Alright, you're a constipated crackpot. Ex-lax will relieve that, I'm told. Oh - wait - you said conspiration? Hmmmm. Better see the doctor. I've heard that can be really bad . . .
Really, what's the point of curing old age, and all the diseases known to mankind, if you have to live in Little Kim's dictatorship. I could probably learn to deal with Kim's egomaniacal personality - if only there were FOOD to go around. Think of it. Eternity ahead of you - and hungry all the time. Phhht.
"So basically you have absolutely zero response to the fact that one of the most basic American values is the right to be left ALONE."
Of course you have the right to be left alone. You don't fly alone, though. Even if you have your own pilot's license, and your own plane, you have to deal with people to get fuel, maintenance, and whatever. Maybe you own your own land, and all your freinds have airstrips on their own land, as well. Sooner or later, though, I'm sure that you will deal with SOMEONE who is responsible for a whole lot more than just one individual's person.
At that point in time, you don't have the right to be left ALONE, because you have brought yourself to the attention of AUTHORITY.
In the United States of America, AUTHORITY wants to know with whom they are dealing. Now, you deal with that. This isn't Islam, this isn't some podunk backwoods banana republic, and this isn't Utopia. Not mine, not yours. Deal with it.
Again - when a cop pulls you over, you will open your door, or roll your window down. You will remove your dark glasses when the cop requests that you do so. If the cop has any reason to believe you might be dangerous, he will use his loudspeaker to order you out of the car before he approaches, so that he can SEE YOU. And, that is what the article is all about - the cops want to SEE the passengers who are waiting to board the plane.
Not at all. I never "assumed" such a thing. Clothing is for protection against the elements, as well as many other things, such as rival tribesmen, predators, thorny vegetation and whatever else a guy might happen upon. Not to mention, a belt with a loincloth can have a pouch, pocket, or bag attached to carry things in. Clothing is usually functional, wherever it is worn, whoever is wearing it.
Citations, or I call bullshit. How many cultures are you aware of in which complete nudity was acceptable? I don't care if they wore only a scrap of leather as a loincloth - they were clothed.
Some people believe that it's natural and right to have sex with underage minors. We don't lock such people up for believing so. It's the CONDUCT that society finds objectionable. When a person finds an underage minor with whom to have sex, and society finds out about it, THEN we lock him/her up.
Beliefs rarely enter into any court decision. The court can only judge conduct. I cannot evaluate what any person believes, I can only judge that person's conduct.
I call bullshit. People who drag their old cultures here aren't Americans. Their children might be Americans, their grandchildren almost certainly will be, but the camel jockeys who force their women to observe the old country's way of living aren't Americans.
I said, "If you can't show your naked face, don't go out in public, and don't expect to use any infrastructure or any facilities where the people just MIGHT want to see your naked face."
You said, "Nice bob and weave."
In short, you have not obfuscated enough to get away with your little dipshit argument. Admit, you are full of shit, arguing for the sake of argument. I can respect the devil's advocate, but only if he admits he's arguing for the devil.
Bottom line: This is America, and you'll comply with any reasonable requests to identify yourself, and you'll not be given a pass on religious grounds. Reasonable is determined by custom, tradition, case law, and precedent in this country, not by Mohammed.
And, you would be extremely stupid to cash a check for a woman who refused to show her face to you. You would be even stupider to accept an ID and insurance information after an accident, if the other driver refused to show his/her face to you. You would be far beyond stupid if you were looking for an escaped convict, and failed to check the "little old lady" wearing a burqha. Are you even sure that she was really a she?
Anyone who refuses to show their face cannot claim to be an American. I don't give a rat's ass what their excuse is. In America, we don't hide our identities, and we don't use religion as an excuse to do so.
You miss the point. It isn't a "belief", but a conduct that is being challenged here.
When you pass through a security checkpoint, where police officers and/or other security personnel are required to establish your identity, you will cooperate with them, or you don't passs the checkpoint.
Whining that you might go to hell if you show your face to people outside your family wins no sympathy. Go to hell, and go quietly. Or, find another mode of transportation.
Those men and women whose faith requires them to wear veils, burqhas, or whatever are free to do so - unless and until they want to do anything that requires positive identification.
Want me to cash a check, for instance? Show my your photo ID, and show me your face. No face, no money. Whine away, threaten a lawsuit, do whatever you want to do, but you still get no money.
Also, let me add that whatever is acceptable IN THEIR SOCIETY may or may not be acceptable in other societies, ie, societies that build and fly airplanes.
When I was in the service, and when I had liberty in other countries, I was ALWAYS warned that I must observe these laws, and those traditions, if I were to visit and enjoy the society that was hosting our ship. I conducted myself ashore so as not to offend anyone, no matter how silly I thought the rules might be.
I expect as much consideration here, in MY homeland. It's just fine for women to hide their faces in Mecca. It would be extremely stupid of me to take offense that they do. But, here, in Manhattan, or San Diego, or Kansas City, we don't do that. Anyone who insists on doing so is welcome to walk wherever they need to go, but they can't board a plane or get a driver's license.
Call me arrogant - but this is MY LAND, not Islam's land.
Citations? 1/3 of the world's population? Which world, exactly? I know that China has like 1/4 of the world's population, and they don't cover their faces. Christianity claims another huge portion of the world's population, and nothing in Christianity says that anyone must hide their faces. Pagans don't do it. Hindus? I've never seen them do so. I've seen a few photos, in which some women are wearing sheer veils - maybe you count them. Jews don't. To my knowledge, only Muslims make their women hide their faces. I mean, HIDDEN. All you can see is the color of their eyes. You're claiming that Islam accounts for 1/3 of the world's population? I hardly think so. Even if that were so, not all Muslims agree that a woman has to be invisible behind a barrier of fabric.
Bottom line - citations, or your claims mean something really close to nothing.
No, it isn't your "right" to wear anything that covers your face if/when a cop wants to identify you. Do you have a driver's license, or a state issued ID card? You photo is on it, right? Were you asked to remove your glasses? In most places, you were. Did you wear a mask, a burqha, or anything else that might have hidden and/or disguised your face? Hell no, you didn't, or you wouldn't have the ID card. When a cop wants to look at you, you WILL remove anything from your face and/or head that obstructs his view of your face. Simple as that.
Reductio ad absurdum - did I spell it right? Whatever.
Societies and cultures around the world recognize that the pubic and the breast areas should be covered, no matter how backward they might be. Tribesmen in the most forgotten parts of the world covered themselves hundreds of years ago, when they were first discoverd by Europeans. Some very few permitted females to show their breasts in public, generally they all covered them up.
How many societies, or cultures require women to hide their faces?
Call me a bigot, but majority rules here. I don't respect the tradition, I don't respect those who insist on observing it, and I don't respect your argument.
I'm over 50, and the damned phone books haven't been much use for several years anyway. When Ma Bell and AT&T were the only people who published phone books, I could navigate them quickly and easily. Then half a dozen different companies started publishing them, all in slightly different formats. Then, a separate book for the yellow pages became the norm, meaning I had to keep up with yet another phone book. Then, each publisher decided that I really wanted to see a different set of cities listed in my directory, "helpfully" eliminating listings from cities or towns that routinely did business in.
I have relied on online directories for at least 5 years now, because the physical phone book is worthless!
Sorry, but you lose me with the face covering thing. I just don't CARE about the "rights" of those who CHOOSE to cover their faces. If you can't show your naked face, don't go out in public, and don't expect to use any infrastructure or any facilities where the people just MIGHT want to see your naked face.
Those who wish to live in the 10th century are welcome to do so. Ride a frigging horse or a camel to go where you need to go.
I wish Rupert would go swimming in shark infested waters. Maybe Green Peace will do some chumming nearby. Wait - no - Green Peace loves nature, they wouldn't poison any unsuspecting sharks. I should contact Anon with this idea then? They wouldn't mind a few poisoned sharks, I would think.
Reading comprehension problems? I said that THIS vehicle won't see widespread use - but if it were modified with a vertical turbine it MIGHT see more widespread use. A community college near you has remedial reading courses available - check them out!
chromium-browser --user-agent="Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X 10_5_8; en-us) AppleWebKit/531.22.7 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Safari/531.22.7"
I had to spend a minute figuring out how to change Chromium's user agent. Give it a try. But, it doesn't work if there is already an instance of Chromium running - you have to close other instances, then run this command. The audio didn't work, nor did the VR, but the rest worked.
chromium-browser --user-agent="Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X 10_5_8; en-us) AppleWebKit/531.22.7 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Safari/531.22.7"
The vehicle in the article will never see widespread use, on crowsed highways. Replace those propellors with a verticle turbine, and you might have something that sell.
And, the legal situation is dynamic. Why do you think so many corporations are so happy to employ illegal aliens? It isn't just the up-front cost of employment. Millions of illegals also give the corporates the muscle to avoid increased wages, benefits, and rights of employees. If half of your employees are afraid to talk to a law enforcement officer for any reason, he certainly isn't going to rat on you for putting spycams in the restrooms! Any lesser violation of an employee's rights simply won't be noticed.
chromium-browser --user-agent="Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X 10_5_8; en-us) AppleWebKit/531.22.7 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Safari/531.22.7"
You have to change the user agent string, for any of it to work. There is no GUI method for doing so with Chromium. Modify as needed if you're on a Microsoft operating system.
Slashdot Mirror
Alright, you're a constipated crackpot. Ex-lax will relieve that, I'm told. Oh - wait - you said conspiration? Hmmmm. Better see the doctor. I've heard that can be really bad . . .
Really, what's the point of curing old age, and all the diseases known to mankind, if you have to live in Little Kim's dictatorship. I could probably learn to deal with Kim's egomaniacal personality - if only there were FOOD to go around. Think of it. Eternity ahead of you - and hungry all the time. Phhht.
"So basically you have absolutely zero response to the fact that one of the most basic American values is the right to be left ALONE."
Of course you have the right to be left alone. You don't fly alone, though. Even if you have your own pilot's license, and your own plane, you have to deal with people to get fuel, maintenance, and whatever. Maybe you own your own land, and all your freinds have airstrips on their own land, as well. Sooner or later, though, I'm sure that you will deal with SOMEONE who is responsible for a whole lot more than just one individual's person.
At that point in time, you don't have the right to be left ALONE, because you have brought yourself to the attention of AUTHORITY.
In the United States of America, AUTHORITY wants to know with whom they are dealing. Now, you deal with that. This isn't Islam, this isn't some podunk backwoods banana republic, and this isn't Utopia. Not mine, not yours. Deal with it.
Again - when a cop pulls you over, you will open your door, or roll your window down. You will remove your dark glasses when the cop requests that you do so. If the cop has any reason to believe you might be dangerous, he will use his loudspeaker to order you out of the car before he approaches, so that he can SEE YOU. And, that is what the article is all about - the cops want to SEE the passengers who are waiting to board the plane.
Not at all. I never "assumed" such a thing. Clothing is for protection against the elements, as well as many other things, such as rival tribesmen, predators, thorny vegetation and whatever else a guy might happen upon. Not to mention, a belt with a loincloth can have a pouch, pocket, or bag attached to carry things in. Clothing is usually functional, wherever it is worn, whoever is wearing it.
Citations, or I call bullshit. How many cultures are you aware of in which complete nudity was acceptable? I don't care if they wore only a scrap of leather as a loincloth - they were clothed.
Some people believe that it's natural and right to have sex with underage minors. We don't lock such people up for believing so. It's the CONDUCT that society finds objectionable. When a person finds an underage minor with whom to have sex, and society finds out about it, THEN we lock him/her up.
Beliefs rarely enter into any court decision. The court can only judge conduct. I cannot evaluate what any person believes, I can only judge that person's conduct.
I call bullshit. People who drag their old cultures here aren't Americans. Their children might be Americans, their grandchildren almost certainly will be, but the camel jockeys who force their women to observe the old country's way of living aren't Americans.
I said, "If you can't show your naked face, don't go out in public, and don't expect to use any infrastructure or any facilities where the people just MIGHT want to see your naked face."
You said, "Nice bob and weave."
In short, you have not obfuscated enough to get away with your little dipshit argument. Admit, you are full of shit, arguing for the sake of argument. I can respect the devil's advocate, but only if he admits he's arguing for the devil.
Bottom line: This is America, and you'll comply with any reasonable requests to identify yourself, and you'll not be given a pass on religious grounds. Reasonable is determined by custom, tradition, case law, and precedent in this country, not by Mohammed.
And, you would be extremely stupid to cash a check for a woman who refused to show her face to you. You would be even stupider to accept an ID and insurance information after an accident, if the other driver refused to show his/her face to you. You would be far beyond stupid if you were looking for an escaped convict, and failed to check the "little old lady" wearing a burqha. Are you even sure that she was really a she?
Anyone who refuses to show their face cannot claim to be an American. I don't give a rat's ass what their excuse is. In America, we don't hide our identities, and we don't use religion as an excuse to do so.
You miss the point. It isn't a "belief", but a conduct that is being challenged here.
When you pass through a security checkpoint, where police officers and/or other security personnel are required to establish your identity, you will cooperate with them, or you don't passs the checkpoint.
Whining that you might go to hell if you show your face to people outside your family wins no sympathy. Go to hell, and go quietly. Or, find another mode of transportation.
Those men and women whose faith requires them to wear veils, burqhas, or whatever are free to do so - unless and until they want to do anything that requires positive identification.
Want me to cash a check, for instance? Show my your photo ID, and show me your face. No face, no money. Whine away, threaten a lawsuit, do whatever you want to do, but you still get no money.
Also, let me add that whatever is acceptable IN THEIR SOCIETY may or may not be acceptable in other societies, ie, societies that build and fly airplanes.
When I was in the service, and when I had liberty in other countries, I was ALWAYS warned that I must observe these laws, and those traditions, if I were to visit and enjoy the society that was hosting our ship. I conducted myself ashore so as not to offend anyone, no matter how silly I thought the rules might be.
I expect as much consideration here, in MY homeland. It's just fine for women to hide their faces in Mecca. It would be extremely stupid of me to take offense that they do. But, here, in Manhattan, or San Diego, or Kansas City, we don't do that. Anyone who insists on doing so is welcome to walk wherever they need to go, but they can't board a plane or get a driver's license.
Call me arrogant - but this is MY LAND, not Islam's land.
Citations? 1/3 of the world's population? Which world, exactly? I know that China has like 1/4 of the world's population, and they don't cover their faces. Christianity claims another huge portion of the world's population, and nothing in Christianity says that anyone must hide their faces. Pagans don't do it. Hindus? I've never seen them do so. I've seen a few photos, in which some women are wearing sheer veils - maybe you count them. Jews don't. To my knowledge, only Muslims make their women hide their faces. I mean, HIDDEN. All you can see is the color of their eyes. You're claiming that Islam accounts for 1/3 of the world's population? I hardly think so. Even if that were so, not all Muslims agree that a woman has to be invisible behind a barrier of fabric.
Bottom line - citations, or your claims mean something really close to nothing.
No, it isn't your "right" to wear anything that covers your face if/when a cop wants to identify you. Do you have a driver's license, or a state issued ID card? You photo is on it, right? Were you asked to remove your glasses? In most places, you were. Did you wear a mask, a burqha, or anything else that might have hidden and/or disguised your face? Hell no, you didn't, or you wouldn't have the ID card. When a cop wants to look at you, you WILL remove anything from your face and/or head that obstructs his view of your face. Simple as that.
Reductio ad absurdum - did I spell it right? Whatever.
Societies and cultures around the world recognize that the pubic and the breast areas should be covered, no matter how backward they might be. Tribesmen in the most forgotten parts of the world covered themselves hundreds of years ago, when they were first discoverd by Europeans. Some very few permitted females to show their breasts in public, generally they all covered them up.
How many societies, or cultures require women to hide their faces?
Call me a bigot, but majority rules here. I don't respect the tradition, I don't respect those who insist on observing it, and I don't respect your argument.
I'm over 50, and the damned phone books haven't been much use for several years anyway. When Ma Bell and AT&T were the only people who published phone books, I could navigate them quickly and easily. Then half a dozen different companies started publishing them, all in slightly different formats. Then, a separate book for the yellow pages became the norm, meaning I had to keep up with yet another phone book. Then, each publisher decided that I really wanted to see a different set of cities listed in my directory, "helpfully" eliminating listings from cities or towns that routinely did business in.
I have relied on online directories for at least 5 years now, because the physical phone book is worthless!
Sorry, but you lose me with the face covering thing. I just don't CARE about the "rights" of those who CHOOSE to cover their faces. If you can't show your naked face, don't go out in public, and don't expect to use any infrastructure or any facilities where the people just MIGHT want to see your naked face.
Those who wish to live in the 10th century are welcome to do so. Ride a frigging horse or a camel to go where you need to go.
I wish Rupert would go swimming in shark infested waters. Maybe Green Peace will do some chumming nearby. Wait - no - Green Peace loves nature, they wouldn't poison any unsuspecting sharks. I should contact Anon with this idea then? They wouldn't mind a few poisoned sharks, I would think.
Reading comprehension problems? I said that THIS vehicle won't see widespread use - but if it were modified with a vertical turbine it MIGHT see more widespread use. A community college near you has remedial reading courses available - check them out!
chromium-browser --user-agent="Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X 10_5_8; en-us) AppleWebKit/531.22.7 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Safari/531.22.7"
I had to spend a minute figuring out how to change Chromium's user agent. Give it a try. But, it doesn't work if there is already an instance of Chromium running - you have to close other instances, then run this command. The audio didn't work, nor did the VR, but the rest worked.
chromium-browser --user-agent="Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X 10_5_8; en-us) AppleWebKit/531.22.7 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Safari/531.22.7"
http://www.thefutureisawesome.com/category/energy/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VxoA8rnJj0U&feature=player_embedded
The vehicle in the article will never see widespread use, on crowsed highways. Replace those propellors with a verticle turbine, and you might have something that sell.
And, the legal situation is dynamic. Why do you think so many corporations are so happy to employ illegal aliens? It isn't just the up-front cost of employment. Millions of illegals also give the corporates the muscle to avoid increased wages, benefits, and rights of employees. If half of your employees are afraid to talk to a law enforcement officer for any reason, he certainly isn't going to rat on you for putting spycams in the restrooms! Any lesser violation of an employee's rights simply won't be noticed.
NOW it is. Remember, they couldn't sell it, so they finally gave it away. And, NOW it is a pretty decent AV that actually works as advertised!
chromium-browser --user-agent="Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X 10_5_8; en-us) AppleWebKit/531.22.7 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Safari/531.22.7"
You have to change the user agent string, for any of it to work. There is no GUI method for doing so with Chromium. Modify as needed if you're on a Microsoft operating system.