= = = You're an idiot. If you're a Carrier network or large Enterprise, you have two options- Juniper or Cisco. Nobody else makes hardware that even comes close when you're talking routing and switching. = = =
A bit of an exaggeration, but reasonably correct.
= = =IF Cisco (or Juniper) were as insecure as you claim, the entire internet would have been completely owned long ago.= = =
I think at this point we have to accept that the entire Internet being owned is a fact, and probably has been since the first malicious sniffer was found on the backbone (around 1994 IIRC, although the memory is a bit dim). It seems reasonable to think that all the world's major sigint agencies have operatives/moles deep inside the major equipment and software providers and that all core infrastructure is cracked and spewing our information.
Yeah, I'm pretty well aware of the geography and population census of the United States / North America. I'm also aware of the total fraction of the US/North American population that lives there (very small) and the questions that have been raised over the last 30 years as to whether it is possible to maintain human habitation there for anything other than specialized purposes such as mining towns ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ). Whether or not it is ecologically or economically possible to maintain the use of personal transit vehicles is entirely separate from the question of whether people live in certain areas of North America or prefer to live there.
But sure: some pure diesel vehicles as well. Heavy construction and heavy delivery vehicles will presumably remain diesel, and some passenger vehicles as well. As originally noted diesel can be manufactured from non-fossil sources which means it will be with us for a long time.
If we continue to have personal transportation vehicles (a big if), in the long run they will be a combination of pure electric (Nissan Leaf) and extended-range electric (Chevy Volt) - because that's the only sustainable set of transportable energy sources. However, the engine in the extended-range vehicle will need to be diesel rather than gas since we can manufacture diesel fuel from non-fossil sources. Therefore long run we really need better diesels with good efficiency and emissions controls. Volkswagen has managed to set this process back a decade. Thanks Merkel.
= = = STEPHANOPOULOS: You’ve also said we have to consider closing mosques. Jeb Bush called that a sign of weakness.
TRUMP: Well, Jeb Bush is a weak person and that’s been defined very strongly. I mean, Jeb is a weak person who is a -- you know, I call him a low energy person. That’s what he is. I mean, call him anything you want, but Jeb is a person that will not solve a problem like this.
You have very, very tough people that you’re dealing with. They only understand strength. They don’t understand weakness. Somebody like Jeb, and others that are running against me -- and by the way Hillary is another one.
I mean, Hillary is a person who doesn’t have the strength or the stamina, in my opinion, to be president. She doesn’t have strength or stamina. She’s not a strong enough person to be president.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But what would be your criteria --
TRUMP: We’re dealing with --
STEPHANOPOULOS: -- for closing a mosque?
TRUMP: We’re dealing with very -- George, we’re dealing with very, very strong people. And you need strength and you need stamina.
STEPHANOPOULOS: I get that, but --
TRUMP: Hillary does not have that.
STEPHANOPOULOS: -- I want to get the details though.
What would be your criteria for closing a mosque?
And how does that square with the First Amendment?
You’ve said your top priority would be to preserve and protect our religious liberties.
Is that only for Christians?
What are your criteria for closing a mosque?
TRUMP: Well, I don’t want to close mosques; I want to surveil mosques. I want mosques surveiled. We were doing it New York City for a while until the worst mayor that New York City has ever had got elected --
STEPHANOPOULOS: All mosques?
TRUMP: -- De Blasio, which was a fluke. And all I would do, certainly there are certain hot spots and everybody knows they’re hot spots.
And let me tell you, the people that are involved in those mosques, they know who the bad ones are and they know who the good ones are, but they don’t talk. And we have to surveil the mosques -- and we were doing it.
We were doing it recently until De Blasio closed them up in New York City. We were doing it recently. We have to surveil the mosques.
And big material and good material, from what I understood, from a very good source, was coming out of those mosques. We were learning a lot. And they were stopping problems and potential problems by learning what was happening.
Hey, look, I don’t want to close up mosques but things have to happen where, if you’ve got -- you have got to use strong measures or you’re going to see buildings coming down all over New York City and elsewhere. = = =
Plenty more gold in that interview.
So please, tell me: why is the hard Radical Right so afraid to own this? It is what you want isn't it? Why can't you go ahead and say so?
= = = http://www.huffingtonpost.com/... WASHINGTON -- Professional entertainer and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump refused to rule out creating some kind of database for tracking Muslims in the United States.
George Stephanopoulos asked Trump on ABC's "This Week" on Sunday whether he would unequivocally rule out a database for "all Muslims" since Trump's position on the question has been a little unclear.
"No, not at all," Trump said. "I want a database for the refugees that -- if they come into the country. We have no idea who these people are. When the Syrian refugees are going to start pouring into this country, we don’t know if they’re ISIS, we don’t know if it’s a Trojan horse. And I definitely want a database and other checks and balances. We want to go with watch lists. We want to go with databases."
To recap: Trump said he would not rule out a database "for all Muslims," but then talked about a database specifically for Syrian refugees. Refugees are already subject to a lengthy vetting process that can last years, but the government doesn't necessarily track them after they arrive.
Trump also said he supported torturing terrorism suspects via waterboarding and that he doesn't want to close mosques, just to spy on them.
And Stephanopoulos asked Trump about his questionable claim that he saw thousands of people cheering when the World Trade Center fell on Sept. 11.
"It was on television. I saw it," Trump said. "There were people that were cheering on the other side of New Jersey, where you have large Arab populations."
Stephanopoulos repeatedly pointed out that police said it didn't happen. = = =
So again, why are you so anxious to not only claim that Trump didn't say what he clearly did say on multiple occasions but to brand those who are accurately reporting what Trump did say (and his base is eating up) as "liers"?
I'm genuinely curious what the hard Radical Right is trying to accomplish here. Trump clearly said what he said, and his statements are very appealing to his polling base. Why are you trying so hard to pretend he didn't say what he obviously did say? Are you afraid to own your own policies? Or do you think you have to keep your actual policy plans and the consequences of those plans secret until after the election ("I'm a compassionate conservative"). What does that say about your policies?
Interestingly enough that turns out not to be the case. There are at least three documented situations where Trump has discussed keeping a database of people of Islamic faith in the United States, including one at his own campaign rally. In the most recent case he dodged a bit and left himself an out so the dog whistle wasn't quite as obvious, but he has already left plenty of evidence.
By the way, the time is about 5 years past when simply throwing out the word "liberal" causes reality-based folks to cower in fear and allow the mainstream media to fall in line with the hard Radical Right line without serious and vociferous counterattack. You can put your magic totem back in the skin bag: it doesn't work any more.
German citizens or United States citizens of German descent? While some legal immigrants of Japanese descent were sent to the detainment camps the vast majority were US Citizens who happened to be of Japanese descent - some being 3rd or 4th generation Americans being rounded up and guarded by 1st or 2nd generation citizens of German or Italian descent.
= = = its hard to argue that some sort of registration and restriction of movement of Japanese civilians in the US could not be justified
Absolutely. And their movement was justifiably restricted, until they could be repatriated (through Peru IIRC). But here we are referring to the rounding up and imprisonment without trial and without probable cause of United States Citizens who happened to be of Japanese descent. As opposed to, say, German descent. Or enemy aliens of Italian descent who were ordered to move from New York to Chicago but still allowed to work on the Manhattan Project (Enrico Fermi and his wife). That's the difference.
= = = Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting "Jesus Christ," so that it would read "A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.
-Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom = = =
The hard Radical Right pushback attempt has failed utterly. Here's another through documentation of Trump saying exactly that he proposes to create a national tracking database singling out members of a specific religion: http://www.vox.com/2015/11/20/...
The dog whistle dropped down into audible range this time and it is repugnant. sPh
Yeah, I'm sure the Bundy ranch family and friends who pointed high-velocity firearms at Federal law enforcement officers, and anti-choice terrorists, will both be in that database. Sure.
The absolute roar-back - presumably being coordinated by Breitbart and similar message management systems of the hard Radical Right - over what Trump clearly and obviously did say is fascinating. Dog whistle got too far down into the human hearing range for comfort?
And downrating people who describe and link to what Trump actually said - that he wants to create a database of US citzens whose religion he doesn't like - is only highlighting how desperate the hard Right is to keep this one quiet.
As to questions to a candidate for the US Presidency being "too political", I'm not sure what that even means. Or are you arguing the leading Republican candidate isn't sharp enough to handle a tough question on his feet? Seems a bit at odds with the criticism of President Obama from the hard right that he [Obama] pauses and thinks before answering a question and often speaks in complex paragraphs rather than snapping out a cute one-liner. Trump snapped out a one-liner, got himself in deep trouble over it, and now you think the questions were "too tough"? Got it.
Kevin Drum, a moderately conservative centrist, pretty well demolishes the "Trump didn't really say that" cover story that is now making the right wing circuit:
= = = This happened during Hurricane Sandy where people from NYC started begging/stealing/robbing rural farms. = = =
100% grade A baloney. This entire post is a radical survivalist's fantasy of what they think should have happened after a national-scale natural disaster, and bears no resemblance to what actually did happen. During the Sandy situation citizens of the New York City region showed for the second time in 14 years that they are far more resilient and cooperative than the average American. "+4 Interesting" - sheesh.
= = = A solution for this is to fund these big projects with private investments. Then the government will buy the services that they provide, such as, say, a guaranteed $100 subsidy for each passenger that takes the train from downtown SF to downtown LA. Since this train is projected to cost $500,000 PER SEAT, that would mean a payback after 5000 trips. If no private investors can be found, that should be an obvious indicator that the project cannot be built at the projected cost.= = =
The history of the Denver metro area E-470 toll road system indicates that this concept doesn't work quite as well in practice as in theory.
Slashdot Mirror
Tell that to the CEO of QWEST.
A bit of an exaggeration, but reasonably correct.
I think at this point we have to accept that the entire Internet being owned is a fact, and probably has been since the first malicious sniffer was found on the backbone (around 1994 IIRC, although the memory is a bit dim). It seems reasonable to think that all the world's major sigint agencies have operatives/moles deep inside the major equipment and software providers and that all core infrastructure is cracked and spewing our information.
sPh
Yeah, I'm pretty well aware of the geography and population census of the United States / North America. I'm also aware of the total fraction of the US/North American population that lives there (very small) and the questions that have been raised over the last 30 years as to whether it is possible to maintain human habitation there for anything other than specialized purposes such as mining towns ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ). Whether or not it is ecologically or economically possible to maintain the use of personal transit vehicles is entirely separate from the question of whether people live in certain areas of North America or prefer to live there.
But sure: some pure diesel vehicles as well. Heavy construction and heavy delivery vehicles will presumably remain diesel, and some passenger vehicles as well. As originally noted diesel can be manufactured from non-fossil sources which means it will be with us for a long time.
sPh
If we continue to have personal transportation vehicles (a big if), in the long run they will be a combination of pure electric (Nissan Leaf) and extended-range electric (Chevy Volt) - because that's the only sustainable set of transportable energy sources. However, the engine in the extended-range vehicle will need to be diesel rather than gas since we can manufacture diesel fuel from non-fossil sources. Therefore long run we really need better diesels with good efficiency and emissions controls. Volkswagen has managed to set this process back a decade. Thanks Merkel.
sPh
Plenty more gold in that interview.
So please, tell me: why is the hard Radical Right so afraid to own this? It is what you want isn't it? Why can't you go ahead and say so?
Oops. Time to update the talking points:
I'm sure Trump didn't really say that either.
sPh
Vox has another detailed analysis with multiple quotes: http://www.vox.com/2015/11/20/...
So again, why are you so anxious to not only claim that Trump didn't say what he clearly did say on multiple occasions but to brand those who are accurately reporting what Trump did say (and his base is eating up) as "liers"?
sPh
I'm genuinely curious what the hard Radical Right is trying to accomplish here. Trump clearly said what he said, and his statements are very appealing to his polling base. Why are you trying so hard to pretend he didn't say what he obviously did say? Are you afraid to own your own policies? Or do you think you have to keep your actual policy plans and the consequences of those plans secret until after the election ("I'm a compassionate conservative"). What does that say about your policies?
sPh
Interestingly enough that turns out not to be the case. There are at least three documented situations where Trump has discussed keeping a database of people of Islamic faith in the United States, including one at his own campaign rally. In the most recent case he dodged a bit and left himself an out so the dog whistle wasn't quite as obvious, but he has already left plenty of evidence.
sPh
I want my Constitution back. I want my country back.
Seriously, think about what you are saying. Destroying the village in order to save it is not a plan that I want to recognize as an American.
sPh
By the way, the time is about 5 years past when simply throwing out the word "liberal" causes reality-based folks to cower in fear and allow the mainstream media to fall in line with the hard Radical Right line without serious and vociferous counterattack. You can put your magic totem back in the skin bag: it doesn't work any more.
German citizens or United States citizens of German descent? While some legal immigrants of Japanese descent were sent to the detainment camps the vast majority were US Citizens who happened to be of Japanese descent - some being 3rd or 4th generation Americans being rounded up and guarded by 1st or 2nd generation citizens of German or Italian descent.
sPh
Absolutely. And their movement was justifiably restricted, until they could be repatriated (through Peru IIRC). But here we are referring to the rounding up and imprisonment without trial and without probable cause of United States Citizens who happened to be of Japanese descent. As opposed to, say, German descent. Or enemy aliens of Italian descent who were ordered to move from New York to Chicago but still allowed to work on the Manhattan Project (Enrico Fermi and his wife). That's the difference.
sPh
I want my Constitution back.
sPh
Trump has discussed the religious tracking database several times, including at his own campaign rallies: http://www.vox.com/2015/11/20/...
sPh
The hard Radical Right pushback attempt has failed utterly. Here's another through documentation of Trump saying exactly that he proposes to create a national tracking database singling out members of a specific religion: http://www.vox.com/2015/11/20/...
The dog whistle dropped down into audible range this time and it is repugnant.
sPh
Yeah, I'm sure the Bundy ranch family and friends who pointed high-velocity firearms at Federal law enforcement officers, and anti-choice terrorists, will both be in that database. Sure.
sPh
Trump exact words:
Yep. Kevin Drum goes into the details with links and transcripts: http://www.motherjones.com/kev...
The absolute roar-back - presumably being coordinated by Breitbart and similar message management systems of the hard Radical Right - over what Trump clearly and obviously did say is fascinating. Dog whistle got too far down into the human hearing range for comfort?
And downrating people who describe and link to what Trump actually said - that he wants to create a database of US citzens whose religion he doesn't like - is only highlighting how desperate the hard Right is to keep this one quiet.
sPh
Yeah, not really: http://www.motherjones.com/kev...
As to questions to a candidate for the US Presidency being "too political", I'm not sure what that even means. Or are you arguing the leading Republican candidate isn't sharp enough to handle a tough question on his feet? Seems a bit at odds with the criticism of President Obama from the hard right that he [Obama] pauses and thinks before answering a question and often speaks in complex paragraphs rather than snapping out a cute one-liner. Trump snapped out a one-liner, got himself in deep trouble over it, and now you think the questions were "too tough"? Got it.
sPh
Kevin Drum, a moderately conservative centrist, pretty well demolishes the "Trump didn't really say that" cover story that is now making the right wing circuit:
http://www.motherjones.com/kev...
Yeah, Trump really did say that.
sPh
That word "obliquely" - I do not think it means what you think it means.
sPh
100% grade A baloney. This entire post is a radical survivalist's fantasy of what they think should have happened after a national-scale natural disaster, and bears no resemblance to what actually did happen. During the Sandy situation citizens of the New York City region showed for the second time in 14 years that they are far more resilient and cooperative than the average American. "+4 Interesting" - sheesh.
sPg
The history of the Denver metro area E-470 toll road system indicates that this concept doesn't work quite as well in practice as in theory.
sPh