" 99% of corporations work as intended. They maximize profit for the shareholders and provide services like food, cars and this nice Internet we all enjoy."
All the while consuming the earths resources at a much higher level then is sustainable.
"There were about 100,000 names on the list, and after all of the research Greg Palast did, he was only able to identify 5 people that were incorrectly put on the list"
Wrong. I don't know who this Greg Palast is but I highly doubt he is an objective researcher if he concluded that only five people on the list for wrong reasons. If that was an actual fact florida would not have settled.
"Gov Bush and Catherine Harris did not stop anybody from voting- "
Wrong. They were in charge, you can't be in charge and then pass the buck on to your underlings. If that's their line they are really foul people. Give people orders and then when shit hits the fan point to them and say "it wasn't my fault", how slimy can you get.
"Everybody that was removed from the voter registration was given notice months before the election, and they were given a procedure to dispute the decision"
It was an effort to put obstacles in front of black people to discourage and prevent people from voting. They should not have been on the list in the first place. I said it before but apparently you did not even bother reading my last post. You can not prevent people from voting unless they jump through your hoops. Jeb Bush set the clock back to Jim Crow with this one.
"It probably was not fair that some innocent people had to jump through these hoops to vote (thats what the NAACP lawsuit was about, and that has been corrected), but if an innocent person didn't follow the dispute process, they share the blame for not being able to vote"
Ah yes the typical republicanazi response, Blame the victim and excuse the criminal.
"You might notice that aside from some socialist at the BBC that clearly dislikes Bush, no other media outlets have picked up on this story. That should tell you something."
Republicanazi response number two. "Anybody who disagrees with me is a commie, socialist, pinko fag, atheist, tree hugging feminst facist". I have heard it many times from dittoheads like you.
The fact that the American media has not followed this story tells me that the media is overwhlmingly republican. Liberals have no voice.
"Is that why Florida Democrats organized an effort to have absentee ballots [cnn.com] from military personnel thrown out?"
Yes. Too bad for the entire world they were not succesful. The republicans OTOH were succesful in preventing thousands of black from voting and they won.
"The Florida law that prohibits convicted felons from voting has been in the books for YEARS. This was not some last minute crackpot scheme to help Bush."
The law had been on the books for years. Only in this election cycle they put innocents on that list to prevent them from voting.
"The NAACP lawsuit (a civil suit, btw) was only to change the somewhat sloppy implementation of the convicted felon list, and the NAACP concedes that most of the changes that they requested were made before the suit was even filed."
It has to be a civil suit because voting is a civil right.
"If you are upset that Florida doesn't let convicted felons vote"
I am not against letting convicted felons vote I am against putting innocent people on the convicted felons list in order to take away their right to vote.
Do you need for me to say that again? You keep insisting that these people were felons and they were not. They were tagged as felons in order to prevent them from voting.
"I think its funny that you are still claiming that this some sort of conspiracy against the minority Florida voters when the very group that represented these minorities was very explicit that they were not alleging discrimination or fraud."
When you are under attack by very powerful forces you have to be careful how you fight back. You can't always attack your enemy head on especially if your enemy is the governor, the president, the supreme court, and the entire republian party apparatus. Unfortunately the NAACP was caught between a rock and a hard place. If the case ever got out of florida they knew that republicans in the supreme court would vote against them. They also knew that the republican legislature and the republican governor could act to derail the case via a thousand ways. They took what they could and got out. Sometimes that's all you can hope for when you are in the minority.
If what you said was true the palestenians would be free right now. Light arms (and even rockets) don't work agains the israeli army and they won't work against the US army either. Just ask the afghanis how well those AK47's did against the daisy cutters. We slaughtered by the thousands while they slept. They didn't even know what hit them.
The pakistanis are already fleeing the US in search of freedom. Cana is turning them down though and they are arrested as soon as they return to the US. If at the time of arrest they are unable to post a $1,500 bond they are held "indefinately" by the us govt.
Funny isn't it. Think of an absurd schenario and then find out it's happening. So much for the land of free.
It's only unconsttutional if people are forced to say it. It's like prayer in school. Anybody can pray in school anytime they want but the teachers are not allowed to make you pray to their god or any god.
Anybody can say the pledge any time they want although I have never ever witnessed anybody saying it without being forced to.
"n response to the grandparent's point, it's true that in terms of the number of cases the Supreme Court hears, the reversal rate of the Ninth Circuit is very high-"
This is not surprising. 9th circuit court is liberal and the supreme court is republican. Why would a rebublican court let liberals make the law?
In a close election every vote counts. This election was very close. The republican florida legislature and governor chose to eliminate an overwhelmingly black voterbase because they knew that they were likely to vote for a democrat. I believe that blacks in florida voted more then 80% for democrats.
Taking away peoples right to vote and then saying "all they had to do was to jump through our hoops and we would have let them vote" is crap. It's also illegal. The state of florida was sued over this act and they settled out of court. Of course by then it was too late and the election was over.
And finally of course there were all those retired jews who voted for Buchanan for president (thousands) who even Buchanan admits were probably mistaken. If those votes went to Gore he would have won too.
There is no doubt in my mind that a majority of florida voters intended to vote for Gore. Alas they did not get what they wanted and look what happened to our lives.
Why not? Our country relies on the electoral collage and as long as that system is in place there is no moral reason not to use the system to your best advantage. Think of it this way.
If you live in a heavily democratic state (say NY or CA) and you are a republican your vote is wasted, if you live in a heavily republican state (say MT or AZ) and you are a democrat you might as well not even bother to vote.
This way everybody can vote feel like our vote counts. As an added bonus we give increased power to minority parties and that can't be bad.
Really I think this is a creative way for the voters to take back the elections. The candidates don't even campaign in states that are a lock for one party or another anymore.
Re:Not the only person in US history ....
on
Kevin Mitnick Answers
·
· Score: 0, Troll
"How many times do I have to repeat myself. Some evidence is required!"
You said that but it's a moot point. Since 1) the evidence is not presented to a judge and 2) the evidence consists almost entirely of the presients word, 3) whoever the evidence gets presented to is just a lackey of the president.
"Again, start lobbying and quit your passive bitching."
I can do both and I will. Sorry but you will not shut me up.
" The difference is that it's a lot more difficult to confirm the identities of everyone in the car from an unmanned aircraft high in the sky."
It's even more difficult to discriminate if we dropped a daisy cutter. On what moral framework is this an excuse? No judge, No jury, No trial, just launch a missle at the guy and then claim that you did nothing wrong because "it's difficult to discriminate"
" You're stretching my statement a bit too far, don't you think? I'm simply stating that it's a little unusual for innocent people to be driving around with generals of worldwide terrorist organizations."
I don't think I am stretching your statement. Once again the only reason you are claiming that those people were worldwide terrorists is because the president said so. I would have prefered a trial but that's just me I don't normally believe my presidents.
"LOL! You sure have a hyperactive imagination!"
In what way? Is guantanamo bay a concentration camp? If not why not? Does it have any similarities to a concentration camp at all? How many people are held there? Do you know how they are treated? if you do then tell us how you found out.
"Yeah, Saddam is a wonderful leader for his people and he loves to play nice with his neighbors"
Saddam is evil but you can't use that fact to act evil yourself. Nobody is arguing that saddam is a good guy.
"Condoning [google.com] the 9/11 trajedy should say a lot about his viewpoint on conventional war"
Even if he took joy in the 9/11 event it does not justify a war. Other people took joy in it too all over the world. You can't go around killing everybody who delights in your misfortune.
" I don't care what nation gets innocent civilians killed. It's wrong and should be avoided."
If it's wrong then why don't you care?
"Before you comment on civilian casualties we have caused, remember that there will be honest mistakes that are regretted."
Don't do it and you won't have to regret it.
"Do you really think we want to go to war? "
Yes I do. George Bush wanted to attack iraq as soon as he became president. 9-11 gave him the cover to do it.
"If he disarmed, we would love to bring our brothers, sisters, and fathers back home!"
It would not matter we would still bomb his country and take over the oil fields.
"Unfortunately, he hasn't disarmed yet"
Lots of people have arms, lots of people have WMD, lots of countries have broken UN resolutions. Somehow we dealt with the dissolution of the communist empire and the largest stock pile of nuclear weapons. Russia was run a by a series of madmen and we did not attack them. North Korea is run a by madmen which WMD and we are not going to attack them.
Attacking iraq shows a severe lack of imagination. Do you really believe that the only possible way to deal with Saddam Hussein is to occupy his country? There are no other options?
Well I was just guessing and it just makes sense. Because..
1) Israel is a close ally of the US, we always exchange intelligence data with them. 2) Torture is legal in israel. 3) Israelis have lots of experience torturing arabs. they know what makes the arab tick, they have lots of insight into the arab psycology. 4) They don't like arabs.
It just makes sense that they would torture our arabs for us.
"Oh, and a few more points. First-- learn to spell. Second-- learn how to capitalize. Third-- shut up."
No, No, No. People disagree with you, learn to deal with it.
Re:Not the only person in US history ....
on
Kevin Mitnick Answers
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
"you must show "some evidence"."
Really to who? A judge? Which Judge? Is there a jury? It's all moot. All it takes is for the president to say so.
"I'm proud to be an American and I'm impressed by the progress we've made so far to evolve."
Yadda, Yadda, Yadda, flag, apple pie, chevrolet. I say we are moving backwards. The fact of the matter is that I have less freedom today then I did before. I imagine that's pretty much a win for the terrorists.
" The guys in Yemen were hit by a hellfire from a predator aircraft. There wasn't an operative sitting in the car with a gun executing the guys."
I fail to see the distinction.
"The operation was legal under U.S. law."
Yes. It's now legal to assasinate US citizens if they are abroad.
"The target deserved it and the American with him probably did too"
And you know this how?
"Yeah, he could have been innocent of providing assistance to terrorists...in a movie"
Yes because in real life innocent people are never accused of crimes or found guilty of the. Innocent people also have never been to jail or put on death row. Because in america we are infallible and our president is all knowing. After all god himself chose this country and appointed this president and everybody knows eating apple pies and driving chevrolets makes you infallible.
"Supposedly, they did not know that an American citizen was with him. That's an honest mistake."
Oops you just contradicted yourself. Did the guy deserve it or was he there by accident? Oh well it's OK to kill american citizens with a missle if it's an honest mistake. We may be infallible but the CIA operatives in yemen probably were not eating apple pie and driving chevrolets. That's why they made this honest mistake.
"This is an extremely perverted comparison."
Really? I don't think so. Here I'll hit you with this one too. There is no real difference between the conctration camps set up by hitler and the contration camps set up by bush. Ok maybe the conditions are better (but then again how would any of us know) but the idea is the same. Round people up and send them away to a distant concentration camp to be "interrogated".
Slashdot Mirror
" 99% of corporations work as intended. They maximize profit for the shareholders and provide services like food, cars and this nice Internet we all enjoy."
All the while consuming the earths resources at a much higher level then is sustainable.
"There were about 100,000 names on the list, and after all of the research Greg Palast did, he was only able to identify 5 people that were incorrectly put on the list"
Wrong. I don't know who this Greg Palast is but I highly doubt he is an objective researcher if he concluded that only five people on the list for wrong reasons. If that was an actual fact florida would not have settled.
"Gov Bush and Catherine Harris did not stop anybody from voting- "
Wrong. They were in charge, you can't be in charge and then pass the buck on to your underlings. If that's their line they are really foul people. Give people orders and then when shit hits the fan point to them and say "it wasn't my fault", how slimy can you get.
"Everybody that was removed from the voter registration was given notice months before the election, and they were given a procedure to dispute the decision"
It was an effort to put obstacles in front of black people to discourage and prevent people from voting. They should not have been on the list in the first place. I said it before but apparently you did not even bother reading my last post. You can not prevent people from voting unless they jump through your hoops. Jeb Bush set the clock back to Jim Crow with this one.
"It probably was not fair that some innocent people had to jump through these hoops to vote (thats what the NAACP lawsuit was about, and that has been corrected), but if an innocent person didn't follow the dispute process, they share the blame for not being able to vote"
Ah yes the typical republicanazi response, Blame the victim and excuse the criminal.
"You might notice that aside from some socialist at the BBC that clearly dislikes Bush, no other media outlets have picked up on this story. That should tell you something."
Republicanazi response number two. "Anybody who disagrees with me is a commie, socialist, pinko fag, atheist, tree hugging feminst facist". I have heard it many times from dittoheads like you.
The fact that the American media has not followed this story tells me that the media is overwhlmingly republican. Liberals have no voice.
What the hell does that have to do with anything? the question was is GW dumber then Nader and Gore and the answer is an emphatic YES.
"Is that why Florida Democrats organized an effort to have absentee ballots [cnn.com] from military personnel thrown out?"
Yes. Too bad for the entire world they were not succesful. The republicans OTOH were succesful in preventing thousands of black from voting and they won.
"The Florida law that prohibits convicted felons from voting has been in the books for YEARS. This was not some last minute crackpot scheme to help Bush."
The law had been on the books for years. Only in this election cycle they put innocents on that list to prevent them from voting.
"The NAACP lawsuit (a civil suit, btw) was only to change the somewhat sloppy implementation of the convicted felon list, and the NAACP concedes that most of the changes that they requested were made before the suit was even filed."
It has to be a civil suit because voting is a civil right.
"If you are upset that Florida doesn't let convicted felons vote"
I am not against letting convicted felons vote I am against putting innocent people on the convicted felons list in order to take away their right to vote.
Do you need for me to say that again? You keep insisting that these people were felons and they were not. They were tagged as felons in order to prevent them from voting.
"I think its funny that you are still claiming that this some sort of conspiracy against the minority Florida voters when the very group that represented these minorities was very explicit that they were not alleging discrimination or fraud."
When you are under attack by very powerful forces you have to be careful how you fight back. You can't always attack your enemy head on especially if your enemy is the governor, the president, the supreme court, and the entire republian party apparatus. Unfortunately the NAACP was caught between a rock and a hard place. If the case ever got out of florida they knew that republicans in the supreme court would vote against them. They also knew that the republican legislature and the republican governor could act to derail the case via a thousand ways. They took what they could and got out. Sometimes that's all you can hope for when you are in the minority.
If what you said was true the palestenians would be free right now. Light arms (and even rockets) don't work agains the israeli army and they won't work against the US army either. Just ask the afghanis how well those AK47's did against the daisy cutters. We slaughtered by the thousands while they slept. They didn't even know what hit them.
Isn't it obvious to anybody that both nader and gore are smarter then bush. The man himself admitted that he didn't have "book learnin".
The pakistanis are already fleeing the US in search of freedom. Cana is turning them down though and they are arrested as soon as they return to the US. If at the time of arrest they are unable to post a $1,500 bond they are held "indefinately" by the us govt.
Funny isn't it. Think of an absurd schenario and then find out it's happening. So much for the land of free.
"probably in the form of electing the "other" party"
What other party?
"A religious organisation is, fundamentally, a non-profit organisation"
I can't believe that you actually said that.
Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about his cock, why can't bush be impeached for much worse?
It's only unconsttutional if people are forced to say it. It's like prayer in school. Anybody can pray in school anytime they want but the teachers are not allowed to make you pray to their god or any god.
Anybody can say the pledge any time they want although I have never ever witnessed anybody saying it without being forced to.
"n response to the grandparent's point, it's true that in terms of the number of cases the Supreme Court hears, the reversal rate of the Ninth Circuit is very high-"
This is not surprising. 9th circuit court is liberal and the supreme court is republican. Why would a rebublican court let liberals make the law?
In a close election every vote counts. This election was very close. The republican florida legislature and governor chose to eliminate an overwhelmingly black voterbase because they knew that they were likely to vote for a democrat. I believe that blacks in florida voted more then 80% for democrats.
Taking away peoples right to vote and then saying "all they had to do was to jump through our hoops and we would have let them vote" is crap. It's also illegal. The state of florida was sued over this act and they settled out of court. Of course by then it was too late and the election was over.
And finally of course there were all those retired jews who voted for Buchanan for president (thousands) who even Buchanan admits were probably mistaken. If those votes went to Gore he would have won too.
There is no doubt in my mind that a majority of florida voters intended to vote for Gore. Alas they did not get what they wanted and look what happened to our lives.
"Without an electoral college the opinions of vast regions of the country would be meaningless."
They are already meaningless. The politicians concentrate on a handful of "swing" states and ignore the rest.
"You fellows live in an interesting fantasy world."
We live in the United States which is the ultimate fantasy world.
"Yes, it's legal, but is it a good idea?"
Why not? Our country relies on the electoral collage and as long as that system is in place there is no moral reason not to use the system to your best advantage. Think of it this way.
If you live in a heavily democratic state (say NY or CA) and you are a republican your vote is wasted, if you live in a heavily republican state (say MT or AZ) and you are a democrat you might as well not even bother to vote.
This way everybody can vote feel like our vote counts. As an added bonus we give increased power to minority parties and that can't be bad.
Really I think this is a creative way for the voters to take back the elections. The candidates don't even campaign in states that are a lock for one party or another anymore.
Is code really subject to fair use? DO we have fair use to the MS code and when can we look at it to see what parts can be used under this doctorine.
How do I use AT when all the tools I am likely to call are GUI based?
At sometime launch some program, click to the appropriate tab, uncheck the appropriate box.
This guy is just trolling.
Maybe if this kind of behaviour was rare then we'd give them the benefit of doubt but come on now this is MS. This is how they work.
"The GPL may serve a symbolic purpose to some, but it sure as hell doesn't fucking empower you."
The GPL is a software licence. If it falls then all licenses will fall too.
Good point.
"How many times do I have to repeat myself. Some evidence is required!"
You said that but it's a moot point. Since 1) the evidence is not presented to a judge and 2) the evidence consists almost entirely of the presients word, 3) whoever the evidence gets presented to is just a lackey of the president.
"Again, start lobbying and quit your passive bitching."
I can do both and I will. Sorry but you will not shut me up.
" The difference is that it's a lot more difficult to confirm the identities of everyone in the car from an unmanned aircraft high in the sky."
It's even more difficult to discriminate if we dropped a daisy cutter. On what moral framework is this an excuse? No judge, No jury, No trial, just launch a missle at the guy and then claim that you did nothing wrong because "it's difficult to discriminate"
" You're stretching my statement a bit too far, don't you think? I'm simply stating that it's a little unusual for innocent people to be driving around with generals of worldwide terrorist organizations."
I don't think I am stretching your statement. Once again the only reason you are claiming that those people were worldwide terrorists is because the president said so. I would have prefered a trial but that's just me I don't normally believe my presidents.
"LOL! You sure have a hyperactive imagination!"
In what way? Is guantanamo bay a concentration camp? If not why not? Does it have any similarities to a concentration camp at all? How many people are held there? Do you know how they are treated? if you do then tell us how you found out.
"Yeah, Saddam is a wonderful leader for his people and he loves to play nice with his neighbors"
Saddam is evil but you can't use that fact to act evil yourself. Nobody is arguing that saddam is a good guy.
"Condoning [google.com] the 9/11 trajedy should say a lot about his viewpoint on conventional war"
Even if he took joy in the 9/11 event it does not justify a war. Other people took joy in it too all over the world. You can't go around killing everybody who delights in your misfortune.
" I don't care what nation gets innocent civilians killed. It's wrong and should be avoided."
If it's wrong then why don't you care?
"Before you comment on civilian casualties we have caused, remember that there will be honest mistakes that are regretted."
Don't do it and you won't have to regret it.
"Do you really think we want to go to war? "
Yes I do. George Bush wanted to attack iraq as soon as he became president. 9-11 gave him the cover to do it.
"If he disarmed, we would love to bring our brothers, sisters, and fathers back home!"
It would not matter we would still bomb his country and take over the oil fields.
"Unfortunately, he hasn't disarmed yet"
Lots of people have arms, lots of people have WMD, lots of countries have broken UN resolutions. Somehow we dealt with the dissolution of the communist empire and the largest stock pile of nuclear weapons. Russia was run a by a series of madmen and we did not attack them. North Korea is run a by madmen which WMD and we are not going to attack them.
Attacking iraq shows a severe lack of imagination. Do you really believe that the only possible way to deal with Saddam Hussein is to occupy his country? There are no other options?
Well I was just guessing and it just makes sense. Because..
1) Israel is a close ally of the US, we always exchange intelligence data with them.
2) Torture is legal in israel.
3) Israelis have lots of experience torturing arabs. they know what makes the arab tick, they have lots of insight into the arab psycology.
4) They don't like arabs.
It just makes sense that they would torture our arabs for us.
"Oh, and a few more points. First-- learn to spell. Second-- learn how to capitalize. Third-- shut up."
No, No, No. People disagree with you, learn to deal with it.
"you must show "some evidence"."
Really to who? A judge? Which Judge? Is there a jury? It's all moot. All it takes is for the president to say so.
"I'm proud to be an American and I'm impressed by the progress we've made so far to evolve."
Yadda, Yadda, Yadda, flag, apple pie, chevrolet. I say we are moving backwards. The fact of the matter is that I have less freedom today then I did before. I imagine that's pretty much a win for the terrorists.
" The guys in Yemen were hit by a hellfire from a predator aircraft. There wasn't an operative sitting in the car with a gun executing the guys."
I fail to see the distinction.
"The operation was legal under U.S. law."
Yes. It's now legal to assasinate US citizens if they are abroad.
"The target deserved it and the American with him probably did too"
And you know this how?
"Yeah, he could have been innocent of providing assistance to terrorists...in a movie"
Yes because in real life innocent people are never accused of crimes or found guilty of the. Innocent people also have never been to jail or put on death row. Because in america we are infallible and our president is all knowing. After all god himself chose this country and appointed this president and everybody knows eating apple pies and driving chevrolets makes you infallible.
"Supposedly, they did not know that an American citizen was with him. That's an honest mistake."
Oops you just contradicted yourself. Did the guy deserve it or was he there by accident? Oh well it's OK to kill american citizens with a missle if it's an honest mistake. We may be infallible but the CIA operatives in yemen probably were not eating apple pie and driving chevrolets. That's why they made this honest mistake.
"This is an extremely perverted comparison."
Really? I don't think so. Here I'll hit you with this one too. There is no real difference between the conctration camps set up by hitler and the contration camps set up by bush. Ok maybe the conditions are better (but then again how would any of us know) but the idea is the same. Round people up and send them away to a distant concentration camp to be "interrogated".
Kind of sucks huh?