But they are different from mainstream Socialists in many different ways. The main one is the "National" bit on their name. Socialist parties proper were international in scope and had complete disregard of borders (which is why Che Guevara, an Argentinian, became a government minister in Cuba, and fought guerrillas in Congo and Bolivia).
While mainstream Socialism was aiming for the internationalization of the movement, National Socialism in Germany was the xenophobic, ultra patriotic movement we all know it was.
But there was a strong Socialist component on it, like providing state jobs for unemployed people (which is how many of the Autobahns still in use today were built) and many other benefits for the working class.
This of course are very minor merits of an evil regime, but they really meant what it said on their name.
That didn't mean they were ready to act upon them themselves (one of them wrote somewhere that terrorism was not an effective means of struggle, that only regular combat would do).
I still agree that they must be released. We need no crimentals in 2008....
Your explanation is very judicious, but you are giving a free pass to the US/UK and no credit to the radical Islamists.
The radical Islamists have a long and well documented list of grievances, some more valid than others. They didn't just started hating the West and what it stands for as you present it.
The hate against Western values came later, after a rationalization that the system followed in those countries harming Islamic countries (liberal democracy) must be the source of the problem. Colonialism and imperialism helped to create Islamic extremists, they did not grow in a vacuum of hate.
I buy a weekly listing, find the programs that are worth my time and record them. I may not watch them all, but when I feel like watching I know I have quality stuff on disk.
That is very defeatist. My mom (a teacher) would spend many afternoons playing with us and giving us tasks which, at the time, we didn't realize were giving us skills that would come useful once we started school proper.
And our dad would take us to play football (soccer) to the park on weekends.
TV? Yeah, much later in life, but it was never a nany replacement at home. If there is the will it should not be the case.
... there has been little differentiation between the US, the USSR/Russia, China or other regional or global bullies.
In Mexico, Central and South America we pray and hope you pull your military to your shores and keep it there. You created fake countries (Panama) to suit your needs, tried to colonize a couple (Cuba and Puerto Rico) with mixed results, and have invaded many others (Mexico, Grenada) or supported dictators in others (Cuba, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Chile) when this suited you alright. You killed democratic governments because banana producing companies asked you to do so. Bananas instead of democracy for bunnies sakes.
I would leave to peoples from other places to recount the history of US "friendship". I am sure the relatives of the thousands of innocent Iraqis have something to say about losing their loved ones so some fat cats can benefit economically (how are doing the oil companies?)
Not happy with that you trained the military elite (Academia de las Americas, google it) that would rule with fear and torture many of our countries.
Vietnam, as another, example was invaded by all France, China and the US. If you think they see any difference between the lot of you, imperialistic countries, you need to go and visit sometime.
US history is an exercise in revisionism, in which good actions are enhanced beyond recognition (no guys, you did not win WWII alone) and the horrendous deeds are conveniently swept under the carpet.
Or pray do tell us, what is taught to you about invasions of other countries?
What a way to embarras yourself in public.
on
Ethics In IT
·
· Score: 1
There are so many ethical issues regarding the choice of software licensing (either as developer or user) that I will not even try to talk about it.
How somebody with an MBA fails to see this baffles me completely.
Where do people like you work?
on
Ethics In IT
·
· Score: 1
I can guarantee you that in Fortune 500 companies there are codes of ethics. Written. In many of them you get in-house training to make sure you don't calim ignorance later. Most likely a disciplinary action will follow if you don't read it. And your ass will be out of the door if you don't follow it.
All being equal? The cheapest one.
on
Ethics In IT
·
· Score: 1
That is why we need heavy government regulation, specially against those CEOs, traders and other types that are rewarded regardless if they are successful or not.
Economic factors are mindless and follow pretty predictable rules. Governments should step in to ensure that the mindless mechanisms of the market are controlled so the markets work in benefit of the majority and not only in the benefit of a privileged few, who are rewarded for being reckless even if they are a miserable failure.
In the example you are trying to put forward the government should step in, perhaps by rewarding consumer satisfaction in some way that would make more profitable to follow the client-oriented attitude of company B.
Governments, by their inactions, are promoting the growth of companies of kind A above. They are getting out of hand, and we are all paying the price (look at Iraq if in any doubt: which companies have benefited the most of all that sorry mess?).
Burning tires does little. You have some neighbors very active in that department and they are still in deep shit.
Political organization is the key, blogging and writing about the state of affairs is part of the same coin as demonstrations, but demonstrations by themselves change nothing.
In the UK 1 million people demonstrated against the Iraq war. That made no difference whatsoever.
When the time came to vote, people put the same liar back in power, because the economy was good, never mind all the dead people killed with our tax money. Money triumphs over decency, unless there are people out there that make sure you are aware you are helping to kill innocent people if you vote for your own convenience in mind exclusively.
A properly organized political opposition would have been more important than the biggest of demonstrations.
As a Mexican I can go to Canada without applying for a visa.
In order to go to the US I have to go the the US consulate, be subjected to idiotic questioning about my motivations for going, and after wasting all day I may be denied entry without any possible redress (a relative that needed to go in order to help with funeral arrangements of a relative of hers, wasn't allowed in. The reason is that she hasn't hold a job for many years. So stay at home mums, you are out of luck).
Then assuming I get a visa, I will still be harassed in the US airport *even if I am just going in fucking transit*. Authorities in US airports have the verb to ask me where I am going (well duh, you should know that already) and they insist to ask particulars about my whereabouts in bloody Mexico! To which I of course reply with a sharp inquiry about since when the Mexican government handed control of our borders and our internal affairs to US authorities.
And all this without even starting about the rampant racialism in daily US life, where if you are walking in the part of town where "Mexicans are not supposed to be" you can get questioned by police for the grave crime of walking.
So again tell me, why should I visit the US? Instead I am going to Canada now, which seems to be a friendly and interesting place that actually has sane immigration policies in place.
And the perception of the original poster is right on the money. I stopped going when the invasive, abusive, demaning "security" measures started to get out of hand. In all other countries I visit I am welcomed. Even Vietnam or Indonesia in the times of the dictatorship. Nothing can equal the humiliating treatment you can receive in an US airport.
The US basks in their self perceived exceptionallity without realizing the colossal contradictions that the political system and monumental political apathy are ushering into the normal people.
It is undeniable that he didn't find anything and that the US (an their lackeys, the shameful Tony Blair and lest not forget, the laughable Jose Maria Aznar) wanted to use the UN as their rubber stamp.
If the US is not prepared to accept UN resolutions when they don't conform to your wishes, why don't you get the heck out of the UN? You are already out of several UN's organizations like UNESCO for the most cavalier of reasons, don't recognize the International Court of Justice (where hopefully, one day, irresponsible individuals like Bush and Blair will one day face justice. Unlikely, utopic, but most necessary heal the wounds of the thousands or Iraqi people dead for no discernible reason whatsoever) and in general think you are exceptional and are not prepared to play ball.
Well, make it official, most of the world is fed up with this, so we can as well officialize what is obvious fact.
The US and UK messed up their countries for the best part of 100 years.
The US and UK (and France on occasions) sided with dictators, despots and other nocive types in order to protect short term interests.
What is the moral rationale of keep befriending countries like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan? What is the reason for the paranoid fear of Iran (at least they have some kind of elections)?
THe US have destroyed Iraq over false pretenses and you pretend that the Muslims in the world have no reason to be angry.
Send a copy of the complete works of Kafka to the 3 US presidential candidates still in the race. Not that I hope they will understand the message (when you hear McCain or Clinton pathetic excuses for their support of a war that has killed an maimed who knows how many thousands of people, you know there is no hope), but I don't know, I like poetic irony in the face of madness....
It is terrifying the lengths to which some people are prepared to go to deny the patently obvious.
For you:
Torture, according to the United Nations Convention Against Torture, is "any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions."
Normally somebody breaking the law constantly will be dealt done in more harshere way. You stupid scenario is simply imposible.
Would MS tried to pull that one (they are not that stupid) the EU would confiscate their assets in the EU, keep the business running and would put lots of asses in a court of law.
Also you are blissfully unaware that MS may have not much cash left if the Yahoo acquisition goes ahead...
Slashdot Mirror
Terrorism is the idiots way to do Jihad. There are many other ways.
The facts were that these guys were saying lots of angry words but where not part of any organization or plot.
Thinking is not a crime, saying out loud or in public what you think should not be necessarily one neither.
That is the case here, which is why they were set free, no matter how unsavory their convictions are.
But they are different from mainstream Socialists in many different ways. The main one is the "National" bit on their name. Socialist parties proper were international in scope and had complete disregard of borders (which is why Che Guevara, an Argentinian, became a government minister in Cuba, and fought guerrillas in Congo and Bolivia).
While mainstream Socialism was aiming for the internationalization of the movement, National Socialism in Germany was the xenophobic, ultra patriotic movement we all know it was.
But there was a strong Socialist component on it, like providing state jobs for unemployed people (which is how many of the Autobahns still in use today were built) and many other benefits for the working class.
This of course are very minor merits of an evil regime, but they really meant what it said on their name.
They were (are?) fully supportive of the ideas.
That didn't mean they were ready to act upon them themselves (one of them wrote somewhere that terrorism was not an effective means of struggle, that only regular combat would do).
I still agree that they must be released. We need no crimentals in 2008....
Your explanation is very judicious, but you are giving a free pass to the US/UK and no credit to the radical Islamists.
The radical Islamists have a long and well documented list of grievances, some more valid than others. They didn't just started hating the West and what it stands for as you present it.
The hate against Western values came later, after a rationalization that the system followed in those countries harming Islamic countries (liberal democracy) must be the source of the problem. Colonialism and imperialism helped to create Islamic extremists, they did not grow in a vacuum of hate.
Then you will watch only good TV.
I buy a weekly listing, find the programs that are worth my time and record them. I may not watch them all, but when I feel like watching I know I have quality stuff on disk.
That is very defeatist. My mom (a teacher) would spend many afternoons playing with us and giving us tasks which, at the time, we didn't realize were giving us skills that would come useful once we started school proper.
And our dad would take us to play football (soccer) to the park on weekends.
TV? Yeah, much later in life, but it was never a nany replacement at home. If there is the will it should not be the case.
.... you will remember your idiotic tirade about human rights been nothing but mental masturbations.
If that was so, everybody would be running computers with DOS.
I like the smell of class envy in the morning.
With one tall skinny cap please.
... there has been little differentiation between the US, the USSR/Russia, China or other regional or global bullies.
In Mexico, Central and South America we pray and hope you pull your military to your shores and keep it there. You created fake countries (Panama) to suit your needs, tried to colonize a couple (Cuba and Puerto Rico) with mixed results, and have invaded many others (Mexico, Grenada) or supported dictators in others (Cuba, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Chile) when this suited you alright. You killed democratic governments because banana producing companies asked you to do so. Bananas instead of democracy for bunnies sakes.
I would leave to peoples from other places to recount the history of US "friendship". I am sure the relatives of the thousands of innocent Iraqis have something to say about losing their loved ones so some fat cats can benefit economically (how are doing the oil companies?)
Not happy with that you trained the military elite (Academia de las Americas, google it) that would rule with fear and torture many of our countries.
Vietnam, as another, example was invaded by all France, China and the US. If you think they see any difference between the lot of you, imperialistic countries, you need to go and visit sometime.
US history is an exercise in revisionism, in which good actions are enhanced beyond recognition (no guys, you did not win WWII alone) and the horrendous deeds are conveniently swept under the carpet.
Or pray do tell us, what is taught to you about invasions of other countries?
It is not like you are making a great discovery.
There are so many ethical issues regarding the choice of software licensing (either as developer or user) that I will not even try to talk about it.
How somebody with an MBA fails to see this baffles me completely.
I can guarantee you that in Fortune 500 companies there are codes of ethics. Written. In many of them you get in-house training to make sure you don't calim ignorance later. Most likely a disciplinary action will follow if you don't read it. And your ass will be out of the door if you don't follow it.
That is why we need heavy government regulation, specially against those CEOs, traders and other types that are rewarded regardless if they are successful or not.
Economic factors are mindless and follow pretty predictable rules. Governments should step in to ensure that the mindless mechanisms of the market are controlled so the markets work in benefit of the majority and not only in the benefit of a privileged few, who are rewarded for being reckless even if they are a miserable failure.
In the example you are trying to put forward the government should step in, perhaps by rewarding consumer satisfaction in some way that would make more profitable to follow the client-oriented attitude of company B.
Governments, by their inactions, are promoting the growth of companies of kind A above. They are getting out of hand, and we are all paying the price (look at Iraq if in any doubt: which companies have benefited the most of all that sorry mess?).
Burning tires does little. You have some neighbors very active in that department and they are still in deep shit.
Political organization is the key, blogging and writing about the state of affairs is part of the same coin as demonstrations, but demonstrations by themselves change nothing.
In the UK 1 million people demonstrated against the Iraq war. That made no difference whatsoever.
When the time came to vote, people put the same liar back in power, because the economy was good, never mind all the dead people killed with our tax money. Money triumphs over decency, unless there are people out there that make sure you are aware you are helping to kill innocent people if you vote for your own convenience in mind exclusively.
A properly organized political opposition would have been more important than the biggest of demonstrations.
As a Mexican I can go to Canada without applying for a visa.
In order to go to the US I have to go the the US consulate, be subjected to idiotic questioning about my motivations for going, and after wasting all day I may be denied entry without any possible redress (a relative that needed to go in order to help with funeral arrangements of a relative of hers, wasn't allowed in. The reason is that she hasn't hold a job for many years. So stay at home mums, you are out of luck).
Then assuming I get a visa, I will still be harassed in the US airport *even if I am just going in fucking transit*. Authorities in US airports have the verb to ask me where I am going (well duh, you should know that already) and they insist to ask particulars about my whereabouts in bloody Mexico! To which I of course reply with a sharp inquiry about since when the Mexican government handed control of our borders and our internal affairs to US authorities.
And all this without even starting about the rampant racialism in daily US life, where if you are walking in the part of town where "Mexicans are not supposed to be" you can get questioned by police for the grave crime of walking.
So again tell me, why should I visit the US? Instead I am going to Canada now, which seems to be a friendly and interesting place that actually has sane immigration policies in place.
That will solve the problem pretty quickly.
And the perception of the original poster is right on the money. I stopped going when the invasive, abusive, demaning "security" measures started to get out of hand. In all other countries I visit I am welcomed. Even Vietnam or Indonesia in the times of the dictatorship. Nothing can equal the humiliating treatment you can receive in an US airport.
The US basks in their self perceived exceptionallity without realizing the colossal contradictions that the political system and monumental political apathy are ushering into the normal people.
Your own fucking Congress has ruled about that one...
I prefer to believe Hans Blix, the chap that was actually doing the work, have this for starters: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/jun/11/iraq.usa
It is undeniable that he didn't find anything and that the US (an their lackeys, the shameful Tony Blair and lest not forget, the laughable Jose Maria Aznar) wanted to use the UN as their rubber stamp.
If the US is not prepared to accept UN resolutions when they don't conform to your wishes, why don't you get the heck out of the UN? You are already out of several UN's organizations like UNESCO for the most cavalier of reasons, don't recognize the International Court of Justice (where hopefully, one day, irresponsible individuals like Bush and Blair will one day face justice. Unlikely, utopic, but most necessary heal the wounds of the thousands or Iraqi people dead for no discernible reason whatsoever) and in general think you are exceptional and are not prepared to play ball.
Well, make it official, most of the world is fed up with this, so we can as well officialize what is obvious fact.
The US and UK messed up their countries for the best part of 100 years.
....
The US and UK (and France on occasions) sided with dictators, despots and other nocive types in order to protect short term interests.
What is the moral rationale of keep befriending countries like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan? What is the reason for the paranoid fear of Iran (at least they have some kind of elections)?
THe US have destroyed Iraq over false pretenses and you pretend that the Muslims in the world have no reason to be angry.
Honestly
You need to educate yourselves people.
Send a copy of the complete works of Kafka to the 3 US presidential candidates still in the race. Not that I hope they will understand the message (when you hear McCain or Clinton pathetic excuses for their support of a war that has killed an maimed who knows how many thousands of people, you know there is no hope), but I don't know, I like poetic irony in the face of madness....
It is terrifying the lengths to which some people are prepared to go to deny the patently obvious.
For you:
Torture, according to the United Nations Convention Against Torture, is "any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions."
Honestly, only scumbags keep arguing this point.
A fine is a way to comply somebdoy with the law.
Normally somebody breaking the law constantly will be dealt done in more harshere way. You stupid scenario is simply imposible.
Would MS tried to pull that one (they are not that stupid) the EU would confiscate their assets in the EU, keep the business running and would put lots of asses in a court of law.
Also you are blissfully unaware that MS may have not much cash left if the Yahoo acquisition goes ahead...
Is that news or not?
I posit it is.