I agree that what they are doing is wrong, but realistically what can I, or anyone do? Have you ever tried to actually resist in a situation like that? There's a good chance you would get arrested.
And aren't you blaming the victim here a little bit? It's kind of like saying to a rape victim, you should have fought back! The police have immense power and use it fearlessly.
What would you have done? Serious question.
I'm in Canada and every time I try to take pictures of the police, I am either told to stop, or am questioned, or in some cases have been told to delete the pictures! This just happened to a friend who was taking pictures of police practicing riot control.
I get the message. Try it some time. It may not be illegal but it is not a good idea.
Do a search on this, police harassment of people taking their pictures is absolutely common in various Western countries.
That's not so crazy. There are a number of countries, like Australia, England and of course America that are pretty much going crazy with the control of the populace stuff. Russia used to have "internal passports" and if you wanted to travel to certain places you needed permission. Being caught traveling without permission was indeed a crime.
The current trend toward kontrol resembles the get tough on crime meme, that has resulted in draconian and counter-productive policies such as the 3 strikes law in America. The dynamics are similar with pols vying to come up with ever "tougher" (read stupider and or more authoritarian) policies and laws.
Somehow the idea of Captain Jean Luc Picard settling into his chair and pointing at row of buttons while saying, "8000th floor number one!", isn't quite as inspiring as him saying, "Engage!".
This will be done someday, like others I doubt that it can be done for 5 billion. However, when it's done, it will change everything. And compared to the filth generated by a booster, this thing is nearly as green as Jack's magic bean stock!
You said, you knew right away, and that this intuition was confirmed when you read the lists. I was talking about lists that were published "at the time" which is relevant, because you are telling us that lists without Arab names supported your immediate belief that it was Bin Laden. I am aware that the BBC has since backtracked. They even admitted to altering their own archives to "correct" the error.
Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them irrational.
It's the man who resorts to insults who has run out of ideas.
It might not have been an actor, (it was) but it sure wasn't an engineer, not if he had the slightest tiniest belief that aviation fuel could melt "iron".
Disinfo.
And why didn't they attack Sweden? No warrantless wiretapping there!
Yeah, sure, he let it "stagnate" the sanctions in Iraq only produced 500,000 "extra" deaths, so if 30 million was the goal, then yeah, I guess he let it "stagnate".
If only we could kill enough people then our problems would soon be over.
Seconds? Positive? On what rational basis? Sure he was on the list that morning, but so were a lot of people. What process did you go through that allowed you to be sure? Are you still thinking that way?
Of course you have some evidence that Saddam sent his weapons to Syria? And by evidence I don't mean the MSM, or the Bush Whitehouse. If I gave you several bad cheques in a row, would take another one? They lie. They lie all the time.
Since you killed over a million of them, you either targeted them, didn't give a shit, or are really lousy shots.
Collateral damage is always on purpose.
No one trusts the United States and has not for many decades. You should read teh "foreign" papers once in a while. And the United States does not send in weapons inspectors, the UN does.
Russia is not going nuts. Georgia attacked and killed hundreds, perhaps thousands of ethnic Russians in Ossetia their reaction was quite measured compared to what America did after 911. Try those foreign newspapers again.
Pakistan is indeed on the brink.
If he did send them to Syria, and these putative WMD are so dangerous and destabilizing, then why has the US not attacked Syria? Lack of oil perhaps?
We had proof, the UN inspectors found nothing.
If it's so bloody "mass" how is it that Saddam fought the Iranians for 8 years (using gas), until it ended in a stalemate? Real WMD, i.e. nukes, would have ended it in 20 minutes. You overreach.
Actually there is nothing new here, Bin Laden credibly denied everything on Sept. 17, 2001 to CNN -- it simply went down the memory hole, since the MSM, has not mentioned his denial since.
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/inv.binladen.denial/
And let's never forget that Mullah Omar offered to turn over Bin Laden, all he asked was for the US to show him some evidence that Bin Laden was guilty. Bush told him to get lost -- and started bombing. Bush could have had Bin Laden. He did not want him. America can send cruise missiles to Afghanistan, but it couldn't send a fax?
Religious extremism of any stripe is offensive. There is a long long long long list of deaths caused by religious extremists. Crazy stupid beliefs like creationism contribute to that extremism (what could be more extreme than completely rejecting science?) Having said that, the best antidote to creationist videos are scientific videos based on the evidence. Censorship is XXXXXX and XXXXX, and if you don't believe that I XXXXX XXXXX for you.
Foxy Palin says that the war in Iraq is God's will. Seems to me a few people have gotten killed there. So maybe American religious extremism has killed some people, just not subways.
It's true this is the beginning of the end for the youtubes. Now every group with a grievance (and is there any other kind?) will be lobbying to have Anti *.* or Pro *.* videos removed.
Enjoy those Leave it to Beaver clips everyone! Personally I think we should remove those nasty Obama videos! He's a mooslim you know!
I see that videos showing Rachel Corrie's murder by D9 ("I hit an object") are still up. It's good to know it wasn't terrorism.
Man that Lieberman has got some juice. We all better hope he doesn't get pissed Star Wars or something.
How many states are there in America again?
It's hardly "voluntary" when you can "choose" extortionate rate A or extortionate rate B. Here in Canada we have some of the highest data rates in the world. This is precisely because there is no real competition which is my point. If there was real competition in the US there is no way a couple of dozen logons a some emails would cost that kind of money, the market would force rates down closer to the actual cost which is my second point, there is no real capitalism at work in America (or Canada to a lesser extent) anymore. Market forces are great - if they are allowed to function.
How much does it "cost" ATT to pay for that kind of bandwidth? 20 cents? 1 cent? This is theft, grand theft, 20 grand theft - 20 cents for the actual cost of course.
On what basis is it justifiable for a corporation to make that kind of profit?
Comrade Lenin had it right.
CBC National News Radio here in Canada, just did a piece on the ad (at 6PM! the drive show). It was about the negative reception the ad was getting, but then they directed people to the MS site to read MS's explanation that the ad is just a teaser and to get people talking again.
I wish my ads were 1/1000 as "ineffective".
Watch for a lot more talk about what they'll do next.
Microsoft is doing this for the same reason that Coca Cola signs and ads are ubiquitous, they are not selling coke, they are maintaining brand profile. This is not advertising, this is marketing and branding which is an entirely different animal. Gates is raising awareness, creating a buzz and getting people to talk about Microsoft. This is what marketing is all about.
Not everyone here is talking about how "bad" MS is anyway. But they are talking about Microsoft, and again, to a marketer it's all about brand awareness.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree that what they are doing is wrong, but realistically what can I, or anyone do? Have you ever tried to actually resist in a situation like that? There's a good chance you would get arrested. And aren't you blaming the victim here a little bit? It's kind of like saying to a rape victim, you should have fought back! The police have immense power and use it fearlessly. What would you have done? Serious question.
I'm in Canada and every time I try to take pictures of the police, I am either told to stop, or am questioned, or in some cases have been told to delete the pictures! This just happened to a friend who was taking pictures of police practicing riot control. I get the message. Try it some time. It may not be illegal but it is not a good idea. Do a search on this, police harassment of people taking their pictures is absolutely common in various Western countries.
That's not so crazy. There are a number of countries, like Australia, England and of course America that are pretty much going crazy with the control of the populace stuff. Russia used to have "internal passports" and if you wanted to travel to certain places you needed permission. Being caught traveling without permission was indeed a crime. The current trend toward kontrol resembles the get tough on crime meme, that has resulted in draconian and counter-productive policies such as the 3 strikes law in America. The dynamics are similar with pols vying to come up with ever "tougher" (read stupider and or more authoritarian) policies and laws.
Somehow the idea of Captain Jean Luc Picard settling into his chair and pointing at row of buttons while saying, "8000th floor number one!", isn't quite as inspiring as him saying, "Engage!". This will be done someday, like others I doubt that it can be done for 5 billion. However, when it's done, it will change everything. And compared to the filth generated by a booster, this thing is nearly as green as Jack's magic bean stock!
Yeah, better for everyone except all the dead people. You should sign your posts - God.
You said, you knew right away, and that this intuition was confirmed when you read the lists. I was talking about lists that were published "at the time" which is relevant, because you are telling us that lists without Arab names supported your immediate belief that it was Bin Laden. I am aware that the BBC has since backtracked. They even admitted to altering their own archives to "correct" the error. Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them irrational. It's the man who resorts to insults who has run out of ideas.
Actually the manifests as published by CNN at the time contained NO Arab names. http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/evidence/passengers.html Since then the lists seem to have been "revised" and now include the names of the hijackers. Including of course the ones the BBC has reported as still being alive. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm
It might not have been an actor, (it was) but it sure wasn't an engineer, not if he had the slightest tiniest belief that aviation fuel could melt "iron". Disinfo. And why didn't they attack Sweden? No warrantless wiretapping there!
Yeah, sure, he let it "stagnate" the sanctions in Iraq only produced 500,000 "extra" deaths, so if 30 million was the goal, then yeah, I guess he let it "stagnate". If only we could kill enough people then our problems would soon be over.
Bush is dick who killed millions around the world, and supports torture, and extra-judicial killings around the world. You think he wouldn't lie???
Seconds? Positive? On what rational basis? Sure he was on the list that morning, but so were a lot of people. What process did you go through that allowed you to be sure? Are you still thinking that way?
Of course you have some evidence that Saddam sent his weapons to Syria? And by evidence I don't mean the MSM, or the Bush Whitehouse. If I gave you several bad cheques in a row, would take another one? They lie. They lie all the time.
Since you killed over a million of them, you either targeted them, didn't give a shit, or are really lousy shots. Collateral damage is always on purpose.
No one trusts the United States and has not for many decades. You should read teh "foreign" papers once in a while. And the United States does not send in weapons inspectors, the UN does. Russia is not going nuts. Georgia attacked and killed hundreds, perhaps thousands of ethnic Russians in Ossetia their reaction was quite measured compared to what America did after 911. Try those foreign newspapers again. Pakistan is indeed on the brink.
If he did send them to Syria, and these putative WMD are so dangerous and destabilizing, then why has the US not attacked Syria? Lack of oil perhaps? We had proof, the UN inspectors found nothing.
If it's so bloody "mass" how is it that Saddam fought the Iranians for 8 years (using gas), until it ended in a stalemate? Real WMD, i.e. nukes, would have ended it in 20 minutes. You overreach.
Actually there is nothing new here, Bin Laden credibly denied everything on Sept. 17, 2001 to CNN -- it simply went down the memory hole, since the MSM, has not mentioned his denial since. http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/inv.binladen.denial/ And let's never forget that Mullah Omar offered to turn over Bin Laden, all he asked was for the US to show him some evidence that Bin Laden was guilty. Bush told him to get lost -- and started bombing. Bush could have had Bin Laden. He did not want him. America can send cruise missiles to Afghanistan, but it couldn't send a fax?
Religious extremism of any stripe is offensive. There is a long long long long list of deaths caused by religious extremists. Crazy stupid beliefs like creationism contribute to that extremism (what could be more extreme than completely rejecting science?) Having said that, the best antidote to creationist videos are scientific videos based on the evidence. Censorship is XXXXXX and XXXXX, and if you don't believe that I XXXXX XXXXX for you. Foxy Palin says that the war in Iraq is God's will. Seems to me a few people have gotten killed there. So maybe American religious extremism has killed some people, just not subways.
Dramatic gopher could cause hatred toward gophers and may be evidence of animal abuse. As such it should be removed. RFN!
It's true this is the beginning of the end for the youtubes. Now every group with a grievance (and is there any other kind?) will be lobbying to have Anti *.* or Pro *.* videos removed. Enjoy those Leave it to Beaver clips everyone! Personally I think we should remove those nasty Obama videos! He's a mooslim you know!
I see that videos showing Rachel Corrie's murder by D9 ("I hit an object") are still up. It's good to know it wasn't terrorism. Man that Lieberman has got some juice. We all better hope he doesn't get pissed Star Wars or something. How many states are there in America again?
It's hardly "voluntary" when you can "choose" extortionate rate A or extortionate rate B. Here in Canada we have some of the highest data rates in the world. This is precisely because there is no real competition which is my point. If there was real competition in the US there is no way a couple of dozen logons a some emails would cost that kind of money, the market would force rates down closer to the actual cost which is my second point, there is no real capitalism at work in America (or Canada to a lesser extent) anymore. Market forces are great - if they are allowed to function.
How much does it "cost" ATT to pay for that kind of bandwidth? 20 cents? 1 cent? This is theft, grand theft, 20 grand theft - 20 cents for the actual cost of course. On what basis is it justifiable for a corporation to make that kind of profit? Comrade Lenin had it right.
CBC National News Radio here in Canada, just did a piece on the ad (at 6PM! the drive show). It was about the negative reception the ad was getting, but then they directed people to the MS site to read MS's explanation that the ad is just a teaser and to get people talking again. I wish my ads were 1/1000 as "ineffective". Watch for a lot more talk about what they'll do next.
Microsoft is doing this for the same reason that Coca Cola signs and ads are ubiquitous, they are not selling coke, they are maintaining brand profile. This is not advertising, this is marketing and branding which is an entirely different animal. Gates is raising awareness, creating a buzz and getting people to talk about Microsoft. This is what marketing is all about. Not everyone here is talking about how "bad" MS is anyway. But they are talking about Microsoft, and again, to a marketer it's all about brand awareness.