So a new pair of cables of the same brand/model as used by the reviewer could have been bought...meets the idea that the cables are untouched. The writer (Mike Fremer) suggest the cables he uses everyday as an alternative. Did not suggest they use his personally owned cables, but the ones (as in the make/model) he uses.
And if the reason Randi wants to "disprove" an idea it show it is BS, then a one time $7k cost would be earned back in free publicity. Plus, there is a good market for used cables out there...may even be able to get back most of the outlay on them. Or put them on ebay.
Sorry...the fact that Randi then lied post-canx of the challenge, suggests he has an agenda outside of purely seeking the truth.
Randi initially had been deriding Audiophiles of their claim they can hear differences in cables, etc. The Pear cables were singled out due to their extremely high cost. The Stereophile writer offered to do the experiment with different cables (which Randi then needed others to approve....is it his challenge or not?). Of course, Randi could have simply bought the Pear cables and pressed ahead any way....
http://www.stereophile.com/thinkpieces/021708swiftboat/ is an example of Randi's moving targets to win the money. In this case, the starting point is "Audiophile's can't really hear the difference in cables" and specifying a specific make and model. They then add that the loser pays for all testing costs (do you want to pay for something that later appears to be rigged against you). The maker of said high-end cable decides not to play....audio writer offers to use another make/model of high-end cable...Randi says it has to "approved" by his "advisers". And so on....basically, Randi prefers to name call and rig any test beyond neutrality. He WANTS a negative result versus looking to actually prove.
The president does not make the laws, only signs them for implementation or vetoes them. If they are vetoed then Congress can force it through with enough votes (though this rarely happens).
The Congress has been overwhelmingly Republican until about 2 years ago.
Okay...used for a photo-op at a political event. Not proof she provides the day to day care for the child.
What about the day-to-day aspects? Does she or her husband care for the child directly or is there a nanny or other home-help involved in the raising of their children?
Having grown up in England and lived around the world over the years, I understand that phone costs vary around the world. However, this is about Comcast in the US. And, the connection I have with DSL, Cable or Fios is the same as my dialup when I was limited to that...me to my ISP. And, today, my ISP offers unlimited calling in the US at a rate close to what I was paying for just local calls only. Allows my wife to talk to her sisters and mom without me worrying about the bill.
Um....no, no they didn't. My phone package for my landline in the days of dial-up was about $25+taxes. I could call anyone in my local area (which was large, included El Paso, TX to halfway to Albuquerque, NM). If I logged into my ISP, I could spend all day on-line (especially if I were trying to download a large file/group of files) with no additional charge by the Telco.
Same idea with my Fios...and as their advertising says "Unlimited" use, adding an arbitrary limit to my use woudl be a contract violation.
The welfare you describe is nothing compared to the most expensive type of welfare in the US today_ Corporate Welfare.
Companies are given huge bail-outs by the federal government (see Airlines, Mortgage Companies for recent examples), no competition contracts (see KBR and Halliburton), and the many other various ways the government manages to funnel money into corporations and create new ways for companies to avoid paying taxes.
THAT is the welfare that is expensive. Remove that form, and we can afford the welfare you speak of while still paying less overall taxes...and even be able to provide health care for everyone!
He stated he was stopped. Without knowing the car he was driving and the type of SUV, I can only guess....but reasonable distance between stopped vehicles is less than the distance a heavy SUV at speed can push first vehicle into the one in front.
Having been in this situation many years ago and the police were standing right there when it happened (because they had stopped traffic on the I5 in LA), the person who hit me was cited...and while the person in the very front of the 6 car chain reaction (my car was totaled as was the one that hit me), she was trying to sue any one for money...her car had a scratch on the bumper, the rest had various levels of damage from me (total) to crease in the rear bumper (second from front), so she was told to go pound sand by my insurance company.
Bottomline...ALWAYS call the police when in an accident if you are not at fault. If you are at fault, you do not want the police to muddy your story later with facts.
Not disagreeing, but the clean up of the failure to secure should NOT be charged to the criminal.
Besides, a case can be made that failure to secure the military network IS a criminal act (for example, in the military, failing to secure your desktop is potentially punishable under the UCMJ). In this case, failing to secure the network could be seen as potentially treasonous as any reasonable person could see that using the default or weak passwords could lead to intrusion by those who seek to do harm to the US.
Perhaps YOU miss the point that the "victim" in this case failed to take appropriate measures. Taking them AFTER the intrusion should NOT be considered the damages as those measures SHOULD have been taken PRIOR to the intrusion.
Not a good comparison. Better one: If a rape victim knowingly goes to the house of a known rapist wearing an outfit known to turn him on and gets raped, then YES, the victim IS partially to blame.
The military network should have been secured tightly before the intrusion. Unfortunately, Windows is the default OS of the Government and Military and the majority of the computer admins are worthless (this is based on personal experience over 22 years in the military) and whose common solution to a problem is to simply re-image the machine (even if said machine was working fine until THEY messed with it) regardless of the potential data loss. Sometimes all that is needed is a password reset but their answer is "re-image". Or they insist on coming out to troubleshoot when you tell them you need a new [fill in the blank] peripheral becuase you swapped your bad one for a known good one and it worked while the bad one did not work on another machine... While there are a few decent techs out there, they are rare and only occasionally spotted...they are rarer than the yeti.
No..I was assigned to Al Udeid on my last deployment. Had 2 man room in a trailer (which had 20+ rms) by a Cadillac nr the Post Office. I worked in Ops Town and went to the CAOC frequently when planning missions downrange in the AOR. I went off base frequently and the food was better offbase (found many good restaurants there of all types of cuisine). Plus, as I said, there are many malls off base.
"Luxury" is not what I would call the Deid. "Okay" is the best I would give it. Khandahar, Afghanistan and Eskan, Saudi Arabia were both better than the Deid was/is.
Or are you referring to the Army Post in Qatar? Their BX was better than the Deid's and they had a better DFAC. If so, that is part of NOT AL Udeid.
How is Booth a patriot? Unless you consider the Confederacy a real nation rather than a group who tried to leave the union.
But coupled with your comments about one group committing more crime and getting caught more often adds to that impression.
Especially when it appears you have no support for said position (and the studies done of various police departments such as Denver PD, and LAPD show your premise to be false, that systemic profiling based on race occurs frequently and is used by police to justify their actions in profiling...in a circular logic kinda way...when the truth is that Whites commit as much crime as minorities do).
He was a pilot, mostly in heavy airlift until he reached command rank.
And his bio is not likely to list everything he did in his career. It is designed to show his education, his awards, his assignments and his specialties (in this case, Nav, then Pilot).
For take off and landings, fixed seats must face directly forward or back. Jump seats do not have this requirement. Hence, the seats must be able to be swiveled to face forward or backwards in relation to the cockpit of the aircraft used.
You forgot that ALL furnishings that are designed to be placed in Aircraft MUST meet certain requirements by US Law and FAA regulations. THAT is what costs the money.
No...the BAM in Doha, Qatar is a mall. The BX was a big tent type facility with a few trailer buildings with the barbers, fastfood (Subway/BK/Pizza Hut) and a few other vendors.
The "game room" was a MWR facility run by the military (SVS) for all there, as was the bar at the "bra" (those that have been there know what it is!) along with the gyms, "library" and education center. The "DFACs" (chow halls to most older GIs) required you turn in your trays (ala the other branched) because it is a deployed location. At home station, we have people who do clear your plates. Note: at homestation, very few officers are allowed to use the chow halls on AF bases, and so this "luxury" is afforded the enlisted corps primarily.
Call BS. The BK would have been built with NAF (Non-Appropriated Funds) money as they are an AAFES concessionaire. The money would not have been accessible to any officer NOT assigned to AAFES (and those tend to be in TX).
Perhaps this ignorance or stupidity is why you were transferred? After all, you admit to accidentally blowing up your own base.
As a retired member of the military, my last job was Military Equal Opportunity and we are the people who handle these types of complaints. They occur. YOU may not have seen it, YOU may not have been personally affected by it, but many others have. And the Navy has had some of the more egregious examples of this behavior over the years.
There have been members of the military who are NOT of a Christian faith who have received death threats when they complained about forced religious activities. Their careers have been cut short. I know of an officer who was downchecked on his annual Fitness Report (OPR for official acronym) for "not being a good Christian Team Player' (note: he filed a complaint, it was confirmed, rater was punished/career ended, report was removed from the officer's file and new one written).
Bottom line...it happens way to damn often despite all the training. With all the training the military gets, there is no reason I should have needed to investigate several complaints in the AOR (discrimination, sexual harassment, etc)...and confirm many of them...but unfortunately I did.
Your active duty pay check has tax free allowances, such as housing and subsistence, but they are not included in the retired pay (or even used for calculating retired pay), only your base pay is used. To see their base pay, simply double the 20 year retired pay.
Hm...he was a navigator and then pilot. As he got promoted to command, he spends more time as a bureaucrat (problem inherent in senior command positions in the military). He is a Desert Storm veteran (among other campaigns). He is a career Heavy Transporter guy based on his bio, culminating in his previous job being the commander of the USAF Airlift command (Air Mobility Command), in charge of all airlift and air refueling tanker support.
Perhaps you should learn how to read the bios before you mouth off about them.
No...there are have been plenty of studies on profiling by police departments. For example, in CO, for the same types of traffic stops, Hispanics and Blacks were 3 times more likely to be searched by the police, however, Whites were more likely to have something illegal on them when searched. If the profiling is based on statistics, Whites should be searched more frequently in CO. Minorities are more careful when driving becuase they know they are more likely to be searched.
Plus, your sig line tells me you are likely to be bigoted in your views.
Slashdot Mirror
So a new pair of cables of the same brand/model as used by the reviewer could have been bought...meets the idea that the cables are untouched. The writer (Mike Fremer) suggest the cables he uses everyday as an alternative. Did not suggest they use his personally owned cables, but the ones (as in the make/model) he uses.
And if the reason Randi wants to "disprove" an idea it show it is BS, then a one time $7k cost would be earned back in free publicity. Plus, there is a good market for used cables out there...may even be able to get back most of the outlay on them. Or put them on ebay.
Sorry...the fact that Randi then lied post-canx of the challenge, suggests he has an agenda outside of purely seeking the truth.
Randi initially had been deriding Audiophiles of their claim they can hear differences in cables, etc. The Pear cables were singled out due to their extremely high cost. The Stereophile writer offered to do the experiment with different cables (which Randi then needed others to approve....is it his challenge or not?). Of course, Randi could have simply bought the Pear cables and pressed ahead any way....
http://www.stereophile.com/thinkpieces/021708swiftboat/ is an example of Randi's moving targets to win the money. In this case, the starting point is "Audiophile's can't really hear the difference in cables" and specifying a specific make and model. They then add that the loser pays for all testing costs (do you want to pay for something that later appears to be rigged against you). The maker of said high-end cable decides not to play....audio writer offers to use another make/model of high-end cable...Randi says it has to "approved" by his "advisers". And so on....basically, Randi prefers to name call and rig any test beyond neutrality. He WANTS a negative result versus looking to actually prove.
The president does not make the laws, only signs them for implementation or vetoes them. If they are vetoed then Congress can force it through with enough votes (though this rarely happens).
The Congress has been overwhelmingly Republican until about 2 years ago.
Okay...used for a photo-op at a political event. Not proof she provides the day to day care for the child.
What about the day-to-day aspects? Does she or her husband care for the child directly or is there a nanny or other home-help involved in the raising of their children?
Having grown up in England and lived around the world over the years, I understand that phone costs vary around the world. However, this is about Comcast in the US. And, the connection I have with DSL, Cable or Fios is the same as my dialup when I was limited to that...me to my ISP. And, today, my ISP offers unlimited calling in the US at a rate close to what I was paying for just local calls only. Allows my wife to talk to her sisters and mom without me worrying about the bill.
Um....no, no they didn't. My phone package for my landline in the days of dial-up was about $25+taxes. I could call anyone in my local area (which was large, included El Paso, TX to halfway to Albuquerque, NM). If I logged into my ISP, I could spend all day on-line (especially if I were trying to download a large file/group of files) with no additional charge by the Telco.
Same idea with my Fios...and as their advertising says "Unlimited" use, adding an arbitrary limit to my use woudl be a contract violation.
The welfare you describe is nothing compared to the most expensive type of welfare in the US today_ Corporate Welfare.
Companies are given huge bail-outs by the federal government (see Airlines, Mortgage Companies for recent examples), no competition contracts (see KBR and Halliburton), and the many other various ways the government manages to funnel money into corporations and create new ways for companies to avoid paying taxes.
THAT is the welfare that is expensive. Remove that form, and we can afford the welfare you speak of while still paying less overall taxes...and even be able to provide health care for everyone!
He stated he was stopped. Without knowing the car he was driving and the type of SUV, I can only guess....but reasonable distance between stopped vehicles is less than the distance a heavy SUV at speed can push first vehicle into the one in front.
Having been in this situation many years ago and the police were standing right there when it happened (because they had stopped traffic on the I5 in LA), the person who hit me was cited...and while the person in the very front of the 6 car chain reaction (my car was totaled as was the one that hit me), she was trying to sue any one for money...her car had a scratch on the bumper, the rest had various levels of damage from me (total) to crease in the rear bumper (second from front), so she was told to go pound sand by my insurance company.
Bottomline...ALWAYS call the police when in an accident if you are not at fault. If you are at fault, you do not want the police to muddy your story later with facts.
Let's see...Germany signed a pact with Japan and declared war on the US.
When did Iraq attack or declare war on the US?
Actually, only your lawyer (usually) needs to show up in civil cases. So you can still go to work, etc.
Not disagreeing, but the clean up of the failure to secure should NOT be charged to the criminal.
Besides, a case can be made that failure to secure the military network IS a criminal act (for example, in the military, failing to secure your desktop is potentially punishable under the UCMJ). In this case, failing to secure the network could be seen as potentially treasonous as any reasonable person could see that using the default or weak passwords could lead to intrusion by those who seek to do harm to the US.
Perhaps YOU miss the point that the "victim" in this case failed to take appropriate measures. Taking them AFTER the intrusion should NOT be considered the damages as those measures SHOULD have been taken PRIOR to the intrusion.
Not a good comparison. Better one: If a rape victim knowingly goes to the house of a known rapist wearing an outfit known to turn him on and gets raped, then YES, the victim IS partially to blame.
The military network should have been secured tightly before the intrusion. Unfortunately, Windows is the default OS of the Government and Military and the majority of the computer admins are worthless (this is based on personal experience over 22 years in the military) and whose common solution to a problem is to simply re-image the machine (even if said machine was working fine until THEY messed with it) regardless of the potential data loss. Sometimes all that is needed is a password reset but their answer is "re-image". Or they insist on coming out to troubleshoot when you tell them you need a new [fill in the blank] peripheral becuase you swapped your bad one for a known good one and it worked while the bad one did not work on another machine... While there are a few decent techs out there, they are rare and only occasionally spotted...they are rarer than the yeti.
No..I was assigned to Al Udeid on my last deployment. Had 2 man room in a trailer (which had 20+ rms) by a Cadillac nr the Post Office. I worked in Ops Town and went to the CAOC frequently when planning missions downrange in the AOR. I went off base frequently and the food was better offbase (found many good restaurants there of all types of cuisine). Plus, as I said, there are many malls off base.
"Luxury" is not what I would call the Deid. "Okay" is the best I would give it. Khandahar, Afghanistan and Eskan, Saudi Arabia were both better than the Deid was/is.
Or are you referring to the Army Post in Qatar? Their BX was better than the Deid's and they had a better DFAC. If so, that is part of NOT AL Udeid.
How is Booth a patriot? Unless you consider the Confederacy a real nation rather than a group who tried to leave the union.
But coupled with your comments about one group committing more crime and getting caught more often adds to that impression.
Especially when it appears you have no support for said position (and the studies done of various police departments such as Denver PD, and LAPD show your premise to be false, that systemic profiling based on race occurs frequently and is used by police to justify their actions in profiling...in a circular logic kinda way...when the truth is that Whites commit as much crime as minorities do).
Dispatcher? Sorry...what are you talking about?
He was a pilot, mostly in heavy airlift until he reached command rank.
And his bio is not likely to list everything he did in his career. It is designed to show his education, his awards, his assignments and his specialties (in this case, Nav, then Pilot).
For take off and landings, fixed seats must face directly forward or back. Jump seats do not have this requirement. Hence, the seats must be able to be swiveled to face forward or backwards in relation to the cockpit of the aircraft used.
You forgot that ALL furnishings that are designed to be placed in Aircraft MUST meet certain requirements by US Law and FAA regulations. THAT is what costs the money.
No...the BAM in Doha, Qatar is a mall. The BX was a big tent type facility with a few trailer buildings with the barbers, fastfood (Subway/BK/Pizza Hut) and a few other vendors.
The "game room" was a MWR facility run by the military (SVS) for all there, as was the bar at the "bra" (those that have been there know what it is!) along with the gyms, "library" and education center. The "DFACs" (chow halls to most older GIs) required you turn in your trays (ala the other branched) because it is a deployed location. At home station, we have people who do clear your plates. Note: at homestation, very few officers are allowed to use the chow halls on AF bases, and so this "luxury" is afforded the enlisted corps primarily.
Call BS. The BK would have been built with NAF (Non-Appropriated Funds) money as they are an AAFES concessionaire. The money would not have been accessible to any officer NOT assigned to AAFES (and those tend to be in TX).
Perhaps this ignorance or stupidity is why you were transferred? After all, you admit to accidentally blowing up your own base.
As a retired member of the military, my last job was Military Equal Opportunity and we are the people who handle these types of complaints. They occur. YOU may not have seen it, YOU may not have been personally affected by it, but many others have. And the Navy has had some of the more egregious examples of this behavior over the years.
There have been members of the military who are NOT of a Christian faith who have received death threats when they complained about forced religious activities. Their careers have been cut short. I know of an officer who was downchecked on his annual Fitness Report (OPR for official acronym) for "not being a good Christian Team Player' (note: he filed a complaint, it was confirmed, rater was punished/career ended, report was removed from the officer's file and new one written).
Bottom line...it happens way to damn often despite all the training. With all the training the military gets, there is no reason I should have needed to investigate several complaints in the AOR (discrimination, sexual harassment, etc)...and confirm many of them...but unfortunately I did.
No. None of the pay is tax free.
Your active duty pay check has tax free allowances, such as housing and subsistence, but they are not included in the retired pay (or even used for calculating retired pay), only your base pay is used. To see their base pay, simply double the 20 year retired pay.
Hm...he was a navigator and then pilot. As he got promoted to command, he spends more time as a bureaucrat (problem inherent in senior command positions in the military). He is a Desert Storm veteran (among other campaigns). He is a career Heavy Transporter guy based on his bio, culminating in his previous job being the commander of the USAF Airlift command (Air Mobility Command), in charge of all airlift and air refueling tanker support.
Perhaps you should learn how to read the bios before you mouth off about them.
No...there are have been plenty of studies on profiling by police departments. For example, in CO, for the same types of traffic stops, Hispanics and Blacks were 3 times more likely to be searched by the police, however, Whites were more likely to have something illegal on them when searched. If the profiling is based on statistics, Whites should be searched more frequently in CO. Minorities are more careful when driving becuase they know they are more likely to be searched.
Plus, your sig line tells me you are likely to be bigoted in your views.
No....for a bad movie, try to find the Vincent Price movie "The Monster Club" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0081178/)