Your entire post could have been copied and pasted from a Palestinian propoganda leaflet.
Before that the land was occupied by Palestinians, Jew terrorist organizations or "settlers" as they called themselves were of the position that they were restoring the biblical state of Israel.
1. THERE WERE NO PALESTINIANS IN 1948. None. There were Arabs living in the British Mandate of Palestine, but they have absolutely nothing in common with the Palestinians of today, who are Egyptians and Jordanians who were refused return to their own countries.
2. Your vicious anti-semitism here is noted. The Jewish settlers were not terrorists. They bought the land they lived on. Bought it.
It's not hard to understand the situation:
The Israelies want to live in peace. The Palestinians want to murder the entire population of Israel.
My conclusion on this subject is that Palestine needs to be given a state and all funding from all parties involved with keeping this war alive needs to be enacted.
My conclusion is that you are a complete idiot. The Palestinians have been offered a state twice, giving them more than 90% of what they had asked for, and both times they rejected it in favour of continued murder.
The Palestinians deserve little sympathy at all in this. Their leaders have deliberately chosen this path to keep themselves in power, and will cling to it to the bitter end.
The Israeli's shoot tank ammo and 5.56, 7.68 mm rounds into Palestinian women and children.
No they don't. Very simply, no they don't. The Israelis simply and absolutely do not target non-combatants, regardless of gender or age. Sometimes a sad accident will happen, as the Palestinians do use children as human shields.
On the other hand, the Palestinians do deliberately target women and children, and always target non-combatants when they can find them. Not long ago, they shot and killed a pregnant woman in her car along with her three daughters. The blow up crowded cafes and packed buses. They send teenagers to their deaths just so as to kill a few more Israelis.
You can't blame the entire situation on the Palestinians; the Israelis aren't perfect angels. And the other Arab nations have been carefully fostering the situation for decades, after they realised that they couldn't hope to defeat Israel militarily.
No, only 99% or so of the blame can be laid at the feet of the Palestinians and the other Arab leaders. And the UN, and the Europeans who continue to fund the Palestinians. The other 1% can be spread amongst the Israelis and their friends, the United States and Australia.
The whole point of the German system is to have a TV station that can afford to produce a high-quality program with balanced news coverage, without being influenced either by the state or by private sponsors.
Sure. It's such a pity that the result is, well, German television.
The FBI had nothing to do with this. In fact, it was the CDC, attempting to contain an outbreak of viral insanity.
I visited an Indymedia site once. I could actually hear my neurons screaming their tiny death screams. Fortunately I shut down my browser quickly and, in time, I hope to make a full recovery.
Glenn Reynolds is an editor, not a writer, for the most part. He picks the items he thinks are important or interesting, and posts them, with links for more details. What makes Instapundit worthwhile is not his commentary (such as it is) but the fact that he is very good at filtering out the significant news that the mainstream media has missed.
$110 billion worth of oil in. $15 billion worth of food and medicine sent to Iraq - according to the UN's own accounting. No external audits. No accountability. As much as $10 billion may have gone straight back to Saddam Hussein. No-one knows except the U.N. - and they're not talking.
Google for Claudia Rosett, just about the only journalist who has been following this story.
Are you saying that the European social democracies/Germany/France, etc have large budget deficits that America? If so, not by much....
Germany and France are running very substantial budget deficits, well beyond the limits set by the EU.
I would say that budgetarily, they are in BETTER shape than America.
Not so. And on matters other than budget deficits, they fare even worse.
And of course when it comes to quality of life for most of their citizenry, they do much better than America does for most of its citizens.
Which is why, just to pick an example out of the air, tens of thousands of elderly Americans die from lack of air conditioning when there's a brief heat wave, and such a thing could never happen in, for example, France.
Quality of life is a complex thing. I like the quality of life here in Australia, for example, even though our per capita GDP is less than that of the U.S.
But if you stop for a moment ducking economic issues with fuzzy terms like "quality of life":
Moderate budgetary deficits aren't really an issue if your economy is growing. France's economy isn't. France:
The tax burden remains one of the highest in Europe (43.8% of GDP in 2003). The current economic slowdown and inflexible budget items have pushed the 2003 deficit to 4% of GDP, above the EU's 3% debt limit.
I'll just note in passing that Australia has good public education and health care, a higher per-capita GDP than these three major European economies, and economic growth close to that of the U.S. (And we didn't have a recession either.) And we're very much pro free trade, and very much not economic "neoliberals" (socialists).
Sorry, on your last point, you were saying that as "economic liberals", Europeans favour protectionist trade policies. You are correct that this is the case, but I must say that this as bizarre a use of the term "liberal" as any I have seen.
yes, the media is clearly SOCIALLY liberal. What I mean is that they favor the officially "approved" liberal agenda issues, such as abortion, gun rights, gay marriage, etc.
Agreed. Though I'd note they are largely for restricting gun rights, that being the "approved" liberal position.
But the media is NOT ECONOMICALLY liberal. By that I mean that they do NOT favor a progressive taxation structure, such as America had in the past, and as most of Europe STILL has, which is why Europeans have universal healthcare, years of unemployment benefits, welfare for poor single people, and the whole social safety net.
... And are completely bankrupt.
That's not economic liberalism, that's socialism, and it's a tried and tested surefire way to destroy your economy. See: Russia, Eastern Europe, France, Germany...
And the American mainstream media does tend to push massive government aid programs as the cure to, well, pretty much everything.
The media also favors free trade.
I certainly wouldn't take that as a given.
If you are really liberal, economically liberal, you do not favor free trade. That is a conservative thing.
Hence the massive protectionism favoured by the EU. No, wait...
you really think that anybody like saddam could bribe countries in the g7? You think such countries are so poor they have to take money from a old, failing dictator, when they could just sell airbuses to china?
Yes. Have you looked at the economic forecasts for France and Germany lately? They are completely screwed.
That article is talking about the chemical toxicity of specific uranium compounds which has nothing to do with the health effects of depleted uranium ammunition. (It does mention in passing the effects of breathing uranium dust.)
From the article you quote: Oral toxicity of insoluble UO2, U3O8, and UF4 was found to be non-toxic in rats, while six other soluble components were of a considerable toxicity.
So unless we somehow convert the DU into specific soluble toxic compounds, it's not a problem.
The thing that strikes me about this list is that most of them just aren't stories.
#1 - Speculation #2 - Editorial #3 - Story, maybe #4 - Story, if verified #5 - Editorial #6 - Sounds like an editorial #7 - Story, if verified #8 - Title doesn't say anything #9 - File under "News of the Weird" or some such #10 - Editorial - or "Old News is No News" #11 - Editorial #12 - Could be a story if there are specifics #13 - Old news, no news #14 - Editorial #15 - Story #16 - Well, duh. If we knew who all the guilty ones were, we wouldn't need spies. #17 - Could be a story... Though it makes it sound like private enterprise is a bad thing #18 - Editorial #19 - Good news, therefore not news at all #20 - Not a story, not an editorial, not anything. This wasn't censored, it was too boring to print #21 - Huh? #22 - Could be a story there somewhere, but it clearly flies in the face of the majority of the evidence #23 - Editorial #24 - Definitely a story, and the Democrats should be hung out to dry for trying to re-introduce the draft for political ends. (Yeah, it's the D's behind this one.) #25 - Story's been done, folks.
Is not the obvious liberal bias of most of the mainstream media (yeah, yeah, Fox, Rush Limbaugh, blah blah), but why they are doing such a lousy job.
If you've ever read a newspaper story where you knew the events first hand, you'll know that the papers get just about everything wrong (including directly attributed quotes). And TV news tends to be even worse; not only do they get the facts wrong, but they have to compress the whole story down to about 30 seconds (unless it involves baby pandas).
Part of this is bias, but only part. Equally significant is the reporting of speculation as fact; the treatment of editorials as reportage; and the lamentable trend to just not care about the details.
These days I work on the assumption that any news report will have all the major facts wrong in some way.
...except that from the rest of the world's point of view, the attitude is this. If you consider ABC/NBC/CBS/CNN to be left wing, then you must be...
I live in Australia, often considered to be part of "the rest of the world", and ABC/NBC/CBS/CNN are quite clearly biased to the left, as are NYT, LAT and WaPo. (Though at least WaPo will sometimes slip up and publish a report containing the facts sans editorial.)
Of course, if you're still carrying a torch for Trotsky after all these years, just about everyone will be to the right of you.
An 80 MIP RISC doesn't have the power for abstraction layers.
Blup?
As someone who started out on 0.25 MIPS CISC processors, I can comfortably say that you don't have the faintest idea what you are talking about. Abstraction layers appeared shortly after the stored-program architecture. 80 MIPS is serious, serious luxury.
People won't work if they can't see that their reward is in some way proportional to their effort. So communism and socialism inevitably reduce wealth in proportion to the degree they are implemented in society.
If one country implements a socialist economy, and their neighbours don't, then they will grow poorer while watching their neighbours grow richer. Eventually greed will overwhelm laziness and the people will rise up against their government for the chance to buy Levis and Reeboks and iPods.
Unfettered capitalism works, but it isn't healthy. Unfettered socialism is always a disaster. Finding the right mixture is tricky, but we have plenty of examples of the wrong mixture. (See: Europe.)
Now, you know, a lot of the "rest of the world" isn't quite as paranoid about other people wanting to steal their stuff.
A lot of the rest of the world has no need to be paranoid about other people wanting to steal their stuff. Because they can see it happening. Their own governments are doing it.
A lot of us actually believe that the vast majority of the time, most people like to cooperate.
The entire structure of Western Civilisation is built on trust networks, and this is more true in America than it is in Europe. Trust and co-operation do not rule out competition. But socialist governments do.
And there are enough people that like to act ethically that things like wikipedia and open-source can actually work.
Yes. And?
Either the system allows free choice and free distribution of rewards - which is capitalism. Or it doesn't. And capitalism has out-competed every other system humanity has ever devised. Capitalism produces more and better goods cheaper and with less effort. It's capitalism that has produced the immense surplus of wealth that allows us to spend our free time developing software just to give it away.
Slashdot Mirror
Death by stupidity. Hardly anything new.
Your entire post could have been copied and pasted from a Palestinian propoganda leaflet.
Before that the land was occupied by Palestinians, Jew terrorist organizations or "settlers" as they called themselves were of the position that they were restoring the biblical state of Israel.
1. THERE WERE NO PALESTINIANS IN 1948. None. There were Arabs living in the British Mandate of Palestine, but they have absolutely nothing in common with the Palestinians of today, who are Egyptians and Jordanians who were refused return to their own countries.
2. Your vicious anti-semitism here is noted. The Jewish settlers were not terrorists. They bought the land they lived on. Bought it.
It's not hard to understand the situation:
The Israelies want to live in peace.
The Palestinians want to murder the entire population of Israel.
My conclusion on this subject is that Palestine needs to be given a state and all funding from all parties involved with keeping this war alive needs to be enacted.
My conclusion is that you are a complete idiot. The Palestinians have been offered a state twice , giving them more than 90% of what they had asked for, and both times they rejected it in favour of continued murder.
The Palestinians deserve little sympathy at all in this. Their leaders have deliberately chosen this path to keep themselves in power, and will cling to it to the bitter end.
The Israeli's shoot tank ammo and 5.56, 7.68 mm rounds into Palestinian women and children.
No they don't. Very simply, no they don't. The Israelis simply and absolutely do not target non-combatants, regardless of gender or age. Sometimes a sad accident will happen, as the Palestinians do use children as human shields.
On the other hand, the Palestinians do deliberately target women and children, and always target non-combatants when they can find them. Not long ago, they shot and killed a pregnant woman in her car along with her three daughters. The blow up crowded cafes and packed buses. They send teenagers to their deaths just so as to kill a few more Israelis.
You can't blame the entire situation on the Palestinians; the Israelis aren't perfect angels. And the other Arab nations have been carefully fostering the situation for decades, after they realised that they couldn't hope to defeat Israel militarily.
No, only 99% or so of the blame can be laid at the feet of the Palestinians and the other Arab leaders. And the UN, and the Europeans who continue to fund the Palestinians. The other 1% can be spread amongst the Israelis and their friends, the United States and Australia.
Uh, I think you need to check your medication. Two of the little blue ones after each meal, and one of the bright orange ones before bed, okay?
The 'crazy TV tax' as you put it means the UK has the best news service in the world
Really?
What is that, then? The Financial Times? The Telegraph?
I mean, you're obviously not referring to the BBC, so I'm curious.
There really is no liberal television network, but there are many conservative television networks.
You mean, apart from ABC, CBS, NBC and PBS, right?
Right?
Oh, and CNN. The idea that CNN is center-right is absurd.
Either that, or you are using the term "liberal" as a euphemism for "unreconstructed Marxist".
The whole point of the German system is to have a TV station that can afford to produce a high-quality program with balanced news coverage, without being influenced either by the state or by private sponsors.
Sure. It's such a pity that the result is, well, German television.
The FBI had nothing to do with this. In fact, it was the CDC, attempting to contain an outbreak of viral insanity.
I visited an Indymedia site once. I could actually hear my neurons screaming their tiny death screams. Fortunately I shut down my browser quickly and, in time, I hope to make a full recovery.
I am referring to respectable left-wing parties with an open view on society.
You what? Sorry, we must have a bad line here.
This is a new form of "left wing" that I was previously unaware of.
I take it you slept through the entire 20th century then.
Glenn Reynolds is an editor, not a writer, for the most part. He picks the items he thinks are important or interesting, and posts them, with links for more details. What makes Instapundit worthwhile is not his commentary (such as it is) but the fact that he is very good at filtering out the significant news that the mainstream media has missed.
Nah, he could be incompetent and evil.
Now, I don't like Ashcroft the least bit, but does anyone here remember Janet Reno? Not exactly an improvement.
And the other 88.5% make no sense at all.
Has got to be the UN Oil-for-Food scam.
$110 billion worth of oil in. $15 billion worth of food and medicine sent to Iraq - according to the UN's own accounting. No external audits. No accountability. As much as $10 billion may have gone straight back to Saddam Hussein. No-one knows except the U.N. - and they're not talking.
Google for Claudia Rosett, just about the only journalist who has been following this story.
Are you saying that the European social democracies/Germany/France, etc have large budget deficits that America? If so, not by much....
Germany and France are running very substantial budget deficits, well beyond the limits set by the EU.
I would say that budgetarily, they are in BETTER shape than America.
Not so. And on matters other than budget deficits, they fare even worse.
And of course when it comes to quality of life for most of their citizenry, they do much better than America does for most of its citizens.
Which is why, just to pick an example out of the air, tens of thousands of elderly Americans die from lack of air conditioning when there's a brief heat wave, and such a thing could never happen in, for example, France.
Quality of life is a complex thing. I like the quality of life here in Australia, for example, even though our per capita GDP is less than that of the U.S.
But if you stop for a moment ducking economic issues with fuzzy terms like "quality of life":
GDP Per Capita
US: $37,800 (real growth rate: 3.1%)
Germany: $27,600 (real growth rate: -0.1%)
France: $27,500 (real growth rate: 0.1%)
And for comparison
UK: $27,700 (real growth rate: 2.1%)
Australia: $28,900 (real growth rate: 2.8%)
Moderate budgetary deficits aren't really an issue if your economy is growing. France's economy isn't. France:
The tax burden remains one of the highest in Europe (43.8% of GDP in 2003). The current economic slowdown and inflexible budget items have pushed the 2003 deficit to 4% of GDP, above the EU's 3% debt limit.
I'll just note in passing that Australia has good public education and health care, a higher per-capita GDP than these three major European economies, and economic growth close to that of the U.S. (And we didn't have a recession either.) And we're very much pro free trade, and very much not economic "neoliberals" (socialists).
Data from CIA World Fact Book, but you're free to cite your own sources.
Sorry, on your last point, you were saying that as "economic liberals", Europeans favour protectionist trade policies. You are correct that this is the case, but I must say that this as bizarre a use of the term "liberal" as any I have seen.
Agreed. Though I'd note they are largely for restricting gun rights, that being the "approved" liberal position.
But the media is NOT ECONOMICALLY liberal. By that I mean that they do NOT favor a progressive taxation structure, such as America had in the past, and as most of Europe STILL has, which is why Europeans have universal healthcare, years of unemployment benefits, welfare for poor single people, and the whole social safety net.
That's not economic liberalism, that's socialism, and it's a tried and tested surefire way to destroy your economy. See: Russia, Eastern Europe, France, Germany...
And the American mainstream media does tend to push massive government aid programs as the cure to, well, pretty much everything.
The media also favors free trade.
I certainly wouldn't take that as a given.
If you are really liberal, economically liberal, you do not favor free trade. That is a conservative thing.
Hence the massive protectionism favoured by the EU. No, wait...
you really think that anybody like saddam could bribe countries in the g7? You think such countries are so poor they have to take money from a old, failing dictator, when they could just sell airbuses to china?
Yes. Have you looked at the economic forecasts for France and Germany lately? They are completely screwed.
That article is talking about the chemical toxicity of specific uranium compounds which has nothing to do with the health effects of depleted uranium ammunition. (It does mention in passing the effects of breathing uranium dust.)
From the article you quote: Oral toxicity of insoluble UO2, U3O8, and UF4 was found to be non-toxic in rats, while six other soluble components were of a considerable toxicity.
So unless we somehow convert the DU into specific soluble toxic compounds, it's not a problem.
Try again.
The thing that strikes me about this list is that most of them just aren't stories.
#1 - Speculation
#2 - Editorial
#3 - Story, maybe
#4 - Story, if verified
#5 - Editorial
#6 - Sounds like an editorial
#7 - Story, if verified
#8 - Title doesn't say anything
#9 - File under "News of the Weird" or some such
#10 - Editorial - or "Old News is No News"
#11 - Editorial
#12 - Could be a story if there are specifics
#13 - Old news, no news
#14 - Editorial
#15 - Story
#16 - Well, duh. If we knew who all the guilty ones were, we wouldn't need spies.
#17 - Could be a story... Though it makes it sound like private enterprise is a bad thing
#18 - Editorial
#19 - Good news, therefore not news at all
#20 - Not a story, not an editorial, not anything. This wasn't censored, it was too boring to print
#21 - Huh?
#22 - Could be a story there somewhere, but it clearly flies in the face of the majority of the evidence
#23 - Editorial
#24 - Definitely a story, and the Democrats should be hung out to dry for trying to re-introduce the draft for political ends. (Yeah, it's the D's behind this one.)
#25 - Story's been done, folks.
Is not the obvious liberal bias of most of the mainstream media (yeah, yeah, Fox, Rush Limbaugh, blah blah), but why they are doing such a lousy job.
If you've ever read a newspaper story where you knew the events first hand, you'll know that the papers get just about everything wrong (including directly attributed quotes). And TV news tends to be even worse; not only do they get the facts wrong, but they have to compress the whole story down to about 30 seconds (unless it involves baby pandas).
Part of this is bias, but only part. Equally significant is the reporting of speculation as fact; the treatment of editorials as reportage; and the lamentable trend to just not care about the details.
These days I work on the assumption that any news report will have all the major facts wrong in some way.
Read Michael Crichton's speech on the Murray Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect for an insight into this problem.
...except that from the rest of the world's point of view, the attitude is this. If you consider ABC/NBC/CBS/CNN to be left wing, then you must be...
I live in Australia, often considered to be part of "the rest of the world", and ABC/NBC/CBS/CNN are quite clearly biased to the left, as are NYT, LAT and WaPo. (Though at least WaPo will sometimes slip up and publish a report containing the facts sans editorial.)
Of course, if you're still carrying a torch for Trotsky after all these years, just about everyone will be to the right of you.
An 80 MIP RISC doesn't have the power for abstraction layers.
Blup?
As someone who started out on 0.25 MIPS CISC processors, I can comfortably say that you don't have the faintest idea what you are talking about. Abstraction layers appeared shortly after the stored-program architecture. 80 MIPS is serious, serious luxury.
As far as what Kerry has accomplished, all we can do is look at his Senate voting record
... vote for them before he votes against them.
Strangely enough, Kerry seems to be uncomfortable discussing his Senate voting record. I wonder why?
From what I've read about his decisions, he seems to be able to analyze very complicated issues and
How did we end up with such a lame duck as the Dem candidate? Oh yeah, he's married to five hundred million dollars.
People won't work if they can't see that their reward is in some way proportional to their effort. So communism and socialism inevitably reduce wealth in proportion to the degree they are implemented in society.
If one country implements a socialist economy, and their neighbours don't, then they will grow poorer while watching their neighbours grow richer. Eventually greed will overwhelm laziness and the people will rise up against their government for the chance to buy Levis and Reeboks and iPods.
Unfettered capitalism works, but it isn't healthy. Unfettered socialism is always a disaster. Finding the right mixture is tricky, but we have plenty of examples of the wrong mixture. (See: Europe.)
Now, you know, a lot of the "rest of the world" isn't quite as paranoid about other people wanting to steal their stuff.
A lot of the rest of the world has no need to be paranoid about other people wanting to steal their stuff. Because they can see it happening. Their own governments are doing it.
A lot of us actually believe that the vast majority of the time, most people like to cooperate.
The entire structure of Western Civilisation is built on trust networks, and this is more true in America than it is in Europe. Trust and co-operation do not rule out competition. But socialist governments do.
And there are enough people that like to act ethically that things like wikipedia and open-source can actually work.
Yes. And?
Either the system allows free choice and free distribution of rewards - which is capitalism. Or it doesn't. And capitalism has out-competed every other system humanity has ever devised. Capitalism produces more and better goods cheaper and with less effort. It's capitalism that has produced the immense surplus of wealth that allows us to spend our free time developing software just to give it away.