Hangars, prefabricated maintenance buildings, aprons, and sunshades for the fighters would have to built at Al-Udeid, a huge air field about 35 kilometers south of Doha....
In the autumn of 2001, the US began installing computers, communications and intelligence equipment and other assets at Al Udeid Air Base, in order to establish an alternate command center....
By late March 2002 the US was moving communications and computer equipment from Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia to Al-Udeid,...
Ok, so the op wasn't run from Doha, but from 35 km away.
(Some other poster has a more correct point, by 2004 Al-Udeid was no longer as important, although "Qatar was done with" is somewhat of an exageration).
OTOH, i can see why the thought of bombing a news agancy would be considered. If i remeber corectly they were looking at taking out the transmision towers and a news print facility.
No, you don't remember correctly. AL Jazeera is a satellite TV company. It has neither transmission towers nor news print facilities.
The "plan" was to bomb the HQ.
In an Allied country.
The same country that was used as the HQ of Operation Iraqi Freedom!
If the HQ had been in a neutral, or even enemy, country it would have been a war crime. Bombing your allies is just crazy.
So, it should work better in the USA, you have more people to count the votes.
Why don't you read what you're replying to?
Actualy the real reason Americans are obsessed with complicated vote counting systems is the dogcatcher problem - how to deal with an election in which votes for huge numbers of posts are being held at once. Most countries try to avoid this, until people start complaing of voter fatigue.
YEC has the additional belief that the age of the geologic column is about 6,000 years, and that most of the paleozoic and mesozoic were deposited by a single flood.
Young Earth Creationists believe that the created "kind" is roughly at the family level of taxonomy.
So YEC's believe that (e.g.) the Hominidae evolved in about 6,000 years?
I think that the reason that you'll find many engineers and scientists resisting a pure evolutionary program in schools is that evolution, in its current form, is as much a religion as anything based on the Bible.
No.
If you're going to be honest, you have to admit that there are huge gaps in evolution going all the way back to the Big Bang.
You appear to be confused. Evolution is the (observed) change in species. Darwinian natural selection is the currently best theory to explain evolution. Neither of these has anything to do woth the big bang.
Scientists still can't say how galaxies formed (the "smoothness" of the Big Bang prevents it)
Huh? Like I said, cosmology. Nothing to do with evolution.
nor have we yet found the bridge from ape to man
Huh? What are you talking about? Man is an ape, no bridge is needed.
Or maybe you think scientists are claiming that "man evolved from apes"? No, it is known that man and our ape cousins had a common ancestor.
Somehow NASA scientists predict intelligent life on many planets when the odds say that we're unique, even in a universe that's some 11-15 billion light years in diameter.
Huh? What "NASA scientists"? Enrico Fermi didn't work for NASA. How have you calculated the "odds"? What has this to do with Darwin?
But in the meantime, it's intellectually dishonest to pretend that these discoveries are just around the corner and that we should be teaching evolution as fact.
Well, evolution is a fact. Natural selection is a theory.
Any scientist with his/her salt will tell you that you don't publish results until all the tests are done. Until you have incontrovertable proof of evolution from start to finish, you have to allow for alternate theories, even if you personally believe them to be unreliable.
Huh? Darwin shouldn't have published "On the Origin of the Species" 'cos he didn't have "incontrovertable proof"? If you know anything about science you know that we can never have incontrovertable proof. If we could it wouldn't be science.
There are no alternate (scientific) theories at the moment.
Slashdot Mirror
And if you're blind, hearing the article read out by a screen reader?
Is a recording of a slander slander or libel?
Is a public reading of a libel libel or slander?
I know! I know!
It means you haven't got enough RAM.
Often happens in trial video from Iraq for some reason.
Wow, you're looking short'n'fat today Saddam.
Yes but, that doesn't look like it'd cost much money :-)
Should have lot's left over for Kliper. Wonder what they'll build that out of?
You think that it would be easy to write off bombing a building in a largish town 35Km from your HQ as a mistake?
I suppose it puts a new light on the "accidental" bombing of those Canadians.
With friends like that who needs enemies?
From the link:
How amusing. Note that that's a "warehouse complex", not an HQ.
In Qatar (ok, I'll drop the "u") we find:
Ok, so the op wasn't run from Doha, but from 35 km away.
(Some other poster has a more correct point, by 2004 Al-Udeid was no longer as important, although "Qatar was done with" is somewhat of an exageration).
No, you don't remember correctly. AL Jazeera is a satellite TV company. It has neither transmission towers nor news print facilities.
The "plan" was to bomb the HQ.
In an Allied country.
The same country that was used as the HQ of Operation Iraqi Freedom!
If the HQ had been in a neutral, or even enemy, country it would have been a war crime. Bombing your allies is just crazy.
The funniest part of the "bomb al-jazeera" story is the geography.
Where is the HQ of Al-Jazeera? Doha, Quatar.
Where was the HQ of Operation Iraqi Freedom? Doha, Quatar.
Shades of Milo Minderbinder, the planes taking off to bomb their own airfield.
Let me know when the IPv6 multihoming problem is solved. PA address space is for losers.
Um, who doesn't get it exactly?
Not sad, screamingly funny!
The OZS article was slightly funny, the Slashdot response is hilarious!
Hey, way to spoil the joke.
(The joke being that nobody seems to have realised the "Otto Z. Stern" article is a joke).
Oh, come on, haven't you figured it out yet? Lex is the veep.
Nah, they want to abolish the DTI 'cos they hate Tazan.
Hello Mr Lewis.
In France they ask you if you want to be in on the count when you vote.
Couldn't do it in the last European elections 'cos it was the England/France match that night.
So, it should work better in the USA, you have more people to count the votes.
Why don't you read what you're replying to?
Actualy the real reason Americans are obsessed with complicated vote counting systems is the dogcatcher problem - how to deal with an election in which votes for huge numbers of posts are being held at once. Most countries try to avoid this, until people start complaing of voter fatigue.
Well, speaking as a Brit, none of us believed WMD's exist.
Both statements are obviously ridiculous. All you can say is that you believed, all I can say is that I didn't.
Oh, such temptation, must resist ...
But are you serious? Recent history shows that some people just lap up lies with faked or non-existent evidence.
Hehe, an image - Mr SH of Tikrit, Iraq launches a counter-suit for Libel against a Mr GWB of Crawford, Texas, USA.
Nah, I don't hang around those kinds of places.
'cos, afaik, one of the working assumptions of IPV6 is that there is no PI space.
Great, build a protocol with 128 bit addresses and then cripple it because CISCO seem to think that memory is expensive.
Anyone?
So YEC's believe that (e.g.) the Hominidae evolved in about 6,000 years?
Noah was an orang-utang?
Wild.
Huh? Creationists deny that there has been change!
No.
You appear to be confused. Evolution is the (observed) change in species. Darwinian natural selection is the currently best theory to explain evolution. Neither of these has anything to do woth the big bang.
Huh? Like I said, cosmology. Nothing to do with evolution.
Huh? What are you talking about? Man is an ape, no bridge is needed.
Or maybe you think scientists are claiming that "man evolved from apes"? No, it is known that man and our ape cousins had a common ancestor.
Huh? What "NASA scientists"? Enrico Fermi didn't work for NASA. How have you calculated the "odds"? What has this to do with Darwin?
Well, evolution is a fact. Natural selection is a theory.
Huh? Darwin shouldn't have published "On the Origin of the Species" 'cos he didn't have "incontrovertable proof"? If you know anything about science you know that we can never have incontrovertable proof. If we could it wouldn't be science.
There are no alternate (scientific) theories at the moment.