ignorant putz yourself if you don't know the difference between a reason and an excuse!
Oh and why the big wait between the use of the chemical weapons and the invasion? a couple of decades wasn't it? before the first gulf war?
Oh and where are the weapons of mass destruction?
If by two invasions of neighbouring countries you mean the earlier attack on Iran then which country was it who encouraged it and provided the arms? (I'll give you a clue, by your post, you're probably living in it, and a reason, the recently deposed leader of Iran being american backed)
How many other countries can you name that have done the same or worse to their own people without being invaded?.
Of course saddam was/is an idiot and war criminal who made it easy, and I'm in no way excusing his behavior. It would have been difficult (but not impossible) if Iraq was a nice democracy.
I can probably name 2 other leaders who probably should be on trial with him.(just an opinion)
If you want to throw insults around and call people ignorant putz's at least don't put up straw arguments and TRY to get your facts correct, instead of spouting propaganda
>BR>
Those ignorant of history are condemed to repeat it, those who study it can win most arguments:)
Everyones forgetting that saddam was toppled for the simple reason that he was threatening to sell his oil in euro's not dollars, this would have meant the beginning of the end for the mighty dollar. Once one country got away with it others would follow suit. So in a way Oil was the reason, but just not in the way everyone seems to think.
Whats the betting the lube runs out at the same time as the warranty. A bit like the sealed for 'life' bearings you get where life means ' until it breaks or wears out'. And being really cynical, a 'Server Quality' drive for twice the price has.00001 cents worth of extra lube.
We used to have a store in the uk called C&A (Went belly up a few years ago) used to be a great joke about blondes always buying their knickers there as they had the instructions written on them.
For those who are a bit slow in social situation/or are humour impared the C goes at the front the A at the back
All that needs to happen to cure the problem is the removal from the industry of the protection it seems to have built up against incompetance and faults, in no other industry will consumers put up with companies in effect saying "whatever happens its not our fault, and anyway because you opened the box you absolved us of any possible liability". ie make EULA's illegal rather than just unenforcable. The USA needs a system like the UK and most of Europe where you cannot remove certain basic consumer rights , such as 'fitness for purpose' through any agreement.
At least this proves that at least one section of the entertainment industry is listening to its customers!
Its a shame that the two most progressive and customer centered sections of the industry are the pirates and the porno guys!
We in the UK are blessed with a wonderful press/sarcasm mode off/
Just ten minutes ago I was in the local chippy (fish and chip shop)reading their free papers, I'm too cheap to actually buy one, I had just ordered sausage and chips, when I read the account of a former lover of our esteemed deputy leader John Prescot who I quote " liked big powerful men, but was disappointed to find that his equipment resembled a chipollata sausage" this was accompanied by a picture of the offending article ( the sausage thank god)
Don't get me wrong I am not condoning anything that they do. but to call them terrorists is in my opinion wrong regardless of their acts. I am sure most people could give you lists of attrocities commited by both sides. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the situation they, and the vast majority of the Iraqi population want foreign troops out of their country, Using the word 'terrorists' just serves to obscure the rights and wrongs of the situation. I agree that each attack makes it more difficult to withdraw, but is that not due to the 'macho' attitude prevalent at the moment rather than the rights and wrongs of the situation? In saying that they want to cause instability and your emotive comments afterwards you claim to know what their motives are, is that just what you've been told ? or is that just good propaganda from the US? I'm not so arrogant as to claim that I know ALL their intentions good or bad.
Using the words 'suicide baby killers' is just stupid, and makes finding a solution more difficult.Looking back I can remember similar comments about the IRA during the seventies and now it seems OK to talk with them and even allow their political wing power. My comparison with the resistance is justified I think, after all the Germans probably called them 'terrorists'
My point is mainly (and perhaps not articulatly enough spelled out in my original post) that using emotive language to trash your opposition is standard practice, and that we should not fall for this type of creeping propaganda
wholeheartily agree! my point is more along the lines of the use of language and how perceptions can be slanted by the constant and repetitive use of emotive terms, and also the point that a terrorist is an aggressor whereas these people are reacting against aggression.
Irrelevant comment, makes no difference as to who they are killing, did we call the french resistance terrorists when they killed 'colaborators'? and do you know the war in which most americans where killed?..yes its the civil war By the way look up the history of the american war of independance first before you make comments! http://www.worcestershireregiment.com/wr.php?main= inc/h_boston_massacre after one quick google and by your definition of 'terrorist tactics'
Not wishing for a moment to defend the killing of anybody, but you are in error in conflating freeing from oppression and freeing from occupation the two are not the same or even related I AM sure the goal of all the opposition groups is to remove foreign troops from their country and I am equally sure that each group has its own agenda after that. Think how you would feel if foreign troops where camped on the white house lawn 'terrorist tactics' seems to be defined as anything done to the coalition , legitimate tactics is defined as anything done by the coalition,
BTW why do you think the civilian iraqi casualty numbers caused by the occupying troops are so vague? could it be that the news is being manipulated ? If it where not I would have to doubt the inteligence of the US military, its a standard tactic in any conflict.
no WRONG... howevermuch you disagree with them they are NOT terrorists they are fighting against an occupation of their country by a foreign power and even if you agree with the aims and objectives of that operation (I don't by the way, or rather I do not believe the stated aims and objectives; democracy and the rule of law. Nowhere in them is oil mentioned!) Even calling them insurgents is being a bit disingenuous although by stretching a point I could agree. However unpalatable 'freedom fighters' is more the correct term, at least by any dictionary definition.
true.... good cars, however most are based on european designed base platforms tho' the saleen is perhaps the exception that proves the rule
I was however being provocative in my reply to the provocative parent post!
not all Italian cars are stylish, not all French cars are odd, and we brits have been known to produce the odd clunker etc. etc.
Whats the point? I might if I was acting for a company. but I'm going to do exactly what I want anyway and no EULA is going to stop me. I always assume they are heavily biased towards the company anyway, and fortunatly I live in a country (UK) where you cannot have your consumer rights taken away from you by a 'whatever happens its not our fault' EULA.
Oh I don't know, most F1 cars are designed and built here... we build cars to drive and go, and not ONLY in a straight line. I've yet to drive an american 'performance' car that could go round a corner at a decent speed.....and before you ask both my wife and I work for the british motor industry and have experience with all nationalities cars
Its true, national car designers do reflect their national stereotypes: Italians build fast fragile fantastic looking cars
Germans build well engineered, fast but slightly boring cars
French build slightly odd, quirky cars
British cars are just excellent all round, well I would say that wouldn't I.
American cars, well lets just say they suit the average american and leave it at that. lol
I think everyone is getting things too complicated! in ANY system that can be used by humans (ie viewed and/or heard) there comes a point whereby whatever data is used becomes 'human' readable, at that point all security becomes useless. I can read from just before the output device, why not just unplug the LCD screen and read the signals direct? All HDPC does is try to stop me from reading the signal PC to LCD electronics, as far as I can make out I can read the internal signal to the actual crystal matrix with no problem. Just as for any audio I can plug the speaker output into an input and read that. All any DRM does is make pirated copies MORE attractive.
A note from the uk, one thing that has given me hope that people care about their rights and privacy is this http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1589133.stm and for those to lethargic to click:
During the 2001 census a quirk of our laws became apparent: if enough people put down under the religion question 'Jedi' it would become a recognised religion ( and in a loose link to the topic a 'jedi' minister qualifies for significant tax breaks )
I think this came about due to a backlash against intrusive goverment and its questions.... ahh those where the days, nowadays people just seem to bend over for, it all in the name of state terrorism of course.... ooops sorry I meant terrorism against the state
after all they should know, they sold him most of his supplies, the question should have been did he buy any chemical weapons from anyone else , not did he have any (presumably they knew about the items they sold to him, although with the present UK goverment you can never be sure)
Yes I agree, you CAN make a fairly good film for that kind of money, however I enjoy special effects films (sf especially ) and you cannot self finance that sort of film, most of the films made for that kind of money are made to show off the directing and production talent of the filmmaker.
I seriously doubt that the actors and technical staff from the film you mentioned where paid or earned a living wage.and whilst I applaud anyone who does something just for the love of it, I have no objection to them being paid either,
Most people do not have the luxury of taking a risk about being paid for their main job, otherwise everyone would work on a commission only basis!
I think culturally, losing the music 'industry' would have little or no effect(I'm not talking about individual artists here , just the hangers on). But I think losing the big production movie companies would have a large effect, not that there aren't bad apples or bad examples there , think Sony(DRM recently) and Disney(arguably the most important case for copyright was the micky mouse decision) for starters
I think we need to draw a distinction between the MPAA and the RIAA.
If you examine the costs, we need reasonably large production companies in the picture industry, its production costs are high, and the 'cost' of a flop is also high, in addition, it *mostly* pays its artists reasonably, after all United Artists was just that and was a reaction of the stars of the time against the studios of the time.
However we do NOT on the whole need large record companies. The cost of production is low, the cost of distribution is low *mostly* the artists are poorly paid or ripped off in some way, and the cost of failure is also relativly low. In addition the costs of an artist being independant are low, so they are really only parasites on others work and talent
I really think the MPAA are doing themselves a dis-service being associated with, and adopting the methods of the RIAA
just a quick note to our atlantic cousins, and other non-uk readers. These officials are NOT cops, they are government officials in the same way as traffic wardens and council rent officers. They have no powers other than those related to specific sets of circumstances, for example a traffic warden cannot, as far as I know, arrest someone for murder. Like all public officials 'jobsworth's ', and rules followers often gravitate to these posts and they constantly seek to widen their areas of influence. Their habit of pronouncing on things they're ignorant about seems to be on the increase and is often given more prominence than it deserves. So responce to the article should be:
nothing to see, move along....
Slashdot Mirror
at least the last part of your last comment I can agree with :) but probably for different reasons lol
If thats all you can pick up on, and are now decending to ONLY insults I consider I've won the argument :) and consider this thread ended.
Regards
ignorant putz yourself if you don't know the difference between a reason and an excuse!
:)
Oh and why the big wait between the use of the chemical weapons and the invasion? a couple of decades wasn't it? before the first gulf war?
Oh and where are the weapons of mass destruction?
If by two invasions of neighbouring countries you mean the earlier attack on Iran then which country was it who encouraged it and provided the arms? (I'll give you a clue, by your post, you're probably living in it, and a reason, the recently deposed leader of Iran being american backed)
How many other countries can you name that have done the same or worse to their own people without being invaded?.
Of course saddam was/is an idiot and war criminal who made it easy, and I'm in no way excusing his behavior. It would have been difficult (but not impossible) if Iraq was a nice democracy.
I can probably name 2 other leaders who probably should be on trial with him.(just an opinion)
If you want to throw insults around and call people ignorant putz's at least don't put up straw arguments and TRY to get your facts correct, instead of spouting propaganda
>BR>
Those ignorant of history are condemed to repeat it, those who study it can win most arguments
Everyones forgetting that saddam was toppled for the simple reason that he was threatening to sell his oil in euro's not dollars, this would have meant the beginning of the end for the mighty dollar. Once one country got away with it others would follow suit. So in a way Oil was the reason, but just not in the way everyone seems to think.
Best thing is to alter your profile on facebook/myspace to suit the job your after, after all if it's on the net it must be true mustn't it?
Whats the betting the lube runs out at the same time as the warranty. A bit like the sealed for 'life' bearings you get where life means ' until it breaks or wears out'. And being really cynical, a 'Server Quality' drive for twice the price has .00001 cents worth of extra lube.
F1 cars don't have opening and shutting windows, how are the support tech going to solve problems if they can't do that?
We used to have a store in the uk called C&A (Went belly up a few years ago) used to be a great joke about blondes always buying their knickers there as they had the instructions written on them.
For those who are a bit slow in social situation/or are humour impared the C goes at the front the A at the back
yes..... that's called copyright.
All that needs to happen to cure the problem is the removal from the industry of the protection it seems to have built up against incompetance and faults, in no other industry will consumers put up with companies in effect saying "whatever happens its not our fault, and anyway because you opened the box you absolved us of any possible liability". ie make EULA's illegal rather than just unenforcable. The USA needs a system like the UK and most of Europe where you cannot remove certain basic consumer rights , such as 'fitness for purpose' through any agreement.
At least this proves that at least one section of the entertainment industry is listening to its customers!
Its a shame that the two most progressive and customer centered sections of the industry are the pirates and the porno guys!
We in the UK are blessed with a wonderful press /sarcasm mode off/
Just ten minutes ago I was in the local chippy (fish and chip shop)reading their free papers, I'm too cheap to actually buy one, I had just ordered sausage and chips, when I read the account of a former lover of our esteemed deputy leader John Prescot who I quote " liked big powerful men, but was disappointed to find that his equipment resembled a chipollata sausage" this was accompanied by a picture of the offending article ( the sausage thank god)
I immediatly changed my order to fish and chips
Don't get me wrong I am not condoning anything that they do. but to call them terrorists is in my opinion wrong regardless of their acts. I am sure most people could give you lists of attrocities commited by both sides. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the situation they, and the vast majority of the Iraqi population want foreign troops out of their country, Using the word 'terrorists' just serves to obscure the rights and wrongs of the situation. I agree that each attack makes it more difficult to withdraw, but is that not due to the 'macho' attitude prevalent at the moment rather than the rights and wrongs of the situation? In saying that they want to cause instability and your emotive comments afterwards you claim to know what their motives are, is that just what you've been told ? or is that just good propaganda from the US? I'm not so arrogant as to claim that I know ALL their intentions good or bad. Using the words 'suicide baby killers' is just stupid, and makes finding a solution more difficult.Looking back I can remember similar comments about the IRA during the seventies and now it seems OK to talk with them and even allow their political wing power. My comparison with the resistance is justified I think, after all the Germans probably called them 'terrorists'
My point is mainly (and perhaps not articulatly enough spelled out in my original post) that using emotive language to trash your opposition is standard practice, and that we should not fall for this type of creeping propaganda
wholeheartily agree! my point is more along the lines of the use of language and how perceptions can be slanted by the constant and repetitive use of emotive terms,
and also the point that a terrorist is an aggressor whereas these people are reacting against aggression.
Irrelevant comment, makes no difference as to who they are killing, did we call the french resistance terrorists when they killed 'colaborators'? and do you know the war in which most americans where killed? ..yes its the civil war = inc/h_boston_massacre
By the way look up the history of the american war of independance first before you make comments! http://www.worcestershireregiment.com/wr.php?main
after one quick google and by your definition of 'terrorist tactics'
Not wishing for a moment to defend the killing of anybody, but you are in error in conflating freeing from oppression and freeing from occupation the two are not the same or even related
I AM sure the goal of all the opposition groups is to remove foreign troops from their country and I am equally sure that each group has its own agenda after that. Think how you would feel if foreign troops where camped on the white house lawn
'terrorist tactics' seems to be defined as anything done to the coalition , legitimate tactics is defined as anything done by the coalition,
BTW why do you think the civilian iraqi casualty numbers caused by the occupying troops are so vague? could it be that the news is being manipulated ? If it where not I would have to doubt the inteligence of the US military, its a standard tactic in any conflict.
no WRONG... howevermuch you disagree with them they are NOT terrorists they are fighting against an occupation of their country by a foreign power and even if you agree with the aims and objectives of that operation (I don't by the way, or rather I do not believe the stated aims and objectives; democracy and the rule of law. Nowhere in them is oil mentioned!)
Even calling them insurgents is being a bit disingenuous although by stretching a point I could agree. However unpalatable 'freedom fighters' is more the correct term, at least by any dictionary definition.
true.... good cars, however most are based on european designed base platforms tho' the saleen is perhaps the exception that proves the rule
I was however being provocative in my reply to the provocative parent post!
not all Italian cars are stylish, not all French cars are odd, and we brits have been known to produce the odd clunker etc. etc.
but I stand by my point as a generalization
Whats the point? I might if I was acting for a company. but I'm going to do exactly what I want anyway and no EULA is going to stop me. I always assume they are heavily biased towards the company anyway, and fortunatly I live in a country (UK) where you cannot have your consumer rights taken away from you by a 'whatever happens its not our fault' EULA.
Oh I don't know, most F1 cars are designed and built here... we build cars to drive and go, and not ONLY in a straight line. I've yet to drive an american 'performance' car that could go round a corner at a decent speed.....and before you ask both my wife and I work for the british motor industry and have experience with all nationalities cars
Its true, national car designers do reflect their national stereotypes:
Italians build fast fragile fantastic looking cars
Germans build well engineered, fast but slightly boring cars
French build slightly odd, quirky cars
British cars are just excellent all round, well I would say that wouldn't I.
American cars, well lets just say they suit the average american and leave it at that. lol
I think everyone is getting things too complicated! in ANY system that can be used by humans (ie viewed and/or heard) there comes a point whereby whatever data is used becomes 'human' readable, at that point all security becomes useless. I can read from just before the output device, why not just unplug the LCD screen and read the signals direct? All HDPC does is try to stop me from reading the signal PC to LCD electronics, as far as I can make out I can read the internal signal to the actual crystal matrix with no problem. Just as for any audio I can plug the speaker output into an input and read that. All any DRM does is make pirated copies MORE attractive.
A note from the uk, one thing that has given me hope that people care about their rights and privacy is this http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1589133.stm and for those to lethargic to click:
During the 2001 census a quirk of our laws became apparent: if enough people put down under the religion question 'Jedi' it would become a recognised religion ( and in a loose link to the topic a 'jedi' minister qualifies for significant tax breaks )
I think this came about due to a backlash against intrusive goverment and its questions.... ahh those where the days, nowadays people just seem to bend over for, it all in the name of state terrorism of course.... ooops sorry I meant terrorism against the state
after all they should know, they sold him most of his supplies, the question should have been did he buy any chemical weapons from anyone else , not did he have any (presumably they knew about the items they sold to him, although with the present UK goverment you can never be sure)
Yes I agree, you CAN make a fairly good film for that kind of money, however I enjoy special effects films (sf especially ) and you cannot self finance that sort of film, most of the films made for that kind of money are made to show off the directing and production talent of the filmmaker.
I seriously doubt that the actors and technical staff from the film you mentioned where paid or earned a living wage.and whilst I applaud anyone who does something just for the love of it, I have no objection to them being paid either,
Most people do not have the luxury of taking a risk about being paid for their main job, otherwise everyone would work on a commission only basis!
I think culturally, losing the music 'industry' would have little or no effect(I'm not talking about individual artists here , just the hangers on). But I think losing the big production movie companies would have a large effect, not that there aren't bad apples or bad examples there , think Sony(DRM recently) and Disney(arguably the most important case for copyright was the micky mouse decision) for starters
I think we need to draw a distinction between the MPAA and the RIAA.
If you examine the costs, we need reasonably large production companies in the picture industry, its production costs are high, and the 'cost' of a flop is also high, in addition, it *mostly* pays its artists reasonably, after all United Artists was just that and was a reaction of the stars of the time against the studios of the time.
However we do NOT on the whole need large record companies. The cost of production is low, the cost of distribution is low *mostly* the artists are poorly paid or ripped off in some way, and the cost of failure is also relativly low. In addition the costs of an artist being independant are low, so they are really only parasites on others work and talent
I really think the MPAA are doing themselves a dis-service being associated with, and adopting the methods of the RIAA
just a quick note to our atlantic cousins, and other non-uk readers. These officials are NOT cops, they are government officials in the same way as traffic wardens and council rent officers. They have no powers other than those related to specific sets of circumstances, for example a traffic warden cannot, as far as I know, arrest someone for murder. Like all public officials 'jobsworth's ', and rules followers often gravitate to these posts and they constantly seek to widen their areas of influence. Their habit of pronouncing on things they're ignorant about seems to be on the increase and is often given more prominence than it deserves. So responce to the article should be: nothing to see, move along....