There were and are hundreds of good reasons to go into Iraq.
First, I totally disagree. Saddam was no threat, nor was their any indication that he was. Second, in the absence of any legitimate claims, we may as well just write down a bunch of possible reasons to invade a foreign country, and draw one out of a hat. Either way, many Americans have lost their lives pursuing this falsehood, it is piling a huge financial burden onto the taxpayers, and ironically, it is enriching a very select group of individuals with connections in all the right places. I'm sure Bush has just as much idea as to how all of this will be paid for, as he did about what was actually going on in Iraq.
Whether he actually destroyed them or not was not the issue, he was playing shell games.
He didn't destroy them. Most of his capacity to produce anything tantamount to what Bush and Blair blathered so endlessly about, was destroyed during the Kuwait fiasco. Further, there was no evidence that he was attempting to revitalize any of those efforts.
This assumes the web office is written in AJAX and not Java. If it's written in Java, expect trouble. I used Corel Wordperfect for Java, man. It wasn't a usable tool.
Um, AJAX is not a programming language - it is merely the use of a certain technique that allows you to asynchronously access data on a server, while only updating the relevant portions of a web page, rather than reloading the entire thing. On the client side, it is heavily dependent on javascript, but on the server side, anything can be used that can encapsulate the response in XML.
As the president, Bush is Commander in Chief of the armed forces. If he didn't know what was going on, he should have known was going on. Engaging in the invasion of a foreign country based on completely false pretenses is very serious business. To dismiss any criticism by suggesting that he didn't know is tantamount to giving to go-ahead for any incompetent fool that happens to make it into that office. It's his job to know.
None of the inspectors ever came back with any information that would support Bush's claim. What would prompt him then, to continue such folly?
There's something called the U.S. Constitution (and the accompanying Bill of Rights), and there's something called Due Process. When you combine these you get a certain set of restrictions that detail what the government can and cannot do in order to enforce the law. Amendment IV of the Constitution is very clear about unreasonable search and seizure - the entire premize is founded on the idea that you're *suspected* of *having committed* a crime (thereby giving law enforcement the right to search), whereas much of the current process revolves around the notion, "if I watch you long enough, you're bound to commit a crime of some kind." This is COMPLETELY BACKWARD.
Re:Supporters of the imPatriot Act...
on
Sorry, Wrong Wiretap
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Very simple. Read some history. Read about Hoover's direction of the FBI, McCarthy, COINTELPRO, and REALIZE, that one of the primary roles of the FBI (at least within the past 50 years) has been to trample all over people and freedom in general. Not terrorists, PEOPLE...American citizens...supposedly living in a 'free' country.
I'm not certain how anyone could derive such a far-fetched meaning from such a simple statement. Perhaps a jug of cold water would be more appropriate.
If google manages to become as disgustingly predatory as Microsoft was, then yes, history will probably repeat itself. However, it's possible that Google could shepherd in a new paradigm (actually, an older paradigm that has been reworked), and still maintain a decent set of ethics. I'm not certain that being a scumbag of a company is a requirement for success.
The garden gnomes will be handled according to your suggestion. I will make sure they are disposed of within the next day or two. Don't worry about killing the grass, as much of it is dead already. Certain restrictions have forced us to carefully watch our use of resources. The last thing we need is a heavy fine at a time we can least afford it.
If you feel so inclined, I will leave some cookies and soda for you on the back porch. I'm sure they will make your task more enjoyable.
...is that it's immediately apparent that these words represent something other than what they are. They really don't even have to go that far - they can just agree on some very common-sounding sentences beforehand, that sound completely innocuous. By the way...did I ever tell you about that shade tree outside my window? It's awesome.
Everyone can keep dissing people who bring these problems to light, but I don't think it will have much of an impact on the fact that students are not finding this type of education every rewarding. They aren't going to sake up one day and say, "Oh yeah, it's my attitude!". They're going to accept the fact that the education in these fields just plain sucks, quietly set down the institutional thumbscrews, and walk away.
It's not the Republicans to blame for this crap, it's the neo-cons masquerading as Republicans. Check out http://www.newamericancentury.org/ . That should give people some idea as to why things are happening the way they are.
It's some research which shows that porn addiction (via the internet) can be worse than crack. That roaring sound is the tidal wave of ignorance and self-righteousness that's about to completely overtake common sense. Look for the FBI to use whatever means they now have at their disposal, including those provided by our beloved imPatriot Act (specifically, National Security Letter). I'm willing to bet that the new Supreme Court justices will have some interesting impact on this, as cases being prosecuted may wind up there for further legal clarification.
Ashcroft was just a cog in a wheel. There's a much larger agenda being guided by a cabal of sorts, within the whitehouse. Dismantling that might yield some relief from this nonsense. But that won't happen for at least another three years.
What happens is that typically a politician gets to know the inner workings of the government very well, establishes powerful connections with other politicans, and then gets hired by whatever company needs to grease the wheels of the political machine from the inside- usually for a nifty sum of money. Neil Bush, for example, was hired by a Chinese semiconductor firm (for a tidy fee) so that he could provide them with "strategic advice". Because Bush has absolutely NO experience in the semiconductor industry, absent his political ties, it becomes very difficult to understand why any semiconductor firm would give him the time of day.
In Rumsfeld's case, he moved from a government position (Secretary of Defense), to a key position within GD Searle(the president, in fact), in order to streamline the FDA approval process with respect to NutraSweet. The manner in which this whole thing was executed was highly suspect, as it involved ignoring the recommendations of key FDA officials, altering research results, etc. Under normal circumstances, Nutrasweet may never have been approved.
As you know, Rumsfeld is now back in a key position within the federal goverment.
Some of the "Consititution is a Living Document" crowd - who want to bend the protections into any convenient shape so they can be conveniently ignored - DO want the Supremes to "consider foreign law" when they make their decisions.
It's not the Supremes I'd worry about. It's things like Executive Orders that completely bypass the judicial process, effectively removing it as a part of the checks and balances that work to sustain our freedom. How many people know what FEMA's true role is? Probably very few. How many know that it wasn't created by an act of Congress, but by an executive order? How many people know what will happen when a national emergency is declared? THIS is what people should be worried about.
Simple...make it illegal for any appointed or elected government official to occupy a position that could be contrued as a conflict of interest, or as a sign of impropriety. Hold our elected and appointed officials to standards HIGHER than exist in the private sector.
Both Dick Cheney (Halliburton), and Donald Rumsfeld (GD Searle) come to mind- they did their share of bed-hobbing, and none of it was in the interest of the American public.
I have no doubt that this law would affect a large number of those currently in politics.
It is my opinion that just *because* a large number of people buy and play the game, it's no excuse for the company or its developers act like assholes. When they do, it only means that people play the game DESPITE the company, not because of it- each player is just one additional node of revenue, nothing more. The whole notion of "customer service" doesn't go out the window just because it happens to be an online game.
Slashdot Mirror
There were and are hundreds of good reasons to go into Iraq.
First, I totally disagree. Saddam was no threat, nor was their any indication that he was. Second, in the absence of any legitimate claims, we may as well just write down a bunch of possible reasons to invade a foreign country, and draw one out of a hat. Either way, many Americans have lost their lives pursuing this falsehood, it is piling a huge financial burden onto the taxpayers, and ironically, it is enriching a very select group of individuals with connections in all the right places. I'm sure Bush has just as much idea as to how all of this will be paid for, as he did about what was actually going on in Iraq.
Whether he actually destroyed them or not was not the issue, he was playing shell games.
He didn't destroy them. Most of his capacity to produce anything tantamount to what Bush and Blair blathered so endlessly about, was destroyed during the Kuwait fiasco. Further, there was no evidence that he was attempting to revitalize any of those efforts.
This assumes the web office is written in AJAX and not Java. If it's written in Java, expect trouble. I used Corel Wordperfect for Java, man. It wasn't a usable tool.
Um, AJAX is not a programming language - it is merely the use of a certain technique that allows you to asynchronously access data on a server, while only updating the relevant portions of a web page, rather than reloading the entire thing. On the client side, it is heavily dependent on javascript, but on the server side, anything can be used that can encapsulate the response in XML.
As the president, Bush is Commander in Chief of the armed forces. If he didn't know what was going on, he should have known was going on. Engaging in the invasion of a foreign country based on completely false pretenses is very serious business. To dismiss any criticism by suggesting that he didn't know is tantamount to giving to go-ahead for any incompetent fool that happens to make it into that office. It's his job to know.
None of the inspectors ever came back with any information that would support Bush's claim. What would prompt him then, to continue such folly?
There's something called the U.S. Constitution (and the accompanying Bill of Rights), and there's something called Due Process. When you combine these you get a certain set of restrictions that detail what the government can and cannot do in order to enforce the law. Amendment IV of the Constitution is very clear about unreasonable search and seizure - the entire premize is founded on the idea that you're *suspected* of *having committed* a crime (thereby giving law enforcement the right to search), whereas much of the current process revolves around the notion, "if I watch you long enough, you're bound to commit a crime of some kind." This is COMPLETELY BACKWARD.
Very simple. Read some history. Read about Hoover's direction of the FBI, McCarthy, COINTELPRO, and REALIZE, that one of the primary roles of the FBI (at least within the past 50 years) has been to trample all over people and freedom in general. Not terrorists, PEOPLE...American citizens...supposedly living in a 'free' country.
Kudos - if doing your own thing ethically and honestly is every bit as important to you as doing your own thing, I wish you success.
I'm not certain how anyone could derive such a far-fetched meaning from such a simple statement. Perhaps a jug of cold water would be more appropriate.
Um....such as?
If google manages to become as disgustingly predatory as Microsoft was, then yes, history will probably repeat itself. However, it's possible that Google could shepherd in a new paradigm (actually, an older paradigm that has been reworked), and still maintain a decent set of ethics. I'm not certain that being a scumbag of a company is a requirement for success.
The garden gnomes will be handled according to your suggestion. I will make sure they are disposed of within the next day or two. Don't worry about killing the grass, as much of it is dead already. Certain restrictions have forced us to carefully watch our use of resources. The last thing we need is a heavy fine at a time we can least afford it.
If you feel so inclined, I will leave some cookies and soda for you on the back porch. I'm sure they will make your task more enjoyable.
Great. I will remove any obstacles beforehand which might get in your way. The lawnchair might be difficult.
Everyone can keep dissing people who bring these problems to light, but I don't think it will have much of an impact on the fact that students are not finding this type of education every rewarding. They aren't going to sake up one day and say, "Oh yeah, it's my attitude!". They're going to accept the fact that the education in these fields just plain sucks, quietly set down the institutional thumbscrews, and walk away.
Point taken. The party itself is made up of several factions, and the neo-cons are currently at the helm.
Case closed.
It's not the Republicans to blame for this crap, it's the neo-cons masquerading as Republicans. Check out http://www.newamericancentury.org/ . That should give people some idea as to why things are happening the way they are.
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,65772, 00.html
It's some research which shows that porn addiction (via the internet) can be worse than crack. That roaring sound is the tidal wave of ignorance and self-righteousness that's about to completely overtake common sense. Look for the FBI to use whatever means they now have at their disposal, including those provided by our beloved imPatriot Act (specifically, National Security Letter). I'm willing to bet that the new Supreme Court justices will have some interesting impact on this, as cases being prosecuted may wind up there for further legal clarification.
The only thing they're capable of is brutal oppression, be it via "obscenity laws" or wars of aggression against foreign sovereign nations.
The money. The endless parade of million-dollar beggars, promising people eternal salvation in exchange for their hard-earned cash.
Ashcroft was just a cog in a wheel. There's a much larger agenda being guided by a cabal of sorts, within the whitehouse. Dismantling that might yield some relief from this nonsense. But that won't happen for at least another three years.
If you want a good chuckle, read Rumsfeld's bio at http://www.defenselink.mil/bios/secdef_bio.html
particularly with respect to his time at GD Searle.
What happens is that typically a politician gets to know the inner workings of the government very well, establishes powerful connections with other politicans, and then gets hired by whatever company needs to grease the wheels of the political machine from the inside- usually for a nifty sum of money. Neil Bush, for example, was hired by a Chinese semiconductor firm (for a tidy fee) so that he could provide them with "strategic advice". Because Bush has absolutely NO experience in the semiconductor industry, absent his political ties, it becomes very difficult to understand why any semiconductor firm would give him the time of day.
In Rumsfeld's case, he moved from a government position (Secretary of Defense), to a key position within GD Searle(the president, in fact), in order to streamline the FDA approval process with respect to NutraSweet. The manner in which this whole thing was executed was highly suspect, as it involved ignoring the recommendations of key FDA officials, altering research results, etc. Under normal circumstances, Nutrasweet may never have been approved.
As you know, Rumsfeld is now back in a key position within the federal goverment.
Some of the "Consititution is a Living Document" crowd - who want to bend the protections into any convenient shape so they can be conveniently ignored - DO want the Supremes to "consider foreign law" when they make their decisions.
It's not the Supremes I'd worry about. It's things like Executive Orders that completely bypass the judicial process, effectively removing it as a part of the checks and balances that work to sustain our freedom. How many people know what FEMA's true role is? Probably very few. How many know that it wasn't created by an act of Congress, but by an executive order? How many people know what will happen when a national emergency is declared? THIS is what people should be worried about.
Simple...make it illegal for any appointed or elected government official to occupy a position that could be contrued as a conflict of interest, or as a sign of impropriety. Hold our elected and appointed officials to standards HIGHER than exist in the private sector.
Both Dick Cheney (Halliburton), and Donald Rumsfeld (GD Searle) come to mind- they did their share of bed-hobbing, and none of it was in the interest of the American public.
I have no doubt that this law would affect a large number of those currently in politics.
It is my opinion that just *because* a large number of people buy and play the game, it's no excuse for the company or its developers act like assholes. When they do, it only means that people play the game DESPITE the company, not because of it- each player is just one additional node of revenue, nothing more. The whole notion of "customer service" doesn't go out the window just because it happens to be an online game.
I guess this is what Ballmer is constantly referring to when he talks about Microsoft and its seemingly endless drive to "innovate."