Actually no, it's not easy. Laws are made so numerous, contradictory and complicated that there exists quite a large group of people who make a living with that - they are called lawyers.
Well, the not-so-gay-friendly 1960's USA was able to put people on the moon, while Obama's politically correct America is not even able to put people into orbit. Bush promised a moonshot. Obama promised a Mars-mission. Currently LEO-capability is promised for 2017. Let's see whether the 2017-promise will hold, but I'm not convinced.
I think it was Hillary who said that Russia has no right to have an influence on its Georgian neighbour, while of course the US, being several thousand miles away on a different continent does have a right to have an influence on Georgia.
Now the same thing in the Ukraine: American-financed NGO destabilize the country and stage a coup d'etat against the president because he is too friendly with Russia.
Well, Nigera, Kenya, South Africa, and many more countries have cancelled all flights. But Obama said that he "can't" do that. Why he can't do that he didn't say though.
But you are right, we are screwed. Politicians care a lot more about political correctness than deadly viruses. They (and their mindless TV-educated zombies like "Nemyst") will tell us how it's "unlikely" that it will become a problem and that not a single flight to Liberia must be cancelled, because... well just because we "can't leave West Africa". What happened to "yes we can"?
Chances are, the conversation wouldn't happen like that
Mainly because the USA has signed treaties that make it illegal to refuse entry to a citizen.
That, and when you make a self-report of risk be a metric for spreading the risk, you increase the risk and the amount of lying. But you don't help anyone. So your plan fails for many reasons.
Wait a minute. The USA ignores treaties left and right and constantly bombs and invades countries because they want to leave the US-dollar as reserve currency. They torture and hold people without trial. They pay millions to destabilize Syria, Ukraine and dozens of other countries.
But they can't refuse entry because of some treaty with Libera?
Enforce a 21 day quarantine and you won't be getting any travellers from ebola countries. Instead you'll get travellers from the neighbouring countries
Nope, because ALL neighboring countries have closed the borders.
Why can a country that borders on Libera/SL/Guinea close the border while a country half away can't? Care to explain that one?
or some convenient 3rd country where it's easy to switch flights. And no, there is no way to know who came from the ebola country.
Well, quite a lot of countries are cancelling flights so it will get harder and harder for that. And in fact it is possible to know from where one came - and if the person has a Liberan passport it's a no-brainer. So some ebola-carrier would have to: - take a flight to some moronic country that still allows flights - fake a passport - then take another flight under a different name
Seems quite unlikely. Also why should he take that hassle and not just stay in the first moronic country?
But for the sake of argument: OK, we may not prevent all infections but only the vast majority. Perfect safety is always difficult to achieve. But inperfect safety is still better than no safety at all.
So, why shouldn't we cancel all flights like Kenya and Nigera? Why shouldn't we implement a quarantine period like South Africa?
The answer to stemming the tide of people taking Ebola elsewhere is to get it under control in Liberia/Sierra Leone/Ghana so there's no Ebola to take elsewhere.
So your plan is to send dozens of thousands of people over there, go from village to village and test millions of people?
And in the meantime keep all flights open, because cancelling flights would be such a terrible tragedy?
Exactly my thoughts. We are constantly being told that it is very hard to transmit and then when it does happen to trained medical personell with years of experience we are told that they made some minute mistake in procedure and that's the reason. But an infected taking the subway? - No problem, it's "virtually impossible" to get infected.
Cote d'ivore, Senegal, Nigera, South Africa, Kenya and many more countries have already closed the border, cancelled all flights to the three most affected countries and/or implemented a 21-day quarantine for everybody coming from there.
But the West, being fatally infected by political correctness, just keeps every wide open because to quote Obama, "we can't" shut out Western Africa. Why can't we? Can someone tell me why?
Maybe Obama should listen to his Kenyan brethren who DID end all flights to Libera? Maybe "yes we can" is the best response here?
The irresponsibility of the Western political class knows no bounds. They will literally put everybody at risk just to avoid being criticized at a dinner party.
I have read that he returned from Libera earlier than planned and that he wore his protective suit on the plane.
If that is true, then he probably already suspected an infection and did not want to be stranded in Libera with ebola. Better fly back to his 1st-world homeland where he can be treated effectively - just in case.
As I said, I don't know whether it is true (and because of the sacred status of "doctors without borders" the truth may be hard to get), maybe somebody knows more?
How is the government not concerned about corporate espionage, terrorism, and other criminal activity, you'd think from a security standpoint, they would want encryption to be legit.
They are concerned about it because it gives them a reason for existence.
Imagine the USA if it went isolationist before WWI: Almost no crime, no terrorism, no military-industrial complex, no welfare-state, no military bases all over the world... and politicians would have almost no power compared to what they have today. That would be a nightmare for any politician, "social reformer" and social worker. They would practicably be out of their collective jobs.
An even greater tragedy is the Microsoft marketing department. Those clowns can't seem to sell anything in the consumer market (ok, XBox...I'll give you that).
Is that the same XBox that lost billions in the first versions, barely broke even in the second version and is now again losing billions in the third version?
I remember how they were so proud of Windows-Phone (~2% marketshare) because it was so much more "successful" than the old Windows-Mobile (~10% marketshare).
Or look at the XBox: First they proclaimed that they would just sink a couple of billion to "build the platform" - and look how that worked for XBone. Of course it doesn't make any sense when you break compatibility with every new version: Any XBox version is a incompatible to any other version, so they are different platforms.
I guess that kind of incompetence and stupidity is a consequence of having just too much money flowing in from over 20 year old products (Windows and Office).
Basically Microsoft could just sit back and release Windows with a new wallpaper and small updates - but they even screwed that up with Windows 8.
A couple of thousand - which is not a lot given the fact that Linux is used on millions of webservers.
From all the alarmism, let's not forget that only RedHat is remotely vulnerable (all the other major distros use dash instead of bash for/bin/sh) and only when you use a seriously outdated CGI-setup.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, fuck them for even thinking about changing the status quo
The media, the politics - the whole power-structure just loves these self-hating sick social justice warriors. They ARE the status quo.
Actually no, it's not easy. Laws are made so numerous, contradictory and complicated that there exists quite a large group of people who make a living with that - they are called lawyers.
The media loves Obama and many people are (literally!) raised by TV.
Well, the not-so-gay-friendly 1960's USA was able to put people on the moon, while Obama's politically correct America is not even able to put people into orbit. Bush promised a moonshot. Obama promised a Mars-mission. Currently LEO-capability is promised for 2017. Let's see whether the 2017-promise will hold, but I'm not convinced.
Well, outside the sex and gay-obsessed Anglophone world it isn't.
What hostility to Russia?
I think it was Hillary who said that Russia has no right to have an influence on its Georgian neighbour, while of course the US, being several thousand miles away on a different continent does have a right to have an influence on Georgia.
Now the same thing in the Ukraine: American-financed NGO destabilize the country and stage a coup d'etat against the president because he is too friendly with Russia.
Well, Nigera, Kenya, South Africa, and many more countries have cancelled all flights. But Obama said that he "can't" do that. Why he can't do that he didn't say though.
In fact South Africa did implement such a window.
But you are right, we are screwed. Politicians care a lot more about political correctness than deadly viruses. They (and their mindless TV-educated zombies like "Nemyst") will tell us how it's "unlikely" that it will become a problem and that not a single flight to Liberia must be cancelled, because ... well just because we "can't leave West Africa". What happened to "yes we can"?
How is suspending flights to Liberia a "high opportunity cost"?
Is the economy going to turn down because somebody cannot get to Monrovia?
Gosh, you people are surely crazy.
Chances are, the conversation wouldn't happen like that
Mainly because the USA has signed treaties that make it illegal to refuse entry to a citizen.
That, and when you make a self-report of risk be a metric for spreading the risk, you increase the risk and the amount of lying. But you don't help anyone. So your plan fails for many reasons.
Wait a minute. The USA ignores treaties left and right and constantly bombs and invades countries because they want to leave the US-dollar as reserve currency. They torture and hold people without trial. They pay millions to destabilize Syria, Ukraine and dozens of other countries.
But they can't refuse entry because of some treaty with Libera?
Since when did the USA care about any treaty?
Enforce a 21 day quarantine and you won't be getting any travellers from ebola countries. Instead you'll get travellers from the neighbouring countries
Nope, because ALL neighboring countries have closed the borders.
Why can a country that borders on Libera/SL/Guinea close the border while a country half away can't? Care to explain that one?
or some convenient 3rd country where it's easy to switch flights. And no, there is no way to know who came from the ebola country.
Well, quite a lot of countries are cancelling flights so it will get harder and harder for that. And in fact it is possible to know from where one came - and if the person has a Liberan passport it's a no-brainer.
So some ebola-carrier would have to:
- take a flight to some moronic country that still allows flights
- fake a passport
- then take another flight under a different name
Seems quite unlikely. Also why should he take that hassle and not just stay in the first moronic country?
But for the sake of argument: OK, we may not prevent all infections but only the vast majority. Perfect safety is always difficult to achieve. But inperfect safety is still better than no safety at all.
So, why shouldn't we cancel all flights like Kenya and Nigera? Why shouldn't we implement a quarantine period like South Africa?
Obama should have listened to his Kenyan brethren who cancelled all flights and implemented a 21-day quarantine period.
Why can they do it and we can't?
The answer to stemming the tide of people taking Ebola elsewhere is to get it under control in Liberia/Sierra Leone/Ghana so there's no Ebola to take elsewhere.
So your plan is to send dozens of thousands of people over there, go from village to village and test millions of people?
And in the meantime keep all flights open, because cancelling flights would be such a terrible tragedy?
I meant to point out the absurdity of calling the doctor who knowingly risked his life to help Ebola patients a fsking idiot.
Why is that absurd? Knowingly and needlessly risking one's life is squarely in idiot-territory.
Exactly my thoughts. We are constantly being told that it is very hard to transmit and then when it does happen to trained medical personell with years of experience we are told that they made some minute mistake in procedure and that's the reason. But an infected taking the subway? - No problem, it's "virtually impossible" to get infected.
Cote d'ivore, Senegal, Nigera, South Africa, Kenya and many more countries have already closed the border, cancelled all flights to the three most affected countries and/or implemented a 21-day quarantine for everybody coming from there.
But the West, being fatally infected by political correctness, just keeps every wide open because to quote Obama, "we can't" shut out Western Africa. Why can't we? Can someone tell me why?
Maybe Obama should listen to his Kenyan brethren who DID end all flights to Libera? Maybe "yes we can" is the best response here?
The irresponsibility of the Western political class knows no bounds. They will literally put everybody at risk just to avoid being criticized at a dinner party.
I have read that he returned from Libera earlier than planned and that he wore his protective suit on the plane.
If that is true, then he probably already suspected an infection and did not want to be stranded in Libera with ebola. Better fly back to his 1st-world homeland where he can be treated effectively - just in case.
As I said, I don't know whether it is true (and because of the sacred status of "doctors without borders" the truth may be hard to get), maybe somebody knows more?
start using your brain people.
Why do you need a brain when you have a "scientific consensus"?
It is even worse than that: They were refilled in Utah. That means for refilling, they had to be transported overland for huge distances - twice!
How is the government not concerned about corporate espionage, terrorism, and other criminal activity, you'd think from a security standpoint, they would want encryption to be legit.
They are concerned about it because it gives them a reason for existence.
Imagine the USA if it went isolationist before WWI: Almost no crime, no terrorism, no military-industrial complex, no welfare-state, no military bases all over the world... and politicians would have almost no power compared to what they have today. That would be a nightmare for any politician, "social reformer" and social worker. They would practicably be out of their collective jobs.
An even greater tragedy is the Microsoft marketing department. Those clowns can't seem to sell anything in the consumer market (ok, XBox...I'll give you that).
Is that the same XBox that lost billions in the first versions, barely broke even in the second version and is now again losing billions in the third version?
You luddite! Next you will tell me you want different interfaces for your refrigerator and your car!
Microsoft marketing has a way to forget the past.
I remember how they were so proud of Windows-Phone (~2% marketshare) because it was so much more "successful" than the old Windows-Mobile (~10% marketshare).
Or look at the XBox: First they proclaimed that they would just sink a couple of billion to "build the platform" - and look how that worked for XBone. Of course it doesn't make any sense when you break compatibility with every new version: Any XBox version is a incompatible to any other version, so they are different platforms.
I guess that kind of incompetence and stupidity is a consequence of having just too much money flowing in from over 20 year old products (Windows and Office).
Basically Microsoft could just sit back and release Windows with a new wallpaper and small updates - but they even screwed that up with Windows 8.
So how many computers are fucked becasue of Bash?
A couple of thousand - which is not a lot given the fact that Linux is used on millions of webservers.
From all the alarmism, let's not forget that only RedHat is remotely vulnerable (all the other major distros use dash instead of bash for /bin/sh) and only when you use a seriously outdated CGI-setup.
WIndows is just a tool to do a job like anything else
No, Windows is a tool that is incompatible to everything else, that is the point.