My mind is not the one that is closed. I do not fear Iran irrationally as you do. The only closed mind here is yours.
Lets get back to the facts. How many countries has Iran attacked? Thats right-none!
Despite your semi incoherent rant, where once again you refuse to adress the real issues, I will just keep coming back to the real point.
Once again because you have no answer you resort to abusing me, and once again, you do not address my points, as obviously you have no real case, just an emotional involvement that makes me very suspicious of your anti Iran agaenda.
As I made clear YOU do not define the terms of this discussion, so you can set up your straw man.
If you cant adress my points do not expect me address yours under rules you feel like setting.
Can you read? I clearly stated I do not hate the US, just the actions of its govt.
Anyone with half a brain knows that countries base there defence needs on the people they have to defend against. All of your emotional bluster will not stop this from being true.
I dont like or dislike your opinion of me, frankly I couldnt care less what you think.
This irrational dislike of Iran you have must be for a reason, but I doubt you will reveal it.
Evidenced by your posts, I doubt if you would know intellectual honesty if you fell over it.
"articulate to me an opinion about iran that does not revolve around the usa."
Why should I?
Only an idiot would think that is not you trying to set the rules of discussion.
You have not made a single relevant point so far.
I pity you for your paranoia.
All those words may make you feel better about the fact your opinion is baseless and pathetic, but it doesnt impress anyone.
Anyway, I see no futher point in arguing with the mentally unstable.
My rationale for Iran having the bomb is simply, I trust them exactly as much as any other nation with the bomb, despite your pathetic attempts to demonize Iran, is that clear enough for you?
Now let me see when was the last time a middle eastern country was demonized? By whom?
Can you not see the hipocrasy of citizens of countries who have a weapon and have used it protesting because someone else gets it?
So lets see if you can answer the points I made.
1. Who is the country that is most likely to use nuclear weapons(Hint; they have used them before)
2. The so called Wiping off the map was at best a mistranslation and worst an outright lie(Now lets see, which country goes to war based on lies?)
3. the US is a theocracy, where religious fundamentalists dominate many key policy areas. At least Iran is honest enough to state it in their contitution.
4. Who, going by the past is the most likely country by far to bomb or invade another? (Hint It aint Iran.)
I am concerned by any, country theocracy or not that has atomic weapons. Equally concerned that any country has them. Is that clear to you? I dont care is its timbuck-bloody-too, it makes no difference.
Does the phrase "One nation under god ring any bells"?
One notes how well adhered to constitutions of countries are.(Warrantless surveilance anyone?)
Like I said take the blinkers off.
Deep down know you are putting up a false argument, thats why you are so desperately attempting to limit the terms of discussion. As you completely ignore(Never let facts get in the way of a good rant eh?) all the points I made, why on earth should I allow you to define in what terms I can reply?
From an outside, unbiased perspective, and going by the evidence, the US is far more dangerous than Iran to other countries.
"Your turn. remember, if you mention israel or the usa in your articulation of why iran can have the bomb, you have an invalid opinion."
Bullshit, You do not define the terms of discussion, much as you would like to set up a straw man.
To make it plain you have no right to limit this discussion to what YOU want to limit it to.
I'd be as paranoid as you too, if everyone was plotting against me!
A statement thoroughly discredited as poor if not outright deliberate mistranslation, which I am sure you well know. Doesnt stop you repeating it to bolster your argument does it?
When the US is illegally invading countries only an idiot would think that is not relevant to the situation in Iran.
As I said, I have no bias, I simply assess the facts as put in front of me.
Number of countries bombed or invaded by Iran-0 number invaded or bombed by the US since WW2-18 who is the dangerous country in the above equation? Take off the blinkers and look around, the truth is obvious.
I have no more problem with Iran having a nuke than I do with the US having them, whereas you cannot say the same. Remeber your current govt was elected by religious fundamentalists, so pot meet kettle. You live in a fundamentalist theocracy yourself, admit it or not!
I like America fine, but I am not too keen on the behaviour of its govt. When the Us is the most heavily armed country in the world, only a fool would think other countries do not consider that as part of their defence needs.
I was a fax tech many years ago. One day at a customers premises, I dialed the Telco fax back test service. To my surprise I heard a very irate voice yelling this is not a fax machine, please do not call this number again I picked up the handset and spoke with the poor guy.
The faxback number was 036400999
This poor guy was 3640099.
When a fax tech was at a business with a PABX, which needed a 0 for an outside line, and didnt realise, this poor bloke got the call every time! He was just a bit pissed off!
I wondered how many times I had rung the poor bloke, as the speaker was not on in the bulk of machines at the time!
It is the actions of the US in illegally invading other countries that has provoked Iran in to going nuclear. The US is a country with a fetish for weapons, and what you sow you reap.
Your words are the "morally and logically incoherent" ones here.
I disagree with the poster below, you are not full of shit, theres is just a little room left...
I have seen many such low passes, and frankly I think he exagerates the danger.
A aircraft parachute, known as a ballistic recovery system, wont do you much good if you are not at least 500 ft above the ground, where it wouldnt be needed in the situation described anyway.
I did see a world championship team member in a very high performance ASH25 sailplane (60:1 Glide) have a nasty moment when he went to pull up from a low fast pass and struck sinking air. A heart stopping low turn ensued, but he got away with it because he did not panic.
The guy he was refering to may well have been flying an unpowered glider, one of the main advantages in a crash is they dont burn. Stats show smoke inhalation is the number one killer inplane crashes, so no a rocket would not be a great improvement.
You simply do not have a socialist candidate, you have what most civilised countries would define as a right wing candidate and a far right wing candidate.
Quite so. Aussie working as sysadmin in education.
We are educating kids to one day enter the workforce. Why would we teach with a system that is highly unlikely to be used in any business they might end up working for.
Personally I am a fan and user of open source, but I am also a techo, and realistically there is no point in teaching kids about open source until it is used a LOT more by businesses in OZ>
"a SUV comes up behind you while you're coasting, honks, pulls around you and speeds ahead only to stop at the light, and then you smoke him as you coast through the light just as it turns green."
Yeh, I call it the "tortoise and the Hare" race. Sometimes it can go on for several changes of traffic lights, and annoys the crap out of the other driver! HEHE
Hmmm, I remember from the fuel economy competitions of the past, that in all cases flat out acceleration followed by coasting was the winning method. Seems contradictory, but efficiency was highest with the throttle valve fully open. Not a comfortable way to drive though, and conducted only on race tracks.
This discussion reminds me of a bald friend of mine.
He used to get all the weirdo baldness "Cures" around when he was younger(Mostly in jest).
The funniest one he got, was a sink plunger/unblocker, with a tube of ointment. He was supposed to rub the cream in then use the plunger on his head to pull the hair up......
32 years driving, 2 million KM, twice needed to speed up to avoid accident(Driverless car just got the last 2 feet of the rear of car, and idiots trying to overtake on the inside around a corner called the Devils Elbow again last 2 feet of car rear of car, didnt work but minimized damage. In neither case was I doing anywhere near 80mph.
I would say El Reg has been spot on all the way on this issue. Wikipedia has become a parody of its own ideals. I have followed this saga and all the Reg articles have had links to the Wikipedia discussions etc, and examination of these links has not revealed anything other than verifying the Reg stories.
I am amused at the frantic defense of WP in this thread. What sort of no-lifer does it take to make a Wiki admin?
Slashdot Mirror
My mind is not the one that is closed. I do not fear Iran irrationally as you do. The only closed mind here is yours.
Lets get back to the facts. How many countries has Iran attacked? Thats right-none!
Despite your semi incoherent rant, where once again you refuse to adress the real issues, I will just keep coming back to the real point.
Once again because you have no answer you resort to abusing me, and once again, you do not address my points, as obviously you have no real case, just an emotional involvement that makes me very suspicious of your anti Iran agaenda.
As I made clear YOU do not define the terms of this discussion, so you can set up your straw man.
If you cant adress my points do not expect me address yours under rules you feel like setting.
Can you read? I clearly stated I do not hate the US, just the actions of its govt.
Anyone with half a brain knows that countries base there defence needs on the people they have to defend against. All of your emotional bluster will not stop this from being true.
I dont like or dislike your opinion of me, frankly I couldnt care less what you think.
This irrational dislike of Iran you have must be for a reason, but I doubt you will reveal it.
Evidenced by your posts, I doubt if you would
know intellectual honesty if you fell over it.
"articulate to me an opinion about iran that does not revolve around the usa."
Why should I?
Only an idiot would think that is not you trying to set the rules of discussion.
You have not made a single relevant point so far.
I pity you for your paranoia.
All those words may make you feel better about the fact your opinion is baseless and pathetic, but it doesnt impress anyone.
Anyway, I see no futher point in arguing with the mentally unstable.
My rationale for Iran having the bomb is simply, I trust them exactly as much as any other nation with the bomb, despite your pathetic attempts to demonize Iran, is that clear enough for you?
Now let me see when was the last time a middle eastern country was demonized? By whom?
Can you not see the hipocrasy of citizens of countries who have a weapon and have used it protesting because someone else gets it?
So lets see if you can answer the points I made.
1. Who is the country that is most likely to use nuclear weapons(Hint; they have used them before)
2. The so called Wiping off the map was at best a mistranslation and worst an outright lie(Now lets see, which country goes to war based on lies?)
3. the US is a theocracy, where religious fundamentalists dominate many key policy areas. At least Iran is honest enough to state it in their contitution.
4. Who, going by the past is the most likely country by far to bomb or invade another? (Hint It aint Iran.)
I am concerned by any, country theocracy or not that has atomic weapons. Equally concerned that any country has them. Is that clear to you? I dont care is its timbuck-bloody-too, it makes no difference.
Does the phrase "One nation under god ring any bells"?
One notes how well adhered to constitutions of countries are.(Warrantless surveilance anyone?)
Like I said take the blinkers off.
Deep down know you are putting up a false argument, thats why you are so desperately attempting to limit the terms of discussion.
As you completely ignore(Never let facts get in the way of a good rant eh?) all the points I made,
why on earth should I allow you to define in what terms I can reply?
From an outside, unbiased perspective, and going by the evidence, the US is far more dangerous than Iran to other countries.
"Your turn. remember, if you mention israel or the usa in your articulation of why iran can have the bomb, you have an invalid opinion."
Bullshit, You do not define the terms of discussion, much as you would like to set up a straw man.
To make it plain you have no right to limit this discussion to what YOU want to limit it to.
I'd be as paranoid as you too, if everyone was plotting against me!
wiping israel off the face of the earth.
A statement thoroughly discredited as poor if not outright deliberate mistranslation, which I am sure you well know. Doesnt stop you repeating it to bolster your argument does it?
When the US is illegally invading countries only an idiot would think that is not relevant to the situation in Iran.
As I said, I have no bias, I simply assess the facts as put in front of me.
Number of countries bombed or invaded by Iran-0
number invaded or bombed by the US since WW2-18
who is the dangerous country in the above equation? Take off the blinkers and look around, the truth is obvious.
I have no more problem with Iran having a nuke than I do with the US having them, whereas you cannot say the same. Remeber your current govt was elected by religious fundamentalists, so pot meet kettle. You live in a fundamentalist theocracy yourself, admit it or not!
I like America fine, but I am not too keen on the behaviour of its govt. When the Us is the most heavily armed country in the world, only a fool would think other countries do not consider that as part of their defence needs.
Way to deny reality.
What religious background are you from anyway?
I am an atheist, so have no religious biases.
Way to deny reality All those words and no facts.
It seems a blizzard of words of no substance makes you fell you are right, it just makes you look stupid.
If the US stopped behaving like, as you put it
like a bad hollywood movie plot, the whole world would be better off.
Iran is simply not really a threat to
anyone, for the reasons you well know from previous posts replying to this line of subject.
I smell bias in YOUR ethnic background, I suspect a small mid eastern country, founded by terrorists might play a part.
I do not live in the US or the middle east thank goodness.
So I really have no bias either way, a claim you (as a US resident and presumably voter)obviously cant realistically make.
Ever hear of using caps by the way?
Citation needed. (-:
Some funny things can happen with phone numbers.
I was a fax tech many years ago. One day at a customers premises, I dialed the Telco fax back test service. To my surprise I heard a very irate voice yelling this is not a fax machine, please do not call this number again I picked up the handset and spoke with the poor guy.
The faxback number was 036400999
This poor guy was 3640099.
When a fax tech was at a business with a PABX, which needed a 0 for an outside line, and didnt realise, this poor bloke got the call every time! He was just a bit pissed off!
I wondered how many times I had rung the poor bloke, as the speaker was not on in the bulk of machines at the time!
Not long after the FAX test number was changed
As I recall, DNA did put advertising account executives on the Golgafrinchian "B" ark.
Frankly, your hypocrasy is incredible.
It is the actions of the US in illegally invading other countries that has provoked Iran in to going nuclear. The US is a country with a fetish for weapons, and what you sow you reap.
Your words are the "morally and logically incoherent" ones here.
I disagree with the poster below, you are not full of shit, theres is just a little room left...
Do I smell an ethnic bias here?
A Stemme S10 has an engine you know.
I have seen many such low passes, and frankly I think he exagerates the danger.
A aircraft parachute, known as a ballistic recovery system, wont do you much good if you are not at least 500 ft above the ground, where it wouldnt be needed in the situation described anyway.
I did see a world championship team member in a very high performance ASH25 sailplane (60:1 Glide) have a nasty moment when he went to pull up from a low fast pass and struck sinking air. A heart stopping low turn ensued, but he got away with it because he did not panic.
The guy he was refering to may well have been flying an unpowered glider, one of the main advantages in a crash is they dont burn. Stats show smoke inhalation is the number one killer inplane crashes, so no a rocket would not be a great improvement.
Who's been drinking the Bush Kool-aid then?
Informative WTF, this is plain wrong. In Australia we have a proper public healthcare system with the option of private insurance if you wish.
All my experiences have been good with public health care.
The truly ironic part is that you already pay more than we do for public health care than we do per capita-and you get nothing.
Why anyone would support a system where accountants not doctors make treatment decisions is beyond me.
"Socailism to the extreme", LOL at that.
You simply do not have a socialist candidate, you have what most civilised countries would define as a right wing candidate and a far right wing candidate.
Quite so. Aussie working as sysadmin in education.
We are educating kids to one day enter the workforce. Why would we teach with a system that is highly unlikely to be used in any business they might end up working for.
Personally I am a fan and user of open source, but I am also a techo, and realistically there is no point in teaching kids about open source until it is used a LOT more by businesses in OZ>
Nice troll, pity about the facts eh?
After 5 years as a school admin, I have never seen
the problem you have dreamt up actually occour.
I wonder why not?
Could it be the existing filters ans security doing the job they were designed for?
Could it be that it is difficult to change a mandatory prolfile, and every time the student logs off the profile is reloaded?
If this "mess" was going to happen it would have by now.
the earlier remarks about accelerating slowly and allowing the car to slow a bit climbing hills fit my experience
In a Prius, I would suspect accelerating slowly is the only option (-:
"a SUV comes up behind you while you're coasting, honks, pulls around you and speeds ahead only to stop at the light, and then you smoke him as you coast through the light just as it turns green."
Yeh, I call it the "tortoise and the Hare" race. Sometimes it can go on for several changes of traffic lights, and annoys the crap out of the other driver! HEHE
Hmmm, I remember from the fuel economy competitions of the past, that in all cases flat out acceleration followed by coasting was the winning method. Seems contradictory, but efficiency was highest with the throttle valve fully open. Not a comfortable way to drive though, and conducted only on race tracks.
This discussion reminds me of a bald friend of mine.
He used to get all the weirdo baldness "Cures" around when he was younger(Mostly in jest).
The funniest one he got, was a sink plunger/unblocker, with a tube of ointment. He was supposed to rub the cream in then use the plunger on his head to pull the hair up......
You really have no idea what socialism is do you,
You have a right wing candidate and an ultra right wing candidate. None of your politicians would be classed as socialist in any other country.
Insightful-you must be joking mods.
FORD (Fixed Or Repaired Daily, Found On Rubbish Dumps)
Quite right-as I like to put it, you can't expect teenagers to be responsible if you don't allow them any responsability.
Whilst I am not approving of driving well above the speed limit, it is quite true some drivers are best viewed in the rear vision mirror.
32 years driving, 2 million KM, twice needed to speed up to avoid accident(Driverless car just got the last 2 feet of the rear of car, and idiots trying to overtake on the inside around a corner called the Devils Elbow again last 2 feet of car rear of car, didnt work but minimized damage. In neither case was I doing anywhere near 80mph.
You was lucky-when I was a lad we used to eat, drink and roll cigarettes whilst driving.
I would say El Reg has been spot on all the way on this issue. Wikipedia has become a parody of its own ideals. I have followed this saga and all the Reg articles have had links to the Wikipedia discussions etc, and examination of these links has not revealed anything other than verifying the Reg stories.
I am amused at the frantic defense of WP in this thread. What sort of no-lifer does it take to make a Wiki admin?
It seems Mr Byrne was right all along.