It's called experience. If a guy breaks into my house 3 times and I catch him, then I get broke into again with the same MO, but I don't catch him red handed this time, I'd strongly suspect it was the same guy. Even if I don't have "solid" proof.
And as the judge enformed me when I went in for jury duty, circumstantial evidence IS legally admissable evidence.
I'd just be excastic to not only have kernal patches that are released 6 months after the vulnerability is known publically, but virus definitions that are updated for download 6 months after the viruses come out.
How much you wanna be they just want to cash in on the "Pay for Updates" model AV vendors use? That's one way to slip in their subscription model.
"But of course you guys will construe anything to suit your purposes."
I'm one of "you guys" now, huh? Well, sorry to disappoint you but I was one of _you_ guys up up until around 2001. Around then I realized I was getting the shaft. You see, I didn't like it being construed that for some reason I am evil, support terrorists, hate my country, or any of the other hateful, narrow-minded accusations because I didn't blindingly fall in line with the hardliners. Being effectively alienated from the current set of maroons in Washington, I actually started listening to "you guys."
You can read my other replies to get the rest of what I say.
"I am not afraid of the government abusing that information. A big difference.
The government is made of people."
And that folks, was the second point.
To GP: Think they've got lots of integrity because they're in the government? Remeber that the next time you complain about politicians passing legislation for their pet moneybag special interests.
I guess it's kinda a trust thing.
Example from a different topic: Would you trust your preacher to be alone around little boys? Especially if he tended to drewl while looking at them? He's a "Man of God" and has the ultimate accountability for his actions. Do you still trust him 100%?
You are hiding information so that other people do not take advantage of that information. In all likelyhood it is not because you are doing anything wrong. I believe that is my point.
"None of those bother me at all. Probably because I have nothing to hide or worry about."
I could ask about your address, bank account, relatives, or hint at hidden cameras in bathrooms and bedrooms and such. But, I'll just say this. If you have nothing to worry about, feel free to post your main email address or phone number on here.
Oh, wait: from your slashdot page "tealover (187148) tealover * (email not shown publicly)"
Got something to hide do we?
And sorry, just because someone works for the government doesn't make automatically give them integrity. As for laws, you mean those things that stop regular people from exploiting such information as well?
This is one of Gore's most publically mauled statements. I have no doubt he was trying to spin it in his benefit, but he did take the initiative to bring the public into Arpanet. Or, to explain to those who seem to have trouble comprehending this, he pushed Congress to get Arpanet privatized.
"They're going to provide a "clear upgrade path" to XP Home and Pro."
My psychic powers are hamonizing with this image... I see...I see...
Something about that the first 30 seconds of startup and shutdown will be ads along the lines of "Like XP lite? Buy XP Home or Pro, today!" And if IE is still on it, it will randomly startup with "Upgrade to XP Full Today!" instead of your start page. And every time you try to run more than 3 programs at a time: "We're sorry, but this version is not able to handle that many programs. Purchase XP full today and run as many as you like!"
AKA Nagware disguised as a retail product that never lets you go more than 5 minutes without being nagged with an ad to upgrade it.
-Take heed.- This is but one of many paths in the world of scumbag corporate business as usual.
*looks around* What? WTF? What just happend? *walks away confused*
"I assume you are talking about Secretary of State Katherine Harris. I guess you don't realize that the Department of State is not "in charge of Florida elections". Elections are the responsibility of the... Department of Elections! Funny how that works."
And I take it the Department of Elections is overseen by Joe the toothless guy. I guess, he, not Harris should have certified the results? Or, am I wrong here to? (Like I have to ask in order to get someone to tell me.)
"Bzzzt. Wrong again. ChoicePoint was hired by Ethel Baxtor (D - Florida Director of Elections), before Harris or Bush were elected to Florida office."
I explain this one in the other posts, but to summerize: Just cause I didn't hire you doesn't mean we can't be friends. Did I say she hired them? No, I said they worked together. Funny little mistake, but I guess you and the other guys where too busy trying to make me look like a moron to notice.
"Strike Three! 51,000 people were not "wrongfully taken off the voter rolls". 51,000 (actually it was 56,000) people were included in a list of voters who would possibly not be allowed to vote because their name produced a match in the ChoicePoint database as a convicted felon without their voting rights restored. According to Florida Law (section 98.0977 - Page 15), the only people with authority to remove a voter from the registration rolls are the county election supervisors from one of the 67 counties in Florida (not Katherine Harris or Jeb Bush)."
No shit on the ~56,000, not everyone on the list was on their wrongly. I was using a stat that about 90% where up there wrongly or about 51,000 voters. It wasn't just the fellons on the list, but people who shared the same name as the fellons, the same last name as the fellons, and had the same birthday as the fellons. Then there where was that guy who was convicted of a felony in 2010 and his companions. But, no, no mistakes. Just white out those dates and every thing's ok. Oh, and that same Florida Law (section 98.093) says those local election boards are required to automatically purge people on the list provided to them.
But, hey, look at it this way. I have no complaint about your last argument. Well, other than the possibility of election fraud was ignored. But, hey.
Okay, this a really long one; but it gets good at the end. So, bare with me.
"This is not rocket science. Take 2 seconds at his website. His blatent hatred of President Bush is obvious."
Disliking Bush means you hate the entire Republican party. Wow, is that from the if-you-aren't-with-us-you're-with-the-terrorists department or what?...but the "I Hate Republicans" book on his website sure doesn't help the matter any. (Why the GOP is wrong about everything? Who the Fsck is this jackass author? Someone seriously needs to remove his head from his ass.) I don't see where he loves the crats though. Is it still partisan if you don't like either part?
"This obsession wasn't enough to keep him from screwing up his article."
"In the Salon Politics article "Florida's flawed 'voter-cleansing' program," it was incorrectly stated that Florida's Secretary of State Katherine Harris hired a company, ChoicePoint, to create a voter "purge" list. The company was hired in 1998 before Harris was elected to her post. Also, Rick Rozar was incorrectly identified as a founder of ChoicePoint. Rozar was the president of a company, CDB Infotek, of which Choicepoint owned 70 percent, and which ChoicePoint eventually bought. Salon regrets the errors.
[Corrections made 12/19/00]"
If your point was to show he makes mistakes, no argument. I'll explain my view when I get to your challenge over "my point."
"There were thousands of journalists in Florida to cover the election fallout. Any one of them would have loved to blow open a story that proved misconduct by Harris or Gov. Bush. Instead we only have Palast tooting his horn to promote his own books because he somehow thinks that Katherine Harris complying with a law that was passed before she even took office is scandalous."
This is a subjective view, granted, but when the press is scared they're going to get lynched for being "Un-patriotic" or the "liberal media" etc, this kind of acts as a deterent. There are of cource numerous other possibilities. One of the Palast quotes points out how despite having a juicy bit on Clinton (I kinda wish he would elaborate), no one wanted to hear it. They where too busy scrutinizing slick willie's little sexual escapades to care about it. At least that's the jist I got. Just because it is news doesn't mean it gets reported. The rest, again I will try to explain at "the point."
"No- whats your point?"
THE POINT: The point is that while being hired under some supposedly opposing force, in a system where this can change to a supposedly friendly group, this can allow for collusion where it was difficult before.
Simplified example: It can be alot easier to extort from the corporation you work for if your father replaces your alienated ex-wife as CEO.
Again this does not necessarily happen by any means nor is it necessarily the situation, so by this point it is necessary look for facts if you wish to figure out if this is happening. Unfortunetly, I am unlikely to find such facts directly, so I rely from third parties. So far we both seem to be in a struggle over "my facts are bigger/better than yours!"
You know, kinda like all the special interests get all giddy when someone the bri...err donate to gets elected or selected as it where?
Oh, and about Ms. Harris. Despite not hiring the company responcible for the list, wasn't she responcible for working with the company? Despite saying he wasn't involved, wasn't Jeb's office responcible for overseeing this was done and approved? Damn, I wish I had some sources handy...
"It is not illegal, afterall, to be the President's brother."
No, it is not. It does, however, lead to a situation of conflit of interest.
Herm...i thought it was because the head of the Bush campaign in Florida also happened to be the person in charge of Florida elections and worked with a Republican headed company and George Bush's brother Jeb to have ~51,000 people wrongfully taken off the voter rolls who where later found to 90% Democrat. (I don't know how the conclusion was reached that they would vote Democrat since they wheren't allowed to vote at all. Maybe previous voting habits?)
Greg Palast has a good write up on it....Then there's that whole thing where Bush Jr. got appointed President by the people his daddy appointed into office. Was that even legal? Or did the court just give itself the right to do that?
"OK. I'm not trying to belittle you; I'm trying to help you. Keep that in mind as you read this."... "As for the claims you make in another post . . . Those numbers were invented out of whole cloth as pure Iraqi propaganda, meant to convince gullible suckers who will believe anything that casts the U.S. in a bad light. Sound familiar?"
You have a funny way of not trying to "belittle" someone. *cough*
"No, they began interfering with inspections from day one. Ken Pollack's book, "The Threatening Storm," contains a good, readable chronology of all of Saddam's many, many, many efforts to delay, confuse and/or obstruct the inspection process. You really ought to read it."
I'll keep it in mind if I spot it. But, since I can't read it on the spot, I can't argue for, agains, or just agree.
"Let's ignore your stupidly patronizing "like most Americans" comment for a moment."
What, you think people in the US magically get the news? Few people know the names of politicians outside of the President, much less pay attention to news abroad. The media here is slow and extremely cautious in reporting anything negative of our current government because it is a great way to get figuratively lynched job wise. For instance, in the US it is reported that "we" captured Hussien, while the rest of the world reports that he was handed over by an unnamed iraqi group.
"I notice that somehow, despite the fact that half the administration was saying something, you somehow managed to avoid including a *single example*." etc...
Well, since I can't find info discrediting all links, I'll back off and say a link to Al-Qaida.
"See here for a comprehensive overview of the "threat" surrounding depleted uranium."
Ok, despite the link initially not working and the fact this is from someone's personal blog ie: internet diary instead of a fact source, I did eventually get to reading it. The fact he starts up with accusations that these are scare tactics and lies dreamed up by the "anti-war left" without documentation doesn't help his or your cause.
Here is a collection of information. Although I haven't had a chance yet to probe that specific site thoroughly. I'm still working on getting info for the guy that wanted the evidence on US aiding Iraq WMD in the 80's.
Hey, it's worth testing ones assumptions and opinions every so often to make sure they are based on facts.
Sure it is, thats why armed forces personel are told to stay clear of anything shot up with DU rounds. And Cancer rates in Iraq have soared 7x to 10x and birth deformities have increased 4 to 6 times since Gulf War I.
"Wait. They did not fully cooperate. They kept balking and stalling at the inspection sites. They even went as far as to kick out the inspectors a few years ago. If they had fully complied, the inspections would have been completed 10 years ago."
Yes, they did refuse to cooperate. They interfered with and then outright stopped inspections when they learned the US was planting CIA agents as American inspection team members. This is what the whole "we'll let inspections resume if there are no Americans on it" thing was about.
"No, it decided that it would retaliate against Iraq unless it stopped terrorism and complied with the cease-fire requirements. It gave Iraq plenty of time to comply."
I'm sorry that like most Americans you missed the news cast the rest of the world got where half the administration is busy saying (CYA) they have no evidence that Iraq was linked to terrorist groups. Oh, and that whole WMD BS... Speaking of that, we really did give him all that stuff he gassed the kurds with back in the 80's. And sorry, I know you think a WMD is forever, but alot of that stuff actually has something known commonly as an "expiration date." Where the scumbags that put and helped that scumbag, and we're the scumbags removing the old one and probably going to end up putting in a new one. By the way, if you care so much about the kurds, you should see what all that depleted uranium we dumped over there in ammunition is doing to them.
"Check your firewall for outgoing connections established by their player."
I can vouch for this. I really stopped using real around G2 when I noticed my soft-firewall complaining about the real player application attempting to upload information back to real, even when I was just playing clips on my local drive.
I've had books I never even took out of the shrinkwrap (if it came in it) or opened for classes that where "mandatory." Then a new edition would come out and I couldn't even sell them for even half their cost even with them being brand spanking new.
"It's only logical to assume that the can isn't going to explode. Admittedly, it's not a good idea to put any kind of pressurised container into a very cold or a very hot environment, but water's characteristic of expanding when freezing is very much counterintuitive if you've never encountered it or been taught about it."
I guess I'm some old fart considering I actually have used ice trays....and have running water in my house that I have to let drip when it gets really cold ouside.
Slashdot Mirror
It's called experience. If a guy breaks into my house 3 times and I catch him, then I get broke into again with the same MO, but I don't catch him red handed this time, I'd strongly suspect it was the same guy. Even if I don't have "solid" proof.
And as the judge enformed me when I went in for jury duty, circumstantial evidence IS legally admissable evidence.
Dear valued customer;
Thankyou for purchasing our lunix site licence.
YHBT YHL HAND
Sincerly;
Your friends at SCO
(It's funny, laugh!)
I'd just be excastic to not only have kernal patches that are released 6 months after the vulnerability is known publically, but virus definitions that are updated for download 6 months after the viruses come out.
How much you wanna be they just want to cash in on the "Pay for Updates" model AV vendors use? That's one way to slip in their subscription model.
"But of course you guys will construe anything to suit your purposes."
I'm one of "you guys" now, huh? Well, sorry to disappoint you but I was one of _you_ guys up up until around 2001. Around then I realized I was getting the shaft. You see, I didn't like it being construed that for some reason I am evil, support terrorists, hate my country, or any of the other hateful, narrow-minded accusations because I didn't blindingly fall in line with the hardliners. Being effectively alienated from the current set of maroons in Washington, I actually started listening to "you guys."
You can read my other replies to get the rest of what I say.
"I am not afraid of the government abusing that information. A big difference.
The government is made of people."
And that folks, was the second point.
To GP: Think they've got lots of integrity because they're in the government? Remeber that the next time you complain about politicians passing legislation for their pet moneybag special interests.
I guess it's kinda a trust thing.
Example from a different topic: Would you trust your preacher to be alone around little boys? Especially if he tended to drewl while looking at them? He's a "Man of God" and has the ultimate accountability for his actions. Do you still trust him 100%?
You are hiding information so that other people do not take advantage of that information. In all likelyhood it is not because you are doing anything wrong. I believe that is my point.
"None of those bother me at all. Probably because I have nothing to hide or worry about."
I could ask about your address, bank account, relatives, or hint at hidden cameras in bathrooms and bedrooms and such. But, I'll just say this. If you have nothing to worry about, feel free to post your main email address or phone number on here.
Oh, wait: from your slashdot page
"tealover (187148)
tealover
* (email not shown publicly)"
Got something to hide do we?
And sorry, just because someone works for the government doesn't make automatically give them integrity. As for laws, you mean those things that stop regular people from exploiting such information as well?
Mark Fiore has a good one on this topic: Oil Vay!
"took the initiative in creating the internet"
This is one of Gore's most publically mauled statements. I have no doubt he was trying to spin it in his benefit, but he did take the initiative to bring the public into Arpanet. Or, to explain to those who seem to have trouble comprehending this, he pushed Congress to get Arpanet privatized.
I'll work for 1/3 of that! Maybe even less. And I live in the US. Beats all these "created" part time jobs that pay next to nothing.
"They're going to provide a "clear upgrade path" to XP Home and Pro."
My psychic powers are hamonizing with this image...
I see...I see...
Something about that the first 30 seconds of startup and shutdown will be ads along the lines of "Like XP lite? Buy XP Home or Pro, today!" And if IE is still on it, it will randomly startup with "Upgrade to XP Full Today!" instead of your start page. And every time you try to run more than 3 programs at a time: "We're sorry, but this version is not able to handle that many programs. Purchase XP full today and run as many as you like!"
AKA Nagware disguised as a retail product that never lets you go more than 5 minutes without being nagged with an ad to upgrade it.
-Take heed.- This is but one of many paths in the world of scumbag corporate business as usual.
*looks around* What? WTF? What just happend? *walks away confused*
"I assume you are talking about Secretary of State Katherine Harris. I guess you don't realize that the Department of State is not "in charge of Florida elections". Elections are the responsibility of the ... Department of Elections! Funny how that works."
And I take it the Department of Elections is overseen by Joe the toothless guy. I guess, he, not Harris should have certified the results? Or, am I wrong here to? (Like I have to ask in order to get someone to tell me.)
"Bzzzt. Wrong again. ChoicePoint was hired by Ethel Baxtor (D - Florida Director of Elections), before Harris or Bush were elected to Florida office."
I explain this one in the other posts, but to summerize: Just cause I didn't hire you doesn't mean we can't be friends. Did I say she hired them? No, I said they worked together. Funny little mistake, but I guess you and the other guys where too busy trying to make me look like a moron to notice.
"Strike Three! 51,000 people were not "wrongfully taken off the voter rolls". 51,000 (actually it was 56,000) people were included in a list of voters who would possibly not be allowed to vote because their name produced a match in the ChoicePoint database as a convicted felon without their voting rights restored. According to Florida Law (section 98.0977 - Page 15), the only people with authority to remove a voter from the registration rolls are the county election supervisors from one of the 67 counties in Florida (not Katherine Harris or Jeb Bush)."
No shit on the ~56,000, not everyone on the list was on their wrongly. I was using a stat that about 90% where up there wrongly or about 51,000 voters. It wasn't just the fellons on the list, but people who shared the same name as the fellons, the same last name as the fellons, and had the same birthday as the fellons. Then there where was that guy who was convicted of a felony in 2010 and his companions. But, no, no mistakes. Just white out those dates and every thing's ok. Oh, and that same Florida Law (section 98.093) says those local election boards are required to automatically purge people on the list provided to them.
But, hey, look at it this way. I have no complaint about your last argument. Well, other than the possibility of election fraud was ignored. But, hey.
Wow, you're a smart one chuckes. Kick'em while they're down, eh?
"This is not rocket science. Take 2 seconds at his website. His blatent hatred of President Bush is obvious."
Disliking Bush means you hate the entire Republican party. Wow, is that from the if-you-aren't-with-us-you're-with-the-terrorists department or what?
"This obsession wasn't enough to keep him from screwing up his article."
If your point was to show he makes mistakes, no argument. I'll explain my view when I get to your challenge over "my point."
"There were thousands of journalists in Florida to cover the election fallout. Any one of them would have loved to blow open a story that proved misconduct by Harris or Gov. Bush. Instead we only have Palast tooting his horn to promote his own books because he somehow thinks that Katherine Harris complying with a law that was passed before she even took office is scandalous."
This is a subjective view, granted, but when the press is scared they're going to get lynched for being "Un-patriotic" or the "liberal media" etc, this kind of acts as a deterent. There are of cource numerous other possibilities. One of the Palast quotes points out how despite having a juicy bit on Clinton (I kinda wish he would elaborate), no one wanted to hear it. They where too busy scrutinizing slick willie's little sexual escapades to care about it. At least that's the jist I got. Just because it is news doesn't mean it gets reported. The rest, again I will try to explain at "the point."
"No- whats your point?"
THE POINT:
The point is that while being hired under some supposedly opposing force, in a system where this can change to a supposedly friendly group, this can allow for collusion where it was difficult before.
Simplified example: It can be alot easier to extort from the corporation you work for if your father replaces your alienated ex-wife as CEO.
Again this does not necessarily happen by any means nor is it necessarily the situation, so by this point it is necessary look for facts if you wish to figure out if this is happening. Unfortunetly, I am unlikely to find such facts directly, so I rely from third parties. So far we both seem to be in a struggle over "my facts are bigger/better than yours!"
You know, kinda like all the special interests get all giddy when someone the bri...err donate to gets elected or selected as it where?
Oh, and about Ms. Harris. Despite not hiring the company responcible for the list, wasn't she responcible for working with the company? Despite saying he wasn't involved, wasn't Jeb's office responcible for overseeing this was done and approved? Damn, I wish I had some sources handy...
"It is not illegal, afterall, to be the President's brother."
No, it is not. It does, however, lead to a situation of conflit of interest.
"Ok- fair enough.
Alright, lets have a looksee.
"Here is the USCCR report..."
Herm...i thought it was because the head of the Bush campaign in Florida also happened to be the person in charge of Florida elections and worked with a Republican headed company and George Bush's brother Jeb to have ~51,000 people wrongfully taken off the voter rolls who where later found to 90% Democrat. (I don't know how the conclusion was reached that they would vote Democrat since they wheren't allowed to vote at all. Maybe previous voting habits?)
...Then there's that whole thing where Bush Jr. got appointed President by the people his daddy appointed into office. Was that even legal? Or did the court just give itself the right to do that?
Greg Palast has a good write up on it.
What is it with these people implying I wanted Saddamn to stay in power? Shit, he shouldn't have been there in the first place.
"OK. I'm not trying to belittle you; I'm trying to help you. Keep that in mind as you read this." ...
...and thats all I can dig up at the moment.
"As for the claims you make in another post . . . Those numbers were invented out of whole cloth as pure Iraqi propaganda, meant to convince gullible suckers who will believe anything that casts the U.S. in a bad light. Sound familiar?"
You have a funny way of not trying to "belittle" someone. *cough*
"No, they began interfering with inspections from day one. Ken Pollack's book, "The Threatening Storm," contains a good, readable chronology of all of Saddam's many, many, many efforts to delay, confuse and/or obstruct the inspection process. You really ought to read it."
I'll keep it in mind if I spot it. But, since I can't read it on the spot, I can't argue for, agains, or just agree.
"Let's ignore your stupidly patronizing "like most Americans" comment for a moment."
What, you think people in the US magically get the news? Few people know the names of politicians outside of the President, much less pay attention to news abroad. The media here is slow and extremely cautious in reporting anything negative of our current government because it is a great way to get figuratively lynched job wise. For instance, in the US it is reported that "we" captured Hussien, while the rest of the world reports that he was handed over by an unnamed iraqi group.
"I notice that somehow, despite the fact that half the administration was saying something, you somehow managed to avoid including a *single example*." etc...
Well, since I can't find info discrediting all links, I'll back off and say a link to Al-Qaida.
NYT reprint: Colon Powel covering his rear.
Didn't O'Neill mention something about the Al-Quida-Iraq thing? I'm too tired to hunt for that one. From what I have read so far tonight, looks like a hint at it. But, nothing direct.
Dick Cheney is still holding strong to his original assertions, though.
"Bush has since conceded there was no link between Saddam and the Sept. 11 attacks and there has been no proven ties between the deposed Iraqi leader and the Al Qaeda terrorist network."
"See here for a comprehensive overview of the "threat" surrounding depleted uranium."
Ok, despite the link initially not working and the fact this is from someone's personal blog ie: internet diary instead of a fact source, I did eventually get to reading it. The fact he starts up with accusations that these are scare tactics and lies dreamed up by the "anti-war left" without documentation doesn't help his or your cause.
Ok, first the claim that DU is not harmfully radioactive. Yes, it's primary decay is alpha. In fact, I looked it up and found a nice table and graph. Now, I'm not an expert in thermonuclear physics, but I do realize when something radioactive decays it turns into another isotope and/or another element. Potentially the new atoms can be much more radioactive and have different decays. Please note the different half lifes of the varying steps on the table. And because of the pricipal of half life, DU doesn't magically decay at 4.5 billion years, that is a measurement of rate. Some of it decays much faster than the rate, some slower. This passes down through the decay process. Notice on the graph how around 9th and tenth decays it lets off ~.2 MeV w/ a halflife of 26.8 minutes and ~1.5MeV of Gamma radiation respectively, with halflives of 26.8 minutes and 19.9 minutes respectively. Whereas, U-235 AKA
Ok, I asked around, and rather than swipe credit for other people's digging, how just reading their own replies.
Cross forum link
*Goes back to reading*
Here is a collection of information. Although I haven't had a chance yet to probe that specific site thoroughly. I'm still working on getting info for the guy that wanted the evidence on US aiding Iraq WMD in the 80's.
Hey, it's worth testing ones assumptions and opinions every so often to make sure they are based on facts.
Sure it is, thats why armed forces personel are told to stay clear of anything shot up with DU rounds. And Cancer rates in Iraq have soared 7x to 10x and birth deformities have increased 4 to 6 times since Gulf War I.
"Wait. They did not fully cooperate. They kept balking and stalling at the inspection sites. They even went as far as to kick out the inspectors a few years ago. If they had fully complied, the inspections would have been completed 10 years ago."
Yes, they did refuse to cooperate. They interfered with and then outright stopped inspections when they learned the US was planting CIA agents as American inspection team members. This is what the whole "we'll let inspections resume if there are no Americans on it" thing was about.
"No, it decided that it would retaliate against Iraq unless it stopped terrorism and complied with the cease-fire requirements. It gave Iraq plenty of time to comply."
I'm sorry that like most Americans you missed the news cast the rest of the world got where half the administration is busy saying (CYA) they have no evidence that Iraq was linked to terrorist groups. Oh, and that whole WMD BS... Speaking of that, we really did give him all that stuff he gassed the kurds with back in the 80's. And sorry, I know you think a WMD is forever, but alot of that stuff actually has something known commonly as an "expiration date." Where the scumbags that put and helped that scumbag, and we're the scumbags removing the old one and probably going to end up putting in a new one. By the way, if you care so much about the kurds, you should see what all that depleted uranium we dumped over there in ammunition is doing to them.
"Check your firewall for outgoing connections established by their player."
I can vouch for this. I really stopped using real around G2 when I noticed my soft-firewall complaining about the real player application attempting to upload information back to real, even when I was just playing clips on my local drive.
I've had books I never even took out of the shrinkwrap (if it came in it) or opened for classes that where "mandatory." Then a new edition would come out and I couldn't even sell them for even half their cost even with them being brand spanking new.
"It's only logical to assume that the can isn't going to explode. Admittedly, it's not a good idea to put any kind of pressurised container into a very cold or a very hot environment, but water's characteristic of expanding when freezing is very much counterintuitive if you've never encountered it or been taught about it."
...and have running water in my house that I have to let drip when it gets really cold ouside.
I guess I'm some old fart considering I actually have used ice trays.
I think everyone that wanted to has left you behind, bub.