A million is nothing to a corporation that needs to know what governments are capable of.
Right, because someone who knows all the nation's secrets (and everybody else's) should be selling that information to private corporations.
Brilliant idea.
If this information is classified, how the hell can he provide it without breaking the law?
Indeed, that is the question.
Perhaps he can say "you should do this, and this and this and you shouldn't do that, that or that which doesn't directly say what the NSA (or other) can or can't do.
At any rate, right or wrong, his knowledge is worth a lot.
There have been questions of my ability to do what is on my resume that are legit.
I do a lot of technical interviewing, and that is the whole point of a technical interview, to verify that you actually do possess the skills that you have claimed to possess.
It's not because you're black. It's because you're interviewing. I could tell so many stories of wild resume claims, you'd laugh.
Here's one from today, for an interviewee who was an "expert in J2EE".
Q: What are some different types of EJBs and how do they differ from one another? A: [uncomfortable silence]. Q: Sorry, let's back up a bit. Tell me about your role in your last project that used J2EE. A: Uhh, I think I made a JSP once in college before I left to go work at a startup.
As you might expect, his resume got filed away in the recycling bin.
He said there were questions that were legit. He then went on to say that there were questions that were not legit.
Jesse Jackson is not a Black leader. He does not and never has spoken for Black people. He is self serving and always has been. However! As one of the few Black men in IT, I have to say it is prejudicial almost every time I interview for a position. I have over 15 years in IT. I have done Software Engineering; SQA Engineering; Systems Engineering and Technical Project Management. There have been questions of my ability to do what is on my resume that are legit. But I have had more than a few instances where it was obvious to me that the questions "all of a sudden" take a weird turn. I applied for a Systems Admin position, did really well on the phone technical screen. Came in for a face to face and things took a turn. Under the guise of "I just want to see how you think" questions that are usually asked to potential Software Developers are being asked. I handled the questions with ease (a good education AND experience as a Developer). The surprise on the face of interviewer was disheartening. I knew what was being attempted. So now questions like, "How does one measure the amount of water passing a particular point in a river?" or "Why can you not see the Moon during the day?" are being asked. I've asked more than a few of my IT colleagues if they have had these situations and not one has. The assumption that all Blacks are from the "Inner City" "the ghetto" or "Urban" and lack education is so wrong. There are many of us that are twice as good and make half as much because of the Supremacist entitlement that pervades this culture.
A friend of mine runs, and has run for many years, the network department of a private bank in New York. He is black (oh, sorry Black) coming originally from Jamaica (the island not the borough).
What he told me, back when I was working for him, is that in his opinion blacks in America tend to cause themselves problems that don't actually exist. He was quite worried, at the time, that his son would pick up the 'we are persecuted' mentality and drop his own level of achievement to try and fit in with the other black students in his school.
I grew up in a home for children. We all had nothing and, arguably, we all had the same living environment growing up. I saw this exact thing happen with one of my 'brothers' who was black. He was living the same as me - same room, same money, same people around us. He went to the same schools that I did. The difference was that he picked up the 'we are persecuted' mentality and started acting black to fit in. Things only got worse from there, which I won't go into. The long and short of it is that I think that my friend from Jamaica is right. Even where there is no persecution, American blacks create problems for themselves.
Obviously this is a generalization. There are plenty of successful black people who have never let themselves be stopped by anything - least of all themselves.
Military pay grades are in the public record. Many sites (the above is just one) publish them.
Presumably if the NSA is refusing to provide this information the person in question may have been paid more, perhaps significantly more, than the normal pay grade scale.
You have the right to make the analogy less realistic, but I don't see how that's helpful. The reality is not a mere suspicion of rockets in a school, it's actual rockets in at least three actual schools:
(Reuters) - UNRWA said it found a rocket cache in one of its central Gaza schools on Tuesday, the third such incident.
http://www.france24.com/en/201... Here Israel shelled a school because, they claim, they were returning fire on Hamas mortar positions, which may or may not be true. The problem with this, generally speaking, is that the warzone is so small and densely packed with civilians that there is nowhere that Hamas can attack from that isn't near, more or less, civilian installations and if Israel attacks or returns fire and isn't very exact with it then they will kill civilians.
There are also attacks where no valid military excuse has been given.
Israel calls ceasefires and then doesn't honor them, which is disturbing to say the least. "At least 17 people were killed in an Israeli air strike on a packed Gaza market on Wednesday that followed soon after Israel said it would observe a four-hour humanitarian ceasefire beginning at 12pm (GMT)" http://www.france24.com/en/201...
If Israel cared about Palestinian civilian casualties they would use ground forces to attack specific targets rather than shelling approximate locations.
Israel attacks anything, anytime, anywhere and doesn't care about the civilian casualties caused. They do what they want and they get away with it.
There are - there are *occasional* corporations that actually seem to be driven by the desire to share their love of a great product and delivering that product to their customers. It's rare, but I can think of a few. Granted, they tend to also be much smaller corporations than the Comcasts of the world, but that doesn't mean they have to be tiny local companies.
I'll have to ask you for examples of corporations that care more about anything than profit, as I don't believe they exist.
I could believe that privately held corporations might do so - but not public ones.
they already bought the Music CD so the owner of these CD ripping automobiles are not stealing the music, and they are not capable of sharing those ripped CDs on the internet, it is just making it easier and safer for the driver because they can pay more attention to driving and not fumbling around with a CD collection while driving
Right...instead they can fumble around with ripping their CDs while driving...no doubt much safer:-)
Report them to the IDF? Are you insane? If you came and killed my child I would not report those trying to kill you to the police or army. I would do everything I could to support those trying to kill you.
That's a very bad analogy. It has led you to the wrong conclusion, as bad analogies often do.
A far better analogy: I live in Bellingham, Washington, and my government, the United States Government, stockpiles rockets in my child's school and starts firing them over the border into residential areas of Vancouver, British Columbia, for no good reason. To try to stop the rocket attacks, Canada launches some airstrikes on Bellingham.
In this situation, I would be completely ashamed of my government, the United States Government, and I would be rooting for the Canadians, because I'm a civilized person.
And then if the airstrikes failed to stop the rocket attacks, and Canadian troops arrived in Bellingham, you bet I'd help them find the jerks launching the rockets.
And if the Canadians dropped leaflets begging civilians to evacuate the school before they bomb the rocket-launching site, I would have even more admiration for the Canadians, because that type of concern for civilians is nearly unprecedented in warfare.
And if my child was killed because a school administrator obeyed the duplicitous order to stay put, would I suddenly lose my grip on logic and rationality, and lash out at the Canadians? Nope. My anger would be entirely directed at the Americans who instigated this conflict.
Let me change that just a bit.
Scenario 1a) Let's say the Canadian's suspect that there are rockets stored in the basement of your child's school, where due to flooding your child, your family and the families of everyone you know are sheltering because there is no electricity and no water and all of your houses are under water.
There may or may not be weapons stored under the school. You have no idea and you certainly had nothing to do with putting them there if there are.
Now how do you feel about the Canadians shelling your school on this suspicion? I think not.
Scenario 1b) Let's change 1a to be that now there are militants firing rockets from the roof of the school. You still have nowhere to go because this is the only place you can get food and water.
Are the militants to blame for the immediate situation? Let's say yes.
Would you still be cheering on the Canadians shelling the school, even as you curse the militants.
No, I suspect you would be cursing both sides for crushing you in the middle.
So environmental factors result in DNA changes...is that new?
I thought that those of us not blinded by religion were already of the opinion that this is part of evolution, adaptation, survival of the fittest and all that good stuff....
It was just pointing out that your statement was the equivalent of "So tcp 80 won't be throttled but tcp 80 uses will be -"
Okay - I see...so in that case NBAR (or the equivalent) would be needed but it's still doable.
Thanks for pointing out that it's just port 80 though. I'm in Europe and I haven't bothered setting up a VPN to get this service so I have no direct experience with netflix at all.
IRAN has turned all of its enriched uranium closest to the level needed to make nuclear arms into more harmless forms, the United Nations' nuclear agency says.
THE move was expected. Tehran had committed to convert or dilute its 20-per cent enriched stockpile under an agreement with six powers last November that froze its atomic programs pending negotiations on a comprehensive deal. Those talks were extended on Saturday to November 24.
Still, the development was noteworthy in reflecting Iran's desire not to derail the diplomatic process with the six countries - the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany.
If you really cared about Iran and not about piling up perceived failure at Obama's feet, you sure as shit would have seen this headline from last week.
It wasn't a secret. The AP, AFP, Reuters, and pretty much everyone was talking about it.
/Naturally Fox News did their best to report only on the extension of talks.
Shouldn't forget North Korea either, who we know has nuclear weapons and has actively threatened to use them against US targets.
The side that apparently blew a 300-civilian passenger jet out of the sky because they're too dumb to know what a Boeing looks like is getting direct military support from a major regional power which just happens to have nuclear weapons. And I thought my hometown of Detroit was fucked.
Well, if you want to put it that way the plane would never have been shot down if Russia had supplied a professional crew instead of teaching the separatists how to aim and pull the trigger. At least with the Russian military firing they probably know what they're aiming at.
You're assuming that the 'separatists' are not actually Russian military / mercenaries. I'm not sure where I saw the statistic unfortunately, but I read 80% are Russians and only 20% are actually Ukrainians.
That does not excuse the methods of Israel. For example: "The UN has compiled evidence that Israeli soldiers used Palestinian children as human shields fourteen times between early 2010 and early 2013. It says all soldiers involved in the incident have gone unpunished." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W...
And as I've said over and over again in various posts I do not support the methods of Hamas.
I do tend to trust (as much as that's possible) the statistics from the UN, rather from either side in the actual conflict. More children than Palestinian fighters are being killed in the offensive on Gaza, according to the latest United Nations statistics
It is self evident that killing people will make enemies of their families. [...] If you came and killed my child I would not report those trying to kill you to the police or army. I would do everything I could to support those trying to kill you. As I said above, it is self evident that the Palistinian survivors of this will do everything they can to kill Israelis in the future.
You can not be an enemy if you are dead. This idea that you would get revenge is silly.
This conflict will end because one side will die. The sooner this happens, the lower the body count. (the number of dead can greatly exceed the total population if the conflict drags on for generations)
1) You are describing genocide in the scale that the nazis effected on the jews in WW2. Do you condone this?
2) If anything other than a genocide there are going to be survivors, who will want revenge.
I am saying that when one fights a war, one should fight to win in as short a time as possible. The only way to win a war is convince the civilian population of the other side that any price they might have to pay is better than for the war to continue.
You are arguing in favor of terrorism.
The other way, the valid way, is to defeat the military opponent.
You make two mistakes. The first is that you believe that Israel killing civilians will not stop Hamas. At some point, if Israel makes things horrific enough for the civilians after a Hamas attack, the civilians will stop supporting Hamas and instead report them to the IDF.
It is self evident that killing people will make enemies of their families. You have nothing to base your assertion on at all, other than your opinion.
Again you condone terrorism, warfare against a civilian population. Report them to the IDF? Are you insane? If you came and killed my child I would not report those trying to kill you to the police or army. I would do everything I could to support those trying to kill you. As I said above, it is self evident that the Palistinian survivors of this will do everything they can to kill Israelis in the future.
Second, you seem to believe that Israel targets civilians, they do not. Israel targets military targets, which have been intentionally placed so as to maximize civilian casualties when Israel inevitably destroys them.
I did not say that they target civilians. I said that they do not care who they kill. They kill anything that moves. They destroy any building that may (or may not) be hiding the enemy indiscriminately.
You want to kill soldiers in a civilian position then you send in solders to kill them.
If you want to understand what I am talking about, read about what the French did after WWII in the parts of Germany which they occupied. The Nazis did not stop fighting with the fall of Berlin. They attempted to continue fighting a war of terror against the Allies. The Allies were ruthless in how they dealt with civilian populations among which they found the Nazis who continued to fight.
The Allies were ruthless with nazi sympathizers, yes. They did not effect open terrorist warfare on the civilian population where they suspected that nazis would be hiding though, within the extent of the technology of the day to avoid civilian casualties.
it appears that you do not care if those casualties that you wish to inflict are against valid military targets or against civilians. Is that correct?
No, that is not correct. That would actually be the position of Hamas. For that matter, Hamas only mildly prefers that the civilian casualties be Israeli civilians. They are just as willing for the civilian casualties to be Arabs living in territories they nominally govern. Hamas actively promotes civilian casualties among the Arab population, as long as they can blame it on the Israelis. They will even inflict those casualties if they believe that Israel will get the blame.
While you say that it is not correct, your arguments say otherwise. You are obviously content with the idea that terrorism is valid and as such, you cannot care about the civilians and children that are killed by doing so.
I blame Hamas as much as I blame Israel - but I blame both sides. What I really cannot stand, though, is the hypocrisy of the Israelis saying how badly the Jews have always been treated and then treating others in much the same way.
Read up on Sherman's March to the Sea or about German and Japanese casualties during WWII. From the standpoint of fighting a war for survival, which the state of Israel is doing (read the stated goals of Hamas and other Arab organizations which are waging wars of terror against Israel), Israel has inflicted insufficient casualties on the Palestinian Arabs. For that matter, why should Israel be condemned just because they do everything they can to protect their civilians, while their opponents do everything they can to maximize casualties among their own civilians? Hamas, and other Arab groups fighting against Israel, intentionally take actions so as to maximize the deaths of civilians, and particularly children. They store the missiles they fire at Israeli civilians in schools and hospitals. They use civilians, including children, as human shields while firing on Israeli soldiers. It is Hamas that is responsible for the death toll of civilians in Palestine.
You're saying that it's okay to use terrorism to fight terrorism.
Didn't your mother teach you that two wrongs don't make a right?
I disagree with Hamas methods and I do not in any way support them. But I disagree with Israel's methods as well. Hamas hiding weapons in a school does not justify shelling that school when it is full of children.
Israel is no longer fighting a war for survival. At one point that argument would have been valid but to say so now is ridiculous as no country in the middle east - and most likely not the entire middle east all together - could defeat Israel's military might.
On top of that, Israel is not protecting their own civilians as killing Palestinian civilians will not stop Hamas. It will, in the long run, make Hamas stronger as more Palestinian families lose their loved ones and will do anything to strike back at Israel. Hatred begets hatred, as you should know as you evidently have been begot of hatred.
Per your statement "Israel has inflicted insufficient casualties on the Palestinian Arabs" and the general content of what you are writing it appears that you do not care if those casualties that you wish to inflict are against valid military targets or against civilians. Is that correct?
Also, it doesn't say they don't take down racist comments against Palestinians.
"France continues to promote freedom of the press and speech online by allowing unfiltered access to most content, apart from limited filtering of child pornography and web sites that promote terrorism, or racial violence and hatred." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I...
Umm, have you paid attention to what the people in charge on the Palestinian side of this have done, and are doing? You know, things like killing people for being homosexual? Such that Arabs who have homosexual desires often seek, and receive, asylum in Israel. Or perhaps you have not noticed that their compatriots is Iraq have mandated female genital mutilation in at least one city which they control? Perhaps you have not noticed that the Syrian government has killed more Arabs this year than Israel has, by a wide margin?
You are lumping all muslims and arabs together and even if you were right to do so, itstillwould not justify the way that Israel is conducting themselves.
40 Israelis dead, almost exclusively soldiers. 1,000 Palestinians dead. About 80 percent of them civilian and about 20% of them children.
This is not war. This is not a justified use of appropriate force. This is shooting fish in the barrel and, quantity aside, is disgustingly like what the Germans did to the Jews in WW2.
Slashdot Mirror
Right, because someone who knows all the nation's secrets (and everybody else's) should be selling that information to private corporations.
Brilliant idea.
If this information is classified, how the hell can he provide it without breaking the law?
Indeed, that is the question.
Perhaps he can say "you should do this, and this and this and you shouldn't do that, that or that which doesn't directly say what the NSA (or other) can or can't do.
At any rate, right or wrong, his knowledge is worth a lot.
There have been questions of my ability to do what is on my resume that are legit.
I do a lot of technical interviewing, and that is the whole point of a technical interview, to verify that you actually do possess the skills that you have claimed to possess.
It's not because you're black. It's because you're interviewing. I could tell so many stories of wild resume claims, you'd laugh.
Here's one from today, for an interviewee who was an "expert in J2EE".
Q: What are some different types of EJBs and how do they differ from one another?
A: [uncomfortable silence].
Q: Sorry, let's back up a bit. Tell me about your role in your last project that used J2EE.
A: Uhh, I think I made a JSP once in college before I left to go work at a startup.
As you might expect, his resume got filed away in the recycling bin.
He said there were questions that were legit. He then went on to say that there were questions that were not legit.
Jesse Jackson is not a Black leader. He does not and never has spoken for Black people. He is self serving and always has been.
However!
As one of the few Black men in IT, I have to say it is prejudicial almost every time I interview for a position. I have over 15 years in IT. I have done Software Engineering; SQA Engineering; Systems Engineering and Technical Project Management. There have been questions of my ability to do what is on my resume that are legit. But I have had more than a few instances where it was obvious to me that the questions "all of a sudden" take a weird turn. I applied for a Systems Admin position, did really well on the phone technical screen. Came in for a face to face and things took a turn. Under the guise of "I just want to see how you think" questions that are usually asked to potential Software Developers are being asked. I handled the questions with ease (a good education AND experience as a Developer). The surprise on the face of interviewer was disheartening. I knew what was being attempted. So now questions like, "How does one measure the amount of water passing a particular point in a river?" or "Why can you not see the Moon during the day?" are being asked. I've asked more than a few of my IT colleagues if they have had these situations and not one has. The assumption that all Blacks are from the "Inner City" "the ghetto" or "Urban" and lack education is so wrong. There are many of us that are twice as good and make half as much because of the Supremacist entitlement that pervades this culture.
A friend of mine runs, and has run for many years, the network department of a private bank in New York. He is black (oh, sorry Black) coming originally from Jamaica (the island not the borough).
What he told me, back when I was working for him, is that in his opinion blacks in America tend to cause themselves problems that don't actually exist. He was quite worried, at the time, that his son would pick up the 'we are persecuted' mentality and drop his own level of achievement to try and fit in with the other black students in his school.
I grew up in a home for children. We all had nothing and, arguably, we all had the same living environment growing up. I saw this exact thing happen with one of my 'brothers' who was black. He was living the same as me - same room, same money, same people around us. He went to the same schools that I did. The difference was that he picked up the 'we are persecuted' mentality and started acting black to fit in. Things only got worse from there, which I won't go into. The long and short of it is that I think that my friend from Jamaica is right. Even where there is no persecution, American blacks create problems for themselves.
Obviously this is a generalization. There are plenty of successful black people who have never let themselves be stopped by anything - least of all themselves.
http://www.militaryfactory.com...
Military pay grades are in the public record. Many sites (the above is just one) publish them.
Presumably if the NSA is refusing to provide this information the person in question may have been paid more, perhaps significantly more, than the normal pay grade scale.
I remember when Reagan was making a million a speech as a former President, and thinking There's no fucking way he's worth it.
A million is worth admittedly less these days, I get that, but I have the same feeling now.
A million is nothing to a corporation that needs to know what governments are capable of.
You have the right to make the analogy less realistic, but I don't see how that's helpful. The reality is not a mere suspicion of rockets in a school, it's actual rockets in at least three actual schools:
(Reuters) - UNRWA said it found a rocket cache in one of its central Gaza schools on Tuesday, the third such incident.
http://www.france24.com/en/201...
Here Israel shelled a school because, they claim, they were returning fire on Hamas mortar positions, which may or may not be true. The problem with this, generally speaking, is that the warzone is so small and densely packed with civilians that there is nowhere that Hamas can attack from that isn't near, more or less, civilian installations and if Israel attacks or returns fire and isn't very exact with it then they will kill civilians.
There are also attacks where no valid military excuse has been given.
This is a bit dated, but worth a look:
http://www.hrw.org/news/2014/0...
Israel calls ceasefires and then doesn't honor them, which is disturbing to say the least.
"At least 17 people were killed in an Israeli air strike on a packed Gaza market on Wednesday that followed soon after Israel said it would observe a four-hour humanitarian ceasefire beginning at 12pm (GMT)"
http://www.france24.com/en/201...
Here's another one during a supposed truce:
http://www.independent.co.uk/n...
If Israel cared about Palestinian civilian casualties they would use ground forces to attack specific targets rather than shelling approximate locations.
Israel attacks anything, anytime, anywhere and doesn't care about the civilian casualties caused. They do what they want and they get away with it.
There are - there are *occasional* corporations that actually seem to be driven by the desire to share their love of a great product and delivering that product to their customers. It's rare, but I can think of a few. Granted, they tend to also be much smaller corporations than the Comcasts of the world, but that doesn't mean they have to be tiny local companies.
I'll have to ask you for examples of corporations that care more about anything than profit, as I don't believe they exist.
I could believe that privately held corporations might do so - but not public ones.
Assessment of "Ability to pay" is how the economy currently works. Did you instead mean "beyond the cash on hand"?
Yes
they already bought the Music CD so the owner of these CD ripping automobiles are not stealing the music, and they are not capable of sharing those ripped CDs on the internet, it is just making it easier and safer for the driver because they can pay more attention to driving and not fumbling around with a CD collection while driving
Right...instead they can fumble around with ripping their CDs while driving...no doubt much safer :-)
"...painted a picture of a corporation overrun by the neverending quest for greater profit"
Is there some other type of corporation?
Nobody can force you to go into debt.
Except if you need medical help and aren't poor enough to have title 19, lucky enough to have medical coverage or rich enough not to need it.
If you have a million in assets, what do you need a loan for?
We've finally arrived at the point where your only chance to getting a loan is not needing one.
Excellent.
Now maybe people will stop spending beyond their ability to pay.
And then maybe governments will also stop spending beyond their ability to pay.
Okay probably not but it would be nice.
Its only eroded as socialism has advanced.
socialism stepped in as the american dream eroded.
Socialism has been alive in well in America since the idea of free public schools was introduced, if not before.
The American dream is reachable to any that do not fall into debt, drugs (including alcohol) or have significant medical problems.
Of course for a long time now the American economy has been based on debt which is why so many people fail to live the American dream.
Fuck the banks and fuck the politicians that allow banks to charge people 30% interest which used to be illegal but apparently no longer is so.
Report them to the IDF? Are you insane? If you came and killed my child I would not report those trying to kill you to the police or army. I would do everything I could to support those trying to kill you.
That's a very bad analogy. It has led you to the wrong conclusion, as bad analogies often do.
A far better analogy: I live in Bellingham, Washington, and my government, the United States Government, stockpiles rockets in my child's school and starts firing them over the border into residential areas of Vancouver, British Columbia, for no good reason. To try to stop the rocket attacks, Canada launches some airstrikes on Bellingham.
In this situation, I would be completely ashamed of my government, the United States Government, and I would be rooting for the Canadians, because I'm a civilized person.
And then if the airstrikes failed to stop the rocket attacks, and Canadian troops arrived in Bellingham, you bet I'd help them find the jerks launching the rockets.
And if the Canadians dropped leaflets begging civilians to evacuate the school before they bomb the rocket-launching site, I would have even more admiration for the Canadians, because that type of concern for civilians is nearly unprecedented in warfare.
And if American leaders called those evacuation warning leaflets "psychological warfare, and urged people to stay put," my disgust for my own government would multiply.
And if my child was killed because a school administrator obeyed the duplicitous order to stay put, would I suddenly lose my grip on logic and rationality, and lash out at the Canadians? Nope. My anger would be entirely directed at the Americans who instigated this conflict.
Let me change that just a bit.
Scenario 1a) Let's say the Canadian's suspect that there are rockets stored in the basement of your child's school, where due to flooding your child, your family and the families of everyone you know are sheltering because there is no electricity and no water and all of your houses are under water.
There may or may not be weapons stored under the school. You have no idea and you certainly had nothing to do with putting them there if there are.
Now how do you feel about the Canadians shelling your school on this suspicion? I think not.
Scenario 1b) Let's change 1a to be that now there are militants firing rockets from the roof of the school. You still have nowhere to go because this is the only place you can get food and water.
Are the militants to blame for the immediate situation? Let's say yes.
Would you still be cheering on the Canadians shelling the school, even as you curse the militants.
No, I suspect you would be cursing both sides for crushing you in the middle.
So environmental factors result in DNA changes...is that new?
I thought that those of us not blinded by religion were already of the opinion that this is part of evolution, adaptation, survival of the fittest and all that good stuff....
It was just pointing out that your statement was the equivalent of "So tcp 80 won't be throttled but tcp 80 uses will be -"
Okay - I see...so in that case NBAR (or the equivalent) would be needed but it's still doable.
Thanks for pointing out that it's just port 80 though. I'm in Europe and I haven't bothered setting up a VPN to get this service so I have no direct experience with netflix at all.
Iran can make nuclear weapons and they won't even say a word.
Iran dilutes nuclear material
July 21, 2014
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/latest-news/iran-dilutes-nuclear-material/story-fn3dxix6-1226995916083
IRAN has turned all of its enriched uranium closest to the level needed to make nuclear arms into more harmless forms, the United Nations' nuclear agency says.
THE move was expected. Tehran had committed to convert or dilute its 20-per cent enriched stockpile under an agreement with six powers last November that froze its atomic programs pending negotiations on a comprehensive deal. Those talks were extended on Saturday to November 24.
Still, the development was noteworthy in reflecting Iran's desire not to derail the diplomatic process with the six countries - the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany.
If you really cared about Iran and not about piling up perceived failure at Obama's feet, you sure as shit would have seen this headline from last week.
It wasn't a secret. The AP, AFP, Reuters, and pretty much everyone was talking about it.
/Naturally Fox News did their best to report only on the extension of talks.
Shouldn't forget North Korea either, who we know has nuclear weapons and has actively threatened to use them against US targets.
The side that apparently blew a 300-civilian passenger jet out of the sky because they're too dumb to know what a Boeing looks like is getting direct military support from a major regional power which just happens to have nuclear weapons. And I thought my hometown of Detroit was fucked.
Well, if you want to put it that way the plane would never have been shot down if Russia had supplied a professional crew instead of teaching the separatists how to aim and pull the trigger. At least with the Russian military firing they probably know what they're aiming at.
You're assuming that the 'separatists' are not actually Russian military / mercenaries. I'm not sure where I saw the statistic unfortunately, but I read 80% are Russians and only 20% are actually Ukrainians.
That does not excuse the methods of Israel. For example:
"The UN has compiled evidence that Israeli soldiers used Palestinian children as human shields fourteen times between early 2010 and early 2013. It says all soldiers involved in the incident have gone unpunished."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W...
And as I've said over and over again in various posts I do not support the methods of Hamas.
I do tend to trust (as much as that's possible) the statistics from the UN, rather from either side in the actual conflict.
More children than Palestinian fighters are being killed in the offensive on Gaza, according to the latest United Nations statistics
It is self evident that killing people will make enemies of their families. [...] If you came and killed my child I would not report those trying to kill you to the police or army. I would do everything I could to support those trying to kill you. As I said above, it is self evident that the Palistinian survivors of this will do everything they can to kill Israelis in the future.
You can not be an enemy if you are dead. This idea that you would get revenge is silly.
This conflict will end because one side will die. The sooner this happens, the lower the body count. (the number of dead can greatly exceed the total population if the conflict drags on for generations)
1) You are describing genocide in the scale that the nazis effected on the jews in WW2. Do you condone this?
2) If anything other than a genocide there are going to be survivors, who will want revenge.
http is tcp port 80, so what you said is:
'so tcp port 80 won't be throttled by tcp port 80 (or whatever) uses will be-'
Um...yes and? They're the same thing - so?
I am saying that when one fights a war, one should fight to win in as short a time as possible. The only way to win a war is convince the civilian population of the other side that any price they might have to pay is better than for the war to continue.
You are arguing in favor of terrorism.
The other way, the valid way, is to defeat the military opponent.
You make two mistakes. The first is that you believe that Israel killing civilians will not stop Hamas. At some point, if Israel makes things horrific enough for the civilians after a Hamas attack, the civilians will stop supporting Hamas and instead report them to the IDF.
It is self evident that killing people will make enemies of their families. You have nothing to base your assertion on at all, other than your opinion.
Again you condone terrorism, warfare against a civilian population. Report them to the IDF? Are you insane? If you came and killed my child I would not report those trying to kill you to the police or army. I would do everything I could to support those trying to kill you. As I said above, it is self evident that the Palistinian survivors of this will do everything they can to kill Israelis in the future.
Second, you seem to believe that Israel targets civilians, they do not. Israel targets military targets, which have been intentionally placed so as to maximize civilian casualties when Israel inevitably destroys them.
I did not say that they target civilians. I said that they do not care who they kill. They kill anything that moves. They destroy any building that may (or may not) be hiding the enemy indiscriminately.
You want to kill soldiers in a civilian position then you send in solders to kill them.
If you want to understand what I am talking about, read about what the French did after WWII in the parts of Germany which they occupied. The Nazis did not stop fighting with the fall of Berlin. They attempted to continue fighting a war of terror against the Allies. The Allies were ruthless in how they dealt with civilian populations among which they found the Nazis who continued to fight.
The Allies were ruthless with nazi sympathizers, yes. They did not effect open terrorist warfare on the civilian population where they suspected that nazis would be hiding though, within the extent of the technology of the day to avoid civilian casualties.
it appears that you do not care if those casualties that you wish to inflict are against valid military targets or against civilians. Is that correct?
No, that is not correct. That would actually be the position of Hamas. For that matter, Hamas only mildly prefers that the civilian casualties be Israeli civilians. They are just as willing for the civilian casualties to be Arabs living in territories they nominally govern. Hamas actively promotes civilian casualties among the Arab population, as long as they can blame it on the Israelis. They will even inflict those casualties if they believe that Israel will get the blame.
While you say that it is not correct, your arguments say otherwise. You are obviously content with the idea that terrorism is valid and as such, you cannot care about the civilians and children that are killed by doing so.
I blame Hamas as much as I blame Israel - but I blame both sides. What I really cannot stand, though, is the hypocrisy of the Israelis saying how badly the Jews have always been treated and then treating others in much the same way.
Read up on Sherman's March to the Sea or about German and Japanese casualties during WWII. From the standpoint of fighting a war for survival, which the state of Israel is doing (read the stated goals of Hamas and other Arab organizations which are waging wars of terror against Israel), Israel has inflicted insufficient casualties on the Palestinian Arabs. For that matter, why should Israel be condemned just because they do everything they can to protect their civilians, while their opponents do everything they can to maximize casualties among their own civilians?
Hamas, and other Arab groups fighting against Israel, intentionally take actions so as to maximize the deaths of civilians, and particularly children. They store the missiles they fire at Israeli civilians in schools and hospitals. They use civilians, including children, as human shields while firing on Israeli soldiers. It is Hamas that is responsible for the death toll of civilians in Palestine.
You're saying that it's okay to use terrorism to fight terrorism.
Didn't your mother teach you that two wrongs don't make a right?
I disagree with Hamas methods and I do not in any way support them. But I disagree with Israel's methods as well. Hamas hiding weapons in a school does not justify shelling that school when it is full of children.
Israel is no longer fighting a war for survival. At one point that argument would have been valid but to say so now is ridiculous as no country in the middle east - and most likely not the entire middle east all together - could defeat Israel's military might.
On top of that, Israel is not protecting their own civilians as killing Palestinian civilians will not stop Hamas. It will, in the long run, make Hamas stronger as more Palestinian families lose their loved ones and will do anything to strike back at Israel. Hatred begets hatred, as you should know as you evidently have been begot of hatred.
Per your statement "Israel has inflicted insufficient casualties on the Palestinian Arabs" and the general content of what you are writing it appears that you do not care if those casualties that you wish to inflict are against valid military targets or against civilians. Is that correct?
Won't someone think of the racists?
Also, it doesn't say they don't take down racist comments against Palestinians.
"France continues to promote freedom of the press and speech online by allowing unfiltered access to most content, apart from limited filtering of child pornography and web sites that promote terrorism, or racial violence and hatred."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I...
Also, fuck the racists.
Umm, have you paid attention to what the people in charge on the Palestinian side of this have done, and are doing? You know, things like killing people for being homosexual? Such that Arabs who have homosexual desires often seek, and receive, asylum in Israel. Or perhaps you have not noticed that their compatriots is Iraq have mandated female genital mutilation in at least one city which they control? Perhaps you have not noticed that the Syrian government has killed more Arabs this year than Israel has, by a wide margin?
You are lumping all muslims and arabs together and even if you were right to do so, itstillwould not justify the way that Israel is conducting themselves.
40 Israelis dead, almost exclusively soldiers.
1,000 Palestinians dead. About 80 percent of them civilian and about 20% of them children.
This is not war. This is not a justified use of appropriate force. This is shooting fish in the barrel and, quantity aside, is disgustingly like what the Germans did to the Jews in WW2.