I'm not intending to be dismissive. I actually don't understand why this is even news.
We're following the Google VS China story.
Google goes into china, china says out with the pr0n and the "free tibet" crap or no deal, google says ok. People here say google is turning evil, not giving china any pr0n. Google says china hacks google looking for people who want to free tibet, china says nah-huh, google just wanna make china look at 2 girls one cup and goatse. Google says they're gonna take their ball and go home.
And now we're at "China says google is trying to make china gay for the USA".
If one company's ambition change China's internet rules will only prove to be ridiculous, why is a China government run news agency so frantically issuing statements on the issue?
To make it a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you repeat it enough, people will believe it.
So... A government controlled news entity IN CHINA is reporting dirt about google to the Chinese people. Why the heck is this news?
Yeah, why are things happening in other country news?
"So, the earth IN HAITI is dropping houses on the Haitian people. Why the heck is this news?"
Why is that tripe modded up? Every thread, EVERY THREAD some troll comes along demanding to know why this is news. Ignore them, or mod them down, but don't mod it up: It's noise! Just noise.
even the "worst case" "victims" the administration keep bringing out to show how awful the current US healthcare system is have all been covered and receiving full treatment in their respective states public systems. Something the administration always conveniently neglect to mention.
Conservative talk show hosts and columnists have ridiculed an 11-year-old Washington state boy's account of his mother's death as a "sob story" exploited by the White House and congressional Democrats like a "kiddie shield" to defend their health care legislation.
Tifanny Owens died in June 2007 of pulmonary hypertension, which is described as high blood pressure in the arteries of the lungs that can lead to heart failure. The disease is considered rare. While there's no cure, it can be treated.
The treatments can cost as much as $100,000 a year and must be "consistent and constant," said Katie Kroner , the director of advocacy and awareness for the Pulmonary Hypertension Association .
"It's extremely important to have health coverage," she said.
Owens was an assistant manager at a fast food restaurant when she became sick in September 2006 . As she became sicker, she missed work and was eventually fired, leaving her without health insurance. She was treated twice in an emergency room and died at age 27 after a week of unconsciousness. Gina Owens has custody of Marcelas and his two younger sisters.
Gina Owens said her daughter didn't qualify for Medicaid . State officials said that without knowing the details, it was impossible to speculate on whether Tifanny Owens would have qualified.
Tifanny Owens might have been eligible for Washington state's basic health care plan, which is aimed at the working poor. The plan has had a long waiting list for some time, said Sharon Michael of the Washington state Health Care Authority .
"Right now, we have 100,000 people on the wait list," Michael said.
And what about all the other stations that transmitted the same statement? Should they be closed and expropriated too?
You must be new... to Venezula. They used to have private TV broadcasters (Score:5, Informative)
If you'll look up this thread, you'll see I got into it by telling that guy about all the other stations that were not closed and expropriated. My information, which was correcting his disinformation, was modded down.
What about his claim that Chavez has already closed down and expropriated them?
I certainly don't think your government should be mowing down your country's telecom industry. You tell me he recently got his show to be on every channel, and I think he's a jerk for doing so, if he wants to go on ranting for hours, fine, but he should keep it to his channel. Saying that all your TV stations are government property is +5 "informative" in this thread, I got "troll" for telling someone about something you think you need to remind me of. Think about that.
By the way, Lucas Rincon was appointed by Chavez as Minister of Interior and Justice after the coup, and later on Ambassador to Portugal. So if Rincon's statement was a lie, how can you explain his current high ranking position in the government?
Didn't he change his mind in the middle of the coup and help Hugo in the end? Maybe he didn't care about the statement because he was very happy they kidnapped him instead of shooting him and saying a different lie.
But how can I explain that Hugo had him shipped out to another continent? Oh, I don't know, why do you think he'd want that guy to live comfortably far, far away? If I'd guess I would probably just think he owed him a favor, but he didn't trust him enough to have him around.
Sorry, the moment they become EC's, they lose *all* affiliation with the US, including citizenship, and any protections afforded them by such things as the Geneva Convention...unless they become affiliated with another recognized nation.
1- I don't believe it's that easy to lose your citizenship, so citation needed.
Furthermore, you're replying to someone who mentioned the bill of rights, and it clearly defines rights of "people", "persons" and additional rights for "citizens". The bits about fair trials and whatnot apply to "people" and "persons", voting rights and similar apply exclusively to citizens. That's because the founding fathers of the united states were not bloodthirsty xenophobes. Slave owning libidinous hemp growers, sure, but otherwise fine upstanding people.
You may like to pretend that you can label people "foreigners" or "unlawful combatants" and thus gain the legal leeway to treat them with complete inhumanity, but the US constitution says otherwise, and the Geneva conventions say otherwise.
Stations don't talk? Oh, I bet fox news is fair and balanced in your little fictional world there.
There was nothing fictional in my post, its a link to the public declaration given by Lucas Rincon to more than 8 stations check it out. Nobody can deny this happened. Do you realize how off-topic was to bring up fox news into the discussion? We don't even get that channel here.
So they ran a prepared statement. Did they unquestioningly accept his wild claims, or did they question the veracity of what he said? Did they say "really? that guy resigned? That don't sound much like him..." or did they just serve as the propaganda arm of your local branch of the military-industrial-congress complex?
Stations talk. Stations have a voice: They have an editorial line. Fox News is on topic because it is well known example of a station that claims to be neutral yet is obviously very biased.
I seem to recall something about having a right to a fair trial if I'm a US citizen.
Two things: First of all, the US constitution guarantees these rights if you're a PERSON, not "only if you're a citizen". The rights reserved to citizens have to do with voting and holding office. Secondly, the people are granted rights to fair trials in criminal proceedings, and the US government is simply claiming that they aren't prosecuting a criminal matter, easy peasy.
No person shall be held to answer for any capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
* Sixth Amendment – Trial by jury and rights of the accused; Confrontation Clause, speedy trial, public trial, right to counsel
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.
What the side effects are. One would(perhaps naively) assume that regeneration is an obvious survival advantage, and that losing regenerative capabilities would be a handicap. That being so, one would tend to suspect that an anti-regeneration gene would be fairly strongly selected against. Since this gene is, in fact, rampant in mammals, one is led to the suspicion that there must be some sort of upside. Is it something more or less irrelevant to modern humans(at least those wealthy enough to ever be genetically engineered), something like "without any sort of medical care, most serious injuries were fatal before regeneration could occur, so the extra energy costs weren't worth it", or is it some kicker of the "Well, without a whole bunch of other adaptations possessed by certain amphibians and creepy-crawlies, you'll 'regenerate' yourself entirely full of tumors by age 20." flavor?
Well, FTFA: "In normal cells, p21 acts like a brake to block cell cycle progression in the event of DNA damage, preventing the cells from dividing and potentially becoming cancerous," Heber-Katz said. "In these mice without p21, we do see the expected increase in DNA damage, but surprisingly no increase in cancer has been reported." In fact, the researchers saw an increase in apoptosis in MRL mice -- also known as programmed cell death -- the cell's self-destruct mechanism that is often switched on when DNA has been damaged. According to Heber-Katz, this is exactly the sort of behavior seen in naturally regenerative creatures.
Maybe this gene was like the scaffolding you build before building an arch, and now that we have evolved the rest of the cancer-fighting-arch, we can remove the p21 scaffolding. Or maybe this will end up like thalidomide. I say we proceed with cautious optimism.
The difference being that very few people consider Pakistan to be a democracy, whereas Venezuela is a democracy teetering on the brink of a single party system.
No, the real difference is that Pakistan is a pawn of the US and Venezuela's Chavez is a thorn.
Why do you think I bothered to link and quote a US president saying that he approves of the democratic values displayed in sacking the supreme court and jailing opponents and journalists? I did it to show that whatever Chavez does that gets people to call him "dictator", you can do worse and be called a believer in democracy by "the leader of the free world", as long as you open up your airspace to NATO.
Except they aren't on cable anymore. Chavez created a law to make channels on cable "chain" themselves to political announcements (called "cadenas" or "chains") which can last several hours sometimes. The channel chose not to adhere to this law, therefore chavez made all cable operators remove the channel from the grid or risk being fined and/or closed
What happened to their soaps? Do people still get their stories?
I don't know how you got modded Interesting with all this BS.
Opposed only to the democratically elected government: When there was a coup, and Chavez was kidnapped, that station said he had resigned.
The station didn't "say" he resigned, stations don't talk. It was General Lucas Rincón, the highest ranking military officer, who announced that Chavez resigned.
Stations don't talk? Oh, I bet fox news is fair and balanced in your little fictional world there.
One can't even call the USA an empire without people getting irrational.
Well, empire means so many things. It's easy to find someone who only knows some of its meanings and is ignorant of the meaning that applies. You can use "hegemonic empire" to be more precise. That might cut down on the irrational reactions by a few percentage points. But on the whole, the manufacturing of consent proceeds with great efficacy. Keep fighting the good fight, though.
Slashdot Mirror
How much can a few drops of water along with your conventional meds cost?
It's the guy who shakes the people in that special way who costs a lot.
I'm not intending to be dismissive. I actually don't understand why this is even news.
We're following the Google VS China story.
Google goes into china, china says out with the pr0n and the "free tibet" crap or no deal, google says ok. People here say google is turning evil, not giving china any pr0n. Google says china hacks google looking for people who want to free tibet, china says nah-huh, google just wanna make china look at 2 girls one cup and goatse. Google says they're gonna take their ball and go home.
And now we're at "China says google is trying to make china gay for the USA".
Can't wait to see what google does next.
If one company's ambition change China's internet rules will only prove to be ridiculous, why is a China government run news agency so frantically issuing statements on the issue?
To make it a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you repeat it enough, people will believe it.
So... A government controlled news entity IN CHINA is reporting dirt about google to the Chinese people. Why the heck is this news?
Yeah, why are things happening in other country news?
"So, the earth IN HAITI is dropping houses on the Haitian people. Why the heck is this news?"
Why is that tripe modded up? Every thread, EVERY THREAD some troll comes along demanding to know why this is news. Ignore them, or mod them down, but don't mod it up: It's noise! Just noise.
The internet is its own society which is free from cultural and geological borders.
This video contains content from Sony Pictures, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds.
WAS free. Past tense. And prepare for ACTA, this is only getting worse.
even the "worst case" "victims" the administration keep bringing out to show how awful the current US healthcare system is have all been covered and receiving full treatment in their respective states public systems. Something the administration always conveniently neglect to mention.
Conservative talk show hosts and columnists have ridiculed an 11-year-old Washington state boy's account of his mother's death as a "sob story" exploited by the White House and congressional Democrats like a "kiddie shield" to defend their health care legislation.
Tifanny Owens died in June 2007 of pulmonary hypertension, which is described as high blood pressure in the arteries of the lungs that can lead to heart failure. The disease is considered rare. While there's no cure, it can be treated.
The treatments can cost as much as $100,000 a year and must be "consistent and constant," said Katie Kroner , the director of advocacy and awareness for the Pulmonary Hypertension Association .
"It's extremely important to have health coverage," she said.
Owens was an assistant manager at a fast food restaurant when she became sick in September 2006 . As she became sicker, she missed work and was eventually fired, leaving her without health insurance. She was treated twice in an emergency room and died at age 27 after a week of unconsciousness. Gina Owens has custody of Marcelas and his two younger sisters.
Gina Owens said her daughter didn't qualify for Medicaid . State officials said that without knowing the details, it was impossible to speculate on whether Tifanny Owens would have qualified.
Tifanny Owens might have been eligible for Washington state's basic health care plan, which is aimed at the working poor. The plan has had a long waiting list for some time, said Sharon Michael of the Washington state Health Care Authority .
"Right now, we have 100,000 people on the wait list," Michael said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20100318/pl_mcclatchy/3455226
Even Sarah Palin has to duck across the border to canada to afford medicine.
HAD to. That was before the GOP took over her wardrobe. Now she's got big money backing her.
Probably because socialized systems won't perform a futile procedure
They have homeopathic hospitals in the UK :-|
literally having their "asses sued off".
Court ordered colostomy?
Does chess count as a violent game?
No, silly, only things old people don't like get banned, not everything that fits the definition.
Is there anything that the government runs that really functions correctly/efficiently?
You don't support the troops? You're a... a commie terrorist sympathizer!
And what about all the other stations that transmitted the same statement? Should they be closed and expropriated too?
You must be new... to Venezula. They used to have private TV broadcasters (Score:5, Informative)
If you'll look up this thread, you'll see I got into it by telling that guy about all the other stations that were not closed and expropriated. My information, which was correcting his disinformation, was modded down.
What about his claim that Chavez has already closed down and expropriated them?
I certainly don't think your government should be mowing down your country's telecom industry. You tell me he recently got his show to be on every channel, and I think he's a jerk for doing so, if he wants to go on ranting for hours, fine, but he should keep it to his channel. Saying that all your TV stations are government property is +5 "informative" in this thread, I got "troll" for telling someone about something you think you need to remind me of. Think about that.
By the way, Lucas Rincon was appointed by Chavez as Minister of Interior and Justice after the coup, and later on Ambassador to Portugal. So if Rincon's statement was a lie, how can you explain his current high ranking position in the government?
Didn't he change his mind in the middle of the coup and help Hugo in the end? Maybe he didn't care about the statement because he was very happy they kidnapped him instead of shooting him and saying a different lie.
But how can I explain that Hugo had him shipped out to another continent? Oh, I don't know, why do you think he'd want that guy to live comfortably far, far away? If I'd guess I would probably just think he owed him a favor, but he didn't trust him enough to have him around.
There shouldn’t need to be a law for this, though. Telcos should enforce it on their own.
Score:4, Insightful
If I hadn't just spent my last mod point, you'd just now be at +5 Funny. Telcos, acting right without the law forcing them... good one!
Damn them for being enemy combatants?
Sorry, the moment they become EC's, they lose *all* affiliation with the US, including citizenship, and any protections afforded them by such things as the Geneva Convention...unless they become affiliated with another recognized nation.
1- I don't believe it's that easy to lose your citizenship, so citation needed.
2- The geneva convention still maintains that "unlawful combatants" can't be tortured: "In each case, such persons shall nevertheless be treated with humanity (GCIV Article 5)"
Furthermore, you're replying to someone who mentioned the bill of rights, and it clearly defines rights of "people", "persons" and additional rights for "citizens". The bits about fair trials and whatnot apply to "people" and "persons", voting rights and similar apply exclusively to citizens. That's because the founding fathers of the united states were not bloodthirsty xenophobes. Slave owning libidinous hemp growers, sure, but otherwise fine upstanding people.
You may like to pretend that you can label people "foreigners" or "unlawful combatants" and thus gain the legal leeway to treat them with complete inhumanity, but the US constitution says otherwise, and the Geneva conventions say otherwise.
Stations don't talk? Oh, I bet fox news is fair and balanced in your little fictional world there.
There was nothing fictional in my post, its a link to the public declaration given by Lucas Rincon to more than 8 stations check it out. Nobody can deny this happened.
Do you realize how off-topic was to bring up fox news into the discussion? We don't even get that channel here.
So they ran a prepared statement. Did they unquestioningly accept his wild claims, or did they question the veracity of what he said? Did they say "really? that guy resigned? That don't sound much like him..." or did they just serve as the propaganda arm of your local branch of the military-industrial-congress complex?
Stations talk. Stations have a voice: They have an editorial line. Fox News is on topic because it is well known example of a station that claims to be neutral yet is obviously very biased.
And who cares if they are targeting US citizens?
I seem to recall something about having a right to a fair trial if I'm a US citizen.
Two things: First of all, the US constitution guarantees these rights if you're a PERSON, not "only if you're a citizen". The rights reserved to citizens have to do with voting and holding office.
Secondly, the people are granted rights to fair trials in criminal proceedings, and the US government is simply claiming that they aren't prosecuting a criminal matter, easy peasy.
* Fifth Amendment – due process, double jeopardy, self-incrimination, eminent domain.
No person shall be held to answer for any capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
* Sixth Amendment – Trial by jury and rights of the accused; Confrontation Clause, speedy trial, public trial, right to counsel
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.
the underlying natural reasons for the gene to be turned off? We aught to be taking a very close look at the consequences of turning on this gene
Other way around: The absence of this single gene, called p21, confers a healing potential in mice
What the side effects are. One would(perhaps naively) assume that regeneration is an obvious survival advantage, and that losing regenerative capabilities would be a handicap. That being so, one would tend to suspect that an anti-regeneration gene would be fairly strongly selected against. Since this gene is, in fact, rampant in mammals, one is led to the suspicion that there must be some sort of upside.
Is it something more or less irrelevant to modern humans(at least those wealthy enough to ever be genetically engineered), something like "without any sort of medical care, most serious injuries were fatal before regeneration could occur, so the extra energy costs weren't worth it", or is it some kicker of the "Well, without a whole bunch of other adaptations possessed by certain amphibians and creepy-crawlies, you'll 'regenerate' yourself entirely full of tumors by age 20." flavor?
Well, FTFA: "In normal cells, p21 acts like a brake to block cell cycle progression in the event of DNA damage, preventing the cells from dividing and potentially becoming cancerous," Heber-Katz said. "In these mice without p21, we do see the expected increase in DNA damage, but surprisingly no increase in cancer has been reported."
In fact, the researchers saw an increase in apoptosis in MRL mice -- also known as programmed cell death -- the cell's self-destruct mechanism that is often switched on when DNA has been damaged. According to Heber-Katz, this is exactly the sort of behavior seen in naturally regenerative creatures.
Maybe this gene was like the scaffolding you build before building an arch, and now that we have evolved the rest of the cancer-fighting-arch, we can remove the p21 scaffolding.
Or maybe this will end up like thalidomide. I say we proceed with cautious optimism.
The difference being that very few people consider Pakistan to be a democracy, whereas Venezuela is a democracy teetering on the brink of a single party system.
No, the real difference is that Pakistan is a pawn of the US and Venezuela's Chavez is a thorn.
Why do you think I bothered to link and quote a US president saying that he approves of the democratic values displayed in sacking the supreme court and jailing opponents and journalists? I did it to show that whatever Chavez does that gets people to call him "dictator", you can do worse and be called a believer in democracy by "the leader of the free world", as long as you open up your airspace to NATO.
Except they aren't on cable anymore. Chavez created a law to make channels on cable "chain" themselves to political announcements (called "cadenas" or "chains") which can last several hours sometimes. The channel chose not to adhere to this law, therefore chavez made all cable operators remove the channel from the grid or risk being fined and/or closed
What happened to their soaps? Do people still get their stories?
Big fat fucking deal.
Rewrite the first amendment so it only applies in freespeech zones and it doesn't quite have the same weight, does it?
FTFY
Opposed only to the democratically elected government
Hitler was elected, too. Don't confuse how one gains power with how one wields it.
Don't confuse a godwin with a good argument.
I don't know how you got modded Interesting with all this BS.
Opposed only to the democratically elected government: When there was a coup, and Chavez was kidnapped, that station said he had resigned.
The station didn't "say" he resigned, stations don't talk. It was General Lucas Rincón, the highest ranking military officer, who announced that Chavez resigned.
Stations don't talk? Oh, I bet fox news is fair and balanced in your little fictional world there.
If it was a quote, you should have blockquoted it
Awww, you can't figure it out otherwise! You poor thing.
One can't even call the USA an empire without people getting irrational.
Well, empire means so many things. It's easy to find someone who only knows some of its meanings and is ignorant of the meaning that applies. You can use "hegemonic empire" to be more precise. That might cut down on the irrational reactions by a few percentage points. But on the whole, the manufacturing of consent proceeds with great efficacy. Keep fighting the good fight, though.