Not to mention that defrauding banksters isn't the crime it is made out to be
Actually, even if you've managed to delude yourself into thinking that it's OK to steal from people you don't like, defrauding bankers hurts us all here.
And that's ontop of the hurt from the bankers defrauding us all already. Fuck the banks. Their whole model is based on other peoples money. They use your money to make their money, don't share profits and pass losses onto you. Fuck the bankers, fuck them all.
Punching someone over steak and chips has nothing to do with political correctness. You're going to have to think harder than just relying on the tried-and-busted PC canard again.
People punch people all the time for all kinds of reasons, not all of them have a week long investigation. But are you trying to say the BBC is not highly concerned with it's own political correctness? He almost got sacked over a number plate that may or may not have been selected on purpose but come on, it's a fucking number plate. Every week seemingly he's in the news for saying something slightly dodgy or giving someone a funny look yet the beeb behave everytime as if he's the worst person...in the world.
Well, maybe it wasn't the best thought out post. The main point was the BBC is well into its pc zero tolerance these days, especially after being near the centre of pedogeddon with jimmy Saville, and he's been very nearly sacked a bunch of times for next to nothing and it was all but inevitable now he'd actually done something you can get in trouble for even though there's a lot worse things he could've done.
Doubtful. Top Gear has existed in some form or another for decades. I'll grant you the current incarnation is firmly anchored around Jezza, but this isn't much of a death sentence for the show.
Top Gear was just another boring car show until Clarkson and a different producer (Andy Wilson I think his name is) reinvented it into it's current form, without him that's what it will go back to and we don't need another fifth gear. Considering it's had a ton of spin offs in different countries and they have all died a death. Is Top Gear USA still on, and if so does it still suck? There's something about these three that make the show work so well which would be obviously lacking with three different blokes.
In the politically correct mess that is the BBC Clarkson might've well has stabbed this guy in the eye, pissed on his mothers corpse, killed his dog and burned down his favourite coffee shop for the difference it'd make.
http://beta.sheilaswheels.com/...
Sheila's Wheels. While they don't flat out refuse men, their service is so heavily geared towards women it's really not worth it if you are breastically challenged, there's another company doing the same but I can't remember the name, something about diamonds. Women only sessions at the swimming pool, they never have a men only time slot. Women's hour on Radio 4. There's no men's hour. Not really the straight definition you demanded but there are times when it's apparently ok to say women only when you can't say men only. This is also UK so another easy reason for you to dismiss it.
They're calling it the "Religious Freedom Restoration Act" to feed a bullshit persecution complex, while enshrining their hateful nonsense into law. If you can refuse business to gays because your religion says so, then you can refuse business to anyone, and that's bullshit.
Which is why all affected business owners who disagree with this act should refuse service to Christians. Freedom is two way street. See how they like being discriminated against legally, by the same measures they put in to legally discriminate you.
I would start a business that exclusively excludes Christians. Doesn't matter what it did, if there's even a sniff that you're a Christian, even a moderate ok one that doesn't talk about faith at all, then you can fuck off. Freedom works both ways.
It doesn't seem to have hurt this site. Not even doing it poorly.
Yeah, but this site doesn't need to be on Apple's good side to get information,/. scrapes it from other people who do that and essentially republishes other peoples articles after the fact. If you're trying to be a breaking-primary news source then being denied information from a company many people are interested in means you lag behind your competitors. For a tech news site that can be a major problem, whereas/. is an aggregator, so being behind the curve is a given and the attraction is community-filtered news, not being the first to publish big stories.
You imply apple give different information to each reporter, they don't. they make an announcement with very few pieces of actual information and every apple shill goes and writes 1000 words on it. All of them saying the same basic exact same thing surrounded by fluff.
The "climate of fear" even affects journalists, who face not only stonewalling from Apple after negative reporting
So a journalist becomes persona non grata with Apple, can't get information about The New Big Thing until long after their competitors have published articles about it, so they get a reputation for being slow to publish about new stuff and probably end up with a reputation for recycling other peoples information because they can't get anything from Apple.
I get what you mean, in the long run that attitude will only harm Apple, but in the short term it'll require a bunch of journalists who aren't concerned about falling behind their competitors.
Bullshit, in that regard a reporter might not get invited to apple events, but that doesn't stop them reporting on real actual news, such as the winner of Bumsville, Idaho Annual Pie eating contest or just reading what all the apple approved writers put down, rewording and posting with a ten minute lag.
Claiming that killing people saves lives is delusional to the point of insanity. Unfortunately this insanity is alive and well, though today we claim "we must kill all the Muslims to get peace" instead of those "dirty Japs".
It's not though. The harsh facts are dropping the nukes resulted in far fewer casualties than would have been suffered through invasion and the war ending sooner than it would have had Japan been traditionally combated. The battle for Japan would have dwarfed anything previous and would likely never be topped. The invasion itself would have made D-day look like a gentle stroll in the park with more people dead in the first day than though all victims of the nukes combined. Any one who thinks Japan would have surrendered is delusional and would probably say the same about America facing invasion. What do you think would happen if America were invaded, would they surrender? I really really really doubt it.
Also, only nutters say we should kill all Muslims. We are not at war with them nor intending a massive invasion of their lands.
Remember, these guys get about one shot to get their test explosion right, because in about an hour after a successful test of an H-bomb by anyone the US considers a threat the USAF is going to be raining actual working H-bombs on their entire nuclear program, with a few diverted to cover the presidential palace, the parliament, and essentially every researcher and civilian within a 20-km radius of the aforementioned targets. The US will not tolerate a new state of MAD with a new non-Western-approved government.
What? so any other country the US doesn't like so much tests a bomb and you're going to immediately flatten them with nukes? Good luck with that ever happening. What will happen is whichever choad you have in charge at the time will say something like we cannot stand for this and then do fuck all. Maybe have a whinge to the UN to write a letter or something.
... but if this person got the information without looking at classified materials, who do they think they are to tell him to not publish?
Without knowing the pedigree of the material he looked at, it is impossible to know whether it was classified or not. Simply releasing classified material to the public does not declassify it, especially if the release was unauthorized.
Who do they think they are? They are the people who are paid to protect classified information doing the job they are paid to do, when asked to do that job by the author of the book. He asked, they had to tell him to cut things. They don't get the right to change the classification on material, that has to go through the classifying authority.
Surely there's no classified material in there, otherwise they'd be able to do more than ask him to take it out and I doubt he'd be allowed to tell them to fuck off.
That was a classic case of a glorified revenge killing. As for the police killings, when no charges are brought or disiplininary action taken the authority's are saying it is just and correct even though the majority of the population vocally disagree.
Jeez, I pulled out a well known public burning the fact there are plenty of other examples of worse more recent things just adds to my point, which was basically people can be really shitty to each other for all kinds of reasons all the time.
It turned alot of people in the area who were on the fence about then to thinking that's a bit much, it also upped the air strikes from regional powers that are a little too close for comfort. It didn't cause an uprising or anywhere near, i suppose paying off the west so much was worth more to them.
Slashdot Mirror
Not to mention that defrauding banksters isn't the crime it is made out to be
Actually, even if you've managed to delude yourself into thinking that it's OK to steal from people you don't like, defrauding bankers hurts us all here.
And that's ontop of the hurt from the bankers defrauding us all already. Fuck the banks. Their whole model is based on other peoples money. They use your money to make their money, don't share profits and pass losses onto you. Fuck the bankers, fuck them all.
You don't think Charles will make a good Queen?
For about the 3 years he'll be in the job before popping his own clogs. Then we get Billiam as queen and he will be a shit queen..
Because of The UK, US and Australia.
Punching someone over steak and chips has nothing to do with political correctness. You're going to have to think harder than just relying on the tried-and-busted PC canard again.
People punch people all the time for all kinds of reasons, not all of them have a week long investigation. But are you trying to say the BBC is not highly concerned with it's own political correctness? He almost got sacked over a number plate that may or may not have been selected on purpose but come on, it's a fucking number plate. Every week seemingly he's in the news for saying something slightly dodgy or giving someone a funny look yet the beeb behave everytime as if he's the worst person...in the world.
Well, maybe it wasn't the best thought out post. The main point was the BBC is well into its pc zero tolerance these days, especially after being near the centre of pedogeddon with jimmy Saville, and he's been very nearly sacked a bunch of times for next to nothing and it was all but inevitable now he'd actually done something you can get in trouble for even though there's a lot worse things he could've done.
No, I'm implying there are different levels and not all warrent the same punishment.
I thought the BBC was a non-profit tax-funded government organization?
They are but they call the tax a license fee and they tell the gov to fuck off.
Doubtful. Top Gear has existed in some form or another for decades. I'll grant you the current incarnation is firmly anchored around Jezza, but this isn't much of a death sentence for the show.
Top Gear was just another boring car show until Clarkson and a different producer (Andy Wilson I think his name is) reinvented it into it's current form, without him that's what it will go back to and we don't need another fifth gear. Considering it's had a ton of spin offs in different countries and they have all died a death. Is Top Gear USA still on, and if so does it still suck? There's something about these three that make the show work so well which would be obviously lacking with three different blokes.
and that's bad, why?
In the politically correct mess that is the BBC Clarkson might've well has stabbed this guy in the eye, pissed on his mothers corpse, killed his dog and burned down his favourite coffee shop for the difference it'd make.
http://beta.sheilaswheels.com/... Sheila's Wheels. While they don't flat out refuse men, their service is so heavily geared towards women it's really not worth it if you are breastically challenged, there's another company doing the same but I can't remember the name, something about diamonds. Women only sessions at the swimming pool, they never have a men only time slot. Women's hour on Radio 4. There's no men's hour. Not really the straight definition you demanded but there are times when it's apparently ok to say women only when you can't say men only. This is also UK so another easy reason for you to dismiss it.
If you are a man, you are by definition unable to get pregnant and therefore unable to be served by an OB.
Where's the foetus gonna gestate? You gonna keep it in a box?
They're calling it the "Religious Freedom Restoration Act" to feed a bullshit persecution complex, while enshrining their hateful nonsense into law. If you can refuse business to gays because your religion says so, then you can refuse business to anyone, and that's bullshit.
Which is why all affected business owners who disagree with this act should refuse service to Christians. Freedom is two way street. See how they like being discriminated against legally, by the same measures they put in to legally discriminate you.
I would start a business that exclusively excludes Christians. Doesn't matter what it did, if there's even a sniff that you're a Christian, even a moderate ok one that doesn't talk about faith at all, then you can fuck off. Freedom works both ways.
Doing business with whomever one wants, while denying to do so to others on whatever whim, is a fundamental tenet of freedom
Which is the exact line this gen con should use should Indianapolis start moaning.
So providers should provide broadband as a charity?
See, the thing about poor people is, they're broke and so make poor customers.
No, it should be provided as a utility you dumb fuck. Available to all and not a complete rip off.
It doesn't seem to have hurt this site. Not even doing it poorly.
Yeah, but this site doesn't need to be on Apple's good side to get information, /. scrapes it from other people who do that and essentially republishes other peoples articles after the fact. If you're trying to be a breaking-primary news source then being denied information from a company many people are interested in means you lag behind your competitors. For a tech news site that can be a major problem, whereas /. is an aggregator, so being behind the curve is a given and the attraction is community-filtered news, not being the first to publish big stories.
You imply apple give different information to each reporter, they don't. they make an announcement with very few pieces of actual information and every apple shill goes and writes 1000 words on it. All of them saying the same basic exact same thing surrounded by fluff.
So what?
The "climate of fear" even affects journalists, who face not only stonewalling from Apple after negative reporting
So a journalist becomes persona non grata with Apple, can't get information about The New Big Thing until long after their competitors have published articles about it, so they get a reputation for being slow to publish about new stuff and probably end up with a reputation for recycling other peoples information because they can't get anything from Apple.
I get what you mean, in the long run that attitude will only harm Apple, but in the short term it'll require a bunch of journalists who aren't concerned about falling behind their competitors.
Bullshit, in that regard a reporter might not get invited to apple events, but that doesn't stop them reporting on real actual news, such as the winner of Bumsville, Idaho Annual Pie eating contest or just reading what all the apple approved writers put down, rewording and posting with a ten minute lag.
Claiming that killing people saves lives is delusional to the point of insanity. Unfortunately this insanity is alive and well, though today we claim "we must kill all the Muslims to get peace" instead of those "dirty Japs".
It's not though. The harsh facts are dropping the nukes resulted in far fewer casualties than would have been suffered through invasion and the war ending sooner than it would have had Japan been traditionally combated. The battle for Japan would have dwarfed anything previous and would likely never be topped. The invasion itself would have made D-day look like a gentle stroll in the park with more people dead in the first day than though all victims of the nukes combined. Any one who thinks Japan would have surrendered is delusional and would probably say the same about America facing invasion. What do you think would happen if America were invaded, would they surrender? I really really really doubt it.
Also, only nutters say we should kill all Muslims. We are not at war with them nor intending a massive invasion of their lands.
Women can have kids in the future and may even be pregnant now,.
Not on their own they can't.
What? That's possibly the most retarded scare mongering I've ever seen! Get a clue.
Remember, these guys get about one shot to get their test explosion right, because in about an hour after a successful test of an H-bomb by anyone the US considers a threat the USAF is going to be raining actual working H-bombs on their entire nuclear program, with a few diverted to cover the presidential palace, the parliament, and essentially every researcher and civilian within a 20-km radius of the aforementioned targets. The US will not tolerate a new state of MAD with a new non-Western-approved government.
What? so any other country the US doesn't like so much tests a bomb and you're going to immediately flatten them with nukes? Good luck with that ever happening. What will happen is whichever choad you have in charge at the time will say something like we cannot stand for this and then do fuck all. Maybe have a whinge to the UN to write a letter or something.
Without knowing the pedigree of the material he looked at, it is impossible to know whether it was classified or not. Simply releasing classified material to the public does not declassify it, especially if the release was unauthorized.
Who do they think they are? They are the people who are paid to protect classified information doing the job they are paid to do, when asked to do that job by the author of the book. He asked, they had to tell him to cut things. They don't get the right to change the classification on material, that has to go through the classifying authority.
Surely there's no classified material in there, otherwise they'd be able to do more than ask him to take it out and I doubt he'd be allowed to tell them to fuck off.
That was a classic case of a glorified revenge killing. As for the police killings, when no charges are brought or disiplininary action taken the authority's are saying it is just and correct even though the majority of the population vocally disagree.
Jeez, I pulled out a well known public burning the fact there are plenty of other examples of worse more recent things just adds to my point, which was basically people can be really shitty to each other for all kinds of reasons all the time.
It turned alot of people in the area who were on the fence about then to thinking that's a bit much, it also upped the air strikes from regional powers that are a little too close for comfort. It didn't cause an uprising or anywhere near, i suppose paying off the west so much was worth more to them.