it's reasonable to believe an ATF office wouldn't violate international law on their own.
If the guy who runs the division of the Post Office in my area decides it makes sense to smuggle drugs as an attempt at catching drug smugglers, I would assume someone working in a position directly under the Postmaster General would have been queried if the plan was sensible. That person would have then brought it up to the Postmaster General at a staff meeting. Since that is the whole point of having a hierarchy in an organization.
I would have used a mail metaphor. Either way hierarchies sometimes mean information doesn't travel as high as it should, particularly in law enforcement where telling more people can jeopardize the operation.
Sorry, I thought that was implied. The "guy who runs the division of the Post Office" would be using official mail and postal planes/semi-trailers in his sting operation. Did you think I meant that the "guy who runs the division of the Post Office" buys a ticket on Delta to personally smuggle drugs as an attempt at a drug sting operation?
Why do you think a/. ID has any bearing on knowledge,...?
Maybe because these issues have repeatedly surfaced on Slashdot over the decade+ that ZorinLynx has been a member. I first joined in 2001 or so, and my/. id was over 400,000. So ZL joined long before then.
If the guy who runs the division of the Post Office in my area decides it makes sense to smuggle drugs as an attempt at catching drug smugglers, I would assume someone working in a position directly under the Postmaster General would have been queried if the plan was sensible. That person would have then brought it up to the Postmaster General at a staff meeting. Since that is the whole point of having a hierarchy in an organization.
I don't for one second believe it was a department chief in Phoenix that decided to dust off the folder from Bush's administration, decided the failure of the previous operation was caused by having control of the situation, and so removed the control and came up with Fast and Furious, with no notice going up the chain of responsibility.
Essentially, the reporter in question wrote an article just to say that we had a high-level asset inside the North Korean government. There was no new factual information in the article otherwise - just the need to out a spy in an article about North Korea responding to sanctions.
Does that "current events" selection include all of Obama's scandals and coverups? Or is it limited to who won American Idol and how big Kim Kararshian's ass is?
No, he's not a centrist. He's just a really poor leader for his leftist ideals. A leftist who can't get things done is not a centrist.
Read his books. It gets a lot clearer afterwards.
-- By the way, I say this with no problem that he is a leftist. Everyone has the right to their own beliefs. I just want them to be accurate and honest.
the only consistency to their logic is that they are (obviously) right, and everybody else is (obviously) wrong.
But you wouldn't know anything about that, would you?
They really can't see it. This thread's title fits him perfectly.
To paraphrase the Anonymous Coward:
The worst part is you can tell [the AC] all of this (about his group) and they'll throw the victim card out at you (and in the same breath disparage those who use that tactic. This NEVER fails.)
This is too funny. The above message got modded as "Offtopic".
How the hell is that post not on topic? Because I mention I agree with one of his general premises, and then explain why? Because I tie my concern for his situation with concern for myself in a similar situation? Surely it can't just be because some random snit doesn't like an opinion that differs from his?
Now, as for mention of Muslims, I do apologize. I thought we were dealing with your standard run of the mill ultra-right nutjob in the US -- racist, ignorant, et cetera -- who tends to freak out when they have even the slightest light shined upon them by the Government (but demands the Government hold a spotlight to every Muslin and Arabic American 24x7... in the name of freedom, of course).
I didn't realize we were dealing with a frankly terrifying 9/11, "we gotta kill our government before they kill us," style Prepper sociopath.
You have my sincere apologies.
Now will someone please, please place Brandon J. Raub into psychiatric care before he hurts himself or others?
Funny, I don't see anything about Muslims in the article. Where does he say that? If his is "the same type of" guy who called for them to be killed, I'd think that would be all over his quotes.
Buy, hey, don't let reality intrude on your own biases, right?
At that point, certain Jefferson quotes may in fact, need to come into play. I hope that point is not imminent, that the trial turns up proper non rhetorical, non protected, signals that fully justify the detention and aren't nigh universally and arbitrarily applicable to most citizens.
That point is indeed imminent, and Jefferson's quote will soon be put to the test. I for one want to see what the country looks like afterwards. And if we still speak English then.
If that is the extent of quotes (I skimmed the linked article, it seems to support Raub's point), there was no grounds to pick this guy up. I'm assuming those were the worst lines he typed on Facebook. Nothing like "I'm going to kill soon". He thinks a civil war is coming, and has reasons about what is causing it.
I've posted on this message board that I think a "civil war" is coming to America. Just this week, in fact. I think it will happen within the decade, and maybe within 5 years. My statements about this situation have been the same since the mid-90s, when I gave it 30 years to develop. So 1995 to 2015 will be 20 years. Our current economic situation may speed up the events I foretold then by a few years, but the end result is the same I speculated about then, and for the same reasons.
So, if in combination with that statement I said I plan to be a leader in the faction I support, and I'm acquiring weapons to use, and I have specific targets in mind, do I get picked up and held? On what grounds? Does me being a veteran help or hurt my situation?
Because nothing you just ranted applied to my post. I can explain why, but you won't listen anyway. So why should I bother?
And you have turned into the perfect example of why my sig is spot on. You don't actually want conversation. You want agreement.
I've spent hours, days, and weeks arguing with your kind before. The fact that I can meet you halfway just pisses you off more because I won't march lockstep with you down the road to your dream. At the end of the day, you are just another autocrat wannabe, happily exterminating anybody who disagrees with you.
actually, you're behind the times, the PC era is coming to a close because it is just pandering to psychological marshmallows with chips on their shoulders, and making jokes about anyone different is ok again.
While I do hope you're right, and political correctness should go in the dustbin, it is still not what I expected to see on the front page of a major website with visitors and members of many groups. Especially since it is now owned by an employment company.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but I've already seen the show twice on cable tv. It is not news.
In my case I was called older than dirt on irc, back in the 90s. Now I'm contemplating my retirement :)
Could be worse. On another forum, I got called a liar for claiming to have played computer games in the late 70s. Not arcade games, actual computer games.
Kids nowadays haven't a clue.
Clearly you haven't. Going around judging content by the context of a userid is ridiculous. I ridiculed the post. Ta-da. I mean you don't have to take it personally or anything.
Since I wasn't the original poster, I'm not. I was simply explaining what I would imagine someone else's reasoning to be.
Somehow, that became "bias". Go figure.
Your description of the operation is false. I guess that is where your interpretation differs from mine. They let a lot more than "a few shipments" go, and they made no effort to catch the small fish or the big fish.
And, NO, stopping smuggling does not become smuggling. Smuggling is smuggling in itself. As there was no attempt to stop said smuggling, I'm not even sure what your argument really is. And I still have seen no reason to believe a field office would try such a half assed scheme without someone in Washington knowing about it. Since Holder and Obama have claimed documents about it are covered by Executive Privilege, I think my argument is stronger than yours.
And my sig is very relevant here. You are the gymnast, hoping to play down scandals of your political side. You have stated no "obvious fact" about the ATF office in Phoenix and what they don't tell Washington. Unless you work for the ATF, you know no more than I do about their inner workings. At least I'm basing my reasoning on their actions and testimony before Congress. You are basing yours on political affiliation.
The primary job of the ATF is not to smuggle guns to drug cartels in foreign countries, which is in effect what took place. Therefor it's reasonable to believe an ATF office wouldn't violate international law on their own.
There's your bias.
OK. ??
Glad you found it for me. I've been looking for the damned thing all week.
If the guy who runs the division of the Post Office in my area decides it makes sense to smuggle drugs as an attempt at catching drug smugglers, I would assume someone working in a position directly under the Postmaster General would have been queried if the plan was sensible. That person would have then brought it up to the Postmaster General at a staff meeting. Since that is the whole point of having a hierarchy in an organization.
I would have used a mail metaphor. Either way hierarchies sometimes mean information doesn't travel as high as it should, particularly in law enforcement where telling more people can jeopardize the operation.
Sorry, I thought that was implied. The "guy who runs the division of the Post Office" would be using official mail and postal planes/semi-trailers in his sting operation. Did you think I meant that the "guy who runs the division of the Post Office" buys a ticket on Delta to personally smuggle drugs as an attempt at a drug sting operation?
Why do you think a /. ID has any bearing on knowledge,...?
Maybe because these issues have repeatedly surfaced on Slashdot over the decade+ that ZorinLynx has been a member. I first joined in 2001 or so, and my /. id was over 400,000. So ZL joined long before then.
If the guy who runs the division of the Post Office in my area decides it makes sense to smuggle drugs as an attempt at catching drug smugglers, I would assume someone working in a position directly under the Postmaster General would have been queried if the plan was sensible. That person would have then brought it up to the Postmaster General at a staff meeting. Since that is the whole point of having a hierarchy in an organization.
I don't for one second believe it was a department chief in Phoenix that decided to dust off the folder from Bush's administration, decided the failure of the previous operation was caused by having control of the situation, and so removed the control and came up with Fast and Furious, with no notice going up the chain of responsibility.
Essentially, the reporter in question wrote an article just to say that we had a high-level asset inside the North Korean government. There was no new factual information in the article otherwise - just the need to out a spy in an article about North Korea responding to sanctions.
So, what is the spy's name?
Does that "current events" selection include all of Obama's scandals and coverups? Or is it limited to who won American Idol and how big Kim Kararshian's ass is?
Wow. Great way to be above the partisan ship. You can't even restrain yourself from the "Faux" talking point.
No, he's not a centrist. He's just a really poor leader for his leftist ideals. A leftist who can't get things done is not a centrist.
Read his books. It gets a lot clearer afterwards.
--
By the way, I say this with no problem that he is a leftist. Everyone has the right to their own beliefs. I just want them to be accurate and honest.
But you wouldn't know anything about that, would you?
They really can't see it. This thread's title fits him perfectly.
To paraphrase the Anonymous Coward:
The worst part is you can tell [the AC] all of this (about his group) and they'll throw the victim card out at you (and in the same breath disparage those who use that tactic. This NEVER fails.)
This is too funny. The above message got modded as "Offtopic".
How the hell is that post not on topic? Because I mention I agree with one of his general premises, and then explain why? Because I tie my concern for his situation with concern for myself in a similar situation? Surely it can't just be because some random snit doesn't like an opinion that differs from his?
Now, as for mention of Muslims, I do apologize. I thought we were dealing with your standard run of the mill ultra-right nutjob in the US -- racist, ignorant, et cetera -- who tends to freak out when they have even the slightest light shined upon them by the Government (but demands the Government hold a spotlight to every Muslin and Arabic American 24x7... in the name of freedom, of course).
I didn't realize we were dealing with a frankly terrifying 9/11, "we gotta kill our government before they kill us," style Prepper sociopath.
You have my sincere apologies.
Now will someone please, please place Brandon J. Raub into psychiatric care before he hurts himself or others?
Sincere apology accepted.
Funny, I don't see anything about Muslims in the article. Where does he say that? If his is "the same type of" guy who called for them to be killed, I'd think that would be all over his quotes.
Buy, hey, don't let reality intrude on your own biases, right?
At that point, certain Jefferson quotes may in fact, need to come into play. I hope that point is not imminent, that the trial turns up proper non rhetorical, non protected, signals that fully justify the detention and aren't nigh universally and arbitrarily applicable to most citizens.
That point is indeed imminent, and Jefferson's quote will soon be put to the test. I for one want to see what the country looks like afterwards. And if we still speak English then.
If that is the extent of quotes (I skimmed the linked article, it seems to support Raub's point), there was no grounds to pick this guy up. I'm assuming those were the worst lines he typed on Facebook. Nothing like "I'm going to kill soon". He thinks a civil war is coming, and has reasons about what is causing it.
I've posted on this message board that I think a "civil war" is coming to America. Just this week, in fact. I think it will happen within the decade, and maybe within 5 years. My statements about this situation have been the same since the mid-90s, when I gave it 30 years to develop. So 1995 to 2015 will be 20 years. Our current economic situation may speed up the events I foretold then by a few years, but the end result is the same I speculated about then, and for the same reasons.
So, if in combination with that statement I said I plan to be a leader in the faction I support, and I'm acquiring weapons to use, and I have specific targets in mind, do I get picked up and held? On what grounds? Does me being a veteran help or hurt my situation?
From all of us "everyday persons", thank you for speaking the truth about this ridiculous argument.
I'm sure the US will convert fully to metric in a couple centuries, but for us today, miles and pounds make the most sense.
At what pressure?
Are you done being an ass?
Because nothing you just ranted applied to my post. I can explain why, but you won't listen anyway. So why should I bother?
And you have turned into the perfect example of why my sig is spot on. You don't actually want conversation. You want agreement.
I've spent hours, days, and weeks arguing with your kind before. The fact that I can meet you halfway just pisses you off more because I won't march lockstep with you down the road to your dream. At the end of the day, you are just another autocrat wannabe, happily exterminating anybody who disagrees with you.
Thanks for taking off the mask.
Yes, but you still outsource to Raj and Howard. Those two cause way too many problems.
actually, you're behind the times, the PC era is coming to a close because it is just pandering to psychological marshmallows with chips on their shoulders, and making jokes about anyone different is ok again.
While I do hope you're right, and political correctness should go in the dustbin, it is still not what I expected to see on the front page of a major website with visitors and members of many groups. Especially since it is now owned by an employment company.
Yeah, I'm sure Puerto Ricans would read that joke and think it's the same as calling Canadians polite.
As to whether it's racism, or just ethnic stereotyping, I'm sure if this was a discrimination case in court, the claim would be it is a "racist joke".