Or it's simply that Al Jazeera was the news source that had a story with Kobe Bryant in the headline that Google spidered last - which may just be the bit with the very latest news - or maybe not. When you're googleing you always have to check more than just the first hit, and the fact that the "journalist" didn't know probably reflects on his "journalism" - rather his articles created by googling for the facts.
You mistakenly believe that Saddam was not a not so nice person. A couple of times he send out Iraqi officials to his enemies to tell them it would be safe to come to visit him. A few weeks later he took the pleasure of shooting them in the head personally. The fact that you want to wrench the last bit of doubt about a non-involvement of Iraq in 9/11 out of the report is pretty obvious. As can be seen by not quoting all the obvious hostility between Hussein and Bin Laden.
Sure, there is no difference between between being so drunk that drinking more is a "no brainer" and having consumed so much caffein that deciding "thenextesspressowillstoptheshaking". And the same goes for a cold turkey with either being grumpy with a headache and well, first getting basically the symptoms you describe for an caffein overdose (maybe worse), in hard cases followed by delirium tremens with possible deadly consequences.
First of all, that was a B-25 bomber that hit the Empire State Building, and it was in heavy fog.
If you read several of the reports about 9/11, it is clear that several people knew it was an attack, including NORAD. Now why nobody bothered to inform the President is up to debate. Take this for example. It has different versions of what was said to Bush after the second plane hit. They all involve the word "attack". And yet we have him sitting there for minutes reading (or just holding the book) after that.
We even have the President tell us "I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower - the TV was obviously on. And I used to fly, myself, and I said, well, there's one terrible pilot. I said, it must have been a horrible accident. But I was whisked off there, I didn't have much time to think about it." But we already knew he makes stuff up as he goes.
Well, there are a few things to it. For one, there are very few negative (and not too severe) effects of caffein but quite a few positive ones. Alcohol OTOH, while having positive effects in small dosis, will often make you lose control over how much you consume (IOW when you are drunk), so the severe short and long term effects kick in. When you are an alcoholic, you'll need to drink far above the healthy dose just to be "normal". Also there are very few "dry" alcoholics who can drink one glass and will not start drinking again.
Well, for one: "(B) would result in serious harm to the economy of the United States"
What is that supposed to mean? Less than 5% growth per annum? People starving in the streets? They give us this while they fight for every percentage point of reduction? Somebody think about the children!, that is about as straight forward as this formulation..
A. No. The protocol has never been submitted to the senate for ratification. The Bush administration has referred to a vote on the non-binding Byrd-Hagel resolution, which registered views on some aspects of protocol negotiations. The vote on the Byrd-Hagel resolution took place prior to the conclusion of the Kyoto agreement, and before any of the flexibility mechanisms were established. The resolution was written so broadly that even strong supporters of the Kyoto Protocol, such as senators Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.) and John Kerry (D-Mass.) voted for it. In doing so, Sen. Kerry said: "It is clear that one of the chief sponsors of this resolution, Senator Byrd . . . agrees... that the prospect of human-induced global warming as an accepted thesis with adverse consequences for all is here, and it is real.... Senator Lieberman, Senator Chafee and I would have worded some things differently... [but] I have come to the conclusion that these words are not a treaty killer."
Slashdot Mirror
Nixon-Mecha from Futurama anyone?
Is that the same technologie the CIA used to show that Saddam had an ICBM in his backyard?
So did the moderator come up with any remotely surprizing questions?
It seems they didn't escape the pipes, the gasoline just evaporated (the story doesn't even mention him flushing).
How else are you going to blow up your house (and collect insurance money)?
Or it's simply that Al Jazeera was the news source that had a story with Kobe Bryant in the headline that Google spidered last - which may just be the bit with the very latest news - or maybe not. When you're googleing you always have to check more than just the first hit, and the fact that the "journalist" didn't know probably reflects on his "journalism" - rather his articles created by googling for the facts.
Turkey has a lot of problems with its Democracy, but it is certainly more secular than the US.
No, the definition of libertarian is one who is for minimal government intrusion into his exploitation of others.
Yeah, but only if they hadn't planned all this from the start.
This is very true, but does he have anywhere near the support infastructure that he had on Sept 11th?
So why did AlQaeda attack more often after the "War on Terror" (TM) began?
Are we fighting Terrorism or Al-qaeda? Are you attempting to suggest that Iraq has no ties to terrorism?
Are you fighting the guys who attacked you on 9/11, or just some guys annoying Israel?
You mistakenly believe that Saddam was not a not so nice person. A couple of times he send out Iraqi officials to his enemies to tell them it would be safe to come to visit him. A few weeks later he took the pleasure of shooting them in the head personally. The fact that you want to wrench the last bit of doubt about a non-involvement of Iraq in 9/11 out of the report is pretty obvious. As can be seen by not quoting all the obvious hostility between Hussein and Bin Laden.
Odd, the Mercedes Benz A-Class had the same problem at first doing the "elk-test". What's the point of getting bought if you don't ask the mothership?
For better or worse - there is only one Megadeth - no "s"s.
What do you get when someone tries that? Windows.
Shouldn't this be ice hockey rinks of destruction? Just like you count in Megadeaths and not Kilodeaths?
I hope you hate your job, and live a miserable life. Else you wouldn't deserve to get paid for your work.
Sure, there is no difference between between being so drunk that drinking more is a "no brainer" and having consumed so much caffein that deciding "thenextesspressowillstoptheshaking". And the same goes for a cold turkey with either being grumpy with a headache and well, first getting basically the symptoms you describe for an caffein overdose (maybe worse), in hard cases followed by delirium tremens with possible deadly consequences.
If you read several of the reports about 9/11, it is clear that several people knew it was an attack, including NORAD. Now why nobody bothered to inform the President is up to debate. Take this for example. It has different versions of what was said to Bush after the second plane hit. They all involve the word "attack". And yet we have him sitting there for minutes reading (or just holding the book) after that.
We even have the President tell us "I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower - the TV was obviously on. And I used to fly, myself, and I said, well, there's one terrible pilot. I said, it must have been a horrible accident. But I was whisked off there, I didn't have much time to think about it." But we already knew he makes stuff up as he goes.
And in Iraq you could vote for Saddam H. and S. Hussein.
No, no, you need the poor to use those guns - far away from home of course.
Well, there are a few things to it. For one, there are very few negative (and not too severe) effects of caffein but quite a few positive ones. Alcohol OTOH, while having positive effects in small dosis, will often make you lose control over how much you consume (IOW when you are drunk), so the severe short and long term effects kick in. When you are an alcoholic, you'll need to drink far above the healthy dose just to be "normal". Also there are very few "dry" alcoholics who can drink one glass and will not start drinking again.
What is that supposed to mean? Less than 5% growth per annum? People starving in the streets? They give us this while they fight for every percentage point of reduction? Somebody think about the children!, that is about as straight forward as this formulation..
Yup, and the US hardly shines there either.
Well, Dell does the exact same thing. So do others.
A. No. The protocol has never been submitted to the senate for ratification. The Bush administration has referred to a vote on the non-binding Byrd-Hagel resolution, which registered views on some aspects of protocol negotiations. The vote on the Byrd-Hagel resolution took place prior to the conclusion of the Kyoto agreement, and before any of the flexibility mechanisms were established. The resolution was written so broadly that even strong supporters of the Kyoto Protocol, such as senators Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.) and John Kerry (D-Mass.) voted for it. In doing so, Sen. Kerry said: "It is clear that one of the chief sponsors of this resolution, Senator Byrd . . . agrees ... that the prospect of human-induced global warming as an accepted thesis with adverse consequences for all is here, and it is real.... Senator Lieberman, Senator Chafee and I would have worded some things differently... [but] I have come to the conclusion that these words are not a treaty killer."