Enforcing? How much more cynical can you be? The U.S. broke the law! There is consent about this except in the U.S. and GB. Read the int. public law concering wars of aggression yourself!
Even further so by not punishing the US if indeed we did break any laws!
Must I remind you that the U.S. would have blocked any resolution against itself with punishment because of starting this war of aggression?
And must I remind you that reasons for this war were neither the (non-existant) mass destruction weapons nor the freedom of the Iraquis? It were oil, venegance (GWB:"he tried to kill my daddy") and to have more power in this part of the world!
And as far as I can tell, we didn't break international law.
This was an illegal war of aggression which was not covered by the UNO resolutions! And so the U.S. clearly broke international law, as they always do if the see fit for their purposes.
Just because there was written of consequences, it does not mean that the Americans may define what those consequences are, you arrogant!
d) I don't think the poster meant we were perfect over here. He's just sick and tired (as am I) of the U.S. bashing that goes on quite liberally here...
So then why don't you Americans remove this mad cowboy from Whitehouse and let the man be president who was elected by the Americans to be it?
Why do so many of you support a regime that breaks public international law for reasons of oil and personal hate so openly?
To be completely wireless you'd have to wait at least for the 100 MBit WLANs, and then you'd still have to share them between all nodes. So better put Cat5e (to be ready for Gigabit) in your house, connect them to a 100 Mbit switch, optionally add a wireless AP (for notebooks or else).
For watching all kind of video (yet except.rm and.mov:-) on my TV and listening to MP3s in the living room I bought a modded Xbox and stream the audio and video files from my server (with RelaX). This way I can add "radio appliances" everywhere there's access to the network.
To record moves or shows from TV, put a DVB card in a PC for having the best quality.
Usenet is available 24/7, so what? And so are a load of forums, websites, mailing-lists and so on. More peeps inclining to help you and often better "response times" than your average customer support.
They violate the buyer's-obligation-law, which forces you to buy consumables supplies for printers, even when you don't need them. So, wtf should we care about them?
... Osama Bin Laden the secretary for religious understanding, tolerance and freedom.... D. Rumsfeld the commissioner for disarmament... GWB the the minister for civilian rights and social fairness or international cooperation of equals
Hey you might think its boring but exercise makes you feel good.
BTDT, it is boring, and the result is feeling unpleasantly exhausted, which is far away from good!
It will tire you out to start with but going into work at 8.30 with the energy levels of someone at mid-morning is unbeatable.
If I'd waste energy at 6 for jogging, this energy 'd be gone for no use, in addition there's the lost sleep to compensate when getting up in the middle of the night. Far better it is to sleep as long as possible, so you're most refreshed when you get up.
As usual, there is a group calling the US a police state.
What else would you call a state in which people are being abducted and held in prison by government against the law and the constitution? A state who denies being at war but makes captives and denies them both the rights of war prisoners and the rights a suspected criminal has? A state which tries to collect "total information"?
Perhaps if other countries would simply rise up and kill their own butcherous leaders, we wouldnt have to.
I don't see why you "have to" do such things as this illegal war in Iraq. Noone asked you to do this! The USA do it only because they want to, for whatever reasons they want (in this case: oil, weapon industry and family "honor").
In America, there must 'probable cause' not just 'reasonable suspician' like most of Europe, before a search warrant can be execused. I know this will cause arguements from the uninformed. dont bother replying, just set me as foe.
You are very ignorant concerning your patriot acts and the other bullshit laws thrashing citizen's rights which happily were made after 11.9.01. Here in Germany a judge has to sign a search warrant, except in cases of "danger in sight", in the US the FBI or else just has to claim you being involved in terrorism and you have lost all rights.
In the US, it is ILLEGAL to put the military on the boarders, or to act as police except in emergencies (airports after 9-11 for instance).
Here too.
I'm not going to blame everything in the US. But many of the ideas of your constitution are nowadays perverted in many ways. Too many things depend on how much money someone has, what you call freedom is often only the freedom to buy what you can afford, including politicians and laws. Who is elected depends often on the budget for the election campaign, which gives the richer people more might. Court decisions depend on who can afford to pay the better lawyer, not on what's just.
As the Bush administration induced this highly irrational terrorist-mania after 11.9. to get carte blanche for whatever they want to do, I fear things like this since about spring last year.
Americans be careful where you go, one can easily find parallels to what happened in Germany around 1933!
Here we disagree. I beleive that marital love and sex go together.
Sex will of course be part of marital love, but the other way round it's not mandatory. I'd never marry without having sex in the relationship, but I'd never refrain from having sex just because I'm not married with the girl.:)
I beleive that God created man and woman to be in perfect unity together.
So why does reality then proof that the unity is not that perfect?
Because monogamy is the only way, intimacy requires trust and love requires lack of self-centeredness.
The second part of the sentence is perfectly ok with me, but reality proofes again here that the first part is wrong.
When it is taken outside of marriage I beleive it is corrupt.
Aehm, you are aware that marriage is a thing created by men for various reasons, one of them to ensure their "female benefices"? It exists much longer than whole christianity.
And: why do you think it's corrupt? Just because of some ancient writings of humankind, in which you can hardly find the original sense, as it was modified, manipulated and mistranslated many times over the years?
Just think of this: If god really created the universe and humankind, he created humankind with a desire for sex. So, neither a human can be held responsible for having this desire, nor can it be something "bad", "dirty" or "immoral", as *god* created it!
Religion was created by men, in times where knowledge of nature was small, and people explained things they did not understand with magic and myths (think of the old nature cults). These explanations were interwoven with rules for a better living together. Then, as knowledge grew, soemthing had to replace this magical and mythical universe, so the cults were replaced by the religions (just think how many of the christian holidays are in fact old pagan celebrations). These were focusing mainly now on giving rules how to live together, and dealing with the still not solved "problems" like sexuality and mortality. So, the rules you can find in the bible/quran/thora ran are rules made by humans from some thousand years ago. They contain rules being impossible to follow like "thou shalt not covet your neighbor's wife". Hey, I can't control being attracted to some girl, I can only control how I act on the subject.
btw: Clever people quickly institutionalized these religion thing to gather might and wealth, and that's how the first christian church was born. But that would lead too far now...:)
To bring this to and end: Religion should be treated as what it is: ancient guidelines for the real (ancient!) life, written by ancient people, often with good intentions, but horribly mutilated over the time. One should check every single rule or guideline if it makes sense in todays world. A good example is the ban of pork and other meat in the muslim world. In the times these rules were developed, there were no fridges, and temperature is high in these regions. So pork (and others) becomes inedible very fast, many people died from disease or food poisoning. That's the reason for the ban of pork for muslims, and therefore it should be checked for what reason a common-sensed human should still comply to it.
First of all, I'd like to make clear, that "porn" in this discussion means "pictures of consenting adults having sex".
every time you look at porn you are objectifying the participants and gratifying your lust at the expense of the person's humanity
The first part is correct, as you objectify constantly (even when you're having fun with your wife, but not only when it comes to sexuality), but I can't understand how someone's species should change just because of being pictured while having sex.
I believe that porn is quite damaging - both to the party being objectified and to the party doing the objectifying.
Although I won't say that it's impossible that porn can inflict damage, it's very very unlikely that it will do. And, please, define what "damage" you are talking about here.
I also believe that porn isn't real, it's just a poor imitation of intimacy and love.
Love? We're talking about sex, and sex has not neccessarily something to do with love. They go together often, but that's all.
You will never get any intimacy and you endanger your intimacy with those you love if you are a regular viewer of pornography.
Why and how?
Christians beleive that pornography is wrong.
What is wrong in picturing the most beautiful thing one or more consentig adults can do together?
btw, who's administering your censoring proxy? Your local reverend, strong in his faith?:)
Slashdot Mirror
Darn us for enforcing law!
Enforcing? How much more cynical can you be? The U.S. broke the law! There is consent about this except in the U.S. and GB. Read the int. public law concering wars of aggression yourself!
Even further so by not punishing the US if indeed we did break any laws!
Must I remind you that the U.S. would have blocked any resolution against itself with punishment because of starting this war of aggression?
And must I remind you that reasons for this war were neither the (non-existant) mass destruction weapons nor the freedom of the Iraquis? It were oil, venegance (GWB:"he tried to kill my daddy") and to have more power in this part of the world!
Anybody please tell me why telling the truth and speaking his mind openly gets modded down as troll?
And as far as I can tell, we didn't break international law.
This was an illegal war of aggression which was not covered by the UNO resolutions! And so the U.S. clearly broke international law, as they always do if the see fit for their purposes.
Just because there was written of consequences, it does not mean that the Americans may define what those consequences are, you arrogant!
What about Revolution before he ruins everything?
Get your former CEO elected as Vice President of the United States.
Elected? Not really!
d) I don't think the poster meant we were perfect over here. He's just sick and tired (as am I) of the U.S. bashing that goes on quite liberally here...
So then why don't you Americans remove this mad cowboy from Whitehouse and let the man be president who was elected by the Americans to be it?
Why do so many of you support a regime that breaks public international law for reasons of oil and personal hate so openly?
Kosi
IIRC was he next to Metallica whinning about the evil evil filesharing.
To be completely wireless you'd have to wait at least for the 100 MBit WLANs, and then you'd still have to share them between all nodes. So better put Cat5e (to be ready for Gigabit) in your house, connect them to a 100 Mbit switch, optionally add a wireless AP (for notebooks or else).
.rm and .mov :-) on my TV and listening to MP3s in the living room I bought a modded Xbox and stream the audio and video files from my server (with RelaX). This way I can add "radio appliances" everywhere there's access to the network.
For watching all kind of video (yet except
To record moves or shows from TV, put a DVB card in a PC for having the best quality.
Usenet is available 24/7, so what? And so are a load of forums, websites, mailing-lists and so on. More peeps inclining to help you and often better "response times" than your average customer support.
Look at how absurde the DMCA is, I fear that maybe in some years the corps even really push the politicians to pass a law like the one I joked about.
Hey, easy! This one should have been a joke.
They violate the buyer's-obligation-law, which forces you to buy consumables supplies for printers, even when you don't need them. So, wtf should we care about them?
Wut? '93 they still sold dot matrix printers?
... Osama Bin Laden the secretary for religious understanding, tolerance and freedom. ... D. Rumsfeld the commissioner for disarmament ... GWB the the minister for civilian rights and social fairness or international cooperation of equals
Thanks for the link, found it some way down already.
But, why in the world keep people posting this reg. req'd. links if there is a way without registration?
If there is a way to read this NY Times stuff without reg., why do people keep posting this annoying "reg. req'd." links?
Maybe you are registered, I'm not. So no way for me to read the story unless people gather their wits and mirror such articles before posting about!
Why still feed the shitheads that have been ripping off most artists and us customers for long enough?
If I'd waste energy at 6 for jogging, this energy 'd be gone for no use, in addition there's the lost sleep to compensate when getting up in the middle of the night. Far better it is to sleep as long as possible, so you're most refreshed when you get up.
And what do you think are those links to the right and above your search results? They are even marked as ads!
LOL, like this:
/. ! |
:)
+---------------+
| my website |
| survived
+---------------+
Please, someone mod the parent funny up!
Kosi
As the Bush administration induced this highly irrational terrorist-mania after 11.9. to get carte blanche for whatever they want to do, I fear things like this since about spring last year.
Americans be careful where you go, one can easily find parallels to what happened in Germany around 1933!
cu
Kosi
Here we disagree. I beleive that marital love and sex go together.
:)
... :)
Sex will of course be part of marital love, but the other way round it's not mandatory. I'd never marry without having sex in the relationship, but I'd never refrain from having sex just because I'm not married with the girl.
I beleive that God created man and woman to be in perfect unity together.
So why does reality then proof that the unity is not that perfect?
Because monogamy is the only way, intimacy requires trust and love requires lack of self-centeredness.
The second part of the sentence is perfectly ok with me, but reality proofes again here that the first part is wrong.
When it is taken outside of marriage I beleive it is corrupt.
Aehm, you are aware that marriage is a thing created by men for various reasons, one of them to ensure their "female benefices"? It exists much longer than whole christianity.
And: why do you think it's corrupt? Just because of some ancient writings of humankind, in which you can hardly find the original sense, as it was modified, manipulated and mistranslated many times over the years?
Just think of this: If god really created the universe and humankind, he created humankind with a desire for sex. So, neither a human can be held responsible for having this desire, nor can it be something "bad", "dirty" or "immoral", as *god* created it!
Religion was created by men, in times where knowledge of nature was small, and people explained things they did not understand with magic and myths (think of the old nature cults). These explanations were interwoven with rules for a better living together. Then, as knowledge grew, soemthing had to replace this magical and mythical universe, so the cults were replaced by the religions (just think how many of the christian holidays are in fact old pagan celebrations). These were focusing mainly now on giving rules how to live together, and dealing with the still not solved "problems" like sexuality and mortality. So, the rules you can find in the bible/quran/thora ran are rules made by humans from some thousand years ago. They contain rules being impossible to follow like "thou shalt not covet your neighbor's wife". Hey, I can't control being attracted to some girl, I can only control how I act on the subject.
btw: Clever people quickly institutionalized these religion thing to gather might and wealth, and that's how the first christian church was born. But that would lead too far now
To bring this to and end: Religion should be treated as what it is: ancient guidelines for the real (ancient!) life, written by ancient people, often with good intentions, but horribly mutilated over the time. One should check every single rule or guideline if it makes sense in todays world.
A good example is the ban of pork and other meat in the muslim world. In the times these rules were developed, there were no fridges, and temperature is high in these regions. So pork (and others) becomes inedible very fast, many people died from disease or food poisoning. That's the reason for the ban of pork for muslims, and therefore it should be checked for what reason a common-sensed human should still comply to it.
Kosi
First of all, I'd like to make clear, that "porn" in this discussion means "pictures of consenting adults having sex".
:)
every time you look at porn you are objectifying the participants and gratifying your lust at the expense of the person's humanity
The first part is correct, as you objectify constantly (even when you're having fun with your wife, but not only when it comes to sexuality), but I can't understand how someone's species should change just because of being pictured while having sex.
I believe that porn is quite damaging - both to the party being objectified and to the party doing the objectifying.
Although I won't say that it's impossible that porn can inflict damage, it's very very unlikely that it will do. And, please, define what "damage" you are talking about here.
I also believe that porn isn't real, it's just a poor imitation of intimacy and love.
Love? We're talking about sex, and sex has not neccessarily something to do with love. They go together often, but that's all.
You will never get any intimacy and you endanger your intimacy with those you love if you are a regular viewer of pornography.
Why and how?
Christians beleive that pornography is wrong.
What is wrong in picturing the most beautiful thing one or more consentig adults can do together?
btw, who's administering your censoring proxy? Your local reverend, strong in his faith?
Kosi