"The Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill that not only authorizes, but extends, US warrentless wiretapping. No accountability. No oversight. No definition of 'terrorist.' No record of who voted for what. Great way to devolve a democratic republic into a fascist theocracy. Me worried? Yea."
Read the text of the bill linked above, not the Wired article for the full story.
Oh, and that "Me worried? Yea." part? You're overstating your importance...to...well, anyone.
Don't worry. If you really read what's going on with that bill, you'd know that 1) It's for people communicating the terrorists, 2) It's being overseen by a court, and 3) it's ALSO being overseen by Congress.
You hit the nail on the head. They people that are against this bill would rather give you a "half truth", rather than actually tell you what the REAL bill says.
It's much easier for them to rally their troops when you have people pointing to a wired article that doesn't say a thing about the fact that the OTHER half of the phone call is to a suspected terrorist, AND that it'll go through a court AND it'll have Congressional oversight.
No, it's much easier to be alarmist and only tell the part of the story that backs up what they want to project.
And they wonder why people aren't flocking to their side of the argument.
This is NOT a business model. This is hacking people's systems, without their knowledge, and using it for someone else's purposes. It's stealing, computing resources and the people's time that it costs to get rid of the stuff. I'd be willing to bet a lot of the people effected by this end up having to pay to have it removed (by Geek Squad or some other overpriced outfit).
I'm sure if this happened to the/. editor's systems, or whomever posted this article, THEY wouldn't consider this a "business model".
Considering these things go in cycles, (I mean, in the 1970s, magazines were declaring we were about to enter another ice age), it won't take long for Gore to look like an idiot.
I think what we'll really see is that the cycle will slow within the next few years, and Algore will declare victory over Manbearpig, and claim credit.
Well, the answer for hurricanes at least is that you SHOULDN'T be listening to them in relation to "global warming":
NOAA ATTRIBUTES RECENT INCREASE IN HURRICANE ACTIVITY TO NATURALLY OCCURRING MULTI-DECADAL CLIMATE VARIABILITY Nov. 29, 2005 - "The nation is now wrapping up the 11th year of a new era of heightened Atlantic hurricane activity. This era has been unfolding in the Atlantic since 1995, and is expected to continue for the next decade or perhaps longer. NOAA attributes this increased activity to natural occurring cycles in tropical climate patterns near the equator. These cycles, called "the tropical multi-decadal signal," typically last several decades. As a result, the North Atlantic experiences alternating decades-long of above normal or below normal hurricane seasons. NOAA research shows that the tropical multi-decadal signal is causing the increased Atlantic hurricane activity since 1995, and is not related to greenhouse warming."
For more on Democrats and the minimum wage, here we have a guy doing work for the Democratic National Committee via a firm they hired; he went door to door for 37 hours, and got paid $130 after taxes, far less than the minimum wage of $6.50. Another guy worked 45 hours, and got paid $56 dollars.
I'd also like to point out that it's morally reprehensible for Democrats OR Republicans to be doing that.
No matter what people think about their side (Demo or Repub), neither has the corner on the market when it comes to what's morally right. There's damn goofy stuff on both sides.
There are plenty of racist nutcases in the Democratic party too. Take Cythia McKinney. At least they had the insight to get rid of her. Look at all the so called Democrats that throw racist remarks at black Republican candidates.
Byrd is the same way. Sorry, but once in the KKK, always in the KKK. Like I said, if he had been a Republican, he would have been thrown out of the party long ago. Not so with the Democrats.
Is that morally right? I don't think so.
Don't even get me started at the way the Democrats have enslaved the very people they're supposed to be helping; instead they keep them down just to make sure they keep them in the party. Just witness the Democrat blockade of the latest bill to increase minimum wage. Democrats blocked it.
Keeping people down the like the most racist thing of all, and disgusting at that.
"Despite the protestations of various litigious losers, the court system, including the Supreme Court, generally prefers to interpret existing laws than make law themselves."
Also recall it's not the court's job to "make law". They're not supposed to. That's the legislator's job. The court's job is to interpret law, not make it.
That's one of the reasons people are so pissed off at activist judges, on either side of the aisle.
ISO 9000 just means the people that "certify" this have all their procedures documented.
I'd be much more interested in a company that delivered software that worked, and stood behind it, rather than a company that puts all it's time and effort into ISO 9000. Every time I hear someone asking for that, they're more interested in being buzzword compliant than anything else.
Man, oh man.... The next thing people will be saying is that the company mission statements actually make a difference.
Well, considering that our concept is that we want to spread freedom, and they want to spread strict Islamic law.
That means a lot of the rights that people have fought for during the last 200 years (in the US) would go straight down the tubes, not the mention what's going on in the country these days.
Gay rights? Not for them. They KILL people for being gay.
Women's rights? Nope.
One of the Islamic states actually passed a law that a woman that was raped could be PROSECUTED for it!
There's a HUGE difference about what countries in the West do, and what the Islamic states want to do.
Well, to put another view on this, and to put this in a way that's a bit more realistic when it comes to the "I always believe the 'science'" crowd.
There are actually people in American that think that a fetus isn't "alive" while it's still in the mother, despite all the scientific evidence and just plan common sense to the countrary.
That's telling people to listen to the science on the one hand (evolution), but ignore the science when it's inconvient (pro-abortion).
Slashdot Mirror
"Me worried? Yea."
Dude... Seriously, no one cares about what your phone calls are, unless you're calling out of the country to terrorists.
Go grab your latte and relax. You sound paranoid.
"The Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill that not only authorizes, but extends, US warrentless wiretapping. No accountability. No oversight. No definition of 'terrorist.' No record of who voted for what. Great way to devolve a democratic republic into a fascist theocracy. Me worried? Yea."
Read the text of the bill linked above, not the Wired article for the full story.
Oh, and that "Me worried? Yea." part? You're overstating your importance...to...well, anyone.
Don't worry. If you really read what's going on with that bill, you'd know that 1) It's for people communicating the terrorists, 2) It's being overseen by a court, and 3) it's ALSO being overseen by Congress.
Mod parent up
You hit the nail on the head. They people that are against this bill would rather give you a "half truth", rather than actually tell you what the REAL bill says.
It's much easier for them to rally their troops when you have people pointing to a wired article that doesn't say a thing about the fact that the OTHER half of the phone call is to a suspected terrorist, AND that it'll go through a court AND it'll have Congressional oversight.
No, it's much easier to be alarmist and only tell the part of the story that backs up what they want to project.
And they wonder why people aren't flocking to their side of the argument.
This is NOT a business model. This is hacking people's systems, without their knowledge, and using it for someone else's purposes. It's stealing, computing resources and the people's time that it costs to get rid of the stuff. I'd be willing to bet a lot of the people effected by this end up having to pay to have it removed (by Geek Squad or some other overpriced outfit).
/. editor's systems, or whomever posted this article, THEY wouldn't consider this a "business model".
I'm sure if this happened to the
Considering these things go in cycles, (I mean, in the 1970s, magazines were declaring we were about to enter another ice age), it won't take long for Gore to look like an idiot.
I think what we'll really see is that the cycle will slow within the next few years, and Algore will declare victory over Manbearpig, and claim credit.
Well, the answer for hurricanes at least is that you SHOULDN'T be listening to them in relation to "global warming":
NOAA ATTRIBUTES RECENT INCREASE IN HURRICANE ACTIVITY TO NATURALLY OCCURRING MULTI-DECADAL CLIMATE VARIABILITY
Nov. 29, 2005 - "The nation is now wrapping up the 11th year of a new era of heightened Atlantic hurricane activity. This era has been unfolding in the Atlantic since 1995, and is expected to continue for the next decade or perhaps longer. NOAA attributes this increased activity to natural occurring cycles in tropical climate patterns near the equator. These cycles, called "the tropical multi-decadal signal," typically last several decades. As a result, the North Atlantic experiences alternating decades-long of above normal or below normal hurricane seasons. NOAA research shows that the tropical multi-decadal signal is causing the increased Atlantic hurricane activity since 1995, and is not related to greenhouse warming."
For more on Democrats and the minimum wage, here we have a guy doing work for the Democratic National Committee via a firm they hired; he went door to door for 37 hours, and got paid $130 after taxes, far less than the minimum wage of $6.50. Another guy worked 45 hours, and got paid $56 dollars.
Read about it here.
Another case of "Do as I say, not at I do".
I'd also like to point out that it's morally reprehensible for Democrats OR Republicans to be doing that.
No matter what people think about their side (Demo or Repub), neither has the corner on the market when it comes to what's morally right. There's damn goofy stuff on both sides.
There are plenty of racist nutcases in the Democratic party too. Take Cythia McKinney. At least they had the insight to get rid of her. Look at all the so called Democrats that throw racist remarks at black Republican candidates.
Byrd is the same way. Sorry, but once in the KKK, always in the KKK. Like I said, if he had been a Republican, he would have been thrown out of the party long ago. Not so with the Democrats.
Is that morally right? I don't think so.
Don't even get me started at the way the Democrats have enslaved the very people they're supposed to be helping; instead they keep them down just to make sure they keep them in the party. Just witness the Democrat blockade of the latest bill to increase minimum wage. Democrats blocked it.
Keeping people down the like the most racist thing of all, and disgusting at that.
I do have to point out that if he were Republican, he would have been drummed out of the Senate long ago for his ties to the KKK.
It's a double standard.
"Despite the protestations of various litigious losers, the court system, including the Supreme Court, generally prefers to interpret existing laws than make law themselves."
Also recall it's not the court's job to "make law". They're not supposed to. That's the legislator's job. The court's job is to interpret law, not make it.
That's one of the reasons people are so pissed off at activist judges, on either side of the aisle.
And I love it when the Democrats get caught with the hands in the same cookie jar...
- blogs/washington/washington/entries/2006/08/31/byr d_admits_he.html
I give you, Senator Byrd, King of Pork, another Senator that put a hold on the bill to "read it over" (same as Steven's):
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/blogs/content/shared
As for deranged... Pelosi and McKinney are doing a pretty good job.
"Even the Dem's King of Pork, Senator Byrd of VA, stands up for individual constitutional rights all the time"
- blogs/washington/washington/entries/2006/08/31/byr d_admits_he.html
Not this time...
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/blogs/content/shared
He was another senator that put the bill on hold. He lifted it today, after all the web uproar.
He gave the same basic reason Steven's did.
Ha! I was right. Byrd did put a hold on the bill:
- blogs/washington/washington/entries/2006/08/31/byr d_admits_he.html
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/blogs/content/shared
He admitted it today, and took it off after admitting it.
Hmmm....maybe I spoke too soon.
p redicted-its-ted-stevens-and-he.html
At least one democrat put a hold on it too, if this is to be believed.
http://tapscottscopydesk.blogspot.com/2006/08/as-
These guys need to go.
Surprised it wasn't the KING of pork, Robert Byrd.
No offense intended, but an ISO 9000 source?
ISO 9000 just means the people that "certify" this have all their procedures documented.
I'd be much more interested in a company that delivered software that worked, and stood behind it, rather than a company that puts all it's time and effort into ISO 9000. Every time I hear someone asking for that, they're more interested in being buzzword compliant than anything else.
Man, oh man.... The next thing people will be saying is that the company mission statements actually make a difference.
Exactly. Thanks for proving the point. They are WMDs, "pre gulf war" or not. They said they destroyed them. They didn't.
This is not morally equivalent.
Well, considering that our concept is that we want to spread freedom, and they want to spread strict Islamic law.
That means a lot of the rights that people have fought for during the last 200 years (in the US) would go straight down the tubes, not the mention what's going on in the country these days.
Gay rights? Not for them. They KILL people for being gay.
Women's rights? Nope.
One of the Islamic states actually passed a law that a woman that was raped could be PROSECUTED for it!
There's a HUGE difference about what countries in the West do, and what the Islamic states want to do.
Sorry, but you presume everyone's reasonable. That's already proven not to be the case.
You also presume that every country will have the same capability of deploying those things.
They don't.
Once one of those countries realizes it, they'll use it on the people the don't like, and that'll be the start of something much much worse.
And yet, he's gotten more money for this type of research than any other president. ...Apparently, you forgot that.
Well, sure it was Internet Hype. The same thing happened to Howard Dean.
The thing with the movie is, it made a good tag line to use online, and even for a few funny YouTube videos.
It's just that sometimes (in fact, a lot of the time), it just doesn't translate to the "real world".
I guess they'll be retroactively suing the makers of Invasion of the Body Snatchers....
So, what species of animal do we have proof of that evolved into a completely new species?
I'm not talking "Sabertooth tigers changed into the tigers we have today". That's the same species, with some mods over the years.
That's what we're talking about here.... Changing chimps to orangutans.
Anyone?
"Science threatens their faith"
Well, to put another view on this, and to put this in a way that's a bit more realistic when it comes to the "I always believe the 'science'" crowd.
There are actually people in American that think that a fetus isn't "alive" while it's still in the mother, despite all the scientific evidence and just plan common sense to the countrary.
That's telling people to listen to the science on the one hand (evolution), but ignore the science when it's inconvient (pro-abortion).
"you must agree that the RIAA is using the lawsuits to harass people. That is an abuse of process."
And the ACLU does the same thing when it comes to cities putting up Nativity scenes at Christmas.