I think sometimes this has more to do with the player than the discs...I have two DVD players, and while I generally use one of them, I'll occasionally run into a disc that will only play on the other player...can't explain it, but it's happened a handful of times over the past few years.
I'd think that that could be it except that I've had two dvd players and the first dvd I had trouble playing had the problem on both players. What are the odds of having two different players have trouble playing the same dvd without there being something wrong with the dvd? It also makes it hard to believe it's the player when the replacement dvd does work in the same player.
I would also like to point out the self-destructive nature of the analog media they are pining over. About one third of the VHS tapes that remain in my collection are playable. The first DVD I ever bought does not skip once.
Unlike you I've had a number of dvds go bad on me whereas none of my tapes aren't playable. Currently my oldest tape is more than 15 years old and it still plays however I've bought brand new dvds I had to return because they wouldn't play. Now I'll admit my first dvd plays fine but others don't.
Small governments are no safer than large governments. Jim Jones and Kim Jong Ill in the Head show that. Your average lynch mob shows that.
Jim Jones wasn't about government per se with the exception that they leased land from the government in Jonestown, Guyana. Kim Jong Ill on the other hand is the government in North Korea. That is he controls the government and the people with his iron fist. And lynch mobs have as much power with big and strong as with a small and weak one. The mobs involved in Kristallnacht was government orchestrated. If the government hadn't been as strong it probably wouldn't of been as bad as it was. Afterall even government stormtroopers who helped Hitler rise to power took part.
However, this discussion was about a *national ID card*. I believe that a national id card is justified and reasonable and necessary for law enforcement in an age of terrorism. Right now we have defacto national id cards and a lot of problems because we pretend they are not. We also for the most part also have state id cards. It hasn't been the end of the world.
National ids aren't needed for law enforement nor is one authorized by the Constitution of the USA. If one were needed then how did law enforcement get along without one for so long? Afterall they're not that old as compared to law enforcement. As for whether a national id is the "end of the world", ask those who have had their id stolen what it means to them. Many have had their credit wrecked because of id theft. Your credit worthiness, FICO score, determines to a large extint if you can get a loan or get employment if you're not employed. People have even been arrested because they had their id stolen. A national id will only make id theft easier, instead of having to go different places id theives will have just one place to go to steal an id.
I think you are trying to hold our government to 1700's rules while dealing with 21st century terrorists. I think your path leads to a place where it is *more* likely that we will slam into fascism.
I see it the opposite way, it's big government that leads to fascism or to other authoritarisms, totalitarianisms, an dother forms of dictaterships. With small governments they have no power and can only exist when governments is big. As for dealing with terrorists, terrorists can't bust into your home with government knowledge or assistance, but in the 1700s the British could bust in at will, I bet you could find quotes from some Founding Fathers that the Fourth Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights because of this. I don't believe there has ever been as much a threat to freedom and liberty as in the 1700s, in the USA. Also it's government that are the ultimate terrorists. It's because of government support that some terrorists organizations have their power. For instance in the 1980s and early '90s, the US supported the Mujhadeen in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union, then when the Soviets left gave them free reign instead of helped them to setup a working government. Some of those Mujhadeen became the Taliban or al Quaeda, such as bin Laden. And what you don't hear about regarding the Taliban, the current occupant of the White House, George Bush Jr gave the Taliban US taxpayer dollars. In two different packages, he gave the Taliban $10,000,000 and $43,000,000. That soccer field the Taliban used to behead those they didn't like? It was built by the international community for the Afghan community to play soccer not kill people.
As for the Middle East, throughout the 1980s the Reagan and Bush Sr admins supported Saddam, even as he was using WMDs against both others in Iraq and Iran. It was only after Saddam invaded Kuwait, a sheikdom and not a democracy, before he could do any bad. And Hesbola, before it was listed by the US and Israel as a terrorist org Israel supported them. The Israeli government started supporting Hesbola as a counter balance to Arafat's PLO. Israel registered it as a charity. Ever hear of Blowback?
I recognize that the US does bad things. You don't seem to recognize that on the scale of badness there are many people in this world that make them look like boy scouts.
And appearantly you don't recognize that just because someone else is bad or does bad things it doesn't give anyone else justification to do bad things too. Just because Hitler and the NAZIs massacred 6,000,000 or Stalin 20,000,000 doesn't give the US the right support those who killed 200,000. Ooh, and by the way, the US supported Hitler first then Stalin. Blowback.
But preventing the government from being able to perform basic law enforcement duties is not the correct path. We need to focus them to be more accurate and we need our society to be more forgiving of people who commit stupid crimes.
No where did I say the government shoudn't perform basic law enforcement, but listening to calls without a warrant and building databases of citizens' activities and such isn't how to do it. Heck Bush has at his disposal the FISA court where he can get a search warrant, he can even get one 24 hours after a search, and FISA court as rarely ever turned down a request. Doe he do that? No he just has the NSA, No Such Agency, vacuum all international between the US and somewhere else. And try to protest where he's supposed to appear, if you're lucky you'll be herded into a "freespeech zone" that's nowhere near anything. If you're not lucky you may just disappear or be held as an "enemy combatant" for years without ever even seeing a courtroom or having charges filed against you.
It seems Bush has learned from J. Edgar Hoover, and his FBI's COINTELPRO progam. He's turning my country, the country whose military I served in and I love, into a fascist or other authoritarian nation.
Thanks for the info. It seems the requirements changed since the last tyme I knew what they were. If I recall right back then you had to be able to build your own transceiver.
What's wrong with the Morse code? Personally, I think that learning the Morse code should be a requirement for radio operation at the very least (or any communications course in general) because the Morse code is very simple to learn and use, and because it is nearly universally recognized. Telling radio operators that they don't need to know Morse code is like telling scientists that they don't need to know the periodic table by heart.
Tell that to a quadraplegic. Back in the 1980s I knew a paraplegic, wheelchair bond, who only had partial control of his arms. He could listen to morse code all day long but it was a struggle to key it for him. The only thing requiring morse code does is weed out those who can't or won't learn it. Morse code should be optional not manditory.
As for the periotic table, in the first half year of high school chemistry my class was required to learn and memorize all of the elements except the transuranic elements, valiance, atomic weight, sign, number of protons, and number of neutrons of the most common isotope. But when I took first semester chemistry in college, a few years later, we were only given a list of about 50 elements we had to know. And then only the number of protons, the sign, and the valiance.
Even without the code requirement, getting a license still requires a good deal of work. Every class of license exam includes quite a bit of electronics theory that I think will help to weed out the people who aren't up to the qualifications of having a license and previously would have been turned off by the code requirement. On top of that there's the expense of buying (or building) the equipment and setting up an antenna, so I doubt we'll be flooded by morons any time soon.
That bring up something I was wondering about, if those who want a license are still required to know enough about electricity to build thier own radio. I'd like to get my license but it's been too long since I've worked with electrical equipment so I no longer retain the knowledge. I've been thinking about getting one of those electric/electronic learning labs that has the solderless boards and different parts and comes with a book or booklet with different projects you can make. Used to be that places like RadShack would have a few different sets but I've only found one or two in stores lately., and none for communications or sw radios.
I wish they would start with the chocolate. Considering the size of the average american waist, rationing chocolate would be an improvement, probably save billions in health-care costs.
Ah but dark chocolate is good for the heart. It also contains antioxidants which may help fight cancer. you've gotta love chocolate.
Yeap. At least up through the '70s. I don't know if females still serve in combat in Israel now, I think that changed.
The government's primary responsibility is to its own citizens - if we can protect the citizenry without resorting to invasions of privacy and constitutional rights by not letting certain non-citizens into the US, then so be it. Sucks that we have to resort to this, but better than the alternatives, IMHO.
I agree the main responsibilty of government is to protect the people, but I don't agree that it requires barring others without proving they are a threat. Innocent until proven guilty is what I believe, I'd rather let ten guilty go free instead of falsely convicting one innocent. A vigilant citizenary should be able to handle the occasional person who plans to commit a crime, but what acts aren't prevented is the price of freedom. The tree of liberty sort of thing.
Interesting information. I knew about the older ruling but had forgotten. There was also the matter of Roe v Wade wherein the supreme court held an inherent right to privacy.
I doubt most people have ever heard of any Supreme Court rulings, other than Roe v Wade. I only found out about the SC ruling in the 1800s after searching through Findlaw. When I did I also found other cases on privacy, one in the 1880, one in 1892 or '93, one in the 1950s, and another one in 1968 or '69. The SC used the '68 or '69 ruling in Roe v Wade if I recall right. I now find that I wish I had saved those cases because it takes a while before I can find them again when I get into discussions on privacy. I do save them now just so I can easily find them again, I'll have them locally.
I'm sure Social Security currently requires the use of your state ID (typically a driver's license)
Isn't not, all that's required for the social security card is a birth certificate. And while not all states may require one at least some states require a social security card to get an ID. Under your scenerio this presents a catch22, to get an id an ssn is needed but to get the ssn an id is needed.
(b) the citizens need to have an active role. We need to have an armed citizenry with military training so that they can either recognize and report dangerous activities or even act on them.
This part I agree with, the US needs a citizen's army like Switzerland's. I'd change one thing, whereas in their's all adult males serve 'til the age of 55 if I recall right, I'd have it so every adult serves. I'm for equal rights. The military would be shrunk, with a smaller professional core, but then everyone would be part of it. I also agree with the part about civil liberties and privacy. Where I disagree is with border security and passports. The only reason someone should be barred from the US is if it can be shown they are a threat to the US or to it's citizens.
Florida either should not discriminate against the OR ID, or it should (and probably does) use alternate verification that is not normally faked, or is easy to trust once an answer comes back.
I don't know where Florida comes in, but unless things have changed a lot since I moved from there there's no discrimination or difficulty getting a drivers license. All that was needed when I lived there was a birth certificate and a Social Security card. After testing, or whatever the requirements are, they take your mugshot then and there and within a few minutes you're walking out with your driver's license in hand. Heck, the only reason moved from there was because I needed therapy after being hit by someone who moved to the state because the state he moved from issued a warrent for his arrest. I was in therapy but had to stop when I couuldn't afford it anymore and I was promised if I moved I would get the therapy.
I'm not sure how much or from what tribe but my parents have told me I'm part Indian. An uncle on my moms side says the same thing but he told me to get the info from her. Appearly she won't talk about it because it a "dirty secret". As she has a French Canadian background I believe it's Ottawa or one of the Iroquois Confederacy tribes. My dad also has a French Canadian, er Acadian, background I don't be supprized if there was Indian in his background as well.
And a small group of people but still numbering in the millions wants to kill us- mainly because we make them feel bad because they are so backwards but partially because they are educated from birth that we are "monkeys" and not human. At 4 years old they are pledging to commit suicide killing us. At 5 years old almost a decade ago, they were cheering in the streets when we died.
Who are these people? Do you mean Arabs and other Muslims? Thinking of bin Laden? You may not recall or know this but bin Laden only started his war on America because the US stationed troops in the Holyland, Saudi Arabia. After Saddam invaded Kuwait there was a concern he may invade Saudi Arabia as well. bin Laden told the Saudis his al Quada would defend SA if Saddam attacked, but they declined his offer and asked for the US's assistance. It was only after this when the attacks came, he wanted the infidels out. Prior to the Kuwaiti invasion the US had indirectly supported bin Laden. We supported the mujahideen in Afghanistan, of which bin Laden was a member, in their fight against the Soviet Union.
As far as the US making people mad, it's only right that many do hate the US or at least the policies of the US. The US has a bloody past, it has assasinated or supported those responsible for killings of leaders in other countries. The US helped in establishing the Shah of Iran in power as well as Saddam later. It supported Gen Pinochet's overthrow of a democratically elected government in Chile after which thousands were killed and tens of thousands simply "diappeared". In other parts of the Americas it supported regimes in Guatemala and Honduras while many Mayas were massacred, and the Contras while they were terrorizing many in El Salvador. In the Middle East the US continues to support Israel, even after Israel attacked the USS Liberty. On the other side of the world the US supported Indonesian President Suharto's invasion of East Timor, this dispite a congressional bar for such aid. Pres Ford and Henry Kissingergave Suharto the greenlight for the invasion. After the invasion about 200,000 East Timorese were killed, that's one third the populationof East Timor.
Fact is is there are plenty of people who quite rightly have the right to feel hatred for the US.
Again- the problem is that in an age where even a 16 year old can kill 10 to 20 people, you really don't want people sworn to killing you so they will go to heaven wandering around unsupervised.
I'd have to say I'm the opposite of you, I'd rather keep my liberty and take to chance of being a victim than give up any liberty for a little temperary security. As Benjamin Franklin said, paraphrasing, "Anyone who gives up liberty for a little safety will get nor deserve either." Besides it's government that is the biggest threat to both liberty and safety. Look throughout history and you'll see the biggest massacres were done by governments or those trying to seize control. Most recently it's been Hitler, Pol Pot, the Rwandan government, Soharto, and Stalin. Saddam, who the US supported might be added as well, as well as Chiang Kai-shek led KMT's invasion of Formosa, otherwise called Tiawan. 28 February 1947 was Formosa's Holocaust. Some have also said Mao was responsible for 50,000,000 dead.
So how much more radioactivity will water gain if it flowed over the crush containers? (Assuming that the area will be wet in the future, and water will flow through the storage area.)
First it has been shown water does flow away from Yucca. I didn't find what I was looking for but I did find this about a study DOE will do, DOE to Study Yucca Mountain Water Flow and DOE did not apply its own geologic site criteria (pdf), this subsection is about half way down. Now onto how much radioactivity water will pick up, if the casks are crushed water won't just flow over the top of the casks, water can enter the casks as well. Water will then be irradiated itself as well as carry off radioactive particals that have dissolved.
Shocker? They told me to sit about 12 minutes and my ID would be ready. I thought I mis-heard the clerk. Huh? What?! 12 minutes? Hell, in California, I'd have to wait a month, maybe two (and mine have in CA been lost in the mail once or twice, when time was critical and having an ID for contract work was mandatory... not paper temporary vouchers...).
It sounds like CA is like where I live now, they mail you your DL, and Oregon is like the state I moved here from, they give it to you right then and there. You take the test, if getting a new license, they test your vision, then they take your mugshot and within a few minutes they hand you your DL with the mugshot. I don't see why it can't be done like that everywhere in the US, if it's mailed then it can be ripped off.
If you think about it, the Federal government could set an authority up easily, in a matter of months
Can you show me where in the USA Constitution it gives the federal government the authority to create or require an ID? It's not there, constitutionally the federal government has no such authority.
My local video store demanded my actual physical SSN card before they would rent me a video.
Was it Blockbuster? They require your ssn which is why I'll never join. As it is most dvds I get I buy, and I pay with cash. There's one rental place near here that doesn't require ssns I may join but I'm not sure.
and remember - privacy is *not* guaranteed by the constitution
Though it's not specifically enumerated the USSC has ruled privacy is a right. In the early 1800s the Supreme Court ruled that privacy, anonymity, is a bedrock of the freedom of political speech. If remaining anonymous wasn't possible then free political speech meant nothing because your speech could be held against you. The Founding Fathers thought this too otherwise many of the tracts that supported the War of Independence never would of been published seeing as how most of them were published anonymously. One of the few that did publish under name was Thomas Paine, he published The Crisis while serving in the Continental Army under Washington. It was in "The Crisis" where he wrote "These are the times that try men's souls." Otherwise many writers wrote about the war anonymously.
Of course, if they strike down the use of the Commerce clause to justify anything and everything, then several other Federal programs and departments will become vulnerable, such as Unions and Labor relations, Civil Rights, and possibly even abortion rights. Instead, the individual States will have total control over those issues, because there's no interstate commerce involved. So you can try to deprive the Feds of their ability to mandate ID cards, but you'll probably also kill some other federally controlled programs that you like.
Ah but unions are covered by the First Amendment's freedom of assembly clause and abortion is at least partially covered by the right to privacy and old Supreme Court rulings has acknowledged the right to privacy is embedded in the Freedom of Speech clause. Something along the lines that anonymousity is the bedrock of free political speech. As for killing other federal programs, I'd like to see most of them abolished!!! Make a list of federal agencies, authorities, bureaus, and offices then compare it to the USA Constitution. If the Constitution does not specifcally mension it then strike it from the government. And most of these are not authorized by the Constitution. Take the Accounting and Auditing Policy Committee (AAPC), nowhere in the Constitution does it say anything about this. For a list of more check out LSU Libraries Federal Agencies Directory. Not only would the people regain control of government and have a small and limited one, but we would also see a reduction in taxes and more freedom.
Yeah, but you expressed a desire to focus on a single task at a time. Windows is more about letting you do that--Mac OS X is more about letting you divide your focus when appropriate.
I typically do want to concentrate on one task but when I want or need to multitask Windows allows me to do so, it's not like Windows is better for a single task while Macs are better for multitasking.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps if there is trully free will this means that there must exist something supernatural
How do you come to this conclusion? Can you share the logical analysis of your statements?
FalconI think sometimes this has more to do with the player than the discs...I have two DVD players, and while I generally use one of them, I'll occasionally run into a disc that will only play on the other player...can't explain it, but it's happened a handful of times over the past few years.
I'd think that that could be it except that I've had two dvd players and the first dvd I had trouble playing had the problem on both players. What are the odds of having two different players have trouble playing the same dvd without there being something wrong with the dvd? It also makes it hard to believe it's the player when the replacement dvd does work in the same player.
FalconI would also like to point out the self-destructive nature of the analog media they are pining over. About one third of the VHS tapes that remain in my collection are playable. The first DVD I ever bought does not skip once.
Unlike you I've had a number of dvds go bad on me whereas none of my tapes aren't playable. Currently my oldest tape is more than 15 years old and it still plays however I've bought brand new dvds I had to return because they wouldn't play. Now I'll admit my first dvd plays fine but others don't.
FalconSmall governments are no safer than large governments. Jim Jones and Kim Jong Ill in the Head show that. Your average lynch mob shows that.
Jim Jones wasn't about government per se with the exception that they leased land from the government in Jonestown, Guyana. Kim Jong Ill on the other hand is the government in North Korea. That is he controls the government and the people with his iron fist. And lynch mobs have as much power with big and strong as with a small and weak one. The mobs involved in Kristallnacht was government orchestrated. If the government hadn't been as strong it probably wouldn't of been as bad as it was. Afterall even government stormtroopers who helped Hitler rise to power took part.
However, this discussion was about a *national ID card*. I believe that a national id card is justified and reasonable and necessary for law enforcement in an age of terrorism. Right now we have defacto national id cards and a lot of problems because we pretend they are not. We also for the most part also have state id cards. It hasn't been the end of the world.
National ids aren't needed for law enforement nor is one authorized by the Constitution of the USA. If one were needed then how did law enforcement get along without one for so long? Afterall they're not that old as compared to law enforcement. As for whether a national id is the "end of the world", ask those who have had their id stolen what it means to them. Many have had their credit wrecked because of id theft. Your credit worthiness, FICO score, determines to a large extint if you can get a loan or get employment if you're not employed. People have even been arrested because they had their id stolen. A national id will only make id theft easier, instead of having to go different places id theives will have just one place to go to steal an id.
FalconI think you are trying to hold our government to 1700's rules while dealing with 21st century terrorists. I think your path leads to a place where it is *more* likely that we will slam into fascism.
I see it the opposite way, it's big government that leads to fascism or to other authoritarisms, totalitarianisms, an dother forms of dictaterships. With small governments they have no power and can only exist when governments is big. As for dealing with terrorists, terrorists can't bust into your home with government knowledge or assistance, but in the 1700s the British could bust in at will, I bet you could find quotes from some Founding Fathers that the Fourth Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights because of this. I don't believe there has ever been as much a threat to freedom and liberty as in the 1700s, in the USA. Also it's government that are the ultimate terrorists. It's because of government support that some terrorists organizations have their power. For instance in the 1980s and early '90s, the US supported the Mujhadeen in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union, then when the Soviets left gave them free reign instead of helped them to setup a working government. Some of those Mujhadeen became the Taliban or al Quaeda, such as bin Laden. And what you don't hear about regarding the Taliban, the current occupant of the White House, George Bush Jr gave the Taliban US taxpayer dollars. In two different packages, he gave the Taliban $10,000,000 and $43,000,000. That soccer field the Taliban used to behead those they didn't like? It was built by the international community for the Afghan community to play soccer not kill people.
As for the Middle East, throughout the 1980s the Reagan and Bush Sr admins supported Saddam, even as he was using WMDs against both others in Iraq and Iran. It was only after Saddam invaded Kuwait, a sheikdom and not a democracy, before he could do any bad. And Hesbola, before it was listed by the US and Israel as a terrorist org Israel supported them. The Israeli government started supporting Hesbola as a counter balance to Arafat's PLO. Israel registered it as a charity. Ever hear of Blowback?
I recognize that the US does bad things. You don't seem to recognize that on the scale of badness there are many people in this world that make them look like boy scouts.
And appearantly you don't recognize that just because someone else is bad or does bad things it doesn't give anyone else justification to do bad things too. Just because Hitler and the NAZIs massacred 6,000,000 or Stalin 20,000,000 doesn't give the US the right support those who killed 200,000. Ooh, and by the way, the US supported Hitler first then Stalin. Blowback.
But preventing the government from being able to perform basic law enforcement duties is not the correct path. We need to focus them to be more accurate and we need our society to be more forgiving of people who commit stupid crimes.
No where did I say the government shoudn't perform basic law enforcement, but listening to calls without a warrant and building databases of citizens' activities and such isn't how to do it. Heck Bush has at his disposal the FISA court where he can get a search warrant, he can even get one 24 hours after a search, and FISA court as rarely ever turned down a request. Doe he do that? No he just has the NSA, No Such Agency, vacuum all international between the US and somewhere else. And try to protest where he's supposed to appear, if you're lucky you'll be herded into a "freespeech zone" that's nowhere near anything. If you're not lucky you may just disappear or be held as an "enemy combatant" for years without ever even seeing a courtroom or having charges filed against you.
It seems Bush has learned from J. Edgar Hoover, and his FBI's COINTELPRO progam. He's turning my country, the country whose military I served in and I love, into a fascist or other authoritarian nation.
FalconThanks for the info. It seems the requirements changed since the last tyme I knew what they were. If I recall right back then you had to be able to build your own transceiver.
FalconWhat's wrong with the Morse code? Personally, I think that learning the Morse code should be a requirement for radio operation at the very least (or any communications course in general) because the Morse code is very simple to learn and use, and because it is nearly universally recognized. Telling radio operators that they don't need to know Morse code is like telling scientists that they don't need to know the periodic table by heart.
Tell that to a quadraplegic. Back in the 1980s I knew a paraplegic, wheelchair bond, who only had partial control of his arms. He could listen to morse code all day long but it was a struggle to key it for him. The only thing requiring morse code does is weed out those who can't or won't learn it. Morse code should be optional not manditory.
As for the periotic table, in the first half year of high school chemistry my class was required to learn and memorize all of the elements except the transuranic elements, valiance, atomic weight, sign, number of protons, and number of neutrons of the most common isotope. But when I took first semester chemistry in college, a few years later, we were only given a list of about 50 elements we had to know. And then only the number of protons, the sign, and the valiance.
FalconEven without the code requirement, getting a license still requires a good deal of work. Every class of license exam includes quite a bit of electronics theory that I think will help to weed out the people who aren't up to the qualifications of having a license and previously would have been turned off by the code requirement. On top of that there's the expense of buying (or building) the equipment and setting up an antenna, so I doubt we'll be flooded by morons any time soon.
That bring up something I was wondering about, if those who want a license are still required to know enough about electricity to build thier own radio. I'd like to get my license but it's been too long since I've worked with electrical equipment so I no longer retain the knowledge. I've been thinking about getting one of those electric/electronic learning labs that has the solderless boards and different parts and comes with a book or booklet with different projects you can make. Used to be that places like RadShack would have a few different sets but I've only found one or two in stores lately., and none for communications or sw radios.
FalconWe aren't told the basic truths such as the REAL power of the jury which is to determine if a law itself is bad and get rid of it.
All too true. And the thing is is judges and prosecutors screen juries to get rid of those who believe in Jury Nullification.
FalconI wish they would start with the chocolate. Considering the size of the average american waist, rationing chocolate would be an improvement, probably save billions in health-care costs.
Ah but dark chocolate is good for the heart. It also contains antioxidants which may help fight cancer. you've gotta love chocolate.
FalconI'd have it so every adult serves.
So basically like Israel.
Yeap. At least up through the '70s. I don't know if females still serve in combat in Israel now, I think that changed.
The government's primary responsibility is to its own citizens - if we can protect the citizenry without resorting to invasions of privacy and constitutional rights by not letting certain non-citizens into the US, then so be it. Sucks that we have to resort to this, but better than the alternatives, IMHO.
I agree the main responsibilty of government is to protect the people, but I don't agree that it requires barring others without proving they are a threat. Innocent until proven guilty is what I believe, I'd rather let ten guilty go free instead of falsely convicting one innocent. A vigilant citizenary should be able to handle the occasional person who plans to commit a crime, but what acts aren't prevented is the price of freedom. The tree of liberty sort of thing.
FalconInteresting information. I knew about the older ruling but had forgotten. There was also the matter of Roe v Wade wherein the supreme court held an inherent right to privacy.
I doubt most people have ever heard of any Supreme Court rulings, other than Roe v Wade. I only found out about the SC ruling in the 1800s after searching through Findlaw. When I did I also found other cases on privacy, one in the 1880, one in 1892 or '93, one in the 1950s, and another one in 1968 or '69. The SC used the '68 or '69 ruling in Roe v Wade if I recall right. I now find that I wish I had saved those cases because it takes a while before I can find them again when I get into discussions on privacy. I do save them now just so I can easily find them again, I'll have them locally.
FalconI'm sure Social Security currently requires the use of your state ID (typically a driver's license)
Isn't not, all that's required for the social security card is a birth certificate. And while not all states may require one at least some states require a social security card to get an ID. Under your scenerio this presents a catch22, to get an id an ssn is needed but to get the ssn an id is needed.
Falcon(b) the citizens need to have an active role. We need to have an armed citizenry with military training so that they can either recognize and report dangerous activities or even act on them.
This part I agree with, the US needs a citizen's army like Switzerland's. I'd change one thing, whereas in their's all adult males serve 'til the age of 55 if I recall right, I'd have it so every adult serves. I'm for equal rights. The military would be shrunk, with a smaller professional core, but then everyone would be part of it. I also agree with the part about civil liberties and privacy. Where I disagree is with border security and passports. The only reason someone should be barred from the US is if it can be shown they are a threat to the US or to it's citizens.
FalconI want LIBERTY!!!
FalconFlorida either should not discriminate against the OR ID, or it should (and probably does) use alternate verification that is not normally faked, or is easy to trust once an answer comes back.
I don't know where Florida comes in, but unless things have changed a lot since I moved from there there's no discrimination or difficulty getting a drivers license. All that was needed when I lived there was a birth certificate and a Social Security card. After testing, or whatever the requirements are, they take your mugshot then and there and within a few minutes you're walking out with your driver's license in hand. Heck, the only reason moved from there was because I needed therapy after being hit by someone who moved to the state because the state he moved from issued a warrent for his arrest. I was in therapy but had to stop when I couuldn't afford it anymore and I was promised if I moved I would get the therapy.
FalconThe choctaw.
I'm not sure how much or from what tribe but my parents have told me I'm part Indian. An uncle on my moms side says the same thing but he told me to get the info from her. Appearly she won't talk about it because it a "dirty secret". As she has a French Canadian background I believe it's Ottawa or one of the Iroquois Confederacy tribes. My dad also has a French Canadian, er Acadian, background I don't be supprized if there was Indian in his background as well.
And a small group of people but still numbering in the millions wants to kill us- mainly because we make them feel bad because they are so backwards but partially because they are educated from birth that we are "monkeys" and not human. At 4 years old they are pledging to commit suicide killing us. At 5 years old almost a decade ago, they were cheering in the streets when we died.
Who are these people? Do you mean Arabs and other Muslims? Thinking of bin Laden? You may not recall or know this but bin Laden only started his war on America because the US stationed troops in the Holyland, Saudi Arabia. After Saddam invaded Kuwait there was a concern he may invade Saudi Arabia as well. bin Laden told the Saudis his al Quada would defend SA if Saddam attacked, but they declined his offer and asked for the US's assistance. It was only after this when the attacks came, he wanted the infidels out. Prior to the Kuwaiti invasion the US had indirectly supported bin Laden. We supported the mujahideen in Afghanistan, of which bin Laden was a member, in their fight against the Soviet Union.
As far as the US making people mad, it's only right that many do hate the US or at least the policies of the US. The US has a bloody past, it has assasinated or supported those responsible for killings of leaders in other countries. The US helped in establishing the Shah of Iran in power as well as Saddam later. It supported Gen Pinochet's overthrow of a democratically elected government in Chile after which thousands were killed and tens of thousands simply "diappeared". In other parts of the Americas it supported regimes in Guatemala and Honduras while many Mayas were massacred, and the Contras while they were terrorizing many in El Salvador. In the Middle East the US continues to support Israel, even after Israel attacked the USS Liberty. On the other side of the world the US supported Indonesian President Suharto's invasion of East Timor, this dispite a congressional bar for such aid. Pres Ford and Henry Kissingergave Suharto the greenlight for the invasion. After the invasion about 200,000 East Timorese were killed, that's one third the populationof East Timor.
Fact is is there are plenty of people who quite rightly have the right to feel hatred for the US.
Again- the problem is that in an age where even a 16 year old can kill 10 to 20 people, you really don't want people sworn to killing you so they will go to heaven wandering around unsupervised.
I'd have to say I'm the opposite of you, I'd rather keep my liberty and take to chance of being a victim than give up any liberty for a little temperary security. As Benjamin Franklin said, paraphrasing, "Anyone who gives up liberty for a little safety will get nor deserve either." Besides it's government that is the biggest threat to both liberty and safety. Look throughout history and you'll see the biggest massacres were done by governments or those trying to seize control. Most recently it's been Hitler, Pol Pot, the Rwandan government, Soharto, and Stalin. Saddam, who the US supported might be added as well, as well as Chiang Kai-shek led KMT's invasion of Formosa, otherwise called Tiawan. 28 February 1947 was Formosa's Holocaust. Some have also said Mao was responsible for 50,000,000 dead.
I
So how much more radioactivity will water gain if it flowed over the crush containers? (Assuming that the area will be wet in the future, and water will flow through the storage area.)
First it has been shown water does flow away from Yucca. I didn't find what I was looking for but I did find this about a study DOE will do, DOE to Study Yucca Mountain Water Flow and DOE did not apply its own geologic site criteria (pdf), this subsection is about half way down. Now onto how much radioactivity water will pick up, if the casks are crushed water won't just flow over the top of the casks, water can enter the casks as well. Water will then be irradiated itself as well as carry off radioactive particals that have dissolved.
FalconShocker? They told me to sit about 12 minutes and my ID would be ready. I thought I mis-heard the clerk. Huh? What?! 12 minutes? Hell, in California, I'd have to wait a month, maybe two (and mine have in CA been lost in the mail once or twice, when time was critical and having an ID for contract work was mandatory... not paper temporary vouchers...).
It sounds like CA is like where I live now, they mail you your DL, and Oregon is like the state I moved here from, they give it to you right then and there. You take the test, if getting a new license, they test your vision, then they take your mugshot and within a few minutes they hand you your DL with the mugshot. I don't see why it can't be done like that everywhere in the US, if it's mailed then it can be ripped off.
FalconIf you think about it, the Federal government could set an authority up easily, in a matter of months
Can you show me where in the USA Constitution it gives the federal government the authority to create or require an ID? It's not there, constitutionally the federal government has no such authority.
FalconMy local video store demanded my actual physical SSN card before they would rent me a video.
Was it Blockbuster? They require your ssn which is why I'll never join. As it is most dvds I get I buy, and I pay with cash. There's one rental place near here that doesn't require ssns I may join but I'm not sure.
Falconand remember - privacy is *not* guaranteed by the constitution
Though it's not specifically enumerated the USSC has ruled privacy is a right. In the early 1800s the Supreme Court ruled that privacy, anonymity, is a bedrock of the freedom of political speech. If remaining anonymous wasn't possible then free political speech meant nothing because your speech could be held against you. The Founding Fathers thought this too otherwise many of the tracts that supported the War of Independence never would of been published seeing as how most of them were published anonymously. One of the few that did publish under name was Thomas Paine, he published The Crisis while serving in the Continental Army under Washington. It was in "The Crisis" where he wrote "These are the times that try men's souls." Otherwise many writers wrote about the war anonymously.
FalconWe have SS cards now and that hasn't done anything...isn't that already a universally unique identifying card?
SS cards are specifically barred from being used as id. Of course this hasn't stopped it.
FalconOf course, if they strike down the use of the Commerce clause to justify anything and everything, then several other Federal programs and departments will become vulnerable, such as Unions and Labor relations, Civil Rights, and possibly even abortion rights. Instead, the individual States will have total control over those issues, because there's no interstate commerce involved. So you can try to deprive the Feds of their ability to mandate ID cards, but you'll probably also kill some other federally controlled programs that you like.
Ah but unions are covered by the First Amendment's freedom of assembly clause and abortion is at least partially covered by the right to privacy and old Supreme Court rulings has acknowledged the right to privacy is embedded in the Freedom of Speech clause. Something along the lines that anonymousity is the bedrock of free political speech. As for killing other federal programs, I'd like to see most of them abolished!!! Make a list of federal agencies, authorities, bureaus, and offices then compare it to the USA Constitution. If the Constitution does not specifcally mension it then strike it from the government. And most of these are not authorized by the Constitution. Take the Accounting and Auditing Policy Committee (AAPC), nowhere in the Constitution does it say anything about this. For a list of more check out LSU Libraries Federal Agencies Directory. Not only would the people regain control of government and have a small and limited one, but we would also see a reduction in taxes and more freedom.
FalconYeah, but you expressed a desire to focus on a single task at a time. Windows is more about letting you do that--Mac OS X is more about letting you divide your focus when appropriate.
I typically do want to concentrate on one task but when I want or need to multitask Windows allows me to do so, it's not like Windows is better for a single task while Macs are better for multitasking.
Falcon