I never said I thought the US wants to tap the line. I agree that could be done more easily elsewhere.
I think either the US or Israel cut the lines to damage Iran's access or for some other similar reason.
And I don't think the US government is any more believable than Egypt - or Saddam's former information minister - at this point. George Bush and his scum have been making unbelievable denials for seven years now. Anybody who trusts this lot on anything is on ketamine addiction.
Nobody's noticed that episode 3 of "Terminator - The Sarah Connor Chronicles" is called "The Turk" - because some geek builds an AI platform called "The Turk" - the name being based on the same Turk of the article.
John Connor is concerned that this AI could end up being Skynet (he even mentions "the Singularity", first time I've heard that phrase on TV - although he defines it as AIs becoming smart enough to make themselves smarter, which is not the proper definition). The Terminator babe says the geek should be killed - but Sarah doesn't want to kill him, so she just burns down his house and destroys the "Turk."
For the gamers here, his "Turk" is built out of three Xboxes and four Playstation consoles..."Did you know the military uses those?", he asks Sarah.
The Egyptians are now saying they had onshore cameras viewing the area of the cut, which apparently was close to shore. They say no ships transited that area during the time of the cut. They also say that area is a "no-go" zone for ships - whose charts would identify the presence of the cable.
Of course, that still leaves smuggler ships or whatever. We don't know if the cut was in a portion of the cable suspended closer to the surface, which is more vulnerable than cables nearer the ocean floor.
But as of now, the Egyptians are saying that cut was not done by a ship anchor drag.
Egypt is now saying that no ship was near the location of the cut. They had onshore cameras viewing the area and reviewed the video. The area of the cut is also a "no-go" zone for ships. They're saying no ship did the cut.
Of course, this still allows for smugglers or whatever. We need more details. Was the cut on a portion of the cable which was suspended? That's easier to do than one that's closer to the ocean floor.
Also, if no visible ship did the cut, that means no SURFACE ship. That only leaves a submarine or submersible from a ship outside the "no-go" zone. And that means deliberate sabotage, probably outside the capability of any private actor.
Only two nations with submarines would benefit from cutting off Iran or other ME nations - the US and Israel.
It's fairly clear that somebody is isolating the ME from the Net.
It damn sure isn't Al Qaeda - they don't have submarines or diving equipment or even much motivation. Neither does anybody else I can think of including Russia and China.
Israel and the US on the other hand do have both the hardware and the motivation.
Likelihood in order of probability:
1) Attack on Gaza by Israel - where numerous war crimes will be committed.
2) Attack on Lebanon by Israel - ditto. Less likely than Gaza because of the Winograd report out this week.
3) Attack on Iran by Israel - to bring the US into a war with Iran. This is Dick Cheney's preferred plan, since it allows him to bypass Congressional authorization and having to explain to anybody how the US got in the war.
Oh, please. This is just another bullshit neocon attack on Putin because he chased the oligarchs out of Russia and refused to kowtow to Bush on Iran and the phony European "missile defense" crap.
How much money stands to NOT be given to a bunch of war profiteering Bush/Cheney cronies if the US doesn't put a missile defense in Europe? Compare that to however much the Storm Worm takes in. There's no contest. Let alone how much money the oil companies stand to make if Bush starts a war with Iran and the oil price spikes to $200/barrel.
No, I know exactly what I said. I liked "Swordfish" - the "too" referred to the the new movie, which I assume I will like since Diane is in it. About the only thing I haven't liked with her in it is "Judge Dredd".
In short, your opinion of "Swordfish" was dismissed.
Firs of all, it wouldn't be hard to make robots more ethical than humans, since humans don't have any ethics, no matter how much they talk about them.
Second, that's what "ethicists" do - talk about them. They do that to establish that they're more "moral" than anybody else. That's about it for the value of it.
Third, nonetheless, in distinguishing between Special Ops War and "general" war, you want rules to prevent armies from massacring civilians.
Fourth, unfortunately the corollary of that is that if you have a superpower whose military budget exceeds the combined military budgets of the rest of the world, there is nobody able to compel said superpower to obey the "rules of war" - so they are ignored, as they are in Iraq, where the US military has killed an estimated 300,000 civilians due to trigger-happy troops, loose rules of engagement ("any military age male is a target", which was the rule in Fallujah three years ago), and a five-fold increase in aerial bombing this past year in order to hold military casualties to a minimum in order to proclaim that the war is being won (on the backs of civilians.)
Fifth, that said, if the new robots look like this or this or this or this or this or this, then I for one welcome our new hottie killbot sex toys/overlords. (Those pics are HQ, click on them.)
Anybody picked up on the fact that this new Terminator doesn't seem to have a designation. It ain't just some T100 or T101 with a female form...And this one is operating independently of John's or Sarah's orders. I think we're gonna find out more over time just what this one really is.
Anybody also notice that John is already getting the hots for her. In the revised Episode 1, he was checking out her butt. In Episode 2, she stroked his neck - for her it was a stress test, but that's not how he took it. I knew from day one the writers were going to try to hook those two up. I think it's tied in to what kind of Terminator she really is.
"Beauty is always in the in the eye of the beholder."
Yeah, well, your eyes clearly belong to a Terminator, because the rest of the world considers Diane Lane hot.
I remember some nitwit on Usenet once called Julia Roberts "ugly". There was a big argument over whether he was justified in holding the opinion. I pointed out that anybody who calls Roberts "ugly" clearly is so far out of the mainstream cultural opinion that his opinion was worthless. You can complain about Julia's wide mouth, or whatever, or just not like her looks (I don't like Reese Witherspoon, Chloe Sevigny and some other actresses because of specific features), but calling her "ugly" is just stupid. There are generally accepted criteria for attractiveness and Roberts didn't become the lead in a movie called "Pretty Woman" because she is "ugly."
Calling Diane Lane "plain" isn't much smarter - especially from a/.'er.
Microsoft has finally done something right - produced an OS that no one can hack because no one wants to have it on their system at all.
We've always known the most secure Windows OS was one that was never turned on in the first place. Now Microsoft has gone one better - it will never be installed in the first place.
Naah, wait until she starts levitating cars - then just have some psychic suppress her abilities - until she falls in love with the wrong guy and they surface again.
I mean, c'mon, Jean Grey's powers were surfacing BEFORE the Alkali Lake incident - that obviously means she wanted to fuck Wolverine, but asshat Cyclops was in the way - so he had to go. This is how relationships work: monogamy simply isn't part of the chimp gene pool.
No, as I said, Edmonds WAS the investigation. Read the Philip Giraldi piece where he lays out how important the translator is to an investigation. She had a top secret security clearance for a reason. These aren't clerks doing that job. The translator knows EVERYTHING going on in an investigation because they have to know how to interpret what the target is saying in an wiretap or document.
Now, you could conceivably suggest that the FBI investigation could compromise, say, an unknown to them CIA investigation. In fact, the calls to gag to Edmonds and shut down the FBI investigations came not so much from the FBI itself, but from the DOD and State. But in that case, it is likely the entire FBI investigation would have known parameters, and the translators and agents wouldn't have been tasked with knowingly interfering.
Instead, what happened is that when FBI translators were suspected of spying and this was brought to attention of higher ups all the way up to Robert Mueller's office, the translator who brought to their attention was fired and gagged - not let in on any secret investigation, which would obviously have been the way to go for her superiors if there was one. They could have simply recruited her as part of the investigation, at any time, and that would have satisfied her - but they didn't.
No, your suggestion doesn't make any sense. Something is rotten in Denmark, and it smacks of protecting important elected officials at the Defense Department and State Department. Keep in mind, the same people Edmonds accuses of shutting down FBI investigations ALSO outed Valerie Plames' name and tipped off people to Plames' Brewster Jennings company - a CIA operation against nuclear proliferation. The only beneficiaries of that action could only be the people engaged in the selling of nuclear secrets.
"wouldn't the Bush people have exposed it in 2001"
You need to get up to speed on the case. Tons of Bush people ARE INVOLVED. Almost all the major neocon advisers of Bush in the State Department and the Defense Department are involved. Go look up Edmonds Web site www.justacitizen.com and read up on it. See the documentary video here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1991080575212848283
Or at least read ex-CIA agent Philip Giraldi's recap in this article:
On January 20, 2001, hours before leaving office, President Bill Clinton granted Rich a presidential pardon. Since Rich's former wife and mother of his three children, socialite Denise Rich, had made large donations to the Democratic Party and the Clinton Library during Clinton's time in office, Clinton's critics alleged that Rich's pardon had been bought. Rich had also made substantial donations to Israeli charitable foundations. Clinton explained his decision by noting that similar situations were settled in civil, not criminal court, and cited clemency pleas from Israeli government officials, including Prime Minister Ehud Barak. Federal Prosecutor Mary Jo White was appointed to investigate. She stepped down before the investigation was finished and was replaced by James Comey. Though Comey was critical of Clinton's pardons, he could not find any grounds on which to indict him.
During hearings after Rich's pardon, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, who had represented Rich from 1985 until the spring of 2000, denied that Rich had violated the tax laws but criticized him for trading with Iran at a time when that country was holding U.S. hostages [3]. In his letter to the New York Times, Bill Clinton explained why he pardoned Rich, noting that U.S. tax professors Bernard Wolfman of Harvard Law School and Martin Ginsburg of Georgetown University Law Center concluded that no crime was committed, and that the companies' tax reporting position was reasonable [4]. In the same letter Clinton listed Libby as one of three "distinguished Republican lawyers" who supported Rich's pardon. His pardon was curiously supported also by the king of Spain, Juan Carlos I.
The reality is that there is little doubt Rich was guilty - he was alleged to be subject to up to 400 years in prison time if he came back to the US, and the DoJ has been trying to seize him all over Europe, which is why he has carloads of ex-Israeli mercenaries protecting him when he travels in Europe. There is no doubt that Clinton lied when he said he based his decision solely on the recommendations of some attorneys and law professors. The money did it - any idiot can see that.
The BBC also lists this case of an obviously bought or colluded pardons:
Carlos Vignali, 30, had his 15-year sentence for conspiracy to sell cocaine reduced to time served, and walked free on Mr Clinton's last day in office. His father, Horacio, is a rich and powerful leader in the Los Angeles Hispanic community who has made large donations to the Democratic party. A number of high-profile Los Angeles figures, including the archbishop, the man who is now sheriff and two current mayoral candidates appealed for clemency for Vignali, but several have now said they should not have done so.
Almon Glenn Braswell, a Miami-based businessman, was convicted in 1983 of fraud and perjury in connection with a mail-order treatment for baldness he sold. Federal prosecutors in Los Angeles, where his business is based, were stunned by the pardon because it could throw a spanner into the works of the current investigation of Braswell on new charges. Mr Clinton said he was not aware that Braswell was facing a new investigation, and that his pardon was only intended to apply to the 1983 conviction. Braswell's lawyers argue it applies to the present circumstances as well, but LA prosecutors say they will proceed with their investigation anyway.
Hugh Rodham, Hillary Clinton's younger brother and a Miami lawyer, accepted nearly $400,000 from Braswell and the Vignali family to act on their behalf. When news of the payments became public, he returned the money at the Clintons' insistence. Bill Clinton denied knowing Mr Rodham had taken money for the clemency work, but not having discussed the cases with him. Senator Clinton denied any involvement in t
No, I don't consider lying to be a likelihood for three reasons:
1) She has nothing to gain by doing so.
2) The FBI internal investigation considered her claims credible - as do several reporters who have looked into the claims as far as possible given her gag order.
3) Why would the DoJ gag somebody who was merely lying under the State Secrets Privilege which is almost never invoked?
The Bush administration is not covering up something that happened under the Clintons - it is covering up something that is happening NOW.
I said - try to get up to speed on the story before talking about it.
Slashdot Mirror
I never said I thought the US wants to tap the line. I agree that could be done more easily elsewhere.
I think either the US or Israel cut the lines to damage Iran's access or for some other similar reason.
And I don't think the US government is any more believable than Egypt - or Saddam's former information minister - at this point. George Bush and his scum have been making unbelievable denials for seven years now. Anybody who trusts this lot on anything is on ketamine addiction.
Damn! Beat me to it! And it took until the second page of posts, too! That was the FIRST thing I thought of!
Nobody's noticed that episode 3 of "Terminator - The Sarah Connor Chronicles" is called "The Turk" - because some geek builds an AI platform called "The Turk" - the name being based on the same Turk of the article.
John Connor is concerned that this AI could end up being Skynet (he even mentions "the Singularity", first time I've heard that phrase on TV - although he defines it as AIs becoming smart enough to make themselves smarter, which is not the proper definition). The Terminator babe says the geek should be killed - but Sarah doesn't want to kill him, so she just burns down his house and destroys the "Turk."
For the gamers here, his "Turk" is built out of three Xboxes and four Playstation consoles..."Did you know the military uses those?", he asks Sarah.
The Egyptians are now saying they had onshore cameras viewing the area of the cut, which apparently was close to shore. They say no ships transited that area during the time of the cut. They also say that area is a "no-go" zone for ships - whose charts would identify the presence of the cable.
Of course, that still leaves smuggler ships or whatever. We don't know if the cut was in a portion of the cable suspended closer to the surface, which is more vulnerable than cables nearer the ocean floor.
But as of now, the Egyptians are saying that cut was not done by a ship anchor drag.
Egypt is now saying that no ship was near the location of the cut. They had onshore cameras viewing the area and reviewed the video. The area of the cut is also a "no-go" zone for ships. They're saying no ship did the cut.
Of course, this still allows for smugglers or whatever. We need more details. Was the cut on a portion of the cable which was suspended? That's easier to do than one that's closer to the ocean floor.
Also, if no visible ship did the cut, that means no SURFACE ship. That only leaves a submarine or submersible from a ship outside the "no-go" zone. And that means deliberate sabotage, probably outside the capability of any private actor.
Only two nations with submarines would benefit from cutting off Iran or other ME nations - the US and Israel.
...Summer Glau, I for one welcome our new hottie killbot overlords.
Become a hermaphrodite and get rid of both sexes.
Love thyself and nobody else!
That would be the perfect answer for most people.
"it doesn't contain a single extended discussion of the fact that the US has been slipping in a worldwide broadband rankings throughout the decade."
It's fairly clear that somebody is isolating the ME from the Net.
It damn sure isn't Al Qaeda - they don't have submarines or diving equipment or even much motivation. Neither does anybody else I can think of including Russia and China.
Israel and the US on the other hand do have both the hardware and the motivation.
Likelihood in order of probability:
1) Attack on Gaza by Israel - where numerous war crimes will be committed.
2) Attack on Lebanon by Israel - ditto. Less likely than Gaza because of the Winograd report out this week.
3) Attack on Iran by Israel - to bring the US into a war with Iran. This is Dick Cheney's preferred plan, since it allows him to bypass Congressional authorization and having to explain to anybody how the US got in the war.
4) Attack by the US on Iran directly.
Oh, please. This is just another bullshit neocon attack on Putin because he chased the oligarchs out of Russia and refused to kowtow to Bush on Iran and the phony European "missile defense" crap.
How much money stands to NOT be given to a bunch of war profiteering Bush/Cheney cronies if the US doesn't put a missile defense in Europe? Compare that to however much the Storm Worm takes in. There's no contest. Let alone how much money the oil companies stand to make if Bush starts a war with Iran and the oil price spikes to $200/barrel.
This is a joke.
No, I know exactly what I said. I liked "Swordfish" - the "too" referred to the the new movie, which I assume I will like since Diane is in it. About the only thing I haven't liked with her in it is "Judge Dredd".
In short, your opinion of "Swordfish" was dismissed.
Firs of all, it wouldn't be hard to make robots more ethical than humans, since humans don't have any ethics, no matter how much they talk about them.
Second, that's what "ethicists" do - talk about them. They do that to establish that they're more "moral" than anybody else. That's about it for the value of it.
Third, nonetheless, in distinguishing between Special Ops War and "general" war, you want rules to prevent armies from massacring civilians.
Fourth, unfortunately the corollary of that is that if you have a superpower whose military budget exceeds the combined military budgets of the rest of the world, there is nobody able to compel said superpower to obey the "rules of war" - so they are ignored, as they are in Iraq, where the US military has killed an estimated 300,000 civilians due to trigger-happy troops, loose rules of engagement ("any military age male is a target", which was the rule in Fallujah three years ago), and a five-fold increase in aerial bombing this past year in order to hold military casualties to a minimum in order to proclaim that the war is being won (on the backs of civilians.)
Fifth, that said, if the new robots look like this or this or this or this or this or this, then I for one welcome our new hottie killbot sex toys/overlords.
(Those pics are HQ, click on them.)
Anybody picked up on the fact that this new Terminator doesn't seem to have a designation. It ain't just some T100 or T101 with a female form...And this one is operating independently of John's or Sarah's orders. I think we're gonna find out more over time just what this one really is.
Anybody also notice that John is already getting the hots for her. In the revised Episode 1, he was checking out her butt. In Episode 2, she stroked his neck - for her it was a stress test, but that's not how he took it. I knew from day one the writers were going to try to hook those two up. I think it's tied in to what kind of Terminator she really is.
"Beauty is always in the in the eye of the beholder."
/.'er.
Yeah, well, your eyes clearly belong to a Terminator, because the rest of the world considers Diane Lane hot.
I remember some nitwit on Usenet once called Julia Roberts "ugly". There was a big argument over whether he was justified in holding the opinion. I pointed out that anybody who calls Roberts "ugly" clearly is so far out of the mainstream cultural opinion that his opinion was worthless. You can complain about Julia's wide mouth, or whatever, or just not like her looks (I don't like Reese Witherspoon, Chloe Sevigny and some other actresses because of specific features), but calling her "ugly" is just stupid. There are generally accepted criteria for attractiveness and Roberts didn't become the lead in a movie called "Pretty Woman" because she is "ugly."
Calling Diane Lane "plain" isn't much smarter - especially from a
I liked Swordfish, too! Heh, heh! With or without Halle Berry topless - that was just icing on the cake.
Don't need the tits - it's DIANE LANE! (Of course, tits would be nice, too. Especially her tits! Although her best features are her long legs. - really excellent legs!)
Fantasy on a par with "The Wizard of Oz".
Dude, it's DIANE LANE! A hottie! I admit I didn't watch her in that "Dog" thing, but there are limits, But a cybercrime thriller with DIANE LANE?!
Did you see her in "Unfaithful"?
Even hackers hate this OS.
Microsoft has finally done something right - produced an OS that no one can hack because no one wants to have it on their system at all.
We've always known the most secure Windows OS was one that was never turned on in the first place. Now Microsoft has gone one better - it will never be installed in the first place.
Way to go, Bill!
"We have to find a way to make the aspects of capitalism that serve wealthier people serve poorer people as well."
I can't sell Windows to poor people at full retail - or even OEM - prices.
Like General Zod said in his 2008 Presidential campaign platform: "It is I who shall be your ruler. I shall empower you with wealth to give me as tribute."
Naah, wait until she starts levitating cars - then just have some psychic suppress her abilities - until she falls in love with the wrong guy and they surface again.
I mean, c'mon, Jean Grey's powers were surfacing BEFORE the Alkali Lake incident - that obviously means she wanted to fuck Wolverine, but asshat Cyclops was in the way - so he had to go. This is how relationships work: monogamy simply isn't part of the chimp gene pool.
No, as I said, Edmonds WAS the investigation. Read the Philip Giraldi piece where he lays out how important the translator is to an investigation. She had a top secret security clearance for a reason. These aren't clerks doing that job. The translator knows EVERYTHING going on in an investigation because they have to know how to interpret what the target is saying in an wiretap or document.
Now, you could conceivably suggest that the FBI investigation could compromise, say, an unknown to them CIA investigation. In fact, the calls to gag to Edmonds and shut down the FBI investigations came not so much from the FBI itself, but from the DOD and State. But in that case, it is likely the entire FBI investigation would have known parameters, and the translators and agents wouldn't have been tasked with knowingly interfering.
Instead, what happened is that when FBI translators were suspected of spying and this was brought to attention of higher ups all the way up to Robert Mueller's office, the translator who brought to their attention was fired and gagged - not let in on any secret investigation, which would obviously have been the way to go for her superiors if there was one. They could have simply recruited her as part of the investigation, at any time, and that would have satisfied her - but they didn't.
No, your suggestion doesn't make any sense. Something is rotten in Denmark, and it smacks of protecting important elected officials at the Defense Department and State Department. Keep in mind, the same people Edmonds accuses of shutting down FBI investigations ALSO outed Valerie Plames' name and tipped off people to Plames' Brewster Jennings company - a CIA operation against nuclear proliferation. The only beneficiaries of that action could only be the people engaged in the selling of nuclear secrets.
"wouldn't the Bush people have exposed it in 2001"
You need to get up to speed on the case. Tons of Bush people ARE INVOLVED. Almost all the major neocon advisers of Bush in the State Department and the Defense Department are involved. Go look up Edmonds Web site www.justacitizen.com and read up on it. See the documentary video here:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1991080575212848283
Or at least read ex-CIA agent Philip Giraldi's recap in this article:
http://www.amconmag.com/2008/2008_01_28/article1.html
According to Wikipedia:
On January 20, 2001, hours before leaving office, President Bill Clinton granted Rich a presidential pardon. Since Rich's former wife and mother of his three children, socialite Denise Rich, had made large donations to the Democratic Party and the Clinton Library during Clinton's time in office, Clinton's critics alleged that Rich's pardon had been bought. Rich had also made substantial donations to Israeli charitable foundations. Clinton explained his decision by noting that similar situations were settled in civil, not criminal court, and cited clemency pleas from Israeli government officials, including Prime Minister Ehud Barak. Federal Prosecutor Mary Jo White was appointed to investigate. She stepped down before the investigation was finished and was replaced by James Comey. Though Comey was critical of Clinton's pardons, he could not find any grounds on which to indict him.
During hearings after Rich's pardon, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, who had represented Rich from 1985 until the spring of 2000, denied that Rich had violated the tax laws but criticized him for trading with Iran at a time when that country was holding U.S. hostages [3]. In his letter to the New York Times, Bill Clinton explained why he pardoned Rich, noting that U.S. tax professors Bernard Wolfman of Harvard Law School and Martin Ginsburg of Georgetown University Law Center concluded that no crime was committed, and that the companies' tax reporting position was reasonable [4]. In the same letter Clinton listed Libby as one of three "distinguished Republican lawyers" who supported Rich's pardon. His pardon was curiously supported also by the king of Spain, Juan Carlos I.
Time Magazine has an article from February, 2001, on the case here:
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,99302,00.html
The reality is that there is little doubt Rich was guilty - he was alleged to be subject to up to 400 years in prison time if he came back to the US, and the DoJ has been trying to seize him all over Europe, which is why he has carloads of ex-Israeli mercenaries protecting him when he travels in Europe. There is no doubt that Clinton lied when he said he based his decision solely on the recommendations of some attorneys and law professors. The money did it - any idiot can see that.
The BBC also lists this case of an obviously bought or colluded pardons:
Carlos Vignali, 30, had his 15-year sentence for conspiracy to sell cocaine reduced to time served, and walked free on Mr Clinton's last day in office. His father, Horacio, is a rich and powerful leader in the Los Angeles Hispanic community who has made large donations to the Democratic party. A number of high-profile Los Angeles figures, including the archbishop, the man who is now sheriff and two current mayoral candidates appealed for clemency for Vignali, but several have now said they should not have done so.
Almon Glenn Braswell, a Miami-based businessman, was convicted in 1983 of fraud and perjury in connection with a mail-order treatment for baldness he sold. Federal prosecutors in Los Angeles, where his business is based, were stunned by the pardon because it could throw a spanner into the works of the current investigation of Braswell on new charges. Mr Clinton said he was not aware that Braswell was facing a new investigation, and that his pardon was only intended to apply to the 1983 conviction. Braswell's lawyers argue it applies to the present circumstances as well, but LA prosecutors say they will proceed with their investigation anyway.
Hugh Rodham, Hillary Clinton's younger brother and a Miami lawyer, accepted nearly $400,000 from Braswell and the Vignali family to act on their behalf. When news of the payments became public, he returned the money at the Clintons' insistence. Bill Clinton denied knowing Mr Rodham had taken money for the clemency work, but not having discussed the cases with him. Senator Clinton denied any involvement in t
That was one of the dumbest questions ever asked on Slashdot...
It's on a par with: "Do you think Bill Gates wants to buy Apple and dump Windows?"
No, I don't consider lying to be a likelihood for three reasons:
1) She has nothing to gain by doing so.
2) The FBI internal investigation considered her claims credible - as do several reporters who have looked into the claims as far as possible given her gag order.
3) Why would the DoJ gag somebody who was merely lying under the State Secrets Privilege which is almost never invoked?
The Bush administration is not covering up something that happened under the Clintons - it is covering up something that is happening NOW.
I said - try to get up to speed on the story before talking about it.