Well, the UK is much the same as the US system. General school up until a minimum of 16 years old, to a maximum of 18. You get a choice of subjects, with most of the rest being mandatory, e.g. maths. Then if you want to take education further, it's a choice of college or university, where you are in a specialised course, but most of these start off in a generic way and become more specific as you advance though the years. You choose this path yourself. Or, in reality, you choose what you parents would want you to do!;-)
While the US higher-ed system is a bit more generic than ours, the mandatory part of schooling is almost the same.
I must have missed that part about him trying out chemical weapons on his own people
I'm from the UK. We were gassing the Kurds long before Saddam was born. Saddam's attacks on the Kurds were supported by the Regan administration, who shut down congresses attempt to do some thing about it. But, now that this suddenly suits Bush, it becomes a big issue. Where was the call to war back then? Iraq was an ally of the USA at the time, the west was supplying the ability for him to do this. That is complete hypocracy.
or the acid baths, or calling for the holocaust part II, or paying bounties to PLO for their terrorist organizations.
I'd like to see proof of either of the first two. Sounds like the usual "he is evil" talk, used by the like of Bush. If you can remember the first Gulf war, perhaps you can remember the story about the Iraqi soldiers stealing Kuwaiti incubators, leaving the babies to die on the cold floor. It was Bush Sr. that used that lie to get the undecided congress and public to back that war. Frankly, I don't believe a word Bush says.
As for financing terrorist organisations, that's a bit rich comming from an American. Perhaps you should have a chat to the people from England and Northern Ireland, who's lives have been destroyed by the IRA, a terrorist organisation funded by the US.
Or perhaps the Taliban and Al Qeuda, who we both funded and partially created by the US. Or countless other terrorist groups in South Africa, Asia and South America.
That's nearly as bad as torturing children to death in front of their parents.
Hmm, next you'll be telling me that he eats babies! If we are going to go for all the traditional racist hatred incitements used throughout history that is. These insults date back to biblical times. Gimmie credible proof that Saddam has tortured children to death please.
What *EXACTLY* has Bush done that shows a lack of respect for what the USA is supposed to stand for? Can you even tell me what the USA is supposed to stand for?
To paraphrase a popular cartoon, "Truth, justice and the American way". Democracy is founded on the principle of an informed electorate. Bush is deliberatly lying and misleading the electorate, to push though policies and wars that coincidently work out well for his oil buddies. Jeez, the national security adviser has an oil tanker named after her! He is corrupt and a disgrace. He is also turning the entire world against the USA.
vile spouting idiot with a feeble "education" who learned everything you "know" about "freedom" from MTV.
Jesus, are you are one of these Yanks who thinks that the USA is the only country in the world where freedom florishes?
Just to bring you up to date, most of the world has more freedom than the US. Your complete lack of world knowledge and blind patriotism shocks me. The USA is a great place, don't get me wrong. But you need to throw off this "we are superiour" attitute. If you were superiour, I could maybe handle it, but you aren't/
And let me point out that this is the first time I've ever heard an American imply that everyone elses education system is "feeble". You don't know jack, the US education system is a joke. While you are still gluing macaroni to card we are learning calculus and second languages.
You probably can't even rationalize why the Constitution does a better job of protecting human rights than the U.N's declaration of Human Rights ever will. Fool.
Perhaps the original constitution does, I'm not an expert in US history. Not the key word "history". The US constitution doesn't stand for shit anymore, all the ammendments have pretty much destroyed the original values it once held. Just about every one of the primary ammenments (or whatever they are called) has been attacked by recent legislation. By all means be proud of what the US constitution once was, but stop pretending to yourself that it means anything nowadays.
Bullshit, this is one of the disinformation tactics mentioned in the above link.
Logical error: Appeal to authority/Circular reasoning.
Actually, it's a classic straw man argument, not Circular reasoning. Are you suggesting that starting a war is the only option available at the current time? Of course it isn't.
Even a chimpanzee could grasp this binary relationship.
It's not a binary relationship. Sure, you could have a war, or you could not have a war. Two choices there. You could also increase sanctions, encourage the population to revolt (and actually back them up this time) or use the SAS/CIA to go into Iraq to attack the infrastructure and leadership. There's several options right there.
Raining down 800 cruise missiles on a highly populated city is not the only choice available.
Only a Eurotrash pseudo-intellectual would try to rationalize that it doesn't.
Your true racist tendances are showing now. Is it impossible for a citizen of Europe to be an intellectial? And the "Eurotrash" mention? You are sick, twisted, misguided fool.
spoken like a true frenchman. Q: Hey, why are there trees lining the streets of paris? A: So the Germans can march in the shade.
Semi-funny, I'll grant you that. It's also highly racist and would not be tollerated here. But racism is much inbred into the American way, isn't it. First it was the Indians, nice bit of ethnic cleansing there. Twenty million culled down to less than half a million in the space of two generations. Hitler would be proud, he never thought of calling the concentration camps "reservations".
Then the blacks. Nice bit of slavery you had going there. You stole them from their homeland, make them work for no pay, denied them the rights granted by the constitutions and are still shitting on them today. Look at the startling ratio of blacks/whites in your prison population. Disgusting.
Then the Japanese. Again, rounded up into re-named concentration camps, this time you called them "interment" camps. Since you mention Orwell, I guess you are familiar with the concept of "newspeak".
And the communists. Ohhh, that was a deep hatred, wasn't it. I wonder how many were starved by forcing the Ruskies into an arms race that their ecconomic environment (communism) could not support, ultimately breaking the countries back. I bet you are proud of this to. Yet, despite you stockpiling masses of nuclear weapons, pointing them at everyone who shows a little independance, and using your government agencies to fuck these countries over big time, putting CIA agents into the highest governmental positions then later killing them because they disagree with someone. And you are trying to tell me Iraq is a bad nation? Don't make me laugh, you're lack of knowledge of world history only goes to prove the point that your eduction is sub-standard.
And now it's the Arabs. Can you see how you have been manipuated into hating various groups over the years? Hatred which has aided those at the top to acheive their goals...
Do you mean long term problems like keeping Americans alive to buy some more oil?
When has Iraq ever presented a threat to the USA?
Long term problems like liberating the Iraqi people? Long term problems like destabilizing a fundamentally corrupt chain of arab states led by backwards authoritarians who blame all their internal problems on the west?
Jesus, you really need to get hit by a clue-stick. The liberation of the Iraqi people was never an issue when the US first aided Saddam to power, and supported him. The people of many states in the Middle East are currently (as I type) being surpressed by the governments supported by the USA. Kuwait (where women can't vote), Saudi Arabia (where no one can vote, even if they could, they'd find it hard with the government cutting their hands off).
Why, all of a sudden, has the plight of the Iraq people become an issue for the USA? Historically, you couldn't give a shit about them. Ditto the people who suffered under the US creation and support of the Talliban. When they stopped playing ball with US business interests, they suddenly became this "axis of evil". Note, this switch of "good guy" to "bad guy" happened prior to 9/11, that had nothing to do with the demonisation of Afganistan.
War solves most intractable problems in human interaction in a very permanent fashion. Only a deluded idiot who has never cracked a history book or lived through a time of strife would believe the old hippie canard that "violence solves nothing".
Hmm, sort of. War is the ultimate power, I'll grant you that. It it isn't always the answer, and it's never the only answer.
With respect to your mention of "permanent fashion", that is completely false. It worked in WW2, very well in fact. However, I'd hardly call Korea, Solmalia or Afganistan a permanent solution. War didn't work out very well in those places. Just because the media stops reporting somnething it doesn't mean that it's no longer a problem, it just means that it no longer gets ratings. The rain forests are still being destroyed you know, yet the media interest has gone elsewhere.
(In case you don't know, and if you only follow US media outlet you probably won't, but control of Afganistan is currently being fought over by the government left in place by the US, the remainder of the Talliban and the drug/crime lords. It's a total mess, but the western media seems to have forgotten about it)
Inspectors are now in Iraq because of a tangible threat of force. They are not there because of 12 years of sanctions, or 8 years of inspections.
Yes, and if the threat of force brought all this about, then it is valid. But it's not as simple as that. War is inevitable, there are too many troops commited to the region to not go in. Iraq is now completely complying with the inspectors etc. We have no reason to attack, but we will anyway.
Iraq is not complying because it is hoping people like you will win the day. It will not comply until American boots are in the sand, because that is how the world works, little lamb.
Jesus fucking christ. I really hope you are trolling me here. I really do. This "American boots in the sand" belief was the reasoning the terrorists behind 9/11 hate you. The lives of all those innocent people were lost due to these arogant beliefs. Do you think you can run half-way across the world, kill and fuck people over, without some form of retailiation. Who made you King of the World?
Seing as your country has a terrible record for international relations, I think you are the worst possible nation to do this role. It is the role of the U.N., which represents the whole civilised world. Are you familiar with the concept of democracy, or is facism more your thing?
Gee, by your account we f*cked with them for fifty years, (Guess muslims don't appreciate that we fought the last three wars in Kuwait, Somolia, and Kosovo on their behalf)
You weren't fighting on their behalf. You fighting in the iterests of your own business dealings. I'm not saying that these things weren't admiral or anything like that, but it's not a clear-cut as you make out.
back up their supposedly mortal enemy, Israel, (who hasn't attacked a muslim neighbor since the Six Day War, and humiliated the mujahadeen in Afghanistan.
Excuse me? Israel is illegally occupying a foreign land right now! They are commiting their own holocaust. They have killed all of the key Palestinion figureheads. Any intelectials, writers and politions have been assasinated by the Israelis, but the media refers to these as "targeted killings". Please follow the link and learn about the corporate medias deliberate distortion of the facts in this matter.
Only fools think that the most advanced society on earth has to fear the scorn of people who don't even have the freedom to protest without their government's permission.
Firstly, I have to laugh at the "most advanced society on earth". Please explain the why so much poverty is allowed to exist in this mythical land? Why there are communities of homeless people all over the place. I was amazed to see this in the US, hardly a shining example of modern living. Please explain why you still apply the death penalty to mentally retarded people.
And please explain to me your beliefs about free expression are in any way relevant in modern America. We are talking about a place that cages protestors into "free speach zones", well out of the way from whatever they are protesting. The same society that attempted to ban the anti-war rallys in several cities. And how your government is now tracking an analysising every communication on the internet, databasing anything deemed interesting. How can you feel safe critizing a government who is noting down everything you say? Again, a keystone of democracy is the ability to critize the government, but now all that will get you is a higher "terrorist ranking" on an automated system somewhere, again something that is specifically stated against in the US constitution.
Yeah, just like the Japanese and the Germans are running around trying to blow up Americans today. Even the Vietnamese respect the fact that we weren't there to conquer them.
So, it worked some times. Big deal, it doesn't mean you are going to get a 100% success rate. Remember, Bin Ladens personal beef with the US is due to the fact that the Saudi royal family (dictators) are supported and guarded by US troops. I'd say that's a pretty big example of this kind of thing not working out.
Terrorism will end if people don't think it's in their interests to kill their children for some misguided cause. Right now many do. That will change if A) things improve for them, or B) Antiterror techniques are racheted up until it's very difficult to inflict damage on American targets.
Hmm. And you do you propose making it difficult to inflict damage to the US? Ban diesel and fertiliser? Have checkpoints every 10 miles on the road, searching for bombs etc? Having all plane passengers tied up in their seats? Not possible.
Amazingly, we are in agreement on your first point. If things improve for them, terrorism will stop. But that's not going to happen, and it's not in the interests of our leaders. Again, I bring attention to the fact that our governments (I'm from the UK, which is more similar to the US than Europe by the way) happily deal with and support countries that are screwing over their populations. Until we have honest governments that refuse to have anything to do with these nutjobs and display some honour and valor, then that's not going to happen.
And as I can't see either of these things happening in the near future, I say that the war on terrorism is unwinnable.
(you can't defeat an enemy you can't see)
Woa, they have "predator" light bending camofluage now?
No, but the US is actually developing that sort of technology, not sure with what success though. But that's a geeky side note that has so far been the most on-topic statement so far.
You can't see them because they look like you and be. They don't wear uniforms. They don't have special badges or rings. Sure, you could round up all the Arabs (if you were to throw out yet another part of the constitution), but then you still get the likes of Timmoty McVeigh and the IRA. How do you propose to "win" this "war"?
Yes, let's just become good muslims, and enslave our women, and do nothing while they slaughter or enslave members of other religions, or even their own religion (like that bombing of Shite muslims in Pakistan)
100 years ago, America was enslaving the Blacks. Around the same time, my country denied women the right to vote and the right to own property. We are a more advanced society than them. But it doesn't mean that we are "better" than them and we shouldn't look down on them. Look at how far our societies have come in the last 200 years. You can't expect the world to advance at a uniform rate.
And the sad fact is that we call many countries who do look down on women "allies". We can't critize one nation for doing something when we support other nations that do the same, if not worse. Saudi is an ally of the west, yet Afganistan in 2001 would be a relative paradise for the women there.
They are a common pox not worthy of classification. They have nothing of value to show us.
Again, we are in agreement about something. It's a shame thought that the only ammendment in the constitution to survive unscathed is the first. The Ruskies had that right, religion is stupid.
I didn't realize that we needed you're leave before we go free that slave pen and put an end to France's illicit oil supply. Can you perhaps provide better reasoning for your position
Simple. Because there are other slave pens being supported by us that give us oil supplies that we aren't preparing for war with. If we are going to go around the world fighting for freedom, then we should apply that fairly and not pick out only the ones that we also benefit from attacking.
It is this hipocracy that is the basis for my anti-war stance.
If Hussein got a nuke, why would he use it on Bagdad?
It's called a "response". I never suggested he'd use it on his own capital! Standard response to a country using nukes would be to turn it's capital into a parking lot.
He has a nuke, wants to use it.
Ah, the good ol' disinformed US public. Let me first show you this link pointing out the lies and disinformation prevailent in the current pro-war speaches.
Now, a lot of what you are suggesting comes from the speaches and quotes that are ripped apart in the above link. May I also remind you that Iraq are simply not capable of producing nukes. While the physics are simple, the equiptment isn't. They could not develop a nuclear program without us noticing. Their country doesn't have the manufacturing capabilities to produce the kind of engineering required to build nukes.
Makes arrangements to have it shipped somewhere. Any large shipping port is fine. He has someone loyal to him go along with it, in its container to activate the bomb when they arrive at the destination
I read the Clancy book as well.
I personally could make a nuke. I personally could have it shipped somewhere. I personally could detonate it. Are you going to start a war with Scotland now, just because it's a possibility? Don't be so stupid.
The possibility of someone doing something evil or bad is not the justification for war. If that we're the case, the US would have banned guns by now. After all, they could kill someone.
What you are suggesting is a paranoid fantasy, implanted by a group of people who have lot's of experience in using fear to get what they want. Please educate yourself and rise above it. The US media revolves around fear, if this is a new concept to you, I'd suggest watching "Bowling for Columbine", where Michael Moore spends some time discussing the fear culture in the USA.
No one is saying that Saddam should be left in power. I just don't believe that killing innocent people is the answer, and long term it will only fuel hatred and terrorism towards the west. A bit self-defeating, don't you think?
What would be an actual working example of a democratic communist country ?
Unfortunatly, there aren't any. A dictatorship "works" very well in a Communist system though, because it's easier to keep the people backing the system. There are plenty of examples of Socialism working however, mostly in Europe.
Communism is pretty much against normal human nature though, the old "hunter/gatherer" system. Even in communist states, capitalism has been evident amoungst those with access to it, especially those at the top.
Saddam is a psychopathic fascist who does unspeakable things to his people because he wants to expand his influence in the region.
Bush is a psychopathic fundamentalist who does unspeakable things to his people because he wants to expand his influence in the Gulf region.
(By unspeakable, I refer to his complete lack of respect for everything that the USA is supposed to stand for)
When you support the anti-war movement, you support him and everything he stands for
Bullshit, this is one of the disinformation tactics mentioned in the above link.
Being opposed to war does not mean that we are opposed to doing anything. All it means is that we are not happy about being deliberatly misled by our leaders to start a war that is going to cause more long term problems than it will solve.
Do you think the USA is going to win over any friends in the region by medling further in the Middle East? Why don't you ask the next generation of potential terrorists, who will grow up hating the country that killed their parents...
Suggesting we should do nothing while our cities are attacked or while our enemies prepare to attack our civilian populations is the mark of a coward or klebold worshipping loser.
Ahh, but you forget the fact that your cities were attacked because of meddling in the past. Doing nothing would be a better solution (I'm not saying it's the best though). Going around killing people is only going to inspire the next generation of terrorists. And as the war on terrorism is inherently unwinnable (you can't defeat an enemy you can't see), I question the reasoning and motives behind the current policies.
Husein is so dangerous because he's actually crazy enough to use them.
No he isn't! Where are you getting that suggestion from? The same people that want you to back their war. Hmmm.
If he uses a nuke, Bagdad will be a smoking hole in the ground and the whole world will be queuing up to take potshots at him. Presently, most of the world is against this war. Do you think that's what he wants? Of course not!
The only people that could ever plausably resort to nukes are terrorists. And as the CIA has not been able to prove any terrorist links to Iraq (despite it being their priority lately), attacking Iraq is a non-starter.
I like the concept of Freedom of Religion, but I'm begining to veer towards telling these idiots off for their stupid backwards beliefs.
I don't mind someone believing in god, let's face it, the thought of death is a bit scary and if self-delusion helps, then go for it! But, don't go killing people over your beliefs!!
not let our emotions trick us in to believing Iraq had something to do with 9/11. The Bush administration is a much greater threat to our freedoms than Hussien is.
Perhaps you will find this link interesting. It's a breakdown of the disinformation tactics used by the present US administration to dupe the public into backing this war.
The rest of the site is interesting as well, unfortunatly it's a frameset site, so you'll have to hack the URL to get to the home page
You make a good point about the casualties caused by communism
Communism or socialism did not cause any casualties, it was totalitairism (sp?) that did. I wish people would learn the difference, but the cold-war propaganda is too deeply rooted to allow that to happen.
It is possible to have a democratic communist country, just as it is possible (in fact epidemic) to have a capitalist dictatorship. You can't equate political theory with economic policy as easilly as that.
many feel that criticism of Israel is the same thing as a hatred of Jews
Ironic. You critizise Isreal and get modded as flamebait, yet critizing Iran/Iraq is insightful.
The above post is not flamebait. It is all true, and if you are looking for "nasty nations" to go after, Israel should be a lot higher up the list than Iraq. They are actually partially responsible for 9/11, as their actions lead to most of the anti-US sentiment in the Middle East.
What a world we live in. I'm about to lose karma for not toeing the party line. The Isreal government are a bunch of evil bastards. The does not reflect in any way on the Jewish people. I wish folk could get their heads around that simple fact.
When someone critizises Israel, it does not mean that they hate Jews.
OK, say you are in college and you cheat on your girlfriend, buy some pot, or some other politically unacceptable act. Then, many years later while you are in public office, someone with a grudge to bear against you discovers this via these records and informs the press.
See you later, Bill. I hope the next guy in office is decent, peaceful and knows how to run an ecconomy.
This info is not to track crime for 99% of the people being tracked. Criminals know this and use alternatives. Terrorists are well ahead of the game and aren't affected either. So, what's the point of it? I've got nothing to hide, so stop spying on me!!
Immediately after the Omagh bombing, a copy of the complete datasets of all systems in the Republic and NI going back at least 10 months was made and turned over to the police
Ah. It involved terrorists. I guess that means our civil liberties are irrelevant then.
Please stop deluding yourself. You haven't won anything, your e-mail has been getting scanned for years. Echelon is not some conspriacy theorists wet dream. It exists beyond all doubt. Your rights are meaningless when there are organisations that ignore them.
Q - If ECHELON is so powerful, why haven't I heard about it before?
The United States government has gone to extreme lengths to keep ECHELON a secret. To this day, the U.S. government refuses to admit that ECHELON even exists. We know it exists because both the governments of Australia (through its Defence Signals Directorate) and New Zealand have admitted to this fact. (10)
This "wall of silence" is beginning to erode. The first report on ECHELON was published in 1988. (11) In addition, besides the revelations from Australia, the Scientific and Technical Options Assessment program office (STOA) of the European Parliament commissioned two reports which describe ECHELON's activities. These reports unearthed a startling amount of evidence, which suggests that Echelon's powers may have been underestimated. The first report, entitled "An Appraisal of Technologies of Political Control," suggested that ECHELON primarily targeted civilians.
So, what exactly is this article about? What have we won?
If you are not of the faint of heart, you can see the highly detailed 200 page report into the system here [pdf doc]. This report was originally reported in the news mid September, 2001. Obviously due to other news items, it wasn't widely reported and the whole affair was convienently swept under the carpet.
If you had any idea how hot it gets over here (Florida), you'd understand the ice
Well, a lot of the tea comes from India, which is hotter I think! I've never understood it myself, but a warm drink on warm day, I don't know, it just seems to work. It doesn't seem to heat you up as much as you'd think. Once the milk is in and it's ready, it's not all that warm really anyway.
let me get this straight, you guys drink your tea weak (2 minutes to steep?!?) with milk in it?
Two minutes might be a little too short. Can't say I've ever timed it though, it's instinctive, you know what I mean? You do it so many times you don't even think about it. Until there is a very noticable change in the colour I guess. It's really hard to describe on paper...I'm guessing that either method has a similar steeping time.
The UK process varies a lot from person to person, the quoted one is the "standard", a sort of missionary position for tea drinkers. I used to know a few handymen (carpenters) who put the milk in first. They drink a lot of tea in that trade, so it must be pretty good. I don't drink enough myself to do some proper experimentation in the field. Maybe once I get older and more boring.:-)
If you'd like to know how tea gets made over here, just let me know.
The RIAA has been actively threatening sites that carry high res album art.
Yup, it's unbelievable. You'd think that these sites would be providing free promotional information about the artists and that would increase visibility and sales. If someone sees an image on a website, where is the sale that is lost? Copyright law is to protect your revenue. There isn't revenue here.
I can see their argument about pirates using them for printing off covers, but there are a dozen other sources of getting the artwork, be it from a friend, a lending library, p2p (yes, the jpgs are there), commercial website, music database, and on, and on.
I really get the feeling that the RIAA are very stupid. Either that or they are so smart that no one can figure out what they are up to!
That's pretty much why you have to hire a lawyer for it. There is a whole industry living of contract proof-reading. Essential part of the process.
I keep getting reminded of "Fear and Loathing", where his attourney follows him around. A bit like the scene in the Simpsons "Behind the Laughs" spoof, where the family have their lawyers with them at all times. "How was your day?", "You don't have to answer that".
The AC here is right. Just because the company says that "that's the way it is", that doesn't make it legally binding. They say you don't own the data, but I've yet to see a legal challenge to this. It's not based on any point of law, and they have zero right just to make anything up.
For instance, they could have a clause in the EULA that states "we have the right to modify this agreement as we see fit". That is not unusual. They then could later add a clause to say that 10% of your salary must go to them.
However, legally, I'd like to see them try and follow that up!
something else -- not necessarily anything very sinister, mind you, just run of the mill disinformation.
I noticed at the time that the news agencies were making a big deal of the toxins and that people shouldn't touch anything. Then a few days later it was followed up by reports of people in hospital, in a very "we told you so" attitude.
The chances are though, while there were some pretty nasty chemicals on board, all they wanted to do was to keep the parts in as good a condition as possible. They will be rebuilding and analysing the parts to get as much information on what happened. Let's face it, the main objective of investigations will be to prevent a similar disaster happening again. Good luck to them, I hope they figure it out.
Since the loss of Challenger, the shuttle has not carried any commercial payloads. It's all military and other government agencies, so they'd want to use secure comms to get those things set up.
Also, they'd want to be able to restrict who has access to the remote telemetry feeds and possibly even any kind of remote control systems they have. The last thing NASA wants is for a l33t hax0r to deploy the landing gear while still in orbit! Good encrytion will play a large part in this.
Slashdot Mirror
While the US higher-ed system is a bit more generic than ours, the mandatory part of schooling is almost the same.
I must have missed that part about him trying out chemical weapons on his own people
I'm from the UK. We were gassing the Kurds long before Saddam was born. Saddam's attacks on the Kurds were supported by the Regan administration, who shut down congresses attempt to do some thing about it. But, now that this suddenly suits Bush, it becomes a big issue. Where was the call to war back then? Iraq was an ally of the USA at the time, the west was supplying the ability for him to do this. That is complete hypocracy.
or the acid baths, or calling for the holocaust part II, or paying bounties to PLO for their terrorist organizations.
I'd like to see proof of either of the first two. Sounds like the usual "he is evil" talk, used by the like of Bush. If you can remember the first Gulf war, perhaps you can remember the story about the Iraqi soldiers stealing Kuwaiti incubators, leaving the babies to die on the cold floor. It was Bush Sr. that used that lie to get the undecided congress and public to back that war. Frankly, I don't believe a word Bush says.
As for financing terrorist organisations, that's a bit rich comming from an American. Perhaps you should have a chat to the people from England and Northern Ireland, who's lives have been destroyed by the IRA, a terrorist organisation funded by the US.
Or perhaps the Taliban and Al Qeuda, who we both funded and partially created by the US. Or countless other terrorist groups in South Africa, Asia and South America.
That's nearly as bad as torturing children to death in front of their parents.
Hmm, next you'll be telling me that he eats babies! If we are going to go for all the traditional racist hatred incitements used throughout history that is. These insults date back to biblical times. Gimmie credible proof that Saddam has tortured children to death please.
What *EXACTLY* has Bush done that shows a lack of respect for what the USA is supposed to stand for? Can you even tell me what the USA is supposed to stand for?
To paraphrase a popular cartoon, "Truth, justice and the American way". Democracy is founded on the principle of an informed electorate. Bush is deliberatly lying and misleading the electorate, to push though policies and wars that coincidently work out well for his oil buddies. Jeez, the national security adviser has an oil tanker named after her! He is corrupt and a disgrace. He is also turning the entire world against the USA.
vile spouting idiot with a feeble "education" who learned everything you "know" about "freedom" from MTV.
Jesus, are you are one of these Yanks who thinks that the USA is the only country in the world where freedom florishes?
Just to bring you up to date, most of the world has more freedom than the US. Your complete lack of world knowledge and blind patriotism shocks me. The USA is a great place, don't get me wrong. But you need to throw off this "we are superiour" attitute. If you were superiour, I could maybe handle it, but you aren't/
And let me point out that this is the first time I've ever heard an American imply that everyone elses education system is "feeble". You don't know jack, the US education system is a joke. While you are still gluing macaroni to card we are learning calculus and second languages.
You probably can't even rationalize why the Constitution does a better job of protecting human rights than the U.N's declaration of Human Rights ever will. Fool.
Perhaps the original constitution does, I'm not an expert in US history. Not the key word "history". The US constitution doesn't stand for shit anymore, all the ammendments have pretty much destroyed the original values it once held. Just about every one of the primary ammenments (or whatever they are called) has been attacked by recent legislation. By all means be proud of what the US constitution once was, but stop pretending to yourself that it means anything nowadays.
Bullshit, this is one of the disinformation tactics mentioned in the above link.
Logical error: Appeal to authority/Circular reasoning.
Actually, it's a classic straw man argument, not Circular reasoning. Are you suggesting that starting a war is the only option available at the current time? Of course it isn't.
Even a chimpanzee could grasp this binary relationship.
It's not a binary relationship. Sure, you could have a war, or you could not have a war. Two choices there. You could also increase sanctions, encourage the population to revolt (and actually back them up this time) or use the SAS/CIA to go into Iraq to attack the infrastructure and leadership. There's several options right there.
Raining down 800 cruise missiles on a highly populated city is not the only choice available.
Only a Eurotrash pseudo-intellectual would try to rationalize that it doesn't.
Your true racist tendances are showing now. Is it impossible for a citizen of Europe to be an intellectial? And the "Eurotrash" mention? You are sick, twisted, misguided fool.
spoken like a true frenchman. Q: Hey, why are there trees lining the streets of paris? A: So the Germans can march in the shade.
Semi-funny, I'll grant you that. It's also highly racist and would not be tollerated here. But racism is much inbred into the American way, isn't it. First it was the Indians, nice bit of ethnic cleansing there. Twenty million culled down to less than half a million in the space of two generations. Hitler would be proud, he never thought of calling the concentration camps "reservations".
Then the blacks. Nice bit of slavery you had going there. You stole them from their homeland, make them work for no pay, denied them the rights granted by the constitutions and are still shitting on them today. Look at the startling ratio of blacks/whites in your prison population. Disgusting.
Then the Japanese. Again, rounded up into re-named concentration camps, this time you called them "interment" camps. Since you mention Orwell, I guess you are familiar with the concept of "newspeak".
And the communists. Ohhh, that was a deep hatred, wasn't it. I wonder how many were starved by forcing the Ruskies into an arms race that their ecconomic environment (communism) could not support, ultimately breaking the countries back. I bet you are proud of this to. Yet, despite you stockpiling masses of nuclear weapons, pointing them at everyone who shows a little independance, and using your government agencies to fuck these countries over big time, putting CIA agents into the highest governmental positions then later killing them because they disagree with someone. And you are trying to tell me Iraq is a bad nation? Don't make me laugh, you're lack of knowledge of world history only goes to prove the point that your eduction is sub-standard.
And now it's the Arabs. Can you see how you have been manipuated into hating various groups over the years? Hatred which has aided those at the top to acheive their goals...
Do you mean long term problems like keeping Americans alive to buy some more oil?
When has Iraq ever presented a threat to the USA?
Long term problems like liberating the Iraqi people? Long term problems like destabilizing a fundamentally corrupt chain of arab states led by backwards authoritarians who blame all their internal problems on the west?
Jesus, you really need to get hit by a clue-stick. The liberation of the Iraqi people was never an issue when the US first aided Saddam to power, and supported him. The people of many states in the Middle East are currently (as I type) being surpressed by the governments supported by the USA. Kuwait (where women can't vote), Saudi Arabia (where no one can vote, even if they could, they'd find it hard with the government cutting their hands off).
Why, all of a sudden, has the plight of the Iraq people become an issue for the USA? Historically, you couldn't give a shit about them. Ditto the people who suffered under the US creation and support of the Talliban. When they stopped playing ball with US business interests, they suddenly became this "axis of evil". Note, this switch of "good guy" to "bad guy" happened prior to 9/11, that had nothing to do with the demonisation of Afganistan.
War solves most intractable problems in human interaction in a very permanent fashion. Only a deluded idiot who has never cracked a history book or lived through a time of strife would believe the old hippie canard that "violence solves nothing".
Hmm, sort of. War is the ultimate power, I'll grant you that. It it isn't always the answer, and it's never the only answer.
With respect to your mention of "permanent fashion", that is completely false. It worked in WW2, very well in fact. However, I'd hardly call Korea, Solmalia or Afganistan a permanent solution. War didn't work out very well in those places. Just because the media stops reporting somnething it doesn't mean that it's no longer a problem, it just means that it no longer gets ratings. The rain forests are still being destroyed you know, yet the media interest has gone elsewhere.
(In case you don't know, and if you only follow US media outlet you probably won't, but control of Afganistan is currently being fought over by the government left in place by the US, the remainder of the Talliban and the drug/crime lords. It's a total mess, but the western media seems to have forgotten about it)
Inspectors are now in Iraq because of a tangible threat of force. They are not there because of 12 years of sanctions, or 8 years of inspections.
Yes, and if the threat of force brought all this about, then it is valid. But it's not as simple as that. War is inevitable, there are too many troops commited to the region to not go in. Iraq is now completely complying with the inspectors etc. We have no reason to attack, but we will anyway.
Iraq is not complying because it is hoping people like you will win the day. It will not comply until American boots are in the sand, because that is how the world works, little lamb.
Jesus fucking christ. I really hope you are trolling me here. I really do. This "American boots in the sand" belief was the reasoning the terrorists behind 9/11 hate you. The lives of all those innocent people were lost due to these arogant beliefs. Do you think you can run half-way across the world, kill and fuck people over, without some form of retailiation. Who made you King of the World?
Seing as your country has a terrible record for international relations, I think you are the worst possible nation to do this role. It is the role of the U.N., which represents the whole civilised world. Are you familiar with the concept of democracy, or is facism more your thing?
Gee, by your account we f*cked with them for fifty years, (Guess muslims don't appreciate that we fought the last three wars in Kuwait, Somolia, and Kosovo on their behalf)
You weren't fighting on their behalf. You fighting in the iterests of your own business dealings. I'm not saying that these things weren't admiral or anything like that, but it's not a clear-cut as you make out.
back up their supposedly mortal enemy, Israel, (who hasn't attacked a muslim neighbor since the Six Day War, and humiliated the mujahadeen in Afghanistan.
Excuse me? Israel is illegally occupying a foreign land right now! They are commiting their own holocaust. They have killed all of the key Palestinion figureheads. Any intelectials, writers and politions have been assasinated by the Israelis, but the media refers to these as "targeted killings". Please follow the link and learn about the corporate medias deliberate distortion of the facts in this matter.
Only fools think that the most advanced society on earth has to fear the scorn of people who don't even have the freedom to protest without their government's permission.
Firstly, I have to laugh at the "most advanced society on earth". Please explain the why so much poverty is allowed to exist in this mythical land? Why there are communities of homeless people all over the place. I was amazed to see this in the US, hardly a shining example of modern living. Please explain why you still apply the death penalty to mentally retarded people.
And please explain to me your beliefs about free expression are in any way relevant in modern America. We are talking about a place that cages protestors into "free speach zones", well out of the way from whatever they are protesting. The same society that attempted to ban the anti-war rallys in several cities. And how your government is now tracking an analysising every communication on the internet, databasing anything deemed interesting. How can you feel safe critizing a government who is noting down everything you say? Again, a keystone of democracy is the ability to critize the government, but now all that will get you is a higher "terrorist ranking" on an automated system somewhere, again something that is specifically stated against in the US constitution.
Yeah, just like the Japanese and the Germans are running around trying to blow up Americans today. Even the Vietnamese respect the fact that we weren't there to conquer them.
So, it worked some times. Big deal, it doesn't mean you are going to get a 100% success rate. Remember, Bin Ladens personal beef with the US is due to the fact that the Saudi royal family (dictators) are supported and guarded by US troops. I'd say that's a pretty big example of this kind of thing not working out.
Terrorism will end if people don't think it's in their interests to kill their children for some misguided cause. Right now many do. That will change if A) things improve for them, or B) Antiterror techniques are racheted up until it's very difficult to inflict damage on American targets.
Hmm. And you do you propose making it difficult to inflict damage to the US? Ban diesel and fertiliser? Have checkpoints every 10 miles on the road, searching for bombs etc? Having all plane passengers tied up in their seats? Not possible.
Amazingly, we are in agreement on your first point. If things improve for them, terrorism will stop. But that's not going to happen, and it's not in the interests of our leaders. Again, I bring attention to the fact that our governments (I'm from the UK, which is more similar to the US than Europe by the way) happily deal with and support countries that are screwing over their populations. Until we have honest governments that refuse to have anything to do with these nutjobs and display some honour and valor, then that's not going to happen.
And as I can't see either of these things happening in the near future, I say that the war on terrorism is unwinnable.
(you can't defeat an enemy you can't see)
Woa, they have "predator" light bending camofluage now?
No, but the US is actually developing that sort of technology, not sure with what success though. But that's a geeky side note that has so far been the most on-topic statement so far.
You can't see them because they look like you and be. They don't wear uniforms. They don't have special badges or rings. Sure, you could round up all the Arabs (if you were to throw out yet another part of the constitution), but then you still get the likes of Timmoty McVeigh and the IRA. How do you propose to "win" this "war"?
Yes, let's just become good muslims, and enslave our women, and do nothing while they slaughter or enslave members of other religions, or even their own religion (like that bombing of Shite muslims in Pakistan)
100 years ago, America was enslaving the Blacks. Around the same time, my country denied women the right to vote and the right to own property. We are a more advanced society than them. But it doesn't mean that we are "better" than them and we shouldn't look down on them. Look at how far our societies have come in the last 200 years. You can't expect the world to advance at a uniform rate.
And the sad fact is that we call many countries who do look down on women "allies". We can't critize one nation for doing something when we support other nations that do the same, if not worse. Saudi is an ally of the west, yet Afganistan in 2001 would be a relative paradise for the women there.
They are a common pox not worthy of classification. They have nothing of value to show us.
Again, we are in agreement about something. It's a shame thought that the only ammendment in the constitution to survive unscathed is the first. The Ruskies had that right, religion is stupid.
I didn't realize that we needed you're leave before we go free that slave pen and put an end to France's illicit oil supply. Can you perhaps provide better reasoning for your position
Simple. Because there are other slave pens being supported by us that give us oil supplies that we aren't preparing for war with. If we are going to go around the world fighting for freedom, then we should apply that fairly and not pick out only the ones that we also benefit from attacking.
It is this hipocracy that is the basis for my anti-war stance.
It's called a "response". I never suggested he'd use it on his own capital! Standard response to a country using nukes would be to turn it's capital into a parking lot.
He has a nuke, wants to use it.
Ah, the good ol' disinformed US public. Let me first show you this link pointing out the lies and disinformation prevailent in the current pro-war speaches.
Now, a lot of what you are suggesting comes from the speaches and quotes that are ripped apart in the above link. May I also remind you that Iraq are simply not capable of producing nukes. While the physics are simple, the equiptment isn't. They could not develop a nuclear program without us noticing. Their country doesn't have the manufacturing capabilities to produce the kind of engineering required to build nukes.
Makes arrangements to have it shipped somewhere. Any large shipping port is fine. He has someone loyal to him go along with it, in its container to activate the bomb when they arrive at the destination
I read the Clancy book as well.
I personally could make a nuke. I personally could have it shipped somewhere. I personally could detonate it. Are you going to start a war with Scotland now, just because it's a possibility? Don't be so stupid.
The possibility of someone doing something evil or bad is not the justification for war. If that we're the case, the US would have banned guns by now. After all, they could kill someone.
What you are suggesting is a paranoid fantasy, implanted by a group of people who have lot's of experience in using fear to get what they want. Please educate yourself and rise above it. The US media revolves around fear, if this is a new concept to you, I'd suggest watching "Bowling for Columbine", where Michael Moore spends some time discussing the fear culture in the USA.
No one is saying that Saddam should be left in power. I just don't believe that killing innocent people is the answer, and long term it will only fuel hatred and terrorism towards the west. A bit self-defeating, don't you think?
Unfortunatly, there aren't any. A dictatorship "works" very well in a Communist system though, because it's easier to keep the people backing the system. There are plenty of examples of Socialism working however, mostly in Europe.
Communism is pretty much against normal human nature though, the old "hunter/gatherer" system. Even in communist states, capitalism has been evident amoungst those with access to it, especially those at the top.
Bush is a psychopathic fundamentalist who does unspeakable things to his people because he wants to expand his influence in the Gulf region.
(By unspeakable, I refer to his complete lack of respect for everything that the USA is supposed to stand for)
When you support the anti-war movement, you support him and everything he stands for
Bullshit, this is one of the disinformation tactics mentioned in the above link.
Being opposed to war does not mean that we are opposed to doing anything. All it means is that we are not happy about being deliberatly misled by our leaders to start a war that is going to cause more long term problems than it will solve.
Do you think the USA is going to win over any friends in the region by medling further in the Middle East? Why don't you ask the next generation of potential terrorists, who will grow up hating the country that killed their parents...
Suggesting we should do nothing while our cities are attacked or while our enemies prepare to attack our civilian populations is the mark of a coward or klebold worshipping loser.
Ahh, but you forget the fact that your cities were attacked because of meddling in the past. Doing nothing would be a better solution (I'm not saying it's the best though). Going around killing people is only going to inspire the next generation of terrorists. And as the war on terrorism is inherently unwinnable (you can't defeat an enemy you can't see), I question the reasoning and motives behind the current policies.
No he isn't! Where are you getting that suggestion from? The same people that want you to back their war. Hmmm.
If he uses a nuke, Bagdad will be a smoking hole in the ground and the whole world will be queuing up to take potshots at him. Presently, most of the world is against this war. Do you think that's what he wants? Of course not!
The only people that could ever plausably resort to nukes are terrorists. And as the CIA has not been able to prove any terrorist links to Iraq (despite it being their priority lately), attacking Iraq is a non-starter.
I don't mind someone believing in god, let's face it, the thought of death is a bit scary and if self-delusion helps, then go for it! But, don't go killing people over your beliefs!!
Perhaps you will find this link interesting. It's a breakdown of the disinformation tactics used by the present US administration to dupe the public into backing this war.
The rest of the site is interesting as well, unfortunatly it's a frameset site, so you'll have to hack the URL to get to the home page
Communism or socialism did not cause any casualties, it was totalitairism (sp?) that did. I wish people would learn the difference, but the cold-war propaganda is too deeply rooted to allow that to happen.
It is possible to have a democratic communist country, just as it is possible (in fact epidemic) to have a capitalist dictatorship. You can't equate political theory with economic policy as easilly as that.
Ironic. You critizise Isreal and get modded as flamebait, yet critizing Iran/Iraq is insightful.
The above post is not flamebait. It is all true, and if you are looking for "nasty nations" to go after, Israel should be a lot higher up the list than Iraq. They are actually partially responsible for 9/11, as their actions lead to most of the anti-US sentiment in the Middle East.
What a world we live in. I'm about to lose karma for not toeing the party line. The Isreal government are a bunch of evil bastards. The does not reflect in any way on the Jewish people. I wish folk could get their heads around that simple fact.
When someone critizises Israel, it does not mean that they hate Jews.
See you later, Bill. I hope the next guy in office is decent, peaceful and knows how to run an ecconomy.
This info is not to track crime for 99% of the people being tracked. Criminals know this and use alternatives. Terrorists are well ahead of the game and aren't affected either. So, what's the point of it? I've got nothing to hide, so stop spying on me!!
Ah. It involved terrorists. I guess that means our civil liberties are irrelevant then.
I remember when it used to be "communists".
Wow, just how many popups does that page open? My popup killer nearly asked for a vacation afterwards...
I think that's the point the original poster was trying to make, albeit with a lot of subtlety.
Here is a quote from Echelon Watch's FAQ:
So, what exactly is this article about? What have we won?
For the still-skeptical people amoung us, here is a warning from the EU government to e-mail users, originally stated in it's original form here. You can also find an EU resolution on the matter here
If you are not of the faint of heart, you can see the highly detailed 200 page report into the system here [pdf doc]. This report was originally reported in the news mid September, 2001. Obviously due to other news items, it wasn't widely reported and the whole affair was convienently swept under the carpet.
Cool, will give that a try this weekend. Thanks!
Well, a lot of the tea comes from India, which is hotter I think! I've never understood it myself, but a warm drink on warm day, I don't know, it just seems to work. It doesn't seem to heat you up as much as you'd think. Once the milk is in and it's ready, it's not all that warm really anyway.
let me get this straight, you guys drink your tea weak (2 minutes to steep?!?) with milk in it?
Two minutes might be a little too short. Can't say I've ever timed it though, it's instinctive, you know what I mean? You do it so many times you don't even think about it. Until there is a very noticable change in the colour I guess. It's really hard to describe on paper...I'm guessing that either method has a similar steeping time.
The UK process varies a lot from person to person, the quoted one is the "standard", a sort of missionary position for tea drinkers. I used to know a few handymen (carpenters) who put the milk in first. They drink a lot of tea in that trade, so it must be pretty good. I don't drink enough myself to do some proper experimentation in the field. Maybe once I get older and more boring. :-)
If you'd like to know how tea gets made over here, just let me know.
Go on then!
Milk & cookies.
How to make a British cup of tea:
Anything else just isn't cricket. What's with the ice, yankie? ;-)
Yup, it's unbelievable. You'd think that these sites would be providing free promotional information about the artists and that would increase visibility and sales. If someone sees an image on a website, where is the sale that is lost? Copyright law is to protect your revenue. There isn't revenue here.
I can see their argument about pirates using them for printing off covers, but there are a dozen other sources of getting the artwork, be it from a friend, a lending library, p2p (yes, the jpgs are there), commercial website, music database, and on, and on.
I really get the feeling that the RIAA are very stupid. Either that or they are so smart that no one can figure out what they are up to!
Been that way for some time. All the good Disney stuff was leeched from somewhere, mainly the public domain.
Can you name anything groundbreaking or inovative that they have done with entirely original work?
That's pretty much why you have to hire a lawyer for it. There is a whole industry living of contract proof-reading. Essential part of the process.
I keep getting reminded of "Fear and Loathing", where his attourney follows him around. A bit like the scene in the Simpsons "Behind the Laughs" spoof, where the family have their lawyers with them at all times. "How was your day?", "You don't have to answer that".
For instance, they could have a clause in the EULA that states "we have the right to modify this agreement as we see fit". That is not unusual. They then could later add a clause to say that 10% of your salary must go to them.
However, legally, I'd like to see them try and follow that up!
Yeah, I know! He should have stolen millions, lied about it, gave money to the Bush campaign, and he'd have never gotten arrested!
I noticed at the time that the news agencies were making a big deal of the toxins and that people shouldn't touch anything. Then a few days later it was followed up by reports of people in hospital, in a very "we told you so" attitude.
The chances are though, while there were some pretty nasty chemicals on board, all they wanted to do was to keep the parts in as good a condition as possible. They will be rebuilding and analysing the parts to get as much information on what happened. Let's face it, the main objective of investigations will be to prevent a similar disaster happening again. Good luck to them, I hope they figure it out.
Since the loss of Challenger, the shuttle has not carried any commercial payloads. It's all military and other government agencies, so they'd want to use secure comms to get those things set up.
Also, they'd want to be able to restrict who has access to the remote telemetry feeds and possibly even any kind of remote control systems they have. The last thing NASA wants is for a l33t hax0r to deploy the landing gear while still in orbit! Good encrytion will play a large part in this.