Also note that one of the teams is closely associated with Jews for some reason that I guess makes sense if you are British, so these guys were probably not REALLY saying anything more than "fuck the Raiders".
I think that's it. They're trying to come up with something that will get the other side.
It's like the American right-wingers saying, "Obama is a socialist!"
I predict that one of these guys is going to say, "But I have a Jewish girlfriend," which is what happens all the time in these racial harassment cases in the U.S.
Perhaps the British should also work on reforming their laws on free speech (or lack thereof)."
You could be arrested for the same activity in the US under the 18 USC 245 -- Federally protected activities, act.
As the American Civil Liberties Union keeps patiently explaining, there is a bright line between words and action.
You can punish action, but not words. You can punish words that lead immediately to action, like shouting, "Let's kill the Jew" in front of an angry mob, but you can't punish free expression, like publishing the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (as Henry Ford did) or an interview with George Lincoln Rockwell, head of the American Nazi Party (as Playboy did).
There have been times when the First Amendment was ignored, like the Communist cases during the cold war, but that was an abuse of the legal system.
I have arthritis. I can walk 4 blocks to the supermarket and back, but by the time I get home it's painful. But what am I going to do? I want my independence.
My post office stopped delivering packages, and I have to pick them up at the local post office. Every time I see a slip in my mailbox for a package, it means another painful trip to the post office.
But there are benefits to cooperation (as any evolutionary biologist will tell you). It's necessary to get the job done. It's necessary to get ahead. If you try to get ahead by screwing everybody else, you may find out that it comes back to bite you.
But it's all moot. You're not in the U.S., and you may never get here. You can't make up for bad grades by working cheaper. If you're willing to work for less in a free market, that means you're worth less.
Ayn Rand died alone, without friends, attended by a paid nurse. That's where the virtue of selfishness gets you.
We have a working model in City College of a free university. Thousands of graduates of City College were successful and contributed to society.
Many of the universities on your list were also free, like Berkeley (before the Ronald Reagan budget cuts) and the European universities. So it continues to demonstrate that free universities are a good model.
For all practical purposes, the only people who can graduate expensive schools like Harvard are the wealthy. So free universities give access to education for people who are smart but not wealthy.
It's not true that free universities are a myth. They exist and they are (or were) very successful.
I'm a bit offended here right now. I have believed in the spaghetti monser from my birth. My mother told me about his greatness and noodly tentacles. The bottom line being: WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU TO TELL OTHER PEOPLE WHAT TO BELIEVE AND WHAT RELIGION IS TRUE AND REAL AND WHAT IS NOT? IS christianity less real than judaism because christianity is younger? Where is the limit on how old religion must be for it to be real? Is there a list somewhere? Who made it? On what grounds?
Our God can strike you dead. Can your God strike anybody dead?
L. Ron Hubbard came up with Scientology just to make money by scamming people. And he wound up being tax-deductible.
Different people came to FSMism through different motivations. I think a lot of adherents said, "I can come up with a religion that's just as good as yours."
The US doesn't need people like you. (It sounds like Canada and France don't, either.) You don't want to contribute anything to society. You can't get along with people anywhere. You don't want to cooperate with your fellow workers. You're willing to bring everybody's wages down, in order to advance your own selfish interests.
Why do you think you're being "ostracized"? You're doing something wrong.
I hope you're just going through an Ayn Rand stage and you'll get over it. But unless you learn how to be a normal social human being, I don't want you in the country.
I was thinking of Linus Torvalds, who described in an interview with Terry Gross how his university education was free, and he got a stipend for his living expenses, so he could sit in his dorm room playing computer games, which is where he came up with the idea of Linux.
I don't think there is a great class divide in Finland, the way we have in the US. It has the greatest equality of income, and the greatest social mobility, in the world.
I could also give the example of City College of New York, which graduated a dozen Nobel laureates https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nobel_laureates_affiliated_with_the_City_University_of_New_York If you go to the Nobel prize web site and read their biographies, you'll see that most of them came from working-class families -- their parents were tailors and butchers. City College also graduated titans of industry, like Andrew Grove, founder of Intel, who created the modern computer revolution. During that time, the City University system was free. The upper-class kids fought it out with the working-class kids, and the smartest, hardest-working kids won. A free university system is a meritocracy. The lazy rich kids went to NYU and Columbia.
Now City University is charging tuition, and it's much harder to duplicate that success.
Then a reporter asked GWB what his favorite book was. (His wife is a librarian, and his handlers thought it would look good if he was walking around with the latest deep-thinking conservative books under his arm.)
He said, "The Bible."
They asked him what his favorite passage was in the Bible.
He couldn't answer. He said he'd have to look it up.
I hate to be unkind, but it looks like GWB was really stupid.
I could put up with stupid people, but not if they wind up in a position where they can attack a country and kill 150,000 people, and appoint right-wingers to the Supreme Court who give us cases like Citizens United that turns the country over to billionaires.
Same with the walnuts study. It looks good, but we've been down this road before. The results seemed too good to be true. They'll have to wait until somebody confirms the study.
The traditional Greek diet looked pretty good. Actually, it wasn't the "traditional" Greek diet. During WWII, and for years afterwards, they didn't have much money, so they couldn't afford things like meat and just bought cheap food. A friend of mine visited that region, and she said it's a very hilly area and a lot of people didn't have cars. They spent all their lives climbing up and down hills. So you can't tell whether it was the Greek diet or the exercise.
When diet does show an effect, it's a relatively small effect. If you could lower heart attacks by 5%, that's nothing to brush off, but it's not as if you'll be healthy if you just eat a good enough diet. Robert Atkins, the diet doctor, had a viral infection of his heart which led to heart failure.
Atkins published a lot of research, including in the Journal of the American Medical Association, so I took him very seriously. But you can read the Wikipedia article about him to see the controversy. Atkins said that a high-fat, low-carbohydrate diet reduced heart disease. Is that true? I can't figure it out.
There actually was a study several years ago in which one group of people had a normal diet delivered to them, and another group of people got a low-fat diet delivered to them. There was no difference in their health after several years. Then what do you do? Are you better off eating healthy fats, or just less fats? Are fats better than carbohydrates? Are whole grains and brown rice better than fat? I don't think anybody knows.
I'd like to ask a nutritionist, but I think that if I asked different nutritionists, I'd get different answers.
Slashdot Mirror
Also note that one of the teams is closely associated with Jews for some reason that I guess makes sense if you are British, so these guys were probably not REALLY saying anything more than "fuck the Raiders".
I think that's it. They're trying to come up with something that will get the other side.
It's like the American right-wingers saying, "Obama is a socialist!"
I predict that one of these guys is going to say, "But I have a Jewish girlfriend," which is what happens all the time in these racial harassment cases in the U.S.
Perhaps the British should also work on reforming their laws on free speech (or lack thereof)."
You could be arrested for the same activity in the US under the 18 USC 245 -- Federally protected activities, act.
As the American Civil Liberties Union keeps patiently explaining, there is a bright line between words and action.
You can punish action, but not words. You can punish words that lead immediately to action, like shouting, "Let's kill the Jew" in front of an angry mob, but you can't punish free expression, like publishing the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (as Henry Ford did) or an interview with George Lincoln Rockwell, head of the American Nazi Party (as Playboy did).
There have been times when the First Amendment was ignored, like the Communist cases during the cold war, but that was an abuse of the legal system.
This was the offending tweet
Spurs are on their way to auschwitz
Hitler's gonna gas em again
We can't stop them
The yids from tottenham
The yids from white hart lane
I can put up with that. I've seen worse in T.S. Eliot, Ezra Pound, and Shakespeare.
Somewhere, sometime we lost whatever tolerance and sense of humor we may once have possessed.
Fortunately, we haven't lost all our sense of humor. http://www.evcomics.com/
In the United States, Antisemitism overwhelmingly comes from the political left, both the Occupy Wall Street crowd and the victimhood identity politics left that regard Islamists and Palestinians as protected species.
This accusation is so utterly stupid that it requires a Jew smarter than me to answer it.
http://forward.com/workspace/assets/images/articles/Eli_OWS_greyscale-FINAL-greyscale-for-web.jpg
I have arthritis. I can walk 4 blocks to the supermarket and back, but by the time I get home it's painful. But what am I going to do? I want my independence.
My post office stopped delivering packages, and I have to pick them up at the local post office. Every time I see a slip in my mailbox for a package, it means another painful trip to the post office.
I have never followed the flock.
But there are benefits to cooperation (as any evolutionary biologist will tell you). It's necessary to get the job done. It's necessary to get ahead. If you try to get ahead by screwing everybody else, you may find out that it comes back to bite you.
But it's all moot. You're not in the U.S., and you may never get here. You can't make up for bad grades by working cheaper. If you're willing to work for less in a free market, that means you're worth less.
Ayn Rand died alone, without friends, attended by a paid nurse. That's where the virtue of selfishness gets you.
We have a working model in City College of a free university. Thousands of graduates of City College were successful and contributed to society.
Many of the universities on your list were also free, like Berkeley (before the Ronald Reagan budget cuts) and the European universities. So it continues to demonstrate that free universities are a good model.
For all practical purposes, the only people who can graduate expensive schools like Harvard are the wealthy. So free universities give access to education for people who are smart but not wealthy.
It's not true that free universities are a myth. They exist and they are (or were) very successful.
Why should being juvenile have any effect on the legal status of a religion?
So ... Gods Playing Poker as a reverse Dogs Playing Poker?
That gives me an excuse to post this link.
http://www.timeout.com/newyork/sex-dating/naked-poker-ladies
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, wrapped in bacon and cheese
You insensitive clod! I'm Jewish!
"Offensive" is an unhelpful criterion because it's a subjective assessment, and one that varies from person to person.
I thought the purpose of the Ten Commandments tablets was to annoy non-Christians and Christians who didn't agree with them.
It's like a dog pissing on a tree to mark his territory and assert dominance. "We own this courthouse."
I'm guessing you're having a hard time understanding sarcasm?
That's the point. It's hard to figure out which religions are serious and which are sarcasm. Xenu? Come on.
I'm a bit offended here right now. I have believed in the spaghetti monser from my birth. My mother told me about his greatness and noodly tentacles. The bottom line being: WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU TO TELL OTHER PEOPLE WHAT TO BELIEVE AND WHAT RELIGION IS TRUE AND REAL AND WHAT IS NOT? IS christianity less real than judaism because christianity is younger? Where is the limit on how old religion must be for it to be real? Is there a list somewhere? Who made it? On what grounds?
Our God can strike you dead. Can your God strike anybody dead?
L. Ron Hubbard came up with Scientology just to make money by scamming people. And he wound up being tax-deductible.
Different people came to FSMism through different motivations. I think a lot of adherents said, "I can come up with a religion that's just as good as yours."
Now let them put up their FSM monument.
It would be hard to come up with a more ridiculous story than Joseph Smith did when he established the Mormon religion.
But L. Ron Hubbard managed to do it.
The people who work in genetic testing labs would agree with you.
They go to church for the music, business contacts and fellowship. Theology has NOTHING to do with it.
And to pick up girls. That's very important.
Go back where you came from.
The US doesn't need people like you. (It sounds like Canada and France don't, either.) You don't want to contribute anything to society. You can't get along with people anywhere. You don't want to cooperate with your fellow workers. You're willing to bring everybody's wages down, in order to advance your own selfish interests.
Why do you think you're being "ostracized"? You're doing something wrong.
I hope you're just going through an Ayn Rand stage and you'll get over it. But unless you learn how to be a normal social human being, I don't want you in the country.
I was thinking of Linus Torvalds, who described in an interview with Terry Gross how his university education was free, and he got a stipend for his living expenses, so he could sit in his dorm room playing computer games, which is where he came up with the idea of Linux.
I don't think there is a great class divide in Finland, the way we have in the US. It has the greatest equality of income, and the greatest social mobility, in the world.
I could also give the example of City College of New York, which graduated a dozen Nobel laureates https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nobel_laureates_affiliated_with_the_City_University_of_New_York If you go to the Nobel prize web site and read their biographies, you'll see that most of them came from working-class families -- their parents were tailors and butchers. City College also graduated titans of industry, like Andrew Grove, founder of Intel, who created the modern computer revolution. During that time, the City University system was free. The upper-class kids fought it out with the working-class kids, and the smartest, hardest-working kids won. A free university system is a meritocracy. The lazy rich kids went to NYU and Columbia.
Now City University is charging tuition, and it's much harder to duplicate that success.
Yes, that's the one was thinking of.
Then a reporter asked GWB what his favorite book was. (His wife is a librarian, and his handlers thought it would look good if he was walking around with the latest deep-thinking conservative books under his arm.)
He said, "The Bible."
They asked him what his favorite passage was in the Bible.
He couldn't answer. He said he'd have to look it up.
I hate to be unkind, but it looks like GWB was really stupid.
I could put up with stupid people, but not if they wind up in a position where they can attack a country and kill 150,000 people, and appoint right-wingers to the Supreme Court who give us cases like Citizens United that turns the country over to billionaires.
There is weak evidence, but when one researcher tries to confirm another researcher's work, they often don't get the same results.
There was a story in today's New York Times about milk from grass-fed cows. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/10/health/organic-milk-high-in-helpful-fatty-acids-study-finds.html The reporter was trying to line up the evidence for whether omega-3 fatty acids were really healthier than omega-6 fatty acids, and different researchers got different results and came to different conclusions.
Same with the walnuts study. It looks good, but we've been down this road before. The results seemed too good to be true. They'll have to wait until somebody confirms the study.
The traditional Greek diet looked pretty good. Actually, it wasn't the "traditional" Greek diet. During WWII, and for years afterwards, they didn't have much money, so they couldn't afford things like meat and just bought cheap food. A friend of mine visited that region, and she said it's a very hilly area and a lot of people didn't have cars. They spent all their lives climbing up and down hills. So you can't tell whether it was the Greek diet or the exercise.
When diet does show an effect, it's a relatively small effect. If you could lower heart attacks by 5%, that's nothing to brush off, but it's not as if you'll be healthy if you just eat a good enough diet. Robert Atkins, the diet doctor, had a viral infection of his heart which led to heart failure.
Atkins published a lot of research, including in the Journal of the American Medical Association, so I took him very seriously. But you can read the Wikipedia article about him to see the controversy. Atkins said that a high-fat, low-carbohydrate diet reduced heart disease. Is that true? I can't figure it out.
There actually was a study several years ago in which one group of people had a normal diet delivered to them, and another group of people got a low-fat diet delivered to them. There was no difference in their health after several years. Then what do you do? Are you better off eating healthy fats, or just less fats? Are fats better than carbohydrates? Are whole grains and brown rice better than fat? I don't think anybody knows.
I'd like to ask a nutritionist, but I think that if I asked different nutritionists, I'd get different answers.
You shouldn't post on Slashdot on the sabbath.
The Ten Commandments are like an insurance contract.
They give you all these obligations in the big print.
Then they have pages and pages of small print where they tell you how to get off the hook.