I just find it insulting to all the people in the world who actually do live helplessly under tyrants that you would consider the United States a police state. 'Cause routing the traffic through hammer and sickle China is a much better thing.
That's a nice straw man you just set up. China is a notorious police state, with a big censoring firewall around it, and would make an even more unfortunate Internet hub. I never said this was the only police state in the world, or the worst one either. But it certainly has become an embarrassing spectacle of a police state. Few of the others are so obnoxious as to present themselves to the world as practically the definition of freedom and liberty, even as they loudly justify their suspension of habeas corpus, their use of conveniently redefined torture, and their intention to abuse their fragile position as the world's central hub for Internet infrastructure with a program for pervasive spying on all foreigners who dare to send packets through.
What is quite plainly insulting to all the people in the world who actually live outside the United States at all (aside from the obnoxious packet inspection) is this supposition Americans have that once you leave their country you have no rights as recognized by other nations. All other countries are run by "tyrants" who torture people. And as long as conditions are worse anywhere else in the world, this country is justified in degrading itself ever further.
Of course, if you could confront these dweebs that write this garbage and ask them what country they would prefer over the US, I doubt they would have a clue how to answer. What they usually do is start calling the challenger names and making derogatory remarks about the challenger's intelligence or penis size.
If you want to know "what country I would prefer over the US" most of all, I would have to say it would be the United States that I grew up in as a kid. I'm sorry that people keep calling you stupid and making fun of your penis, but don't attribute those attacks to me. For all I know, you could be a big-dicked genius who just asked the first dumb question of his life.
so how is that the USs fault? because russia and other states in the region havent laid sufficient fiber, the US is somehow responsible?
You miss the point. It isn't about who's "responsible" for anything. We recently passed something called the "Protect America Act"- in full view of everyone, ironically with limited public debate- that allows the American government to engage in warrantless surveillance of any Internet traffic routed through the United States if either or (commonly) both endpoints of that traffic lie in a foreign country.
And it turns out, surprise surprise, that most people in the world would rather not have their packets routed through a police state.
How many kilowatt-hours were devoted to this nonsense? How many tons of coal were burned to support a botnet of a quarter million computers? How many microkelvin did the resulting carbon dioxide raise the planet's temperature? How many square meters of ice cover did we lose? How many polar bears drowned or froze to death? There's a good Google interview question in here somewhere.
Of course one might ask how many polar bears Google itself has on its conscience but that's the wrong response to give at the interview.
I don't see it as an on-the-spot decision either but I also don't see why that's even relevant. So what if there's plenty of time to deliberate with bad information? If the doctor says it's necessary and the insurance company says it's covered (to the extent that they ever guarantee anything) then most people will have the procedure. That doesn't justify being jerked around after the fact on the basis of some stupid technicality.
I have a chronic neurological disorder that causes me to wake up in an ER strapped to a gurney once or twice a year. (The U.S. health care system is designed to "disincentivize" you from having a condition like that.) On one of these ER visits, which insurance later refused to cover for some reason, I asked for a Tylenol to relieve a pounding headache- a mistake I'll never make again. They charged me eighteen dollars for a single tablet. Acetaminophen was invented in the 19th century.
That assumes you can make an informed decision knowing whether or not they are covered by your insurance, and if they are, whether or not you can trust that your insurer won't come up with a flimsy pretext later on for denying the claim and sticking you with the bill.
Well you could always go back to the 19th century and avoid hospitals if you don't like modern medical advances (which are quite expensive).
I'd actually prefer to go back to the 1950s. By then we had penicillin, X-rays, sanitation, hygiene, anesthesia, and a health care system that cost us less than what we spent on food. I could do without the expensive gimmicky crap like MRIs (of which I have had several, all completely useless).
Why do people fall for this garbage? If telecoms are granted carte blanche immunity now it prevents a more reasonable immunity deal later which would have a chance of exposing what appears to be significant wrongdoing on the part of the government. The motivation behind telecom immunity isn't really to let telecoms off the hook as much as it is to prevent stuff from coming out in court about what the government did. There are many things we'll never find out about if Dianne Feinstein helps usher this crap through. (I phoned her office at 202-224-3841 to complain. That's 202-224-3841. If enough Californians call 202-224-3841 maybe she'll change her mind since her constituents are overwhelmingly against this. But probably not- Feinstein is really horrible and is probably not running for reelection when her term expires years from now.)
Telecoms don't go to prison like you or I would. At most they incur legal expenses- probably less than a day's operating expenses- it's the cost of doing business. And they could have easily told the government to screw themselves. They were cooperating with these patently illegal requests even before 9/11.
Telecom immunity is obstruction of justice enshrined into law.
This is a foldable dupe so it doesn't take as much room on the front page. You can fit six more dupes about this story in the same space that a regular article would take.
After all, isn't it our own toy designers that came up with this "woo, if you pour water on the date-rape drug, they stick together" idea and the poor chinese factories are merely following the instructions? or am I missing something?
I'll give you two guesses.
They were supposed to use 1,5 pentanediol which is a common ingredient used to keep glues from getting sticky before they get wet. Instead they cut costs and used 1,4 butanediol (gamma-butyrolactone) which is a prodrug enzymatically metabolized into GHB.
Conservatism is generally against foreign adventures, against foreign borrowing, against big government, and against government interference in private matters.
Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit, and bullshit. Bush is as conservative as they come, and under Bush, conservatives have gotten everything they wanted: foreign wars of choice, a replacement of tax revenue with foreign borrowing, a massive expansion of government power (outweighing the decimation of government services), and an aggressive effort to bring the power of the state to bear on influencing individual moral decisions. Bush is unpopular because the inevitable results of conservative ideology are unpopular. Period.
I have to laugh when I see conservatives pretending they don't recognize this guy. He is hanging on your necks like a sack of shit and you all smell just like him. Not only is your next candidate going to be Rudy (you can just forget about this Ron Paul crap), there's a good chance Rudy will win since you're still going to vote for him.
We can't figure out what causes a disease we've knows about for 75 years and that affects half of million people.
I thought they found it was an autoimmune disorder caused by the absence of intestinal parasites (it mostly affects people in developed countries). The human gut has coevolved with its parasites and your immune system depends on them somehow. It uses them for practice. Link: http://www.news-medical.net/?id=6855 (I just googled "helminth crohn's".)
I had ulcerative colitis in college. I took sulfa drugs which did nothing. I had severe anemia and I was always popping iron pills and folic acid. I was always lightheaded, I could barely study, and I had to run to the toilet constantly. I could barely finish exams with all the running to the bathroom. Every bowl I flushed was an angry red color. I thought I was dying. If I had known about the curative powers of parasitic worms in college, I would have eaten them for breakfast lunch and dinner. I would have gone to third world countries just to get my hands on filthy doorknobs and toilet handles. That wouldn't have been quite as gross.
Does your wife smoke? Nicotine also has some effect. (Smokers love to light up on the throne and they rarely have these disorders.) Maybe the nicotine patches work. My UC went away once I started smoking and since I quit it's only flared back once. I didn't start smoking again; I took Colazal (new drug, suck on it Intel!) and that was the end of that.
I need to be told "think about it". Because otherwise I would forget and not think about it, due to me being a simpleton.
Doesn't that phrase just drip with arrogance?
It needs to drip with arrogance, because we are governed by simpletons.
... any expectation of privacy can be waived [citing case holding that a privacy disclaimer on a bulletin board "defeats claims to an objectively reasonable expectation of privacy."] Many employees are provided with e-mail and Internet services by their employers. Often, those employees are required to waive any expectation of privacy in their email each time they log on to their computers. [Court] orders directed to the email of employees who have waived any possible expectation of privacy do not violate the Fourth Amendment.
And that's your government there, arguing in a court brief that if your company reserves the right to read emails you send on their behalf, the government gets to read them too, so when you go home, the boss can't read your emails but the government still can. And if Slashdot puts up a "privacy statement", it replaces the Fourth Amendment with some sort of SlashAmendment that doesn't apply to the government, and if digg.com fails to put one up you don't get the Fourth Amendment OR the SlashAmendment because Slashdot's privacy statement somehow undermines privacy rights on digg in line with a precedent set by a stacked court.
If your electronic mail is not encrypted, then one might argue that it is unreasonable to expect privacy. It sucks, but there's some truth to the idea that we all know already that our ISP can monitor any unencrypted traffic we send, and that they reserve the right to.
I don't know where people get this notion that if it's possible for the government to do something, they have a right to do it. If I don't lock my door when I leave the house I'm not implicitly inviting the police into my house and surrendering my Fourth Amendment rights. If I make a call to my mother on the POTS network they can't simply listen in (recent fascist precedents notwithstanding) just because our voices are unencrypted.
There is a reasonable expectation of privacy that still applies to plaintext communications. Yes it's possible to do packet inspection on my emails, hold my mail up to the light, etc. and that might be relevant if we were talking about criminals doing these things. Not the government.
I'm getting sick of writing this post over and over and over again. If you had told me ten years ago that I would even have to make these arguments in my lifetime, I would have laughed in your face. Hopefully in 2008 someone sane will enter the White House, and we can look back on these threads and conversations and laugh. Unless this idiot holes himself up there and tries to pull off a Musharraf of his own which wouldn't surprise me at this point.
Its partly because a Universal Service Obligation is built into our telecommunications laws. Companies which supply loss making services to remote areas get a subsidy from companies which do not.
A law like that in the United States wouldn't have made it past the Reagan administration. American law is written by telecom lobbyists and is designed to create and sustain fake scarcity of telecommunications services.
No, it really isn't. There's this marvelous technology, instantiated in these crazy devices we call "fuses", see...
Fuses are "crazy?":P
Actually I was thinking more of dented capacitors, where there's nowhere to put a fuse to interrupt the short. The workarounds are obvious (arrays of little caps instead of one big one at the cost of energy density and extra materials) but the guy was asking about what might happen in a crash.
If a car powered by this technology wrecks or impacts with another car, would it not be feasible that a significant amount charge would be depleted during an impact because the energy could not be fully recovered?
If I'm reading your post correctly you're worrying about a loss of kinetic energy not being recoverable for recharging the capacitor. That's not more of a problem here than with any car. Air friction already produces similar energy losses without any crash. My Prius suffers from the problem you describe, but it's no big deal. It has ordinary mechanical brakes in case the regenerative braking cannot recharge the battery fast enough to slow down the car, but they rarely engage and the car has never needed a brake job because the battery (plus friction) is already pretty good at absorbing the energy.
With capacitors, the danger with a crash is an explosion. This could in theory release much more energy than the cars had in kinetic energy upon impact (like when an ordinary car's gas tank ruptures and ignites). While people like to worry about 911 workers with can openers unwittingly shorting out the NiMH batteries in a Prius, a short-circuited battery can only discharge energy as fast as the chemical reactions inside will allow. You don't necessarily get this protection with a cap. Basically the pulse width you can get from a capacitor is mediated only by its internal resistance and its magnetic induction.
That can still be considerable. I used to have a 100000 uF cap (they were just coming out in the early 90s, and this one was the size of a small stack of dimes). When I charged it to 5V and discharged it, I had to wait a few minutes for the thing to drain. It had electrical characteristics similar to those of a worn out rechargeable. But when one of those big HV paper-and-oil caps shorts out, wow. A friend of mine made a can crusher for the Rutgers physics department out of a car-battery-sized HV capacitor. It was the size of a car battery not because of its capacitance (it had an unimpressive 100 uF in that regard) but because of the high voltage rating (at least a few kV). Most caps can only handle 35 or 50 volts. The stored energy in a capacitor rises only linearly with capacitance, but quadratically with respect to voltage. This thing discharged through a coil of copper piping (6-7 turns) wrapped around a plexiglass tube with a soda can inside. When it discharged through the coil, it induced a circular countercurrent in the can. Then the magnetic repulsion between the coil current and the can current crushed the can into the shape of a pencil in an instant- BANG! It woke up all the engineering students, that's for sure. I think they still use it.
Let's say there's a TICKING TIME BOMB waiting to go off. And you've got a terrorist on the phone, who knows where the TICKING TIME BOMB is and he's watching a movie in a crowded theater. Now do you let hundreds of people die, because you want everyone to enjoy the movie? NO, you force him to talk on the phone, and MAKE him tell you where the bomb is. Anyone in the theater who uses a cellphone jammer is either a Democrat (who refuses to believe that we're at War) or another terrorist in on the plot.
then surely it follows from this reasoning that the majority of Americans, being Christian (or Jewish os Muslim), are sexist, racist, genocidal gangbangers? so why single out Ron Paul?
The majority of Americans are not running for president.
I used it recently when I had a nasty sore throat. You put a teaspoon of chili powder in a cup of lukewarm water and throw it in the back of your throat and gargle with it.
Probably makes your breath smell like hell but the pain from the blazing heat felt better than the sore throat.
Slashdot Mirror
I just find it insulting to all the people in the world who actually do live helplessly under tyrants that you would consider the United States a police state. 'Cause routing the traffic through hammer and sickle China is a much better thing.
That's a nice straw man you just set up. China is a notorious police state, with a big censoring firewall around it, and would make an even more unfortunate Internet hub. I never said this was the only police state in the world, or the worst one either. But it certainly has become an embarrassing spectacle of a police state. Few of the others are so obnoxious as to present themselves to the world as practically the definition of freedom and liberty, even as they loudly justify their suspension of habeas corpus, their use of conveniently redefined torture, and their intention to abuse their fragile position as the world's central hub for Internet infrastructure with a program for pervasive spying on all foreigners who dare to send packets through.
What is quite plainly insulting to all the people in the world who actually live outside the United States at all (aside from the obnoxious packet inspection) is this supposition Americans have that once you leave their country you have no rights as recognized by other nations. All other countries are run by "tyrants" who torture people. And as long as conditions are worse anywhere else in the world, this country is justified in degrading itself ever further.
Of course, if you could confront these dweebs that write this garbage and ask them what country they would prefer over the US, I doubt they would have a clue how to answer. What they usually do is start calling the challenger names and making derogatory remarks about the challenger's intelligence or penis size.
If you want to know "what country I would prefer over the US" most of all, I would have to say it would be the United States that I grew up in as a kid. I'm sorry that people keep calling you stupid and making fun of your penis, but don't attribute those attacks to me. For all I know, you could be a big-dicked genius who just asked the first dumb question of his life.
so how is that the USs fault? because russia and other states in the region havent laid sufficient fiber, the US is somehow responsible?
You miss the point. It isn't about who's "responsible" for anything. We recently passed something called the "Protect America Act"- in full view of everyone, ironically with limited public debate- that allows the American government to engage in warrantless surveillance of any Internet traffic routed through the United States if either or (commonly) both endpoints of that traffic lie in a foreign country.
And it turns out, surprise surprise, that most people in the world would rather not have their packets routed through a police state.
What kind of fucking lunatic would hire somebody who has PROVEN that he says he's one thing but is actually another?
Oh you'd be surprised. This guy might have a bright future ahead of him in politics.
How many kilowatt-hours were devoted to this nonsense? How many tons of coal were burned to support a botnet of a quarter million computers? How many microkelvin did the resulting carbon dioxide raise the planet's temperature? How many square meters of ice cover did we lose? How many polar bears drowned or froze to death? There's a good Google interview question in here somewhere.
Of course one might ask how many polar bears Google itself has on its conscience but that's the wrong response to give at the interview.
So he's pleading guilty to avoid ... what, a way harsh punishment, like 65 years in prison and $2 million in fines?
Waterboarding.
I don't see it as an on-the-spot decision either but I also don't see why that's even relevant. So what if there's plenty of time to deliberate with bad information? If the doctor says it's necessary and the insurance company says it's covered (to the extent that they ever guarantee anything) then most people will have the procedure. That doesn't justify being jerked around after the fact on the basis of some stupid technicality.
I have a chronic neurological disorder that causes me to wake up in an ER strapped to a gurney once or twice a year. (The U.S. health care system is designed to "disincentivize" you from having a condition like that.) On one of these ER visits, which insurance later refused to cover for some reason, I asked for a Tylenol to relieve a pounding headache- a mistake I'll never make again. They charged me eighteen dollars for a single tablet. Acetaminophen was invented in the 19th century.
That assumes you can make an informed decision knowing whether or not they are covered by your insurance, and if they are, whether or not you can trust that your insurer won't come up with a flimsy pretext later on for denying the claim and sticking you with the bill.
Well you could always go back to the 19th century and avoid hospitals if you don't like modern medical advances (which are quite expensive).
I'd actually prefer to go back to the 1950s. By then we had penicillin, X-rays, sanitation, hygiene, anesthesia, and a health care system that cost us less than what we spent on food. I could do without the expensive gimmicky crap like MRIs (of which I have had several, all completely useless).
Why do people fall for this garbage? If telecoms are granted carte blanche immunity now it prevents a more reasonable immunity deal later which would have a chance of exposing what appears to be significant wrongdoing on the part of the government. The motivation behind telecom immunity isn't really to let telecoms off the hook as much as it is to prevent stuff from coming out in court about what the government did. There are many things we'll never find out about if Dianne Feinstein helps usher this crap through. (I phoned her office at 202-224-3841 to complain. That's 202-224-3841. If enough Californians call 202-224-3841 maybe she'll change her mind since her constituents are overwhelmingly against this. But probably not- Feinstein is really horrible and is probably not running for reelection when her term expires years from now.)
Telecoms don't go to prison like you or I would. At most they incur legal expenses- probably less than a day's operating expenses- it's the cost of doing business. And they could have easily told the government to screw themselves. They were cooperating with these patently illegal requests even before 9/11.
Telecom immunity is obstruction of justice enshrined into law.
This is a foldable dupe so it doesn't take as much room on the front page. You can fit six more dupes about this story in the same space that a regular article would take.
After all, isn't it our own toy designers that came up with this "woo, if you pour water on the date-rape drug, they stick together" idea and the poor chinese factories are merely following the instructions? or am I missing something?
I'll give you two guesses.
They were supposed to use 1,5 pentanediol which is a common ingredient used to keep glues from getting sticky before they get wet. Instead they cut costs and used 1,4 butanediol (gamma-butyrolactone) which is a prodrug enzymatically metabolized into GHB.
Conservatism is generally against foreign adventures, against foreign borrowing, against big government, and against government interference in private matters.
Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit, and bullshit. Bush is as conservative as they come, and under Bush, conservatives have gotten everything they wanted: foreign wars of choice, a replacement of tax revenue with foreign borrowing, a massive expansion of government power (outweighing the decimation of government services), and an aggressive effort to bring the power of the state to bear on influencing individual moral decisions. Bush is unpopular because the inevitable results of conservative ideology are unpopular. Period.
I have to laugh when I see conservatives pretending they don't recognize this guy. He is hanging on your necks like a sack of shit and you all smell just like him. Not only is your next candidate going to be Rudy (you can just forget about this Ron Paul crap), there's a good chance Rudy will win since you're still going to vote for him.
I think we know why the standard kilogram is getting lighter. It's filled with pens and people are bringing them back without the caps.
We can't figure out what causes a disease we've knows about for 75 years and that affects half of million people.
I thought they found it was an autoimmune disorder caused by the absence of intestinal parasites (it mostly affects people in developed countries). The human gut has coevolved with its parasites and your immune system depends on them somehow. It uses them for practice. Link: http://www.news-medical.net/?id=6855 (I just googled "helminth crohn's".)
I had ulcerative colitis in college. I took sulfa drugs which did nothing. I had severe anemia and I was always popping iron pills and folic acid. I was always lightheaded, I could barely study, and I had to run to the toilet constantly. I could barely finish exams with all the running to the bathroom. Every bowl I flushed was an angry red color. I thought I was dying. If I had known about the curative powers of parasitic worms in college, I would have eaten them for breakfast lunch and dinner. I would have gone to third world countries just to get my hands on filthy doorknobs and toilet handles. That wouldn't have been quite as gross.
Does your wife smoke? Nicotine also has some effect. (Smokers love to light up on the throne and they rarely have these disorders.) Maybe the nicotine patches work. My UC went away once I started smoking and since I quit it's only flared back once. I didn't start smoking again; I took Colazal (new drug, suck on it Intel!) and that was the end of that.
Doesn't that phrase just drip with arrogance?
It needs to drip with arrogance, because we are governed by simpletons.And that's your government there, arguing in a court brief that if your company reserves the right to read emails you send on their behalf, the government gets to read them too, so when you go home, the boss can't read your emails but the government still can. And if Slashdot puts up a "privacy statement", it replaces the Fourth Amendment with some sort of SlashAmendment that doesn't apply to the government, and if digg.com fails to put one up you don't get the Fourth Amendment OR the SlashAmendment because Slashdot's privacy statement somehow undermines privacy rights on digg in line with a precedent set by a stacked court.
If your electronic mail is not encrypted, then one might argue that it is unreasonable to expect privacy. It sucks, but there's some truth to the idea that we all know already that our ISP can monitor any unencrypted traffic we send, and that they reserve the right to.
I don't know where people get this notion that if it's possible for the government to do something, they have a right to do it. If I don't lock my door when I leave the house I'm not implicitly inviting the police into my house and surrendering my Fourth Amendment rights. If I make a call to my mother on the POTS network they can't simply listen in (recent fascist precedents notwithstanding) just because our voices are unencrypted.
There is a reasonable expectation of privacy that still applies to plaintext communications. Yes it's possible to do packet inspection on my emails, hold my mail up to the light, etc. and that might be relevant if we were talking about criminals doing these things. Not the government.
I'm getting sick of writing this post over and over and over again. If you had told me ten years ago that I would even have to make these arguments in my lifetime, I would have laughed in your face. Hopefully in 2008 someone sane will enter the White House, and we can look back on these threads and conversations and laugh. Unless this idiot holes himself up there and tries to pull off a Musharraf of his own which wouldn't surprise me at this point.
Its partly because a Universal Service Obligation is built into our telecommunications laws. Companies which supply loss making services to remote areas get a subsidy from companies which do not.
A law like that in the United States wouldn't have made it past the Reagan administration. American law is written by telecom lobbyists and is designed to create and sustain fake scarcity of telecommunications services.
No, it really isn't. There's this marvelous technology, instantiated in these crazy devices we call "fuses", see...
:P
Fuses are "crazy?"
Actually I was thinking more of dented capacitors, where there's nowhere to put a fuse to interrupt the short. The workarounds are obvious (arrays of little caps instead of one big one at the cost of energy density and extra materials) but the guy was asking about what might happen in a crash.
final class Car {
static {
System.loadLibrary("car.dll");
}
public native void start();
}
#include <jni.h>
#include "car.h"
JNIEXPORT void JNICALL Java_Car_start(JNIEnv *env, jobject obj) {
for(;;)
;
}
If a car powered by this technology wrecks or impacts with another car, would it not be feasible that a significant amount charge would be depleted during an impact because the energy could not be fully recovered?
If I'm reading your post correctly you're worrying about a loss of kinetic energy not being recoverable for recharging the capacitor. That's not more of a problem here than with any car. Air friction already produces similar energy losses without any crash. My Prius suffers from the problem you describe, but it's no big deal. It has ordinary mechanical brakes in case the regenerative braking cannot recharge the battery fast enough to slow down the car, but they rarely engage and the car has never needed a brake job because the battery (plus friction) is already pretty good at absorbing the energy.
With capacitors, the danger with a crash is an explosion. This could in theory release much more energy than the cars had in kinetic energy upon impact (like when an ordinary car's gas tank ruptures and ignites). While people like to worry about 911 workers with can openers unwittingly shorting out the NiMH batteries in a Prius, a short-circuited battery can only discharge energy as fast as the chemical reactions inside will allow. You don't necessarily get this protection with a cap. Basically the pulse width you can get from a capacitor is mediated only by its internal resistance and its magnetic induction.
That can still be considerable. I used to have a 100000 uF cap (they were just coming out in the early 90s, and this one was the size of a small stack of dimes). When I charged it to 5V and discharged it, I had to wait a few minutes for the thing to drain. It had electrical characteristics similar to those of a worn out rechargeable. But when one of those big HV paper-and-oil caps shorts out, wow. A friend of mine made a can crusher for the Rutgers physics department out of a car-battery-sized HV capacitor. It was the size of a car battery not because of its capacitance (it had an unimpressive 100 uF in that regard) but because of the high voltage rating (at least a few kV). Most caps can only handle 35 or 50 volts. The stored energy in a capacitor rises only linearly with capacitance, but quadratically with respect to voltage. This thing discharged through a coil of copper piping (6-7 turns) wrapped around a plexiglass tube with a soda can inside. When it discharged through the coil, it induced a circular countercurrent in the can. Then the magnetic repulsion between the coil current and the can current crushed the can into the shape of a pencil in an instant- BANG! It woke up all the engineering students, that's for sure. I think they still use it.
But if MS creates a new language and it's beloved
I believe I have spotted the flaw in your argument.
Let's say there's a TICKING TIME BOMB waiting to go off. And you've got a terrorist on the phone, who knows where the TICKING TIME BOMB is and he's watching a movie in a crowded theater. Now do you let hundreds of people die, because you want everyone to enjoy the movie? NO, you force him to talk on the phone, and MAKE him tell you where the bomb is. Anyone in the theater who uses a cellphone jammer is either a Democrat (who refuses to believe that we're at War) or another terrorist in on the plot.
then surely it follows from this reasoning that the majority of Americans, being Christian (or Jewish os Muslim), are sexist, racist, genocidal gangbangers? so why single out Ron Paul?
The majority of Americans are not running for president.
I used it recently when I had a nasty sore throat. You put a teaspoon of chili powder in a cup of lukewarm water and throw it in the back of your throat and gargle with it.
Probably makes your breath smell like hell but the pain from the blazing heat felt better than the sore throat.