It is my humble pleasure to write this letter irrespective of the fact that you do not know me. However, I came to know of you in my private search for a reliable and trustworthy person that can handle a confidential transaction of this nature in respect to our investment plans in real estate. Though I know that a transaction of this magnitude will make any one apprehensive and worried, but I am assuring you that all will be well at the end of the day. Let me start by first, introducing myself properly to you. I am Peter Okoye, a Branch Manager at one of the standard trust bank in South Africa. A foreigner, Late Nicholas Owen, a Civil engineer/Contractor with the federal Government of South Africa, until his death three years ago in a ghastly automated robot accident, banked with us here at the standard bank South Africa. He had a closing balance of USD$25.5M (Twenty five Million, Five Hundred Thousand United States Dollars) which the bank now unquestionably expects to be claimed by any of his available foreign next of kin. Or,alternatively be donated to a discredited trust fund for arms and ammunition at a military war college here in South Africa. Fervent valuable efforts made by the standard trust bank to get in touch with any of late Nicholas Owen_s next of kin (he had no wife and children)has been unsuccessful. The management under the influence of our chairman and board of directors, are making arrangement for the fund to be declared UNCLAIMABLE and then be subsequently donated to the trust fund for Arms and Ammunition which will further enhance the course of war in Africa and the world in general. In order to avert this negative development. Myself and some of my trusted colleagues in the bank, now seek for your permission to have you stand as late Nicholas Owen_s next of kin. So that the fund (USD$25.5M), would be subsequently transferred and paid into your bank account as the beneficiary next of kin through our overseas corresponding bank. All documents and proves to enable you get this fund have been carefully worked out and we are assuring you a 100% risk free involvement.
Your share would be 30% of the total amount. While the rest would be for me and my colleagues for purchase of properties in your country through you/your Company. If this proposal is OK by you, then kindly get to me immediately via my e-mail (pokoye_mg@mail.com) furnishing me with your most confidential telephone and fax , so I can forward to you the relevant details of this tran! saction. Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation.
I don't like her not because she's not suicidal (in a political sense), but because she is too opportunistic. Too opportunistic in that she dropped any shred of dignity she had for a power grab (unless she had none already, which is possible). The fact that you think it would have been suicide for her career to do what I'm suggesting would have been the RIGHT thing to do - run without Slick Willie's surname in her true home state - shows how highly you actually think of her.
I think my problem with her is not that she didn't quit politics, but that she stayed married to the guy to keep his name and moved to NY because it was the place where she felt she had the best chance of getting elected (rather than divorcing the creep and running in Arkansas).
You say if X needs Y = Yes to remove Z, then Z = Dictatorship I say if Y = No and Z = Dictatorship, X = Fucked
Never mind that data shows that cities which have enacted concealed carry laws have significantly reduced the rate of violent crime.
There are the same number of people with crime on the mind whether people possess guns or not. If someone who commits a gun crime didn't have a gun but was dead set on committing the crime, they'd commit it with a knife or a fist or a rock or some other appropriate utensil (certainly, violent crime was not "invented" when the gun was!). And of course, when you outlaw guns, only outlaws carry guns. If it is legal for law abiding citizens to carry a gun, then a criminal has to consider that before he mugs a person...the possibility that "Mr. Easy Pickens" might have a nasty surprise - whether or not the criminal himself is possessing and using a gun. Mr. Criminal has no such worries if it is illegal to carry a gun, because he knows that there are more law abiding citizens than there are criminals like him, therefore the chances are slim to nil that "Mr. Easy Pickens" is carrying a gun (but Mr. Criminal still most likely has one, though it is illegal to be carrying one. He's robbin' folks, what does he care if he illegally possesses firearms while doing it?)
I've never understood why Europeans and Canadians are so vehemently anti-gun. I don't own a gun and am not a fan of them personally, but I do feel that a free society needs to allow its citizens the ability to lawfully carry them. The founding fathers and the statistics back me up on this.
The old fashioned way is IRC, usenet, and online forums? What does that make "going out into the world and making friends via a mutually enjoyed activity"?
Disclaimer - over the past decade I have participated in BBS's, usenet, IRC, forums, and now social networking sites (roughly in that order too). I actually have a lot more "real-life" friends through Myspace and Facebook than I do any online forum.
Ah, the classic "I'm not doing anything wrong so I don't have to worry about it" argument.
Well then do this for me:
-Record all of your phone calls and post them on the internet -Put up all your sent/received e-mails on the internet -Print out a copy of your bank statements showing all transactions, and put them up on the internet -Leave your curtains/blinds open 24/7 -Stop mailing things in envelopes, send everything as a post card -Make sure to leave your stall door open when you use the restroom at Chili's
After all, you have nothing to hide right?
You might argue that the general public having access is not the same as the government having access, and perhaps that's true. But who makes up the government? That's right, people like you and me (of/by/for the people, remember?) And when 10 years from now, your neighbor who now works for the government and has an axe to grind, pulls the complete history of your phone records and searches through it using some key words to find something to embarrass you with, you'll realize that you (and everyone else in the world) DO have something to hide, and it's not unreasonable to feel that way, even if you have committed no illegal acts. Our personal identities and our safety are centered around being able to keep some things private.
But have you REALLY committed no illegal acts? You've never traveled 1 mph over the speed limit, or downloaded a single song you didn't own, or eaten a grape you didn't pay for at the grocey store, or jaywalked, etc.?
Have you ever read Amendment #4, by the way? I'm sure some neocon lawyer type could argue that the subject of this article doesn't violate the letter of it, but it can't be argued against that it violates the SPIRIT of that amendment.
No legal way other than buying the CD and ripping an mp3 for yourself, you mean? Because that falls under "fair use" which is still law for a little while longer, last I checked.
Check out the Encyclopedia of Arda, that's one of the most hotly contested issues out there (aside from "Did Balrogs have wings?") I think the summary is "sort of". Glorfindel died, his spirit went back to Aman, but then he was later reincarnated and traveled to middle earth with the Wizards in the third age.
No doubt. When I moved from a small apt to a bigger one, I "made a reservation" for one of the smaller trucks (the 2nd smallest one I believe), but when I got there they were "out of those" so I got this behemoth that you would think one would need a CDL to drive and I could barely fit in my parking lot. I also clipped the barrier at the gas station a little bit but fortunately they didn't notice that on the inspection.
"Those making $1MM a year, on the other hand, may spend only a small fraction of their income."
They may, but they don't. How many $1MM households do you know live like those that make $60k and sock away the rest?
Further, the way this has always been described to me, is that necessities will not carry this tax. So if all you can afford is groceries, you're going to be paying less than somebody who buys groceries and HDTV's and vacation cruises.
Getting taxed because I earned money by working has to be one of the stupidest concepts I've ever heard.
The way past this is to monitor someone's levels of various things throughout their entire athletic career. If something gets too far out of whack beyond medical tolerances, then they're a doper. The other, even easier way that still works right now is that artificial genes seem to leave a different um, "fingerprint" I guess. Of course, that's something that could go away over time I'm sure, as the technique is still in its infancy.
It's already on the table, I just wrote a paper on this topic last year. Various "gene doping" techniques have not been very effective for athletic performance as of yet, but it's not far away.
Slashdot Mirror
Ugh, don't go there. I can just imagine the ad campaign: "It's my Wii in a box!"
Dear,
It is my humble pleasure to write this letter irrespective of the fact that you do not know me. However, I came to know of you in my private search for a reliable and trustworthy person that can handle a confidential transaction of this nature in respect to our investment plans in real estate. Though I know that a transaction of this magnitude will make any one apprehensive and worried, but I am assuring you that all will be well at the end of the day. Let me start by first, introducing myself properly to you. I am Peter Okoye, a Branch Manager at one of the standard trust bank in South Africa. A foreigner, Late Nicholas Owen, a Civil engineer/Contractor with the federal Government of South Africa, until his death three years ago in a ghastly automated robot accident, banked with us here at the standard bank South Africa. He had a closing balance of USD$25.5M (Twenty five Million, Five Hundred Thousand United States Dollars) which the bank now unquestionably expects to be claimed by any of his available foreign next of kin. Or,alternatively be donated to a discredited trust fund for arms and ammunition at a military war college here in South Africa. Fervent valuable efforts made by the standard trust bank to get in touch with any of late Nicholas Owen_s next of kin (he had no wife and children)has been unsuccessful. The management under the influence of our chairman and board of directors, are making arrangement for the fund to be declared UNCLAIMABLE and then be subsequently donated to the trust fund for Arms and Ammunition which will further enhance the course of war in Africa and the world in general. In order to avert this negative development. Myself and some of my trusted colleagues in the bank, now seek for your permission to have you stand as late Nicholas Owen_s next of kin. So that the fund (USD$25.5M), would be subsequently transferred and paid into your bank account as the beneficiary next of kin through our overseas corresponding bank. All documents and proves to enable you get this fund have been carefully worked out and we are assuring you a 100% risk free involvement.
Your share would be 30% of the total amount. While the rest would be for me and my colleagues for purchase of properties in your country through you/your Company. If this proposal is OK by you, then kindly get to me immediately via my e-mail (pokoye_mg@mail.com) furnishing me with your most confidential telephone and fax , so I can forward to you the relevant details of this tran! saction. Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation.
Best Regards.
Peter Okoye
Branch Manager,
STANDARD TRUST BANK SOUTH AFRICA
GWB called, he wants his sound byte from 2005 back.
AKA simply as "Slashdot"
I now provide you with this conclusive evidence to the contrary : http://www.lifeinitaly.com/flash/
I believe he also gave us this nugget of wisdom -
It is good to meet girl in park, but it is better to park meat in girl.
I don't like her not because she's not suicidal (in a political sense), but because she is too opportunistic. Too opportunistic in that she dropped any shred of dignity she had for a power grab (unless she had none already, which is possible). The fact that you think it would have been suicide for her career to do what I'm suggesting would have been the RIGHT thing to do - run without Slick Willie's surname in her true home state - shows how highly you actually think of her.
I think my problem with her is not that she didn't quit politics, but that she stayed married to the guy to keep his name and moved to NY because it was the place where she felt she had the best chance of getting elected (rather than divorcing the creep and running in Arkansas).
Notice I specifically mention "concealed carry" laws, not "owning a gun" in general. There is a distinct difference.
I read that too quickly and saw "pornographic needles". I need to step away from the computer for a few, I think....
You = X
Guns = Y
Government = Z
You say if X needs Y = Yes to remove Z, then Z = Dictatorship
I say if Y = No and Z = Dictatorship, X = Fucked
Never mind that data shows that cities which have enacted concealed carry laws have significantly reduced the rate of violent crime.
There are the same number of people with crime on the mind whether people possess guns or not. If someone who commits a gun crime didn't have a gun but was dead set on committing the crime, they'd commit it with a knife or a fist or a rock or some other appropriate utensil (certainly, violent crime was not "invented" when the gun was!). And of course, when you outlaw guns, only outlaws carry guns. If it is legal for law abiding citizens to carry a gun, then a criminal has to consider that before he mugs a person...the possibility that "Mr. Easy Pickens" might have a nasty surprise - whether or not the criminal himself is possessing and using a gun. Mr. Criminal has no such worries if it is illegal to carry a gun, because he knows that there are more law abiding citizens than there are criminals like him, therefore the chances are slim to nil that "Mr. Easy Pickens" is carrying a gun (but Mr. Criminal still most likely has one, though it is illegal to be carrying one. He's robbin' folks, what does he care if he illegally possesses firearms while doing it?)
I've never understood why Europeans and Canadians are so vehemently anti-gun. I don't own a gun and am not a fan of them personally, but I do feel that a free society needs to allow its citizens the ability to lawfully carry them. The founding fathers and the statistics back me up on this.
The old fashioned way is IRC, usenet, and online forums? What does that make "going out into the world and making friends via a mutually enjoyed activity"?
Disclaimer - over the past decade I have participated in BBS's, usenet, IRC, forums, and now social networking sites (roughly in that order too). I actually have a lot more "real-life" friends through Myspace and Facebook than I do any online forum.
Ah, the classic "I'm not doing anything wrong so I don't have to worry about it" argument.
a -surveillance-why-sho_b_16763.html
Well then do this for me:
-Record all of your phone calls and post them on the internet
-Put up all your sent/received e-mails on the internet
-Print out a copy of your bank statements showing all transactions, and put them up on the internet
-Leave your curtains/blinds open 24/7
-Stop mailing things in envelopes, send everything as a post card
-Make sure to leave your stall door open when you use the restroom at Chili's
After all, you have nothing to hide right?
You might argue that the general public having access is not the same as the government having access, and perhaps that's true. But who makes up the government? That's right, people like you and me (of/by/for the people, remember?) And when 10 years from now, your neighbor who now works for the government and has an axe to grind, pulls the complete history of your phone records and searches through it using some key words to find something to embarrass you with, you'll realize that you (and everyone else in the world) DO have something to hide, and it's not unreasonable to feel that way, even if you have committed no illegal acts. Our personal identities and our safety are centered around being able to keep some things private.
But have you REALLY committed no illegal acts? You've never traveled 1 mph over the speed limit, or downloaded a single song you didn't own, or eaten a grape you didn't pay for at the grocey store, or jaywalked, etc.?
Have you ever read Amendment #4, by the way? I'm sure some neocon lawyer type could argue that the subject of this article doesn't violate the letter of it, but it can't be argued against that it violates the SPIRIT of that amendment.
Here's an article for your further consideration:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/geoffrey-r-stone/ns
No legal way other than buying the CD and ripping an mp3 for yourself, you mean? Because that falls under "fair use" which is still law for a little while longer, last I checked.
I titrated your mother last night....
No, SNL Celebrity Jeopardy Sean Connery never said that, but he should have.
"All for not"
Are you SURE you did your own work in college?
Artist rendition and author intent are not necessarily related, as much as I might respect the Hildebrandt Bros.
Check out the Encyclopedia of Arda, that's one of the most hotly contested issues out there (aside from "Did Balrogs have wings?") I think the summary is "sort of". Glorfindel died, his spirit went back to Aman, but then he was later reincarnated and traveled to middle earth with the Wizards in the third age.
No, Gothmog slew Feanor. Glorfindel slew Gothmog.
No doubt. When I moved from a small apt to a bigger one, I "made a reservation" for one of the smaller trucks (the 2nd smallest one I believe), but when I got there they were "out of those" so I got this behemoth that you would think one would need a CDL to drive and I could barely fit in my parking lot. I also clipped the barrier at the gas station a little bit but fortunately they didn't notice that on the inspection.
Go look up the definition of "stock" and "publicly traded company", AC.
"Those making $1MM a year, on the other hand, may spend only a small fraction of their income."
They may, but they don't. How many $1MM households do you know live like those that make $60k and sock away the rest?
Further, the way this has always been described to me, is that necessities will not carry this tax. So if all you can afford is groceries, you're going to be paying less than somebody who buys groceries and HDTV's and vacation cruises.
Getting taxed because I earned money by working has to be one of the stupidest concepts I've ever heard.
I think it's more like this: http://www.chattem.com/products/icy.asp
The way past this is to monitor someone's levels of various things throughout their entire athletic career. If something gets too far out of whack beyond medical tolerances, then they're a doper. The other, even easier way that still works right now is that artificial genes seem to leave a different um, "fingerprint" I guess. Of course, that's something that could go away over time I'm sure, as the technique is still in its infancy.
It's already on the table, I just wrote a paper on this topic last year. Various "gene doping" techniques have not been very effective for athletic performance as of yet, but it's not far away.