Without the US there would be no OLPC. Lovely that you should side with thieves who confiscated everyone's property in Cuba and handed it over to their cronies. Maybe someday you too will have the pleasure of being on the wrong side of that circumstance.
Coming from the government sector, this kind of issue isn't going to be taken lightly. I work at a DoD facility and all our machines were just refreshed with Core 2 Duo machines. It is already almost impossible to get new software approved, if this causes the same paranoia for basic commodity hardware we're really gonna feel some pain.
Keep in mind that most of those computers are ordinary knowledge workers surfing the web and working on mundane reports in MS Office. In that respect they are no different than any other business. Your average DHS employee doesn't have access to anything dangerous in the first place. And sensitive information is typically kept off the unclassified machines.
The article actually says "800 hacker break-ins, virus outbreaks and other computer security problems over two years".
These numbers are remarkably low, if true. I once cleaned over 1000 virii, rootkits and spyware apps off the computer of a busy, filesharing teenager. 800 from 200,000 employees is pretty low. Not to mention that these are on public terminals since the real important data passes across private DoD networks (SIPRNET and JWICS. another clueless article written by another clueless reporter spreading FUD to the clueless liberal masses.
You are misintrepretring Bush's speech. He said, "After a senior official in its weapons program defected and exposed this lie, the regime admitted to producing tens of thousands of liters of anthrax and other deadly biological agents for use with Scud warheads, aerial bombs, and aircraft spray tanks.". The defector didn't say that but his defection forced the Iraqi regime to show it's cards or get caught in a huge lie outright since they believed that the UN would keep pushing harder and harder to inspect the Al Hakam site and interviewing the scientists working there.
Bush's point was that by hiding the Al Hakam work from 1991-1995 he had demonstratively shown his intent to not comply with the UN sanctions or the terms of the first Surrender. In other words, we KNOW he was violating the sanctions in 1995, what else is he doing that we haven't caught him at. He has shown his intent in so many other ways.
Please cite references for your assertions. IF you read the real ISG report you will see that until 1995 there is substantial evidence thet until 1995 they had continued development (expanding the facility including extensive anti-air installations) at the Al-Hakam facility. Sometime in 1995 Hussain had an "Oh Shit" moment and was about to get caught with his pants down and decided to stop working at that facility. If you recall there are a lot of odd incidents between the UNSCOM folks and the Iraqi military whenever they tried to inspect the facility. All that came about, then suspect because of the defection of the scientist/general and Hussain's worry about what he might say. Even though the defector, Hussein Kamal, never admitted to anything that would have incriminated Iraq (really himself), Hussain didn't know what he said. Put Bush's statement in perspective and it make sense.
Brainwashed, here's the source document. I realize how hard it is for non-critical minds to understand. I meant contemporary to the Sept 02 speech Bush gave that I referenced in the original post. Duh.
I was a duty CINCLANT Intel Specialist. I had codeword access and I reviewed EVERYTHING coming in on the message system plus special reports and helped develop the summary reports for local access. If you know anything about that field the last sentence should be a dead giveaway that I do know what I'm talking about (without violating any laws).
As far as the anthrax info, without going into specific classified information, here is a contemporary DOD report that was released to the public.
The Whitehouse is a consumer of intel, not a producer. I have plenty of complaints about the past and current systems for collecting, handling, analyzing and summarizing that intel, but none of that amounts to intentional LYING. YOU choose to put blinders on and read this report and only see the 5% that may have been proven correct in hindsight. YOU choose to ignore the fact that bilateral Congressional Committees read the same stuff the Whitehouse and came to the same conclusions. The other 95% of the reasoning for going into Iraq still holds up.
In the entire speech there is only one questionable statement "buy high-strength aluminum tubes used to enrich uranium...". In retrospect the likely use was in making better Scud missiles.
Now, what proof do you offer? Are you crazy? Are you hallucinating some other text? Virtually every other assertion is credited to UN reports. BTW, I worked in the intelligence field at the time he made this speech so I know the "facts" even though the Democrats in Congress pretend otherwise. At the time they saw the same evidence and reports the President saw and came to the same conclusions. Most anyhow.
Lobbying = Freedom of Assembly + Freedom of Speech
This might seem like inexpensive representation. $2000 to influence a vote. From the elected official's position it works like one of those diagrams cuts of beef. Slice of RIAA, slice of Big Oil slice of Greenpeace, etc. Selling your position piecemeal is quite lucrative.
I dare you to read the full speech that Bush made to the UN prior to the second Iraq war. You just may realize that the press has been lying to you, or at least obfuscating the truth.
President's Remarks at the United Nations General Assembly
Remarks by the President in Address to the United Nations General Assembly
New York, New York
10:39 A.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Secretary General, Mr. President, distinguished
delegates, and ladies and gentlemen: We meet one year and one day
after a terrorist attack brought grief to my country, and brought grief
to many citizens of our world. Yesterday, we remembered the innocent
lives taken that terrible morning. Today, we turn to the urgent duty
of protecting other lives, without illusion and without fear.
We've accomplished much in the last year -- in Afghanistan and
beyond. We have much yet to do -- in Afghanistan and beyond. Many
nations represented here have joined in the fight against global
terror, and the people of the United States are grateful.
The United Nations was born in the hope that survived a world war
-- the hope of a world moving toward justice, escaping old patterns of
conflict and fear. The founding members resolved that the peace of the
world must never again be destroyed by the will and wickedness of any
man. We created the United Nations Security Council, so that, unlike
the League of Nations, our deliberations would be more than talk, our
resolutions would be more than wishes. After generations of deceitful
dictators and broken treaties and squandered lives, we dedicated
ourselves to standards of human dignity shared by all, and to a system
of security defended by all.
Today, these standards, and this security, are challenged. Our
commitment to human dignity is challenged by persistent poverty and
raging disease. The suffering is great, and our responsibilities are
clear. The United States is joining with the world to supply aid where
it reaches people and lifts up lives, to extend trade and the
prosperity it brings, and to bring medical care where it is desperately
needed.
As a symbol of our commitment to human dignity, the United States
will return to UNESCO. (Applause.) This organization has been
reformed and America will participate fully in its mission to advance
human rights and tolerance and learning.
Our common security is challenged by regional conflicts -- ethnic
and religious strife that is ancient, but not inevitable. In the
Middle East, there can be no peace for either side without freedom for
both sides. America stands committed to an independent and democratic
Palestine, living side by side with Israel in peace and security.
Like all other people, Palestinians deserve a government that serves
their interests and listens to their voices. My nation will continue
to encourage all parties to step up to their responsibilities as we
seek a just and comprehensive settlement to the conflict.
Above all, our principles and our security are challenged today by
outlaw groups and regimes that accept no law of morality and have no
limit to their violent ambitions. In the attacks on America a year
ago, we saw the destructive intentions of our enemies. This threat
hides within many nations, including my own. In cells and camps,
terrorists are plotting further destruction, and building new bases for
their war against civilization. And our greatest fear is that
terrorists will find a shortcut to their mad ambitions when an outlaw
regime supplies them with the technologies to kill on a massive scale.
In one place -- in one regime -- we find all these dangers, in
their most lethal and aggressive forms, exactly the kind of aggressive
threat the United Nations was born to confront.
Twelve years ago, Iraq invaded Kuwait without provocation. And the
regime's forces were poised to co
I'm also annoyed with the RAZR stupid noisy shut-down music. Crap, if I'm shutting down the phone I don't want noise. And when you turn it on you get no positive response that it's turning on so I have to hit the power button a bunch of times to get it to turn on. I hope the software designer rots in hell.
The RAZRs Low Battery & Voice Message Beeping has cost me at least a dozen nights sleep this year alone. IT SUCKS. I'll thunk twice before buying a Motorola phone again.
I also have an alarm clock that beeps every time you press a button to change the time. Really annoying. Wan't to get another 30 mins sleep? Forget it, after hearing this thing bee 30 times you won't be able to get back to sleep.
Slashdot Mirror
Without the US there would be no OLPC. Lovely that you should side with thieves who confiscated everyone's property in Cuba and handed it over to their cronies. Maybe someday you too will have the pleasure of being on the wrong side of that circumstance.
Coming from the government sector, this kind of issue isn't going to be taken lightly. I work at a DoD facility and all our machines were just refreshed with Core 2 Duo machines. It is already almost impossible to get new software approved, if this causes the same paranoia for basic commodity hardware we're really gonna feel some pain.
Keep in mind that most of those computers are ordinary knowledge workers surfing the web and working on mundane reports in MS Office. In that respect they are no different than any other business. Your average DHS employee doesn't have access to anything dangerous in the first place. And sensitive information is typically kept off the unclassified machines.
Unrealistic. But go ahead and eat the FUD.
The article actually says "800 hacker break-ins, virus outbreaks and other computer security problems over two years".
These numbers are remarkably low, if true. I once cleaned over 1000 virii, rootkits and spyware apps off the computer of a busy, filesharing teenager. 800 from 200,000 employees is pretty low. Not to mention that these are on public terminals since the real important data passes across private DoD networks (SIPRNET and JWICS. another clueless article written by another clueless reporter spreading FUD to the clueless liberal masses.
I'd put my 11YO's judgment up against many 40YOs I work with any day.
So you choose to presume guilt instead? Hypocrite.
Off topic troll. But you mfers mod it 5. Not to mention you have no idea what you are taking about.
The linked article reads like a bad highschool report. Just a kludge of assertions with no clean data to back them up.
You are misintrepretring Bush's speech. He said, "After a senior official in its weapons program defected and exposed this lie, the regime admitted to producing tens of thousands of liters of anthrax and other deadly biological agents for use with Scud warheads, aerial bombs, and aircraft spray tanks.". The defector didn't say that but his defection forced the Iraqi regime to show it's cards or get caught in a huge lie outright since they believed that the UN would keep pushing harder and harder to inspect the Al Hakam site and interviewing the scientists working there.
Bush's point was that by hiding the Al Hakam work from 1991-1995 he had demonstratively shown his intent to not comply with the UN sanctions or the terms of the first Surrender. In other words, we KNOW he was violating the sanctions in 1995, what else is he doing that we haven't caught him at. He has shown his intent in so many other ways.
Please cite references for your assertions. IF you read the real ISG report you will see that until 1995 there is substantial evidence thet until 1995 they had continued development (expanding the facility including extensive anti-air installations) at the Al-Hakam facility. Sometime in 1995 Hussain had an "Oh Shit" moment and was about to get caught with his pants down and decided to stop working at that facility. If you recall there are a lot of odd incidents between the UNSCOM folks and the Iraqi military whenever they tried to inspect the facility. All that came about, then suspect because of the defection of the scientist/general and Hussain's worry about what he might say. Even though the defector, Hussein Kamal, never admitted to anything that would have incriminated Iraq (really himself), Hussain didn't know what he said. Put Bush's statement in perspective and it make sense.
Brainwashed, here's the source document. I realize how hard it is for non-critical minds to understand. I meant contemporary to the Sept 02 speech Bush gave that I referenced in the original post. Duh.
As far as the anthrax info, without going into specific classified information, here is a contemporary DOD report that was released to the public.
The Whitehouse is a consumer of intel, not a producer. I have plenty of complaints about the past and current systems for collecting, handling, analyzing and summarizing that intel, but none of that amounts to intentional LYING. YOU choose to put blinders on and read this report and only see the 5% that may have been proven correct in hindsight. YOU choose to ignore the fact that bilateral Congressional Committees read the same stuff the Whitehouse and came to the same conclusions. The other 95% of the reasoning for going into Iraq still holds up.
Now, what proof do you offer? Are you crazy? Are you hallucinating some other text? Virtually every other assertion is credited to UN reports. BTW, I worked in the intelligence field at the time he made this speech so I know the "facts" even though the Democrats in Congress pretend otherwise. At the time they saw the same evidence and reports the President saw and came to the same conclusions. Most anyhow.
Lobbying = Freedom of Assembly + Freedom of Speech
This might seem like inexpensive representation. $2000 to influence a vote. From the elected official's position it works like one of those diagrams cuts of beef. Slice of RIAA, slice of Big Oil slice of Greenpeace, etc. Selling your position piecemeal is quite lucrative.
Remarks by the President in Address to the United Nations General Assembly
New York, New York
10:39 A.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Secretary General, Mr. President, distinguished delegates, and ladies and gentlemen: We meet one year and one day after a terrorist attack brought grief to my country, and brought grief to many citizens of our world. Yesterday, we remembered the innocent lives taken that terrible morning. Today, we turn to the urgent duty of protecting other lives, without illusion and without fear.
We've accomplished much in the last year -- in Afghanistan and beyond. We have much yet to do -- in Afghanistan and beyond. Many nations represented here have joined in the fight against global terror, and the people of the United States are grateful.
The United Nations was born in the hope that survived a world war -- the hope of a world moving toward justice, escaping old patterns of conflict and fear. The founding members resolved that the peace of the world must never again be destroyed by the will and wickedness of any man. We created the United Nations Security Council, so that, unlike the League of Nations, our deliberations would be more than talk, our resolutions would be more than wishes. After generations of deceitful dictators and broken treaties and squandered lives, we dedicated ourselves to standards of human dignity shared by all, and to a system of security defended by all.
Today, these standards, and this security, are challenged. Our commitment to human dignity is challenged by persistent poverty and raging disease. The suffering is great, and our responsibilities are clear. The United States is joining with the world to supply aid where it reaches people and lifts up lives, to extend trade and the prosperity it brings, and to bring medical care where it is desperately needed.
As a symbol of our commitment to human dignity, the United States will return to UNESCO. (Applause.) This organization has been reformed and America will participate fully in its mission to advance human rights and tolerance and learning.
Our common security is challenged by regional conflicts -- ethnic and religious strife that is ancient, but not inevitable. In the Middle East, there can be no peace for either side without freedom for both sides. America stands committed to an independent and democratic Palestine, living side by side with Israel in peace and security. Like all other people, Palestinians deserve a government that serves their interests and listens to their voices. My nation will continue to encourage all parties to step up to their responsibilities as we seek a just and comprehensive settlement to the conflict.
Above all, our principles and our security are challenged today by outlaw groups and regimes that accept no law of morality and have no limit to their violent ambitions. In the attacks on America a year ago, we saw the destructive intentions of our enemies. This threat hides within many nations, including my own. In cells and camps, terrorists are plotting further destruction, and building new bases for their war against civilization. And our greatest fear is that terrorists will find a shortcut to their mad ambitions when an outlaw regime supplies them with the technologies to kill on a massive scale.
In one place -- in one regime -- we find all these dangers, in their most lethal and aggressive forms, exactly the kind of aggressive threat the United Nations was born to confront.
Twelve years ago, Iraq invaded Kuwait without provocation. And the regime's forces were poised to co
Also true for allowing anyone with a permit to carry firearms aboard the plane.
This story is a troll but then again Slashdot is run by Bush hating trolls.
So when they pass the plate in church, it's kind of like public sex?
Brag later.
Sounds like a good way to keep the law in sync with the norms of society.
I'm also annoyed with the RAZR stupid noisy shut-down music. Crap, if I'm shutting down the phone I don't want noise. And when you turn it on you get no positive response that it's turning on so I have to hit the power button a bunch of times to get it to turn on. I hope the software designer rots in hell.
The RAZRs Low Battery & Voice Message Beeping has cost me at least a dozen nights sleep this year alone. IT SUCKS. I'll thunk twice before buying a Motorola phone again.
I also have an alarm clock that beeps every time you press a button to change the time. Really annoying. Wan't to get another 30 mins sleep? Forget it, after hearing this thing bee 30 times you won't be able to get back to sleep.
Enough Said. Stating facts is not trolling.
You don't like sex?