Our planet's climate has always been in constant flux and there is nothing, you, or anyone else for that matter, can do about it. Someone needs to keep a list of everyone who is whining about our impending doom due fossile fuel emmission induced global warming, so in 25 years they can be ostracized.
It is sad really. There are a multitude of serious problems we face which we can solve, but yet some people try to impede this progress by pointing to a situation which we have no control over. Maybe western civilazation just does not want to face the frightening problems around them, so instead whine "GLOBAL WARMING! BIG OIL!".
Displacement: An unconscious defense mechanism, whereby the mind redirects emotion from a 'dangerous' object to a 'safe' object.
There are a few in use currently in Iraq. There is the Talon which can fire many different weapons (M249,.50 cal, M4A1, M24, etc). They are very accurate, more accurate than any soldier. Every EOD team seems to have one of these which they use to detonate IEDs.
UAVs are everywhere and are common place in almost all operations. There is the Predator, which when armed with the hellfire missile system can be very leathal and the little Raven which can be utilized at the squad level. The new Viper Strike bombs, which are starting to be depoyed on UAVs, are very usefull in urban situations where you need to take out the enemy without harming innocents in say, the next room. This is a big development because the "insurgents" like to take shelter in mosques, schools, and hospitals, etc. The new Hardstop bombs help in this situation as well (but I do not think they are carried by UAVs). Anyways, here is an exellent video/story which mixes captured enemy video with the video from the UAV which nails them. I love UAVs.
A POW loses protection under the Geneva Convention when he fails to obey the standards of conduct for legal combatants: wearing uniforms, a responsible command structure, and obeying the laws of war. The reasons to deny Geneva status to terrorists extend beyond pure legal obligation. The primary enforcer of the laws of war has been reciprocal treatment: We obey the Geneva Conventions because our opponent does the same with American POWs. That is impossible with al Qaeda. It has never demonstrated any desire to provide humane treatment to captured Americans. If anything, the murders of Nicholas Berg and Daniel Pearl declare al qaeda's intentions to kill even innocent civilian prisoners. Without territory, it does not even have the resources to provide detention facilities for prisoners, even if it were interested in holding captured POWs.
Yes, there is. We try our best to destroy threats overseas before they get here.
Not one person has been locked up because of his or her name. Now, if you so happen to have the same name of a know terrorist, or have been linked to a terrorist organization, you will be denied entry to the US. For instance, Kat Stevens was put on a watch list because some money he gave to a charity we had linked to Hezbollah.
In other words, not very much. Not all prisoners will ever be given the opportunity for a review - the Pentagon has already said as much and has said that it expects some to remain prisoners for life with no possibility of any court review, even on an internal level., Those who have been "processed" have been denied knowledge of the charges against them or the evidence against them. Indeed, nobody other than the top brass and the judges themselves know if any charges or evidence even exists in these cases. That falls a bit short of a right to a hearing.
Well, I am sure that you will be happy to hear that after much criticism from Amnesty International and the Democratic party, the DOD is planning to release roughly 80 percent of the detainees held at Guantanomo. I am sure that the detainees will be overjoyed to be going home to their native countries where they will be most definitely be treated in the most humane fashion (egypt, syria, saudi arabia, morroco). As they are sitting in their new filthy cells trying to pass the time between their regular torture sessions; I am sure that they are very grateful to all who protested their detention! They don't have to worry though; certainly all those who fought so viciously for their 'release' will be there, even though there is no political reward, to ensure they are treated well in their native lands. Ha.
Why don't you idiots understand that those people we are holding in Cuba are POWs? Do you think that we have them there for fun? During WWII, were there people like you calling for trials and the release diehard Nazi soldiers, or any german soldiers for that matter, before the war was over?
The Magna Carta is magnificent, as is our Constitution, but I fail to see how either document applies directly to enemy combatants. That being said, we have gone out of our way to make sure that we are not detaining anyone who is not a threat, Each detainee's status is routinely Administrative Review Board, and the detainee can appeal the ARB's decision by calling for a Combatant Status Review Tribunal. What more do you want?
The whole "war on terror" is one huge unholy mess. Hey, fighting terrorism is a good idea, but you can't fight terrorism with the weapons of terror. You've got to use other methods, where at all possible. The problem is, GWB has no interest in "other methods", which makes me think that he is more interested in the fighting than in the resolving.
So what weapons do you propose we fight with? A little love, and a little understanding? A little diplomacy? Against an enemy that has already proven its desire to see us annihilated? There is no mistaking the threat this time. The threat is a reality, Is your memory that short?
The following is the wording of the printed statement that Neville Chamberlain waved as he stepped off the plane on 30 September, 1938 after the Munich Conference had ended the day before: "We, the German Führer and Chancellor, and the British Prime Minister, have had a further meeting today and are agreed in recognizing that the question of Anglo-German relations is of the first importance for our two countries and for Europe. We regard the agreement signed last night and the Anglo-German Naval Agreement as symbolic of the desire of our two peoples never to go to war with one another again. We are resolved that the method of consultation shall be the method adopted to deal with any other questions that may concern our two countries, and we are determined to continue our efforts to remove possible sources of difference, and thus to contribute to assure the peace of Europe." Chamberlain read the above statement in front of 10 Downing St. and said: "My good friends, for the second time in our history, a British Prime Minister has returned from Germany bringing peace with honour. I believe it is peace for our time... Go home and get a nice quiet sleep."
Larry Loeb is just recylcling this article. which I came across the day the Intel switch was announced.
"Apple -- or rather, Hollywood -- wants the Pentium D to secure an online movie store (iFlicks if you will), that will allow consumers to buy or rent new movies on demand, over the internet.
According to News.com, the Intel transition will occur first in the summer with the Mac mini, which I'll bet will become a mini-Tivo-cum-home-server.
Hooked to the internet, it will allow movies to be ordered and stored, and if this News.com piece is correct, loaded onto the video iPod that's in the works.
Intel's DRM scheme has been kept under wraps -- to prevent giving clues to crackers -- but the company has said it will allow content to be moved around a home network, and onto suitably-equipped portable devices.
And that's why the whole Mac platform has to shift to Intel. Consumers will want to move content from one device to another -- or one computer to another -- and Intel's DRM scheme will keep it all nicely locked down."
I don't think this was the SOLE reason for Apple's decision. but I bet it was the deciding factor. Bottom line is that the success of the iPod has influenced Apple's focus. Now a majority of people associate Apple with iPod and iTunes not OS X or PCs. They pretty much own the portable music player market and will try to extend this to video as well,.. blah blah blah... Anyways, The real question is whether they will be able to use this newfound brand awareness coupled with cheaper systems to increase their share of the PC market. Maybe, just maybe, they can generate enough revenue selling media devices and start licensing OS X to run on non-Apple hardware. Would you like your new Dell with OS X or Windows? Ha. Its not unimaginable anymore.
I did not intend to imply that unchallengable military superiority is a prerequisite for a nation to ensure its freedom, but is necessary to ensure freedom in general. Consider Canada, Mexico, Germany, Japan -- all these nations are ensured freedom because they are our allies, formally, and informally (general ideology). Our military superiority should ensure free nations remain free, and in reality it already does. MAD is not what won the Cold War. MAD is Cold Warfare. What defeated the USSR was our movement away from MAD and towards 'untouchable military superiority'. We need to ensure that we and our close allies have 'untouchable military superiority' in order to make the world a place where freedom is protected and tyrany is in always in jeopardy.
I disagree with our administration's position on almost every domestic (social and economic) issue, but fully support its 'freedom' policy (which I do not think that many people fully understand). Check out this speech.
What? Who said anything about a space war? You do understand the difference between war and weapons right? Currently, there there are no space based weapon systems.... We are by far the world's foremost leader in weapon system development -- stealth aircraft, cruise missiles, laser guided munitions -- these are all our inventions. The exsistence of these inventions do not inherently start war - they deter war, and ensure that if we have to go to war our victory will be decisive.
The French were in the game and didn't know it. It only takes *one* party to start a war. Right now there's no real space war going on. In other words, *no one* is playing the game. It's disgusting to think *we'd* be the ones to start the game.
Since 1998 we have known that China is developing a laser weapon that can take out our communication and intelligence satellites. See, the "game" is always going on, it never ends. There will always be people working to take freedom away from other people. If we do not develop space weapon systems, someone else will. During the Cold War there were people protesting our military buildup - claiming that we were just provoking the Soviets. They were wrong, we defeated them and succesfully avoided war by agressivly developing our weapon systems to a point where they could not no longer compete.
You are saying that the French have moral authority because they did not take adequate steps to protect themselves? If that is the case, I would rather be free and immoral than moral and without my jewish friends.
"The last time the French asked for 'more proof' it came marching into Paris under a German flag." - David Letterman
First of all, there is no talk of placing nukes into space.
"the only winning move is not to play the game".
Ask the French how effective this strategy was in 1940. Our foreign policy is what dertermines our 'worth' - but unchallengable military superiority ensures our freedom.
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free; unless made and kept so by the exertions of a better man than himself." John Stuart Mill
Your comment reminded me of this speech. Our foreign policy can be debated, but unchallengeable military superiority is obligatory. If that means weapons in space, then so be it.
"Now I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country. Men, all this stuff you've heard about America not wanting to fight, wanting to stay out of the war, is a lot of horse dung. Americans traditionally love to fight. All real Americans, love the sting of battle. When you were kids, you all admired the champion marble shooter, the fastest runner, the big league ball players, the toughest boxers... Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser. Americans play to win all the time. I wouldn't give a hoot in Hell for a man who lost and laughed. That's why Americans have never lost and will never lose a war. Because the very thought of losing is hateful to Americans. Now, an army is a team. It lives, eats, sleeps, fights as a team. This individuality stuff is a bunch of crap. The Bilious bastards who wrote that stuff about individuality for the Saturday Evening Post, don't know anything more about real battle than they do about fornicating. Now we have the finest food and equipment, the best spirit, and the best men in the world. You know... My God, I actually pity those poor bastards we're going up against. My God, I do. We're not just going to shoot the bastards, we're going to cut out their living guts and use them to grease the treads of our tanks. We're going to murder those lousy Hun bastards by the bushel. Now some of you boys, I know, are wondering whether or not you'll chicken out under fire. Don't worry about it. I can assure you that you'll all do your duty. The Nazis are the enemy. Wade into them. Spill their blood, shoot them in the belly. When you put your hand into a bunch of goo, that a moment before was your best friends face, you'll know what to do. Now there's another thing I want you to remember. I don't want to get any messages saying that we are holding our position. We're not holding anything. let the Hun do that. We are advancing constantly, and we're not interested in holding onto anything except the enemy. We're going to hold onto him by the nose, and we're going to kick him in the ass. We're going to kick the hell out of him all the time, and we're going to go through him like crap through a goose. Now, there's one thing that you men will be able to say when you get back home, and you may thank God for it. Thirty years from now when you're sitting around your fireside with your grandson on your knee, and he asks you, What did you do in the great World War Two? You won't have to say, Well, I shoveled shit in Louisiana. Alright now, you sons of bitches, you know how I feel. I will be proud to lead you wonderful guys into battle anytime, anywhere. That's all." General George S. Patton, Jr.
BTW - I believe this is an abridged version of his original speech.
China is not 1984. Repeat after me, China is not 1984. China is not EastAsia.
China is not 1984. China is not 1984. China is not EastAsia. China is not 1984. China is not 1984. China is not EastAsia. China is not 1984. China is not 1984. China is not EastAsia.
A linux or palm PDA with integrated wifi, GPS, and a qwerty keyboard - provides normal web browsing and email. Make it a little bigger than the current PDAs if need be. I have waited way to long!
"Neither. Search for "Patriot Act" on news.google.com and you would find it on reputable media websites like NYTimes, Reuters etc. So seriously, be knowledgeable of what you speak or be silent."
I was aware of this draft legislation supposedly 'leaked' a while back, but my point is that it does not contain anything that 'erodes' our constitutional protections.
Here. In a draft of the House GOP legislation obtained by The Associated Press, many of the provisions were similar to the draft copy of the "Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003" that a nonprofit group said had leaked out of the Justice Department in January 2003.
The Justice Department said then that they had made no final decision on the legislation, and never submitted it to Congress.
But many of the anti-terrorism provisions of that draft show up in the the House discussion draft section on terrorism prevention and prosecution that part of the proposed House legislation.
Among the provisions are measures on the deportation of aliens who become members of or help terrorist groups, required pretrial detention for terrorism suspects, warrants against non-citizens even when a target can't be tied directly to a foreign power, and enhanced penalties for threats or attempts to use chemical or nuclear weapons against the United States, including attacks through the mail system.
and
HereThe draft obtained by the AP shows House Republicans want increased border security and customs agents and crackdowns on illegal immigration, including fines of up to $10,000 and possible prison time for illegal immigrants, and penalties for states who don't allow their local law enforcement agents to help with immigration enforcement.
You said: Now, the Republican party is getting ready with "Patriot Act II" in response to the findings of the Sept 11 commission, but in stark contrast to what's required, has granted far greater power and reach to the security agencies while dramatically eroding constitutional protections and providing a fraction of added security.
Explain to me how, Increasing border security to crackdowns on illegal immigration, imposing fines of up to $10,000 and possible prison time for illegal immigrants, required pretrial detention for terrorism suspects (no bail for individuals charged with terrorism), warrants against non-citizens even when a target can't be tied directly to a foreign power, and enhanced penalties for threats or attempts to use chemical or nuclear weapons against the United States, including attacks through the mail system erodes our constitutional protections. I see the Mexico-US border as one of the, if not the, biggest threats to our security.
"And as far as radical islamic terrorists, this play has just begun, its Act 1. Also they dont want you to bow to Islam, most of them just want the US to leave them the fuck alone."
They just want us to leave them alone? You are kidding right? Listen, what drove the terrorists to blow up the WTC is the realization that their warped fundamentalist religious culture is being replaced in the name of progress. For instance, the fundamental Saudi religious leader who sees his grandson watching Baywatch, and his granddaughter starting to get thoughts in her head that she should be treated like a human being, given freedom and an education. They oppose the concepts of freedom of religion, equality of men and women, freedom of speech, etc. They see these ideas which oppose their radical religious views starting to influence their culture and declare a "holy war" against western culture "the great satan". Now who is the leader of the poster child of this 'western evil'? The USA.
I always viewed the Patriot Act as an imperfect, somewhat temporary, attempt to prevent catastrophy (like an A-bomb from leveling NY or incinerating DC), until significantly cripple terrorist orginizations and eliminate/reform the cultures that spawn/support them.
That being said, I do think that there are parts for the Patriot Act that need to be significantly clarified in order to prevent abuse of the powers it grants. That is why I see this Opion/Ruling as important - it will force congress to make these clarifications.
Now, the Republican party is getting ready with "Patriot Act II" in response to the findings of the Sept 11 commission, but in stark contrast to what's required, has granted far greater power and reach to the security agencies while dramatically eroding constitutional protections and providing a fraction of added security.
Really? Where did you hear about this? TFH Magazine or the Left Wing Wacko Newsletter?
"Republicans now more than ever seem to be under the belief that they could throw any dissenting american in to prison and blow up anyone voicing their dissent outside the US and are on a collission course with the stark reality that while we may never die from a terrorist attack, we will surely feel the ever tightening grip of a police state."
So. radical Islamic terrorists who seek to destroy western culture, starting with the US, and slaughter all "infidels" who refuse to bow down to Allah are merely "dissenters"? One of the main, if not the main, reason GW is going to re-elected is because the Democrats have crazies like you in their camp.
" It is good law there, until either overruled by the Supremes, or made the Law of the Land by the Supremes."
Well, IANAL, but I did read the Judge Marrero's Opionon/Order...
V. STAY OF JUDGMENT Considering the implications of its ruling and the importance of the issues involved, the Court will stay enforcement of its judgment pending appeal, or for the Govenment otherwise to pursue any alternate course of of action, for 90 days. The Court is aware that several material issues of the involve uncharted legal terrain.
Its not "good law", rather, functionally its a referal to the appellate court so it can move up to the supreme court - with a notice sent to congress that they can might want to think about clarifying certain parts of its legislation.
I work in an academic library that's also a federal depository. I've had to deal first hand with the implications of this POS raping of our rights
Dealing first hand with implications?
I also live in a city where provisions of this act were (mis)used not to go after terrorists, but after "garden variety" criminals.
Sorry, going to have to call 'bullshit' on you here. Show me an example of how the Patrioit Act has been misused to "go after garden variety" criminals in your community, or for that matter anywhere. Sounds like left wing wacko drivel to me.
Slashdot Mirror
Our planet's climate has always been in constant flux and there is nothing, you, or anyone else for that matter, can do about it. Someone needs to keep a list of everyone who is whining about our impending doom due fossile fuel emmission induced global warming, so in 25 years they can be ostracized.
It is sad really. There are a multitude of serious problems we face which we can solve, but yet some people try to impede this progress by pointing to a situation which we have no control over. Maybe western civilazation just does not want to face the frightening problems around them, so instead whine "GLOBAL WARMING! BIG OIL!".
Displacement: An unconscious defense mechanism, whereby the mind redirects emotion from a 'dangerous' object to a 'safe' object.
There are a few in use currently in Iraq. There is the Talon which can fire many different weapons (M249, .50 cal, M4A1, M24, etc). They are very accurate, more accurate than any soldier. Every EOD team seems to have one of these which they use to detonate IEDs.
UAVs are everywhere and are common place in almost all operations. There is the Predator, which when armed with the hellfire missile system can be very leathal and the little Raven which can be utilized at the squad level. The new Viper Strike bombs, which are starting to be depoyed on UAVs, are very usefull in urban situations where you need to take out the enemy without harming innocents in say, the next room. This is a big development because the "insurgents" like to take shelter in mosques, schools, and hospitals, etc. The new Hardstop bombs help in this situation as well (but I do not think they are carried by UAVs). Anyways, here is an exellent video/story which mixes captured enemy video with the video from the UAV which nails them. I love UAVs.
A POW loses protection under the Geneva Convention when he fails to obey the standards of conduct for legal combatants: wearing uniforms, a responsible command structure, and obeying the laws of war.
The reasons to deny Geneva status to terrorists extend beyond pure legal obligation. The primary enforcer of the laws of war has been reciprocal treatment: We obey the Geneva Conventions because our opponent does the same with American POWs. That is impossible with al Qaeda. It has never demonstrated any desire to provide humane treatment to captured Americans. If anything, the murders of Nicholas Berg and Daniel Pearl declare al qaeda's intentions to kill even innocent civilian prisoners. Without territory, it does not even have the resources to provide detention facilities for prisoners, even if it were interested in holding captured POWs.
Yes, there is. We try our best to destroy threats overseas before they get here.
Not one person has been locked up because of his or her name. Now, if you so happen to have the same name of a know terrorist, or have been linked to a terrorist organization, you will be denied entry to the US. For instance, Kat Stevens was put on a watch list because some money he gave to a charity we had linked to Hezbollah.
In other words, not very much. Not all prisoners will ever be given the opportunity for a review - the Pentagon has already said as much and has said that it expects some to remain prisoners for life with no possibility of any court review, even on an internal level., Those who have been "processed" have been denied knowledge of the charges against them or the evidence against them. Indeed, nobody other than the top brass and the judges themselves know if any charges or evidence even exists in these cases. That falls a bit short of a right to a hearing.
Well, I am sure that you will be happy to hear that after much criticism from Amnesty International and the Democratic party, the DOD is planning to release roughly 80 percent of the detainees held at Guantanomo. I am sure that the detainees will be overjoyed to be going home to their native countries where they will be most definitely be treated in the most humane fashion (egypt, syria, saudi arabia, morroco). As they are sitting in their new filthy cells trying to pass the time between their regular torture sessions; I am sure that they are very grateful to all who protested their detention! They don't have to worry though; certainly all those who fought so viciously for their 'release' will be there, even though there is no political reward, to ensure they are treated well in their native lands. Ha.
Why don't you idiots understand that those people we are holding in Cuba are POWs? Do you think that we have them there for fun? During WWII, were there people like you calling for trials and the release diehard Nazi soldiers, or any german soldiers for that matter, before the war was over?
The Magna Carta is magnificent, as is our Constitution, but I fail to see how either document applies directly to enemy combatants. That being said, we have gone out of our way to make sure that we are not detaining anyone who is not a threat, Each detainee's status is routinely Administrative Review Board, and the detainee can appeal the ARB's decision by calling for a Combatant Status Review Tribunal. What more do you want?
The whole "war on terror" is one huge unholy mess. Hey, fighting terrorism is a good idea, but you can't fight terrorism with the weapons of terror. You've got to use other methods, where at all possible. The problem is, GWB has no interest in "other methods", which makes me think that he is more interested in the fighting than in the resolving.
So what weapons do you propose we fight with? A little love, and a little understanding? A little diplomacy? Against an enemy that has already proven its desire to see us annihilated? There is no mistaking the threat this time. The threat is a reality, Is your memory that short?
The following is the wording of the printed statement that Neville Chamberlain waved as he stepped off the plane on 30 September, 1938 after the Munich Conference had ended the day before:
"We, the German Führer and Chancellor, and the British Prime Minister, have had a further meeting today and are agreed in recognizing that the question of Anglo-German relations is of the first importance for our two countries and for Europe. We regard the agreement signed last night and the Anglo-German Naval Agreement as symbolic of the desire of our two peoples never to go to war with one another again. We are resolved that the method of consultation shall be the method adopted to deal with any other questions that may concern our two countries, and we are determined to continue our efforts to remove possible sources of difference, and thus to contribute to assure the peace of Europe." Chamberlain read the above statement in front of 10 Downing St. and said:
"My good friends, for the second time in our history, a British Prime Minister has returned from Germany bringing peace with honour. I believe it is peace for our time... Go home and get a nice quiet sleep."
Learn this.
Larry Loeb is just recylcling this article. which I came across the day the Intel switch was announced.
"Apple -- or rather, Hollywood -- wants the Pentium D to secure an online movie store (iFlicks if you will), that will allow consumers to buy or rent new movies on demand, over the internet.
According to News.com, the Intel transition will occur first in the summer with the Mac mini, which I'll bet will become a mini-Tivo-cum-home-server.
Hooked to the internet, it will allow movies to be ordered and stored, and if this News.com piece is correct, loaded onto the video iPod that's in the works.
Intel's DRM scheme has been kept under wraps -- to prevent giving clues to crackers -- but the company has said it will allow content to be moved around a home network, and onto suitably-equipped portable devices.
And that's why the whole Mac platform has to shift to Intel. Consumers will want to move content from one device to another -- or one computer to another -- and Intel's DRM scheme will keep it all nicely locked down."
I don't think this was the SOLE reason for Apple's decision. but I bet it was the deciding factor. Bottom line is that the success of the iPod has influenced Apple's focus. Now a majority of people associate Apple with iPod and iTunes not OS X or PCs. They pretty much own the portable music player market and will try to extend this to video as well,.. blah blah blah... Anyways, The real question is whether they will be able to use this newfound brand awareness coupled with cheaper systems to increase their share of the PC market. Maybe, just maybe, they can generate enough revenue selling media devices and start licensing OS X to run on non-Apple hardware. Would you like your new Dell with OS X or Windows? Ha. Its not unimaginable anymore.
I did not intend to imply that unchallengable military superiority is a prerequisite for a nation to ensure its freedom, but is necessary to ensure freedom in general. Consider Canada, Mexico, Germany, Japan -- all these nations are ensured freedom because they are our allies, formally, and informally (general ideology). Our military superiority should ensure free nations remain free, and in reality it already does. MAD is not what won the Cold War. MAD is Cold Warfare. What defeated the USSR was our movement away from MAD and towards 'untouchable military superiority'. We need to ensure that we and our close allies have 'untouchable military superiority' in order to make the world a place where freedom is protected and tyrany is in always in jeopardy.
I disagree with our administration's position on almost every domestic (social and economic) issue, but fully support its 'freedom' policy (which I do not think that many people fully understand). Check out this speech.
"Right now there's no real space war "
What? Who said anything about a space war? You do understand the difference between war and weapons right? Currently, there there are no space based weapon systems.... We are by far the world's foremost leader in weapon system development -- stealth aircraft, cruise missiles, laser guided munitions -- these are all our inventions. The exsistence of these inventions do not inherently start war - they deter war, and ensure that if we have to go to war our victory will be decisive.
The French were in the game and didn't know it. It only takes *one* party to start a war. Right now there's no real space war going on. In other words, *no one* is playing the game. It's disgusting to think *we'd* be the ones to start the game.
Since 1998 we have known that China is developing a laser weapon that can take out our communication and intelligence satellites. See, the "game" is always going on, it never ends. There will always be people working to take freedom away from other people. If we do not develop space weapon systems, someone else will. During the Cold War there were people protesting our military buildup - claiming that we were just provoking the Soviets. They were wrong, we defeated them and succesfully avoided war by agressivly developing our weapon systems to a point where they could not no longer compete.
You are saying that the French have moral authority because they did not take adequate steps to protect themselves? If that is the case, I would rather be free and immoral than moral and without my jewish friends.
"The last time the French asked for 'more proof' it came marching into Paris under a German flag." - David Letterman
First of all, there is no talk of placing nukes into space.
"the only winning move is not to play the game".
Ask the French how effective this strategy was in 1940. Our foreign policy is what dertermines our 'worth' - but unchallengable military superiority ensures our freedom.
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free; unless made and kept so by the exertions of a better man than himself."
John Stuart Mill
"Now I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country. Men, all this stuff you've heard about America not wanting to fight, wanting to stay out of the war, is a lot of horse dung. Americans traditionally love to fight. All real Americans, love the sting of battle. When you were kids, you all admired the champion marble shooter, the fastest runner, the big league ball players, the toughest boxers ... Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser. Americans play to win all the time. I wouldn't give a hoot in Hell for a man who lost and laughed. That's why Americans have never lost and will never lose a war. Because the very thought of losing is hateful to Americans. Now, an army is a team. It lives, eats, sleeps, fights as a team. This individuality stuff is a bunch of crap. The Bilious bastards who wrote that stuff about individuality for the Saturday Evening Post, don't know anything more about real battle than they do about fornicating. Now we have the finest food and equipment, the best spirit, and the best men in the world. You know ... My God, I actually pity those poor bastards we're going up against. My God, I do. We're not just going to shoot the bastards, we're going to cut out their living guts and use them to grease the treads of our tanks. We're going to murder those lousy Hun bastards by the bushel. Now some of you boys, I know, are wondering whether or not you'll chicken out under fire. Don't worry about it. I can assure you that you'll all do your duty. The Nazis are the enemy. Wade into them. Spill their blood, shoot them in the belly. When you put your hand into a bunch of goo, that a moment before was your best friends face, you'll know what to do. Now there's another thing I want you to remember. I don't want to get any messages saying that we are holding our position. We're not holding anything. let the Hun do that. We are advancing constantly, and we're not interested in holding onto anything except the enemy. We're going to hold onto him by the nose, and we're going to kick him in the ass. We're going to kick the hell out of him all the time, and we're going to go through him like crap through a goose. Now, there's one thing that you men will be able to say when you get back home, and you may thank God for it. Thirty years from now when you're sitting around your fireside with your grandson on your knee, and he asks you, What did you do in the great World War Two? You won't have to say, Well, I shoveled shit in Louisiana. Alright now, you sons of bitches, you know how I feel. I will be proud to lead you wonderful guys into battle anytime, anywhere. That's all."
General George S. Patton, Jr.
BTW - I believe this is an abridged version of his original speech.
I use one of these (Deskmount) to maximize my desk space.
China is not 1984. Repeat after me, China is not 1984. China is not EastAsia.
China is not 1984. China is not 1984. China is not EastAsia.
China is not 1984. China is not 1984. China is not EastAsia.
China is not 1984. China is not 1984. China is not EastAsia.
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
- Ministry of Truth
Every year over $1,000,000,000,000 (that's trillion) worth of free goverment grants (including small business grants) are given out to over 30,000,000 (that's million) people! That's 6 times more than what the country spends on automobiles. And you probably bought a car in the last few years, so why didn't you get your share of small business grants, goverment loans and free goverment grants!?!
"Oh well, time to find a printer manufacturer with printers as their core business instead of selling printer ink for gold-prices."
Ha. Good luck.
A linux or palm PDA with integrated wifi, GPS, and a qwerty keyboard - provides normal web browsing and email. Make it a little bigger than the current PDAs if need be. I have waited way to long!
Well, the Houston port is ranked first in the United States in foreign waterborne commerce, second in total tonnage, and sixth in the world. If I remember correctly, four of the top ten US ports (yearly tonnage) are located in Texas as well.
Deconstructionism and this fucking commie bastard
Deconstructionism, Relativism, and Postmodernism have serverly damaged our education system. Damn those dirty commie hippies.
I was aware of this draft legislation supposedly 'leaked' a while back, but my point is that it does not contain anything that 'erodes' our constitutional protections.
and
You said:
Now, the Republican party is getting ready with "Patriot Act II" in response to the findings of the Sept 11 commission, but in stark contrast to what's required, has granted far greater power and reach to the security agencies while dramatically eroding constitutional protections and providing a fraction of added security.
Explain to me how, Increasing border security to crackdowns on illegal immigration, imposing fines of up to $10,000 and possible prison time for illegal immigrants, required pretrial detention for terrorism suspects (no bail for individuals charged with terrorism), warrants against non-citizens even when a target can't be tied directly to a foreign power, and enhanced penalties for threats or attempts to use chemical or nuclear weapons against the United States, including attacks through the mail system erodes our constitutional protections. I see the Mexico-US border as one of the, if not the, biggest threats to our security.
"And as far as radical islamic terrorists, this play has just begun, its Act 1. Also they dont want you to bow to Islam, most of them just want the US to leave them the fuck alone."
They just want us to leave them alone? You are kidding right? Listen, what drove the terrorists to blow up the WTC is the realization that their warped fundamentalist religious culture is being replaced in the name of progress. For instance, the fundamental Saudi religious leader who sees his grandson watching Baywatch, and his granddaughter starting to get thoughts in her head that she should be treated like a human being, given freedom and an education. They oppose the concepts of freedom of religion, equality of men and women, freedom of speech, etc. They see these ideas which oppose their radical religious views starting to influence their culture and declare a "holy war" against western culture "the great satan". Now who is the leader of the poster child of this 'western evil'? The USA.
"To
"Is that the government uses it against NON-TERRORISTS.
Not only that, the government has used it against non-terrorists MORE THAN it has been used against terrorists."
Bullshit - give me ONE example of it being used to against "non-terrorists".
I always viewed the Patriot Act as an imperfect, somewhat temporary, attempt to prevent catastrophy (like an A-bomb from leveling NY or incinerating DC), until significantly cripple terrorist orginizations and eliminate/reform the cultures that spawn/support them.
That being said, I do think that there are parts for the Patriot Act that need to be significantly clarified in order to prevent abuse of the powers it grants. That is why I see this Opion/Ruling as important - it will force congress to make these clarifications.
Now, the Republican party is getting ready with "Patriot Act II" in response to the findings of the Sept 11 commission, but in stark contrast to what's required, has granted far greater power and reach to the security agencies while dramatically eroding constitutional protections and providing a fraction of added security.
Really? Where did you hear about this? TFH Magazine or the Left Wing Wacko Newsletter?
"Republicans now more than ever seem to be under the belief that they could throw any dissenting american in to prison and blow up anyone voicing their dissent outside the US and are on a collission course with the stark reality that while we may never die from a terrorist attack, we will surely feel the ever tightening grip of a police state."
So. radical Islamic terrorists who seek to destroy western culture, starting with the US, and slaughter all "infidels" who refuse to bow down to Allah are merely "dissenters"? One of the main, if not the main, reason GW is going to re-elected is because the Democrats have crazies like you in their camp.
" It is good law there, until either overruled by the Supremes, or made the Law of the Land by the Supremes."
Well, IANAL, but I did read the Judge Marrero's Opionon/Order...
V. STAY OF JUDGMENT
Considering the implications of its ruling and the importance of the issues involved, the Court will stay enforcement of its judgment pending appeal, or for the Govenment otherwise to pursue any alternate course of of action, for 90 days. The Court is aware that several material issues of the involve uncharted legal terrain.
Its not "good law", rather, functionally its a referal to the appellate court so it can move up to the supreme court - with a notice sent to congress that they can might want to think about clarifying certain parts of its legislation.
I work in an academic library that's also a federal depository. I've had to deal first hand with the implications of this POS raping of our rights
Dealing first hand with implications?
I also live in a city where provisions of this act were (mis)used not to go after terrorists, but after "garden variety" criminals.
Sorry, going to have to call 'bullshit' on you here. Show me an example of how the Patrioit Act has been misused to "go after garden variety" criminals in your community, or for that matter anywhere. Sounds like left wing wacko drivel to me.