It's kind of a shame ham radio has for being such a nerdy pursuit.
Jeez. Make that "...has a reputation for being..."
Re:Ham Nerds
on
Hamvention
·
· Score: 3, Informative
I think a friend of mine said it best; "You can be into ham radios and you can be into computers, but being into both is taking it just a little too far".
Problem is, it's getting harder and harder to be into ham radio without being into computers. Digital modes are used more and more, and computers are used for a lot of related things, like satellite tracking, timekeeping, logging, transceiver control, beam headings, etc. True, a lot of these things can be done without computers, but they are ideally suited for computers to manage.
It's kind of a shame ham radio has for being such a nerdy pursuit. It can be a lot of fun, and it has a lot of depth as a hobby.
Wrong. Treat me like I'm not a walking lump of hormones. I have an intelligent brain and I like to watch intelligent shows that don't use sex as a replacement for a storyline.
I believe you have an intelligent brain, but you seem to have failed to notice my post was not exactly serious.
See, I was making fun of the lame and obvious overuse of sex when ratings...oh, never mind. Back to the humorlessness already in progress.
Don't get me wrong - I like hot babes in form-fitting clothes and all, but after Seven of Nine and T'Pol, how about a hot babe with all the nice bits PLUS an actual PERSONALITY? Sure, the physical goods are there, but their behavior isn't exactly sexy.
"Captain, it is 1300 hours. Time for our afternoon copulation."
Then again, since ratings are down, try a proven formula: Have Archer shave his head, grow a beard, and bring in Worf!
Why you would need a MAC to get music quickly over the net either means A) You are an idiot, B) You are an APPLE SHILL or C) You are likely both
One of the more common critters in the Slashdot bestiary is the knee-jerk anti-Apple flamer. They are characterized by their vituperative attitude towards Macintosh computers and their users, in spite of knowing nothing about the Mac platform at all. A sure sign of this is when they spell Mac as MAC, as if it were an acronym, while in the same sentence calling someone else an idiot.
Observing them in the wild is not difficult, and can provide some amusement for a short time, but they ultimately fail to keep the naturalist interested because of their highly repetitive and unvarying behavior, and they do not mate.
I don't have this problem, I'm still using a dot matrix from 1993! I have only replaced the ribbon once, and it still prints. (really light and grey/bluish)
Why, I'd never use one of them new-fangled dot matrix printers. I sit in front of my screen and jot down my text in cuneiform with a wood stylus and a mud tablet. I've only replaced the stylus 32 times in the last 4,000 years!
What I got was some very basic Unix tutorials. My NextStep 0.8 documentation (circa '87) is MUCH more helpful than this book.
While there is some pretty basic stuff about using the shell, I think this comment is a bit unfair. The stuff about fink and other package management, building packages, and the xnu kernel are not what I'd call "very basic." I liked the book not so much because it taught me anything new about Unix, but because it told me the things I needed to know about Darwin's quirks, like its directory structure for example. It helped me get some stubborn source code to compile.
The stuff about X11 is a little dated, though, coming as it did just before Apple's X11 betas hit the net. I'd say this book was OK, but not exhaustive by any stretch.
The war is not "illegal" in the US. Again, I am considering in the US. Outside of the US, its also not "illegal", there have been no court or un proceedings.
So, if I go rob the liquor store down the street, it's not illegal until I go to court?
I agree that these seven rules are useful for judging bogus science, but I reject the implication that if it's not scientific, it is not true. Just because someone cannot point to a scientific reason, doesn't mean that various herbal or eastern medicines don't work.
But science *is* the only way to evaluate claims that fall within the bounds of science. If you claim that some homeopathic remedy cures some disease, that claim can be subjected to scientific scrutiny. You can do a double-blind test to see if the effect is significantly greater than a placebo. When such things are done, and it's shown that such a treatment is not effective, the proponents of homeopathy will tell you, "Hey, man, you just can't evaluate this with your narrowminded scientific methods. It's, like, deeper than that."
That isn't probing the limits of science. That's just head-in-the-sand BS. People are free to maintain their non-falsifiable beliefs, but once they use those beliefs to make an *empirical* claim (e.g, Benny Hinn heals cancer, homeopathy cures disease, psychics predict the future, etc.) science is the appropriate means to evaluate it.
Does anyone think that if you had $37 *million dollars* to spend on education, then there might be better things to spend it on than ibooks?
No. Nobody thinks that. As the article clearly stated, there was not a single objection to this plan. You are the first one to ask these questions. Kudos to you on your (5, Insightful) illuminating this subtle new aspect of the story.
I used to work for a company that provided testing services to MS. I and a team of 2 others tested a product that had serious bug problems. We found some 300 bugs, many severe, and the program manager didn't want to hear about them. I had to practically threaten him just to get the worst of the bunch fixed, and the fixes introduced new bugs that they also wouldn't fix. They had a ship date, and that's all they cared about, aside from egregious show-stopper bugs. It was a depressing experience for a tester. Normally, we get our job satisfaction from seeing our work result in a better product. With this project, we saw most of our work dismissed or ignored.
I found the whole environment weird. MS is the only place I've tested where I would get cussed out by developers for finding bugs. Their bug DB had a lot of really dysfunctional QA/Dev "discussions."
I really think the reason most users don't report MS bugs is because they've been conditioned to be resigned to them. It's this big, hurkin' denial bandwagon and BG is driving.
But understand the difference between something one can't control: sex, age, race, etc and something someone can control like drug use and their credit history. That was really the point I am trying to make.
First, thanks for the apology. I appreciate graciousness.
All I have to add is that, as a victim of identity theft, I disagree that credit reports are something we can control. Some a-hole is running around using my SSN to get credit and has left all kinds of crap on my credit report, including judgments for nonpayment of child support. I've gotten most of that stuff cleared off, but I still have to jump through extra hoops to get credit. Right now, I'm trying to get a cell phone and they're making me provide a bunch of extra documentation just for that. It was also very unfun to get turned down for a car loan, hearing the voice of the loan person change as he assumed I was a deadbeat dad (I have never had to pay child support nor ever had any judgments against me).
So if an employer looked at my credit report, they may well just assume I'm slime and not hire me, due to no fault of my own and in spite of all my efforts to correct the problems.
I'll leave the drug test issue for another time.:)
Gosh, I'm flattered, but I really don't think I have the power to force my beliefs on anyone. What I can do is express my opinion as a member of that society you already conceded has the right to say what criteria are discriminatory that credit checks and drug tests should likewise be considered discriminatory.
You may not like my opinion, fine. But accusing me of somehow forcing anything on anyone is ridiculous.
Problem: Some people don't make enough to live off of.
Solution: Write a law that makes sure everyone makes at least $50K a year.
Problem: Not everyone has medical insurance.
Solution: Write a law that makes sure all insurance companies cover everyone for free.
Problem: Not everyone can afford to own a car.
Solution: Write a law to make sure the government buys everyone a car!
This is a really, really, really bad analogy. Banning pre-employment credit checks is a far cry from forcing someone to give you money or services for free. The standard Libertarian line is that you can just walk and get a job somewhere else. The problem is, when people just submit to this kind of crap, more and more employers do it, until it becomes difficult or impossible to find work in your field. Once that happens, the whole "free market" of jobs is compromised. Competition doesn't give you any leverage.
We don't allow employers to ask about your age, religion, country of origin, or marital status, because these are irrelevancies used to discriminate. Drug screens and credit checks don't strike me as very different from those. Neither one is a good predictor of job performance, and both constitute an unnecessary invasion of privacy. (I can see drug screen for heavy equipment operators, but in most jobs, if you perform well, who cares what substances you ingest? If you suck at your job, you get fired. SImple.)
I find it astounding that people are so willing to meekly submit to these kinds of intrusions. We would never think about letting an employer rummage through our houses looking for "dirt," so why should be let them forcibly extract bodily fluids or make snap judgments based on your financial history? And yes, making employment contingent on these things is a use of force. It's a strong form of coersion.
Everyone needs a job. Laws making employers treat potential hires fairly and rationally are not anything like taking assets away from them.
When you write out an entire script in three acts and actually perform it with your friends, that's borderline obsessive fan behavior. Defintiely obsessive if you film the process.
Ah, fer cryin' out loud, they were just a bunch of guys having fun. Why psychoanalyze them? We all do stuff other people think is weird.
I know you aren't seriously harshing on them, but there are a lot of posts here on the "they have too much time on their hands" theme. Well, most of us who post to slashdot probably have too much time on our hands, too.
Some people like to make Star Trek(ish) movies, some of us scream like idiots at football games, and some of us raise snakes, whatever. It's all harmless recreation. We shouldn't be so quick to put down other peoples' interests just because we don't share them.
I admire their thoroughness. A lot of people talk about doing stuff like this on a lark, but they actually did it. That puts them ahead of most people.
P.S. This is a general rant only partly directed at the parent.
This is a bit like using a Jedi Knight and her light saber to get at a can of soup.
The Jedi Knight and the light saber will definitely get the can, and get it open in a jiffy. But the contents are a mess. And one never seems to have a light saber around when one needs one. Much less a light saber attached to a willing Jedi Knight -- "Follow our mandate from the Jedi Council, we must! Mmmm!"
"Scotty, we can't make it all the way on pompous hot air! I need more from the Jedi Soup Can!"
"Cap'n - I can't get any more rhetoric out of this analogy! It's strained beyond its limit! She'll break up for sure!"
I don't see how this equals a computer "thinking" the subject is a gay pregnant man, or that it has any such category. And when the other guy ordered war movies and then started getting a lot of Third Reich stuff, he claims TiVo "thinks" he's a Nazi. People are reading way too much into this.
I bet your TiVO thinks you're humorless.
Really, lighten up. It was a light-hearted article and I don't think anyone quoted in it felt seriously damaged in any way. I think you're the one reading too much into this.
I'm sorry, but you're giving him a piece of plastic with your name on it and expect anonymity?
Right, but this made their questioning annoy me even more. He asks my name after I hand him my CC. Why? He has the damn name in his hand! Why do I have to answer a bunch of annoying questions?
It isn't the privacy issue that made me hate the questions. It's the fact that I had to go through some damn ritual of answering unnecessary questions every single time, and I had to decide whether to to refuse and get the icy stares, or give them fake or false info, or just cave because I'm too tired to resist. It's just one of those irritations that I don't need. It's like getting a wedgie every time I buy something.
I concur. They are making it seem like a crime to hold a certain attitude towards a certain population, the jewish people.
"A certain opinion?!?" How about outright, vicious hatred? To hear it from you, he said something like, "I'd prefer not to have a jewish man at my tea party."
Of course if Joe Smoe says anything negative about jewish people, IMMEDIATELY everyone (like a reflex action) labels him an antismetic and it's like he is a pedophile and they discount everything that he says, even the truthful elements.
I take it you haven't actually read or heard what Fischer has to say about Jews, then. Tell me, what are the "truthful elements" in the following excerpts?
Bobby Fischer: This is just a conspiracy against me by the Jews. Pablo Mercado: Why? Why? Bobby Fischer: Those filthy filthy bastards. You know they've trying to take over the world. Pablo Mercado: Why? Bobby Fischer: You know they invented the Holocaust story. There's no such. there was no holocaust of the Jews in World War II. Pablo Mercado: Really? Bobby Fischer: They've been pulling this shit from time immemorial about persecution. They're a filthy lying bastard people. That's all they ever do. that's all they'll ever be.
Pablo Mercado: All right. with all of these things Mr. Fischer. what do you intend to do now? Bobby Fischer: I intend to do what I'm doing right now. Pablo Mercado: What? Bobby Fischer: Which is to expose the Jews for the criminals they are, the parasites they are, the liars they are, the thieves they are, the niggers (?) they are.
Bobby Fischer: This is the Jewish mentality. These are a criminal people. They torture their prisoners in the worst way. It's even illegal! They don't even deny it hardly. Jews were always bastards throughout history. They are liars, they are the worst pieces of shit in the world. They mutilate their own children.
Bobby Fischer: You know, the Jews control the courts. What is your name, Mr. Mercado? Pablo Mercado: Yes, Pablo. Bobby Fischer: Yes, the Jews. Pablo, yeah Pablo. The Jews control the courts. It's just a charade they go through. It's Facade City, you know - Facade City. I've been involved in a number of law suits in America. Never got a penny, never got a stop order, never got nothing. I've been involved in about 5 or 6 lawsuits, about 5 cases throughout the years, never got a penny, never got any property back, never got a stop order, never got nothing man. I spent a lot of money, and I have all the documents, and I have all the justice on my side. It's a joke. The United States is a farce controlled by dirty, hook-nosed circumcised Jew bastards. Of course, I'm sure I will be labeled anti-semetic after this post by the ignorant and by pro-censors.
I find it ironic that you'd label your critics "ignorant" when you apparently never bothered to find out what the man actually says. Like a typical knee-jerk conservative with a persecution complex, you consider any critics censors.
As to whether you are anti-semitic, I can't say. Do you think Fischer's opinions have significant "truthful elements?" Is there some excuse for what he said? If you want more, I can find it. Try "Bobby Fischer jews" in google. You should even be able to find audio files of this and other interviews.
But, please think about it. I'm advocating freedom of speech, an essential pillar of our democratic society that is being chiseled away at for the past decade or so.
Oh, you are so very noble. I suppose it never occurred to you that the right of freedom of speech includes the right of anyone to express an opinion about how another exercises that right. Just read his words. Fischer is a racist hatemonger, from the plain meaning of what he says. It requires no "PC-ness" to see that. You are free to say anything you want, but are not free to say it unchallenged. Unless you can cite an example to Fischer being prohibited from speaking in public, your claims of censorship are just a lot of balloon juice.
But it's NOT based on faith. If the "Creation Scientists" would just stop making scientific arguments against evolution, you'd be right. But they don't. They try to substitute their (horribly flawed) "science" for REAL science. They can't have it both ways. If it's purely a matter of faith, they should quit trying to make scientific claims. That justifies a scientific refutation.
Also, theory != "not a fact." Evolution, like gravity, is a theory and a fact. The evidence for both is so overwhelming that, while not proven in the mathematical sense, they're supported to the point that rejecting them is absurd. Not that that stops anyone.
Slashdot Mirror
Some idiot wrote:
It's kind of a shame ham radio has for being such a nerdy pursuit.
Jeez. Make that "...has a reputation for being..."
I think a friend of mine said it best; "You can be into ham radios and you can be into computers, but being into both is taking it just a little too far".
Problem is, it's getting harder and harder to be into ham radio without being into computers. Digital modes are used more and more, and computers are used for a lot of related things, like satellite tracking, timekeeping, logging, transceiver control, beam headings, etc. True, a lot of these things can be done without computers, but they are ideally suited for computers to manage.
It's kind of a shame ham radio has for being such a nerdy pursuit. It can be a lot of fun, and it has a lot of depth as a hobby.
Wrong. Treat me like I'm not a walking lump of hormones. I have an intelligent brain and I like to watch intelligent shows that don't use sex as a replacement for a storyline.
I believe you have an intelligent brain, but you seem to have failed to notice my post was not exactly serious.
See, I was making fun of the lame and obvious overuse of sex when ratings...oh, never mind. Back to the humorlessness already in progress.
Don't get me wrong - I like hot babes in form-fitting clothes and all, but after Seven of Nine and T'Pol, how about a hot babe with all the nice bits PLUS an actual PERSONALITY? Sure, the physical goods are there, but their behavior isn't exactly sexy.
"Captain, it is 1300 hours. Time for our afternoon copulation."
Then again, since ratings are down, try a proven formula: Have Archer shave his head, grow a beard, and bring in Worf!
Which also brings up one of the increasingly common critters in the Slashdot bestiary, the Apple-Fan-Boy.
Feeble.
Why you would need a MAC to get music quickly over the net either means A) You are an idiot, B) You are an APPLE SHILL or C) You are likely both
One of the more common critters in the Slashdot bestiary is the knee-jerk anti-Apple flamer. They are characterized by their vituperative attitude towards Macintosh computers and their users, in spite of knowing nothing about the Mac platform at all. A sure sign of this is when they spell Mac as MAC, as if it were an acronym, while in the same sentence calling someone else an idiot.
Observing them in the wild is not difficult, and can provide some amusement for a short time, but they ultimately fail to keep the naturalist interested because of their highly repetitive and unvarying behavior, and they do not mate.
I don't have this problem, I'm still using a dot matrix from 1993! I have only replaced the ribbon once, and it still prints. (really light and grey/bluish)
Why, I'd never use one of them new-fangled dot matrix printers. I sit in front of my screen and jot down my text in cuneiform with a wood stylus and a mud tablet. I've only replaced the stylus 32 times in the last 4,000 years!
The people will be called randomly during the day and asked to turn on the camera to confirm that they are really there
That must be a lot of fun when you've got a raging fever and hacking cough, trying to get some sleep.
What I got was some very basic Unix tutorials. My NextStep 0.8 documentation (circa '87) is MUCH more helpful than this book.
While there is some pretty basic stuff about using the shell, I think this comment is a bit unfair. The stuff about fink and other package management, building packages, and the xnu kernel are not what I'd call "very basic." I liked the book not so much because it taught me anything new about Unix, but because it told me the things I needed to know about Darwin's quirks, like its directory structure for example. It helped me get some stubborn source code to compile.
The stuff about X11 is a little dated, though, coming as it did just before Apple's X11 betas hit the net. I'd say this book was OK, but not exhaustive by any stretch.
The war is not "illegal" in the US. Again, I am considering in the US. Outside of the US, its also not "illegal", there have been no court or un proceedings.
So, if I go rob the liquor store down the street, it's not illegal until I go to court?
I agree that these seven rules are useful for judging bogus science, but I reject the implication that if it's not scientific, it is not true. Just because someone cannot point to a scientific reason, doesn't mean that various herbal or eastern medicines don't work.
But science *is* the only way to evaluate claims that fall within the bounds of science. If you claim that some homeopathic remedy cures some disease, that claim can be subjected to scientific scrutiny. You can do a double-blind test to see if the effect is significantly greater than a placebo. When such things are done, and it's shown that such a treatment is not effective, the proponents of homeopathy will tell you, "Hey, man, you just can't evaluate this with your narrowminded scientific methods. It's, like, deeper than that."
That isn't probing the limits of science. That's just head-in-the-sand BS. People are free to maintain their non-falsifiable beliefs, but once they use those beliefs to make an *empirical* claim (e.g, Benny Hinn heals cancer, homeopathy cures disease, psychics predict the future, etc.) science is the appropriate means to evaluate it.
Does anyone think that if you had $37 *million dollars* to spend on education, then there might be better things to spend it on than ibooks?
No. Nobody thinks that. As the article clearly stated, there was not a single objection to this plan. You are the first one to ask these questions. Kudos to you on your (5, Insightful) illuminating this subtle new aspect of the story.
Seriously, he seems like your standard cool dork guy.
"Your standard cool dork guy?" What the hell is that? It sounds like "your standard demure porn star gal," or "your standard honest politician dude."
Love,
Your standard endearing wiseass
It's always been possible to mix oil and water with a little thing called SOAP. Or surfactant, to be more precise. Or detergent. You get my drift.
It was once my job to figure out how to get oil out of wastewater, and it could be a really difficult problem. Oil/water emulsions are nothing new.
I used to work for a company that provided testing services to MS. I and a team of 2 others tested a product that had serious bug problems. We found some 300 bugs, many severe, and the program manager didn't want to hear about them. I had to practically threaten him just to get the worst of the bunch fixed, and the fixes introduced new bugs that they also wouldn't fix. They had a ship date, and that's all they cared about, aside from egregious show-stopper bugs. It was a depressing experience for a tester. Normally, we get our job satisfaction from seeing our work result in a better product. With this project, we saw most of our work dismissed or ignored.
I found the whole environment weird. MS is the only place I've tested where I would get cussed out by developers for finding bugs. Their bug DB had a lot of really dysfunctional QA/Dev "discussions."
I really think the reason most users don't report MS bugs is because they've been conditioned to be resigned to them. It's this big, hurkin' denial bandwagon and BG is driving.
But understand the difference between something one can't control: sex, age, race, etc and something someone can control like drug use and their credit history. That was really the point I am trying to make.
:)
First, thanks for the apology. I appreciate graciousness.
All I have to add is that, as a victim of identity theft, I disagree that credit reports are something we can control. Some a-hole is running around using my SSN to get credit and has left all kinds of crap on my credit report, including judgments for nonpayment of child support. I've gotten most of that stuff cleared off, but I still have to jump through extra hoops to get credit. Right now, I'm trying to get a cell phone and they're making me provide a bunch of extra documentation just for that. It was also very unfun to get turned down for a car loan, hearing the voice of the loan person change as he assumed I was a deadbeat dad (I have never had to pay child support nor ever had any judgments against me).
So if an employer looked at my credit report, they may well just assume I'm slime and not hire me, due to no fault of my own and in spite of all my efforts to correct the problems.
I'll leave the drug test issue for another time.
Gosh, I'm flattered, but I really don't think I have the power to force my beliefs on anyone. What I can do is express my opinion as a member of that society you already conceded has the right to say what criteria are discriminatory that credit checks and drug tests should likewise be considered discriminatory.
You may not like my opinion, fine. But accusing me of somehow forcing anything on anyone is ridiculous.
Problem: Some people don't make enough to live off of.
Solution: Write a law that makes sure everyone makes at least $50K a year.
Problem: Not everyone has medical insurance.
Solution: Write a law that makes sure all insurance companies cover everyone for free.
Problem: Not everyone can afford to own a car.
Solution: Write a law to make sure the government buys everyone a car!
This is a really, really, really bad analogy. Banning pre-employment credit checks is a far cry from forcing someone to give you money or services for free. The standard Libertarian line is that you can just walk and get a job somewhere else. The problem is, when people just submit to this kind of crap, more and more employers do it, until it becomes difficult or impossible to find work in your field. Once that happens, the whole "free market" of jobs is compromised. Competition doesn't give you any leverage.
We don't allow employers to ask about your age, religion, country of origin, or marital status, because these are irrelevancies used to discriminate. Drug screens and credit checks don't strike me as very different from those. Neither one is a good predictor of job performance, and both constitute an unnecessary invasion of privacy. (I can see drug screen for heavy equipment operators, but in most jobs, if you perform well, who cares what substances you ingest? If you suck at your job, you get fired. SImple.)
I find it astounding that people are so willing to meekly submit to these kinds of intrusions. We would never think about letting an employer rummage through our houses looking for "dirt," so why should be let them forcibly extract bodily fluids or make snap judgments based on your financial history? And yes, making employment contingent on these things is a use of force. It's a strong form of coersion.
Everyone needs a job. Laws making employers treat potential hires fairly and rationally are not anything like taking assets away from them.
When you write out an entire script in three acts and actually perform it with your friends, that's borderline obsessive fan behavior. Defintiely obsessive if you film the process.
Ah, fer cryin' out loud, they were just a bunch of guys having fun. Why psychoanalyze them? We all do stuff other people think is weird.
I know you aren't seriously harshing on them, but there are a lot of posts here on the "they have too much time on their hands" theme. Well, most of us who post to slashdot probably have too much time on our hands, too.
Some people like to make Star Trek(ish) movies, some of us scream like idiots at football games, and some of us raise snakes, whatever. It's all harmless recreation. We shouldn't be so quick to put down other peoples' interests just because we don't share them.
I admire their thoroughness. A lot of people talk about doing stuff like this on a lark, but they actually did it. That puts them ahead of most people.
P.S. This is a general rant only partly directed at the parent.
This is a bit like using a Jedi Knight and her light saber to get at a can of soup.
The Jedi Knight and the light saber will definitely get the can, and get it open in a jiffy. But the contents are a mess. And one never seems to have a light saber around when one needs one. Much less a light saber attached to a willing Jedi Knight -- "Follow our mandate from the Jedi Council, we must! Mmmm!"
"Scotty, we can't make it all the way on pompous hot air! I need more from the Jedi Soup Can!"
"Cap'n - I can't get any more rhetoric out of this analogy! It's strained beyond its limit! She'll break up for sure!"
I don't see how this equals a computer "thinking" the subject is a gay pregnant man, or that it has any such category. And when the other guy ordered war movies and then started getting a lot of Third Reich stuff, he claims TiVo "thinks" he's a Nazi. People are reading way too much into this.
I bet your TiVO thinks you're humorless.
Really, lighten up. It was a light-hearted article and I don't think anyone quoted in it felt seriously damaged in any way. I think you're the one reading too much into this.
I'm sorry, but you're giving him a piece
of plastic with your name on it and expect
anonymity?
Right, but this made their questioning annoy me even more. He asks my name after I hand him my CC. Why? He has the damn name in his hand! Why do I have to answer a bunch of annoying questions?
It isn't the privacy issue that made me hate the questions. It's the fact that I had to go through some damn ritual of answering unnecessary questions every single time, and I had to decide whether to to refuse and get the icy stares, or give them fake or false info, or just cave because I'm too tired to resist. It's just one of those irritations that I don't need. It's like getting a wedgie every time I buy something.
I concur. They are making it seem like a crime to hold a certain attitude towards a certain population, the jewish people.
"A certain opinion?!?" How about outright, vicious hatred? To hear it from you, he said something like, "I'd prefer not to have a jewish man at my tea party."
Of course if Joe Smoe says anything negative about jewish people, IMMEDIATELY everyone (like a reflex action) labels him an antismetic and it's like he is a pedophile and they discount everything that he says, even the truthful elements.
I take it you haven't actually read or heard what Fischer has to say about Jews, then. Tell me, what are the "truthful elements" in the following excerpts?
Bobby Fischer: This is just a conspiracy against me by the Jews.
Pablo Mercado: Why? Why?
Bobby Fischer: Those filthy filthy bastards. You know they've trying to take over the world.
Pablo Mercado: Why?
Bobby Fischer: You know they invented the Holocaust story. There's no such. there was no holocaust of the Jews in World War II.
Pablo Mercado: Really?
Bobby Fischer: They've been pulling this shit from time immemorial about persecution. They're a filthy lying bastard people. That's all they ever do. that's all they'll ever be.
Pablo Mercado: All right. with all of these things Mr. Fischer. what do you intend to do now?
Bobby Fischer: I intend to do what I'm doing right now.
Pablo Mercado: What?
Bobby Fischer: Which is to expose the Jews for the criminals they are, the parasites they are, the liars they are, the thieves they are, the niggers (?) they are.
Bobby Fischer: This is the Jewish mentality. These are a criminal people. They torture their prisoners in the worst way. It's even illegal! They don't even deny it hardly. Jews were always bastards throughout history. They are liars, they are the worst pieces of shit in the world. They mutilate their own children.
Bobby Fischer: You know, the Jews control the courts. What is your name, Mr. Mercado?
Pablo Mercado: Yes, Pablo.
Bobby Fischer: Yes, the Jews. Pablo, yeah Pablo. The Jews control the courts. It's just a charade they go through. It's Facade City, you know - Facade City. I've been involved in a number of law suits in America. Never got a penny, never got a stop order, never got nothing. I've been involved in about 5 or 6 lawsuits, about 5 cases throughout the years, never got a penny, never got any property back, never got a stop order, never got nothing man. I spent a lot of money, and I have all the documents, and I have all the justice on my side. It's a joke. The United States is a farce controlled by dirty, hook-nosed circumcised Jew bastards.
Of course, I'm sure I will be labeled anti-semetic after this post by the ignorant and by pro-censors.
I find it ironic that you'd label your critics "ignorant" when you apparently never bothered to find out what the man actually says. Like a typical knee-jerk conservative with a persecution complex, you consider any critics censors.
As to whether you are anti-semitic, I can't say. Do you think Fischer's opinions have significant "truthful elements?" Is there some excuse for what he said? If you want more, I can find it. Try "Bobby Fischer jews" in google. You should even be able to find audio files of this and other interviews.
But, please think about it. I'm advocating freedom of speech, an essential pillar of our democratic society that is being chiseled away at for the past decade or so.
Oh, you are so very noble. I suppose it never occurred to you that the right of freedom of speech includes the right of anyone to express an opinion about how another exercises that right. Just read his words. Fischer is a racist hatemonger, from the plain meaning of what he says. It requires no "PC-ness" to see that.
You are free to say anything you want, but are not free to say it unchallenged. Unless you can cite an example to Fischer being prohibited from speaking in public, your claims of censorship are just a lot of balloon juice.
But it looks like this will be the last Leonid shower for quite a while.
It doesn't say it will be the last Leonid shower. It says it will be the last Leonid storm. There's a huge difference.
But it's NOT based on faith. If the "Creation Scientists" would just stop making scientific arguments against evolution, you'd be right. But they don't. They try to substitute their (horribly flawed) "science" for REAL science. They can't have it both ways. If it's purely a matter of faith, they should quit trying to make scientific claims. That justifies a scientific refutation.
Also, theory != "not a fact." Evolution, like gravity, is a theory and a fact. The evidence for both is so overwhelming that, while not proven in the mathematical sense, they're supported to the point that rejecting them is absurd. Not that that stops anyone.