So what? It's science. Science doesn't deal in certainties, it deals with probabilities. You want absolute certainty then go join a church/synagogue/mosque/etc.
RTFA. It doesn't talk about Sun "dying", but about it's decline into near irrelevance. To quote:
Six years later, as the boom of the late 1990s came to a crashing end, Wall Street had more advice for McNealy: Batten down the hatches for the storm ahead; slash research; lay off staffers; and get serious about low-cost products. Once again, McNealy held his ground. But this time, he was dreadfully wrong. Sun's sales have tumbled 48% in the past three years, it has lost a third of its market share -- and it continues to head south even as its rivals ride the economic recovery. Its stock, which reached $64 in 2000, trades at about $4. No other major player has been weakened as much during the tech downturn. "Right now it looks pretty grim," says Geoffrey A. Moore, author of several tech-industry books, including Crossing the Chasm.
Sun may die or it may not, but this article is primarily focused on McNealy's role in his company's decline in the marketplace.
The most common lament I hear on/. (about Mac)is that there's no port of a specific game. Make a Mac-only game with the same 12-year old boy appeal as Halo, and you might sell yourself some Macs.
Wait.. are you saying that more games should be ported to the Mac, or that there should be games developed *solely* for the Mac? If the first, that's already taken care of: anything written in OpenGL works on the Mac. For example: Halo.
If the latter... that's kinda silly. No one would want to limit their market appeal. As great as I think Macs are, I would never expect a software company to limit their product to a single platform, no matter which platform we're talking about.
Try to attract a more mainstream user base. The fact that your user community is tainted by a vocal contigent of "Zealots" doesn't help you get acceptance.
This is such a bullshit argument. Anyone who says anything positive about Macs is (or can be) labelled by someone a "zealot." I'm a Mac fan because they are better machines. If that makes me a zealot in your eyes then so be it. But they are still better machines, regardless of my zealotry.
Developers! Developers! Developers! Face it, Steve Ballmer has a point. Your tools should be the best. They're not. Much as I'd love to love them, Microsoft Visual Studio is MILES ahead of Apple's tools.
Bollocks. XCode -- the IDE for Objective C, Java, and AppleScript that comes with the developer pack -- is a class-act development environment that allows for rapid development, unit testing, drag-and-drop construction of GUI components, code completion, and many other professional level components. Not to mention the fact that the primary interface used to tie into OS X's native functionality, ObjectiveC, is far and away easier to use than C++ with MFC, while being more powerful. This isn't even mentioning all the developer tools that are native to the unix world that are available under Darwin. And don't forget about Shark, either.
Add to this that the widely used (and free) Eclipse is available on this platform and your argument is pretty much shredded.
Sorry, I develop on the Mac every single day now. I developed on PCs for over 10 years prior to this. Mac = Jenna Jameson, PC = Carrottop.
Make it clearly faster than the competition. I have an AMD-64 single processor machine and a G5 sitting here side by side. The AMD just "feels" faster. A lot of it has to do with UI performance.
This is also bollocks. Let me ask you a question: are you a paid Microsoft troll? Because you are really starting to sound like one. Honest question. Because if you really had a G5 sitting next to a beefy PC, then you wouldn't be so ignorant of some key facts.
Re:Undocumented API calls
on
Hacking Quartz
·
· Score: 1
The history of Apple software contradicts your assertion. Apple typically follows a "develop, field test in a software package, release to community" cycle of API development, which has the nice effect of giving the world APIs that have fewer bugs and security issues than otherwise. The Java model -- "have really smart people develop API, release to community" -- by contrast doesn't work as well (see EJBs) since there are frequently APIs developed for which there isn't as much of a demand for as originally expected.
First off, what the hell does this have to do with anything, either the parent post or the topic at hand? Second:
If you haven't figured it out yet, it was Your lord and savior Bill "Does my finger smell like pussy" Clinton that signed the contract with Halliburton.
You come across like a prick talking like that. I'm a longtime Democrat and circulate in that crowd, and I have NEVER run across a Democrat who is or was as knee-jerk supportive of him as the Republicans are towards Bush. The biggest difference I can see between the two parties at this point in history is that the Republicans seem to be the ones who are "all criticism, even from other Republicans, is to be immediately shouted down". Reagan's Eleventh Commandment and whatnot. I have not seen that from Democrats in my lifetime.
Third, TWO WRONGS DON'T MAKE A RIGHT.
What is it with Democrats being the enablers for Republicans these days? "Oh, well, Democrat X did the same thing, or at they very least I can IMAGINE they would, so that makes my side immune to criticism!" Yeah, BULLSHIT. It's still a crime, and still should be punished accordingly. Screaming "CLINTON DID IT TOO!" justifies exactly dick all.
Umm... Is it just me, or does this seems to be a little bit of a shot across the bow of Microsoft? Here we have Apple giving something to the community that will add some seriously cool networking capabilities, capabilities the likes of which have traditionally fallen within the realm of the OS itself. At the very least this takes away the ability for MS to use something like this for a "New in Longhorn!" marketing point.
I can't imagine that this makes MS particularly happy, but there's certainly not much they can do about it. Rendevous is seriously a cool technology, and I'm glad Apple decided to release it before MS came up with something similar but incompatible (and, of course, under their control).
Admittedly this argument could be made for Solaris, etc. But I would imagine those communities welcome this addition, whereas I would imagine MS to be a bit colder to the idea.
Look man, during the 2000 campaign Fox News mentioned "Al Gore claimed to invent the Internet" probably every other time his name came up. The other half of the time they were managing to fit "credibility" into whatever sentence was being constructed. If this isn't your experience then perhaps you weren't watching at the time. But *every* Fox "News" "analyst" was this way; it was like an edict from on high had come down with instructions about how they were to systematically smear Al Gore via negative association.
I would love to be able to prove it to you with a URL, but a cursory search of fox"news".com turns up little. This isn't too surprising because most of what I heard came from the likes of O'Reilly and "Cock" Hannity; I don't believe those shows have transcripts provided.
It's not like this isn't their modus operandi, anyway.
So is Foxnews "fair and balanced"? - Absolutely not. For me though, it is fair and balancing.
Lies are never balancing, no matter where they come from. Lies are incorrect data. Using them will lead to incorrect conclusions. This whole "equally reprehensible" stuff is seductive, but falls flat in the face of the available evidence. I have NEVER seen another media outlet lie with the frequency and as unapologetically as the bloviators that take up the majority of airtime on Fox "News". It is not equal "on the other side." When it comes to lies and deception, Fox is in a league of its own.
Not pointing out that Osama has been to all intents and purposes thrown out of the Bin Laden family is clearly a lie of omission.
That's just one.
He says exactly that. Have you even seen the movie? The guy he interviews about that says something along the lines of "Most people think there was no contact between Osama and the other family members after 1994. Things are more complicated than that." Then they go on to talk about it.
It is hardly a lie of omission when they state exactly what you claim they omit.
A suggestion: reread every paragraph in that article, and at the end of the paragraph ask yourself the following question: "What conclusion made by Moore does he contradict?" Your answer will be consistent: "None, really." Hitchens endlessly bloviates, but he contradicts nothing, despite the title.
I'm married, have been for almost a decade. I like porn. My wife likes porn. We watch it together, we watch it separately. We have a good love life, and aren't so naive as to think that 100% of the thoughts that cross our mind while we're fucking are of each other. Sexual beings want to pollinate with many different creatures. Fantasizing about it doesn't make it real, and doesn't lessen the love in the relationship unless you choose to let it. We don't chose to let it bother us, so it doesn't. And we are very much in love, thank you very much.
Sex is not a one-night stand with a pretty woman; sex is the expression of deep, committed love between a man and woman dedicate to spending the rest of their lives together.
I'd love to live in your dream world, pal. Fact is sometimes a fuck is just a fuck. It doesn't have to be anything more than that, and there is no law of physics saying that it has to be. People who don't love each other manage to successfully copulate all the freakin' time. And sometimes a fuck is just a fuck even between two married people. It's not like violins play every time you screw after you get a ring on your finger.
You may WANT things to be different, think there is a way things SHOULD be, but don't try and say that's the way things ARE.
I really don't care WHAT they call themselves; I can decide that for myself. Moore lies, so does Rush. Doesn't make them any less amusing to me
Where has Moore lied? I see this claim made quite frequently but it is usually only in the generic "look at me I'm above it all they both lie" context. It has been my experience that Moore has exhibited far more of a dedication to honesty and truth than Limbaugh ever has.
Say what you will about Moore, but the facts are the important thing. Limbaugh has a list of lies as long as your arm; I have yet to find any case where Moore has lied or deceived, despite the claims to the contrary by his detractors.
I know I'm going to come off as a rabid partisan, but I don't really care. The facts as I seem them point to the AP being only slightly less partisan than Fox News. This is the same organization who for three years couldn't mention Al Gore's name without finding a way to fit in "claimed to have invented the internet" or "liar" within 5 words of his name.
The AP is like the rest of the media: it plays to the sanctimony when appropriate, and never criticizes military action or defense appropriations bills. And never, EVER interview a soldier on the ground; only interview Pentagon spokesmen who tell you how great things really are.
It no longer matters how clean the code is; it matters how nifty the case is.
Completely untrue, both in the case of Apple and Google.
For Apple, the software they write is tight, powerful, well designed, and elegant. You can reach common functions easily, and the consistency between applications means you don't ever have to do such things as guessing whether "Preferences" is under "File" or "Window".
OS X, iLife, and other Apple software are examples of what well-designed software should be. As a software architect, I am consistently impressed at the dedication Apple has for putting out not only beautiful but rock-solid pieces of software.
"The speed of fiber make advanced broadband offerings -- especially high definition TV -- possible, SBC says, because the technology allows download speeds as high as 25 megabits per second and upload speeds of as much as 3 Mbps. Television services will be based on Microsoft's Internet protocol TV platform, which has been tested by telecoms in India, Canada and Europe.
"IPTV uses the newest Windows Media Series 9 video-compression technology, but some experts question whether it will work efficiently over wires where customers connect to nodes from existing infrastructure. Microsoft says the compression technology will work."
Hmm. Dunno. I have to admit that I'm surprised that SBC is working with MS on this, but then again they are both pretty evil, so I guess not.
I've asked this question before and been modded as troll, but I'm serious: Is Apple the new Sun? It seems that while Apple doesn't have the broad product line that Sun does on the high-end server market, they are nonetheless making inroads into that very market. Further, Apple is sleek and sexy and has a lot of goodwill going for it, whereas Sun mostly brings out ambivalence.
I'm not saying they are direct competitors, but they are competitors in at least some respects. And it seems that Apple is profiting from sales of its products whereas Sun's biggest revenue inflow recently has been its $1b settlement with Microsoft, not from its product lines.
While I love Carlin and have read several of his books, he's (probably intentionally) making a subtle error: most people understand that the planet will survive. It's the survival of the human race that is a matter of deep concern for those who care about such survival.
Climate and weather are two different things, brainchild.
Climate - The accumulation of daily and seasonal weather events over a long period of time. A description of aggregate weather conditions; the sum of all statistical weather information that helps describe a place or region.
Weather - The state of the atmosphere in terms of such variables as temperature, cloudiness, precipitation, and radiation.
I don't have to prove a goddamned thing. You asked how the shell with sarin fit into the WMD debate, I told you. Now you're changing the question, which ain't gonna work. One shell found a year after Saddam's fall proves dick all. That thing could be 20 years old for all you know.
And I could give a rat fuck if you think I look unhinged, jerkoff. Go back to getting ass fucked by the cock that is the right wing media. Maybe enough propaganda and rhetorical trickery will change the facts, but I'm thinking probably not.
Oh, and by the way: how are Bush's poll numbers looking, babycakes? They hit the 30's yet? And what's the burn rate on those vaunted millions in campaign contributions? And how's that scar on dipshit in chief's chin lookin?
You goddamned egotistical fool. You got ramrodded and aren't man enough to admit it. Pride cometh before the fall, though. I mean, Eye-raq was such a huge fucking threat! Goddamn! At least, that's what IRAN was telling us. Iran told Chalabi, Chalabi told Cheney, and Cheney told Bush. We were a proxy for Iran! Did their work for 'em! Suckers! He was a goddamned spy for Iran, but shit, that's good enough to sit behind Lady Laura at the State of the Union!
You can't prove a negative. Can't be done. Can't prove there is no Bigfoot, can't prove there aren't aliens among us, can't prove there is no God. Can't be done. Similarly, no one can prove there are no WMD in Iraq. But that's irrelevant because the burden of proof is on the administration; they're the ones who claimed Saddam was a threat because of his vast quantities of WMD, a threat large enough to justify going to war over. Not me.
I answered your question, you change the subject. Piss off. Your Glorious Leader is a fuckup and all you can offer are parroted RNC talking points.
hyperbole (n.) - A figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect, as in I could sleep for a year or This book weighs a ton.
If you're going to try and speak English at least learn how to use it correctly.
Second, I'm not gullible enough to think it will ever be confirmed. Third, EVEN IF IT IS one gallon of sarin found over a year after Saddam's fall proves exactly squat. It could have been missed by the inspectors and misplaced (or fotten about!) by an incompetent bureacracy (yup, it do happen.) It could have been brought in by al Qaeda or any number of groups that would just love to kill a whole buncha "Zionist imperialist Americans." It could be an unexploded bomb used against the Kurds in the 1980s. Any number of plausible intepretations could be laid forth. And because of this little thing called "chain of evidence" there's no way of knowing for sure. Of course, this happens to show what a flimsy case the admin had -- no big surprise there -- so you will of course not buy any of it.
Saddam was stripped of his WMD because he was. He posed no threat to us or the region, and the war proved this. Ergo, Bush lied or is completely incompetent. Take your pick. You can be pedantic -- which I fully expect -- and say that "there was sarin there! Obviously you're wrong!" -- to which I say: You ain't foolin' anyone, bub. Fourth and finally, it doesn't change the fact that this administration has screwed absolutely everything up that they have touched, including looking for WMD. Remember the looting of the government offices? Think some documents in there might have been helpful? Hmm.
Slashdot Mirror
They might be quiet, but they are still zealously pursuing their goals. Google for Christian Reconstructionists/Reconstructionism.
So what? It's science. Science doesn't deal in certainties, it deals with probabilities. You want absolute certainty then go join a church/synagogue/mosque/etc.
RTFA. It doesn't talk about Sun "dying", but about it's decline into near irrelevance. To quote:
Sun may die or it may not, but this article is primarily focused on McNealy's role in his company's decline in the marketplace.
The most common lament I hear on /. (about Mac)is that there's no port of a specific game. Make a Mac-only game with the same 12-year old boy appeal as Halo, and you might sell yourself some Macs.
Wait.. are you saying that more games should be ported to the Mac, or that there should be games developed *solely* for the Mac? If the first, that's already taken care of: anything written in OpenGL works on the Mac. For example: Halo.
If the latter... that's kinda silly. No one would want to limit their market appeal. As great as I think Macs are, I would never expect a software company to limit their product to a single platform, no matter which platform we're talking about.
Try to attract a more mainstream user base. The fact that your user community is tainted by a vocal contigent of "Zealots" doesn't help you get acceptance.
This is such a bullshit argument. Anyone who says anything positive about Macs is (or can be) labelled by someone a "zealot." I'm a Mac fan because they are better machines. If that makes me a zealot in your eyes then so be it. But they are still better machines, regardless of my zealotry.
Developers! Developers! Developers! Face it, Steve Ballmer has a point. Your tools should be the best. They're not. Much as I'd love to love them, Microsoft Visual Studio is MILES ahead of Apple's tools.
Bollocks. XCode -- the IDE for Objective C, Java, and AppleScript that comes with the developer pack -- is a class-act development environment that allows for rapid development, unit testing, drag-and-drop construction of GUI components, code completion, and many other professional level components. Not to mention the fact that the primary interface used to tie into OS X's native functionality, ObjectiveC, is far and away easier to use than C++ with MFC, while being more powerful. This isn't even mentioning all the developer tools that are native to the unix world that are available under Darwin. And don't forget about Shark, either.
Add to this that the widely used (and free) Eclipse is available on this platform and your argument is pretty much shredded.
Sorry, I develop on the Mac every single day now. I developed on PCs for over 10 years prior to this. Mac = Jenna Jameson, PC = Carrottop.
Make it clearly faster than the competition. I have an AMD-64 single processor machine and a G5 sitting here side by side. The AMD just "feels" faster. A lot of it has to do with UI performance.
This is also bollocks. Let me ask you a question: are you a paid Microsoft troll? Because you are really starting to sound like one. Honest question. Because if you really had a G5 sitting next to a beefy PC, then you wouldn't be so ignorant of some key facts.
The history of Apple software contradicts your assertion. Apple typically follows a "develop, field test in a software package, release to community" cycle of API development, which has the nice effect of giving the world APIs that have fewer bugs and security issues than otherwise. The Java model -- "have really smart people develop API, release to community" -- by contrast doesn't work as well (see EJBs) since there are frequently APIs developed for which there isn't as much of a demand for as originally expected.
Censorship, I say! Censorship!
First off, what the hell does this have to do with anything, either the parent post or the topic at hand? Second:
If you haven't figured it out yet, it was Your lord and savior Bill "Does my finger smell like pussy" Clinton that signed the contract with Halliburton.
You come across like a prick talking like that. I'm a longtime Democrat and circulate in that crowd, and I have NEVER run across a Democrat who is or was as knee-jerk supportive of him as the Republicans are towards Bush. The biggest difference I can see between the two parties at this point in history is that the Republicans seem to be the ones who are "all criticism, even from other Republicans, is to be immediately shouted down". Reagan's Eleventh Commandment and whatnot. I have not seen that from Democrats in my lifetime.
Third, TWO WRONGS DON'T MAKE A RIGHT.
What is it with Democrats being the enablers for Republicans these days? "Oh, well, Democrat X did the same thing, or at they very least I can IMAGINE they would, so that makes my side immune to criticism!" Yeah, BULLSHIT. It's still a crime, and still should be punished accordingly. Screaming "CLINTON DID IT TOO!" justifies exactly dick all.Umm... Is it just me, or does this seems to be a little bit of a shot across the bow of Microsoft? Here we have Apple giving something to the community that will add some seriously cool networking capabilities, capabilities the likes of which have traditionally fallen within the realm of the OS itself. At the very least this takes away the ability for MS to use something like this for a "New in Longhorn!" marketing point.
I can't imagine that this makes MS particularly happy, but there's certainly not much they can do about it. Rendevous is seriously a cool technology, and I'm glad Apple decided to release it before MS came up with something similar but incompatible (and, of course, under their control).
Admittedly this argument could be made for Solaris, etc. But I would imagine those communities welcome this addition, whereas I would imagine MS to be a bit colder to the idea.
In any event, kudos to Apple.
Look man, during the 2000 campaign Fox News mentioned "Al Gore claimed to invent the Internet" probably every other time his name came up. The other half of the time they were managing to fit "credibility" into whatever sentence was being constructed. If this isn't your experience then perhaps you weren't watching at the time. But *every* Fox "News" "analyst" was this way; it was like an edict from on high had come down with instructions about how they were to systematically smear Al Gore via negative association.
I would love to be able to prove it to you with a URL, but a cursory search of fox"news".com turns up little. This isn't too surprising because most of what I heard came from the likes of O'Reilly and "Cock" Hannity; I don't believe those shows have transcripts provided.
It's not like this isn't their modus operandi, anyway.
So is Foxnews "fair and balanced"? - Absolutely not. For me though, it is fair and balancing.
Lies are never balancing, no matter where they come from. Lies are incorrect data. Using them will lead to incorrect conclusions. This whole "equally reprehensible" stuff is seductive, but falls flat in the face of the available evidence. I have NEVER seen another media outlet lie with the frequency and as unapologetically as the bloviators that take up the majority of airtime on Fox "News". It is not equal "on the other side." When it comes to lies and deception, Fox is in a league of its own.
Not pointing out that Osama has been to all intents and purposes thrown out of the Bin Laden family is clearly a lie of omission.
That's just one.
He says exactly that. Have you even seen the movie? The guy he interviews about that says something along the lines of "Most people think there was no contact between Osama and the other family members after 1994. Things are more complicated than that." Then they go on to talk about it.
It is hardly a lie of omission when they state exactly what you claim they omit.
A suggestion: reread every paragraph in that article, and at the end of the paragraph ask yourself the following question: "What conclusion made by Moore does he contradict?" Your answer will be consistent: "None, really." Hitchens endlessly bloviates, but he contradicts nothing, despite the title.
Sex is not a one-night stand with a pretty woman; sex is the expression of deep, committed love between a man and woman dedicate to spending the rest of their lives together.
I'd love to live in your dream world, pal. Fact is sometimes a fuck is just a fuck. It doesn't have to be anything more than that, and there is no law of physics saying that it has to be. People who don't love each other manage to successfully copulate all the freakin' time. And sometimes a fuck is just a fuck even between two married people. It's not like violins play every time you screw after you get a ring on your finger.
You may WANT things to be different, think there is a way things SHOULD be, but don't try and say that's the way things ARE.
Where has Moore lied? I see this claim made quite frequently but it is usually only in the generic "look at me I'm above it all they both lie" context. It has been my experience that Moore has exhibited far more of a dedication to honesty and truth than Limbaugh ever has.
Say what you will about Moore, but the facts are the important thing. Limbaugh has a list of lies as long as your arm; I have yet to find any case where Moore has lied or deceived, despite the claims to the contrary by his detractors.
The AP is like the rest of the media: it plays to the sanctimony when appropriate, and never criticizes military action or defense appropriations bills. And never, EVER interview a soldier on the ground; only interview Pentagon spokesmen who tell you how great things really are.
It no longer matters how clean the code is; it matters how nifty the case is.
Completely untrue, both in the case of Apple and Google.
For Apple, the software they write is tight, powerful, well designed, and elegant. You can reach common functions easily, and the consistency between applications means you don't ever have to do such things as guessing whether "Preferences" is under "File" or "Window".
OS X, iLife, and other Apple software are examples of what well-designed software should be. As a software architect, I am consistently impressed at the dedication Apple has for putting out not only beautiful but rock-solid pieces of software.
To quote from this article:
"The speed of fiber make advanced broadband offerings -- especially high definition TV -- possible, SBC says, because the technology allows download speeds as high as 25 megabits per second and upload speeds of as much as 3 Mbps. Television services will be based on Microsoft's Internet protocol TV platform, which has been tested by telecoms in India, Canada and Europe.
"IPTV uses the newest Windows Media Series 9 video-compression technology, but some experts question whether it will work efficiently over wires where customers connect to nodes from existing infrastructure. Microsoft says the compression technology will work."
Hmm. Dunno. I have to admit that I'm surprised that SBC is working with MS on this, but then again they are both pretty evil, so I guess not.
You may want to read the article I wrote over at kuro5hin on Christian Reconstructionism. Yes, self promotion. But it ties in closely with your sig.
I've asked this question before and been modded as troll, but I'm serious: Is Apple the new Sun? It seems that while Apple doesn't have the broad product line that Sun does on the high-end server market, they are nonetheless making inroads into that very market. Further, Apple is sleek and sexy and has a lot of goodwill going for it, whereas Sun mostly brings out ambivalence.
I'm not saying they are direct competitors, but they are competitors in at least some respects. And it seems that Apple is profiting from sales of its products whereas Sun's biggest revenue inflow recently has been its $1b settlement with Microsoft, not from its product lines.
While I love Carlin and have read several of his books, he's (probably intentionally) making a subtle error: most people understand that the planet will survive. It's the survival of the human race that is a matter of deep concern for those who care about such survival.
Climate and weather are two different things, brainchild.
Climate - The accumulation of daily and seasonal weather events over a long period of time. A description of aggregate weather conditions; the sum of all statistical weather information that helps describe a place or region.
Weather - The state of the atmosphere in terms of such variables as temperature, cloudiness, precipitation, and radiation.
How does Hannity's cock taste this morning?
I don't have to prove a goddamned thing. You asked how the shell with sarin fit into the WMD debate, I told you. Now you're changing the question, which ain't gonna work. One shell found a year after Saddam's fall proves dick all. That thing could be 20 years old for all you know.
And I could give a rat fuck if you think I look unhinged, jerkoff. Go back to getting ass fucked by the cock that is the right wing media. Maybe enough propaganda and rhetorical trickery will change the facts, but I'm thinking probably not.
Oh, and by the way: how are Bush's poll numbers looking, babycakes? They hit the 30's yet? And what's the burn rate on those vaunted millions in campaign contributions? And how's that scar on dipshit in chief's chin lookin?
You goddamned egotistical fool. You got ramrodded and aren't man enough to admit it. Pride cometh before the fall, though. I mean, Eye-raq was such a huge fucking threat! Goddamn! At least, that's what IRAN was telling us. Iran told Chalabi, Chalabi told Cheney, and Cheney told Bush. We were a proxy for Iran! Did their work for 'em! Suckers! He was a goddamned spy for Iran, but shit, that's good enough to sit behind Lady Laura at the State of the Union!
Ain't that a total cunt.
Not that you'd know what one of those are.
(signed)
Mr. Proudly Unhinged
God you're an idiot.
You can't prove a negative. Can't be done. Can't prove there is no Bigfoot, can't prove there aren't aliens among us, can't prove there is no God. Can't be done. Similarly, no one can prove there are no WMD in Iraq. But that's irrelevant because the burden of proof is on the administration; they're the ones who claimed Saddam was a threat because of his vast quantities of WMD, a threat large enough to justify going to war over. Not me.
I answered your question, you change the subject. Piss off. Your Glorious Leader is a fuckup and all you can offer are parroted RNC talking points.
I think it was Dirk Gently...
First off:
hyperbole (n.) - A figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect, as in I could sleep for a year or This book weighs a ton.
If you're going to try and speak English at least learn how to use it correctly.
Second, I'm not gullible enough to think it will ever be confirmed. Third, EVEN IF IT IS one gallon of sarin found over a year after Saddam's fall proves exactly squat. It could have been missed by the inspectors and misplaced (or fotten about!) by an incompetent bureacracy (yup, it do happen.) It could have been brought in by al Qaeda or any number of groups that would just love to kill a whole buncha "Zionist imperialist Americans." It could be an unexploded bomb used against the Kurds in the 1980s. Any number of plausible intepretations could be laid forth. And because of this little thing called "chain of evidence" there's no way of knowing for sure. Of course, this happens to show what a flimsy case the admin had -- no big surprise there -- so you will of course not buy any of it.
Saddam was stripped of his WMD because he was. He posed no threat to us or the region, and the war proved this. Ergo, Bush lied or is completely incompetent. Take your pick. You can be pedantic -- which I fully expect -- and say that "there was sarin there! Obviously you're wrong!" -- to which I say: You ain't foolin' anyone, bub. Fourth and finally, it doesn't change the fact that this administration has screwed absolutely everything up that they have touched, including looking for WMD. Remember the looting of the government offices? Think some documents in there might have been helpful? Hmm.