Here's a question: if you only had enough money to buy, say, 15 CDs instead of the 30 you think are worth paying for, what would you do?
That's a very valid question and a good one. I hadn't really thought of it as I haven't found myself in that kind of financial situation in many many many moons. What would I do? Honestly, I probably would keep those MP3s and buy the 15 CDs that contained the music I liked best. Which as you've pointed out, there is no deprivation to the artist...
So all the database here is going to do, by itself, is show that some downloads lead to sales.
You're right about needing proportions, but on the other side of the equation, you have the industry claiming downloading is pure piracy, only hurts sales, etc...
I definetly agree with what you're saying about needing more info. But I don't think the numbers would be *totally* meaningless. They will help on the small front of demonstrating that the downloads aren't ALL about piracy. Granted, it is a small aspect of the debate, doesn't empirically prove that downloads helps sales, but it does counter some of the more bizarre fud claims about downloads. So in that, I do think it is useful.
I will say this to those people out there who listen to music they download regularly and refuse to buy it: You're fucking it up for everyone. Those artists make music to make a living. Alot of work goes into it. When was the last time you worked for nothing? Why do you expect artists to work for nothing?
Seriously, people need to recognize when they're stealing. Artists deserve compensation if you're constantly listening to their work that has cost alot of money to produce, as well as their time and energy.
Personally, anything I download and continue to listen to I buy. If I had to buy things sound unheard like back in my teen age years, I'd be buying alot less than I do now. In fact, I had dropped down to about 4 CDs a year when I first started downloading MP3s. I had just been so burned so many times by paying 17 bucks for a CD with 1 okay song and 9 crappy ones that I simply stopped buying CDs altogether, unless I got to hear the whole thing from a friend first.
MP3s changed that. I probably buy about 30 CDs a year now. The last CD I bought sound unheard, was Van Halen III. Any Van Halen fans here will probably understand why that was the final straw. MP3s allow me to avoid wasting my money on crap and only buy the stuff worth owning. And believe me, if I don't buy music after downloading it, it means I think the music sucks and is not worth paying for.
When you said this, you reminded me of an earlier version of a parody of that song: This land is their land, It isn't our land, From the Wall Street office To the Cadillac car-land; From the plush apartments To the Hollywood starland, This land is not for you and me.
If this is our land, You'd never know it, So take your bullshit And kindly stow it, Let's get together And overthrow it, Then this land will be for you and me.
I disagree. There is definetly satire involved, but it is also parodying the original song. The message of the original song was one of viewing things in a non-self centered way. Their parody is about viewing it in a very self centered way. Parody and satire are not mutually exclusive.
Excellent link. Thanks alot. Did you follow to read what Martin and Ernest had to say? I side with Ernest on this.
While jibjab definetly incorporates political satire, the thing that makes it so funny and such genius(IMO) is that it is also making fun of the original song. That is clearly being done in my opinion. They took a song about seeing our country in an unselfish way and made it a song about seeing the country in a selfish way. That it happens to incorporate political satire at the same time, IMO, does not take away from the parody of the original.
Out of curiosity, what letter of the law inclines you to think that their use of the song is not parody? I'm no lawyer, so this is my own opinion, but that song seems very much a parody to me.
From wordnet: parody: a composition that imitates somebody's style in a humorous way
It clearly fits this definition of the word, but I have no idea how the law defines it.
If they were really honest in their marketing, they'd equate the deciscion to an exercise in choosing hot, hotter, or "holy shit, I just got a blister from this god damned thing!".
It really doesn't seem fair to blame British Gas. I agree with the other posters after reading about this incident, I don't see why British Gas gets the award.
Man, what kind of a sick culture do we have that things like that go on? I know, I know, I know that there are many worse humanitarian crimes happening around the world in terms of magnitude, but this is pretty damned depraved.
I guess I shouldn't blame my culture, since I'm a yank and not in England, but something tells me American corps would pull something like that if they could get away with it. Maybe I've just grown too cynical.
No kidding. What happened to the free market? I'm so sick of the anti-OSS crowd accusing us of socialism and the like. Here's a for profit company, that works for profit, trying to get itself access to a nice government tit. If it isn't profitable, perhaps this for-profit company ought to form a non-profit and reveal it's true nature as a model that is not viable in the free market.
That is good advice. I myself started on Vic-20 basic when I was 10, moved onto my Atari 800 when I was 12. That was the first platform I learned assembly on.
[in old fogie voice] We didn't have no networks in school in those days. we didn't have CS curriculum in high school. Hell, we didn't even have a single computer class where I went to school. There was no O'reilly books to explain things so eloquently and usefully. All we had were technical manuals, arcane poorly written text files from BBSs, and occasional pieces of wisdom we picked up from user groups.[end old foggie voice]
Young-uns take so many things for granted. Like the value of what they're actually being taught in school. Writing a C program to simulate a tic tac toe game is a far cry from writing software to operate satellite communications equipment.
And learning to program (moderately well) isn't out of reach of a 17-year old
I don't want to sound condescending, but you have much to learn yet. Why doesn't the average 17 year old know how to program moderately well? Find the answer to that, and you'll begin to see the problem I was hinting at. Besides that, until you've entered the working world, your reference to "moderately well" is based upon your peers. It's a whole new ballgame. My 10 years experience I mentioned didn't take into account what I learned on my own or in school, and I wasn't talking about knowledge of programming languages either. My friend runs a security guard company and he knows C very well, but he is not a programmer.
Knowledge is power. Power without wisdom(which comes from maturity, which comes from the process of learning) is a disaster waiting to happen.
even I could learn it [hacking] in a weekend or two.
Don't dirty that term with the mainstream usage of it. If you code now for fun, you are hacking. That's what it originally meant. And seriously, you ought to consider trying to do what you consider hacking on your system(or a spare system) yourself(without using scripts). This statement betrays a lack of knowledge, experience, and a world of assumptions.
And about, the military training, I'd just run. Very, very fast. Maybe pick up a metal pipe somewhere along the line, but most importantly, run.
You just didn't understand my post at all. Imagine columbine where the students responsible had access to the knowledge of taking down the areas phone system, or jamming the police frequencies in the area, or knowledge of urban assault strategies. Yes, they could have found that knowledge, but they didn't, because it would take time to acquire and they didn't have the discipline or maturity to do it. If that knowledge was available without the work required to attain it, that `whole scene could have been alot worse. Not that it wasn't bad as it was.
There is much you don't understand yet. When I was younger, I was the same way. There is still much I don't understand even now, but I understand enough to understand that.
If I hadn't posted on this thread already, I'd mod you up...
You have good points and I really do appreciate you taking the time you took to post this, but honestly, I had the habit and 1 month bit figured out already. The problem I really have right now is that I am so tired and worn out most of the time from work and baby, that it's just so much easier than going through the process AGAIN. As I said before, I quit for 8 years previously.
As for nicotine containing stop smoking aids, the reason the gum worked for me is it took the edge off long enough to establish new habits. I was on the gum heavily for about 4 months, then it faded in use over a period of 2 years. It works, but TMJ(this is a painful jaw joint disorder) flares up if I have just one peace of gum now. The instructions say not to chew it, but when you're "in the zone" on a project, you're not thinking about not chewing it. And if I'm not in the zone, I'm typically not doing my work very effectively.
Yeah, nicotine addiction sucks. I would never advocate outlawing cigarettes, but I would still consider using something that made me immune. I'm not so sure about the brain receptor argument with regards to nicotine. I would have to read about how such a treatment speficially and actually works in practice before I pass judgement.
thanks again for the reply. I enjoyed reading it. It is motivating on one level. yeah, IRC is bad stuff. I broke my addiction years back, saved my eyes too. Now I'm careful to monitor my slashdot usage as well. I see addicts throughout these threads.:)
I share your sentiment about the potential for this. It would be a fundamental change, no doubt.
But I foresee problems with huge amounts of technical information being available to the minds of severely immature people. Schools today suck, that's my opinion based on my experience, but what I did do in school, was mature. If I had access to the programming knowledge that has taken me over a decade to amass, available in my brain when I was 17, I would have used it to wreak havoc. And that's just the programming knowledge I've acquired. I shudder to think about my military training, aikido, iaido, etc...
A hearty agreement. I quit smoking for *8* years, and after my first child was born, the stress got to me in a weak moment, and within a week I was smoking a pack a day again!
If I could pay for a shot that would make me immune to the effects of cigarettes, I would pay for it without thinking. I'd sell assetts if it was expensive.
God I hate cigarettes. Now I have to go have one. And I can't do the nicotine gum again, because though it worked last time, now I have TMJ. The thing I don't get, I went through a 2 year period in my younger days when I got stoned every day. Then I decided I had enough and I quit cold turkey, no withdrawal, no nothing. But tabacco is legal and pot is the villainized drug? the US has it back ass wards.
Order the deportation of all Saudi Citizens? Have you considered that Saudi Arabia is one of our closest allies in the middle east? Not to mention a very important source of oil? Put aside PC thought for a second, and consider the diplomatic and geopolitical ramifications of villainizing that people? That people, the vast majority of whom have not attacked America? Why not just send them an open letter and ask them to join Al Qaeda and to stop selling us oil?
As for your analogy with the other world powers in history, let me ask you something about them. Where are they? Where is their power now? If we walk in their path, we will reach the same destination they did. We are not Romans, we are not Germans, we are Americans. We ought to blaze our own trails, ahdering to the principals upon which this nation was founded.
Yes it is racist to look at someone from a particular race/nationality and judge them by their group identity. The cornerstone of a free society is the recognition of individual identity and individual rights. Every day in America, 3,000 people die from a combination of tobacco, alcohol, and medical malpractice. That's 9/11 everyday. Every single day, 3,000 avoidable deaths occur. We do not take away individual liberty because of them. We do not give up the principle of freedom because of it. Why then, should we compromise our principals for a singular incident where 3,000 people died?
Give me Liberty or give me death.
Live free or die. Better to be dead right, than alive wrong, in chains, bowing the knee. And that is the fate that awaits everyone who gives up their liberty and rights for security. They will bow the knee, they will see lady liberty bow the knee, and the blood of all those who have fought for the principals of our nation, will have been shed in vain.
FYI: Those products have gotten alot better. They now do biologicals including viruses. They typically go for between 40 and 50 bucks for a simple water bottle. You just fill it up with water and drink. I haven't tried it with urine yet, as the more contaminated the water, the shorter the filter life, but it has worked great with water that didn't look very appetizing.
You might be on to something legally, but then again you might not. I think the law should hold website operators responsible for the security of their websites and hold them accountable to their website users to provide information that could potentially save them from being the victims of crime, especially when they would in effect, be a participant(though unwilling) in that crime.
The sad thing is, this will come back and hit those businesses in the ass later when it is inevitably revealed(and it will be by someone) who they are, what happened, how many users were estimated to be affected, and that they didn't do anything to warn their users. the long term damage of that is going to be far more traumatic than if they simply were forthcoming in the first place. That's what I think anyway.
"I really don't understand the "we went to war for oil" charge. It doesn't make economic sense. First of all, the war and subsequent reconstruction cost much more than all the oil Iraq will generate for many years."
Ask who is footing the bill, then ask who is profiting most. Then ask yourself if you really believe we have selfless politicians who only look out for our good. I've already answered these questions for myself. Yes, this is cynical, and I believe I have good reason for being cynical.
"Second, it would have been much easier for the evil Republicans/neo-cons/(oil companies) to just make oil money from the already corrupt Oil for Food program run by the UN."
Oh, hold on a sec... I don't blame the evil Republicans/neo-cons solely. The democrats are in on this, they only pretend not to be for political reasons. I remember the aggression on Yugoslavia... Wasn't for oil, it was for all those mass killings that were occuring, and then later no evidence was found to support the 100,000 number we were told. And a few years later, a pipeline was built through Kosovo...
But you are right about one thing though, there is a deeper motive than oil behind all this. It is about control. There is alot more on the line in Iraq than oil, and it has nothing to do with terrorists.
"A google news search for "oil food corruption UN" will let you choose the sources you find most credible, but I'm pretty sure they all say roughly the same things."
Yeah, I know all about that. We shouldn't even be in the UN as it is now, IMO.
"The best prewar intelligence we had indicated that Iraq was a threat. Also, Saddam never cooperated with the inspections that were the condition for the cessation of hostilities in the Gulf War."
In the end he did cooperate with inspectors. Yes, he played games, didn't for a while, etc... But our government doesn't exist to police the world. We should learn what happened to the Brits back in the day when they took that burden upon themselves.
"2) Saddam's regime was bad enough that whatever we leave in its place has a very good chance of at least being better."
You know, I keep hearing this, but I've seen no evidence that it was so bad. He treated the Kurds about on par with how we treated Indian uprisings. Yeah, people are tortured and in our prisons, people are routinely raped. Yeah, he used gas, the same type of gas we sold to him. And we used gas in Waco on the branch davidians.
Our allies in Saudi Arabia cut peoples hands off. I haven't seen evidence to support this villanization, so I choose not to believe it until I see it. Remember, before Yugoslavia we were told 100,000 people were killed. No evidence to support that after the fact.
"3) The sanctions weren't sustainable because of the harm done to the Iraqi people, but sanctions couldn't be lifted until inspections were allowed."
You're forgetting, before the war he agreed. In fact, there were many years that he did let the inspectors in, and the sanctions weren't lifted. Then there were times he didn't. It was an on again off again game. Sanctions weren't going to be lifted any time soon whether he cooperated or not, and I think he knew that.
"4) By the time we knew for certain Saddam was again a threat, it would be too late to avoid major consequences."
We should have thought of that before we decided to do business with the guy way back in the day. How'd you like law enforcement to hear through the grapevine that you're going to commit some crime and have them break into your house and arrest you before you do it? Same principle. Dangerous principle. Unamerican.
As for that bit about me character assinating Bush, I'd take it a step further, I don't believe Bush, or 99 percent of any of our politicians have any character that can be assinated. This goes for the democrats and republicans equally. I think their records speak for themselves. Follow the money.
But kudos to you for presenting your views in a very civilized and rational manner. I have different views than you, but I welcome hearing yours any day. That anon guy I responded to could learn a lesson from you.
Personally, I don't think we should have to file income tax returns. Terrorists could use that information to determine who to target for blackmail. Also, I don't think we should have to pay income taxes. Terrorists could find a way to take that money and fund terrorist acts. Think about it, our money is safer if we all just hold on to it.
I also don't think we should have license plates on our cars. Terrorists can use the information on a license plate to track down anyone with anti-terrorist bumperstickers on their cars and commit terrorist acts against them.
I think we should stop having our government in Washington and should have it in a secret place, in case terrorists try to attack our government again.
I think we should ban newspapers because terrorists could use them to kindle fires in terrorist acts of arson.
I think we should ban gasoline and motor oil, because terrorists might use them to build Weapons of Mass Destruction.
I think we should ban guns because terrorists could use them to shoot people.
I think we should ban belts, rope, and anything that can be used in any way to harm someone, because terrorists might use them to harm someone.
I think we should ban words, because terorrists might use them to recruit other terrorists. Think about that for a while. Do you really want terrorists here on our soil recruiting other terrorists? Words have to go. Don't you see how important it is to fight terror in the name of freedom!?!?
I think we should ban water because terrorists could drown people in it.
I think we should ban wet noodles, because terrorist might attempt to slap us with them. And believe me, if terrorists don't, and you agree with anything in this post, I will.
Ah, anon-cow, no, I am quite American. I was against an invasion because I believe, unlike you apparently, that war is a serious matter, with American lives on the line, and because of that, there should be a damned good reason for going to war. Which as we know now, we had no good reason(other than oil).
But we don't hear that on Fox every day, do we?
And before you start into some mindless neo-con character assination, no I'm not a liberal, I'm a libertarian who has served in the military(Regular Army). I was against the war for very similar reasons that this person was... www.hackworth.com. Thanks for trying to spin things though, I don't appreciate it but I figure I'll be polite.
Slashdot Mirror
Here's a question: if you only had enough money to buy, say, 15 CDs instead of the 30 you think are worth paying for, what would you do?
That's a very valid question and a good one. I hadn't really thought of it as I haven't found myself in that kind of financial situation in many many many moons. What would I do? Honestly, I probably would keep those MP3s and buy the 15 CDs that contained the music I liked best. Which as you've pointed out, there is no deprivation to the artist...
So all the database here is going to do, by itself, is show that some downloads lead to sales.
You're right about needing proportions, but on the other side of the equation, you have the industry claiming downloading is pure piracy, only hurts sales, etc...
I definetly agree with what you're saying about needing more info. But I don't think the numbers would be *totally* meaningless. They will help on the small front of demonstrating that the downloads aren't ALL about piracy. Granted, it is a small aspect of the debate, doesn't empirically prove that downloads helps sales, but it does counter some of the more bizarre fud claims about downloads. So in that, I do think it is useful.
I will say this to those people out there who listen to music they download regularly and refuse to buy it: You're fucking it up for everyone. Those artists make music to make a living. Alot of work goes into it. When was the last time you worked for nothing? Why do you expect artists to work for nothing?
Seriously, people need to recognize when they're stealing. Artists deserve compensation if you're constantly listening to their work that has cost alot of money to produce, as well as their time and energy.
Personally, anything I download and continue to listen to I buy. If I had to buy things sound unheard like back in my teen age years, I'd be buying alot less than I do now. In fact, I had dropped down to about 4 CDs a year when I first started downloading MP3s. I had just been so burned so many times by paying 17 bucks for a CD with 1 okay song and 9 crappy ones that I simply stopped buying CDs altogether, unless I got to hear the whole thing from a friend first.
MP3s changed that. I probably buy about 30 CDs a year now. The last CD I bought sound unheard, was Van Halen III. Any Van Halen fans here will probably understand why that was the final straw. MP3s allow me to avoid wasting my money on crap and only buy the stuff worth owning. And believe me, if I don't buy music after downloading it, it means I think the music sucks and is not worth paying for.
When you said this, you reminded me of an earlier version of a parody of that song:
This land is their land,
It isn't our land,
From the Wall Street office
To the Cadillac car-land;
From the plush apartments
To the Hollywood starland,
This land is not for you and me.
If this is our land,
You'd never know it,
So take your bullshit
And kindly stow it,
Let's get together
And overthrow it,
Then this land will be for you and me.
I disagree. There is definetly satire involved, but it is also parodying the original song. The message of the original song was one of viewing things in a non-self centered way. Their parody is about viewing it in a very self centered way. Parody and satire are not mutually exclusive.
Excellent link. Thanks alot. Did you follow to read what Martin and Ernest had to say? I side with Ernest on this.
While jibjab definetly incorporates political satire, the thing that makes it so funny and such genius(IMO) is that it is also making fun of the original song. That is clearly being done in my opinion. They took a song about seeing our country in an unselfish way and made it a song about seeing the country in a selfish way. That it happens to incorporate political satire at the same time, IMO, does not take away from the parody of the original.
But again, I'm not a lawyer. Just my opinion.
Out of curiosity, what letter of the law inclines you to think that their use of the song is not parody? I'm no lawyer, so this is my own opinion, but that song seems very much a parody to me.
From wordnet:
parody: a composition that imitates somebody's style in a humorous way
It clearly fits this definition of the word, but I have no idea how the law defines it.
If they were really honest in their marketing, they'd equate the deciscion to an exercise in choosing hot, hotter, or "holy shit, I just got a blister from this god damned thing!".
That's the type of reply I was hoping for. I found it extremely difficult to find a non-sterile media British perspective on this.
I much appreciate your reply.
After reading this:/ articles/Elderly_couple_died_after_gas_was_cut_off .htm
http://www.eurosceptic.com/sources_of_information
It really doesn't seem fair to blame British Gas. I agree with the other posters after reading about this incident, I don't see why British Gas gets the award.
Well that's different. WE aren't foreigners! I hope the humor is recognized.
You beat me on mentioning British gas.
Man, what kind of a sick culture do we have that things like that go on? I know, I know, I know that there are many worse humanitarian crimes happening around the world in terms of magnitude, but this is pretty damned depraved.
I guess I shouldn't blame my culture, since I'm a yank and not in England, but something tells me American corps would pull something like that if they could get away with it. Maybe I've just grown too cynical.
We hope.
No kidding. What happened to the free market? I'm so sick of the anti-OSS crowd accusing us of socialism and the like. Here's a for profit company, that works for profit, trying to get itself access to a nice government tit. If it isn't profitable, perhaps this for-profit company ought to form a non-profit and reveal it's true nature as a model that is not viable in the free market.
Yeah. Who are the socialists again?
That is good advice. I myself started on Vic-20 basic when I was 10, moved onto my Atari 800 when I was 12. That was the first platform I learned assembly on.
[in old fogie voice] We didn't have no networks in school in those days. we didn't have CS curriculum in high school. Hell, we didn't even have a single computer class where I went to school. There was no O'reilly books to explain things so eloquently and usefully. All we had were technical manuals, arcane poorly written text files from BBSs, and occasional pieces of wisdom we picked up from user groups.[end old foggie voice]
Young-uns take so many things for granted. Like the value of what they're actually being taught in school. Writing a C program to simulate a tic tac toe game is a far cry from writing software to operate satellite communications equipment.
And learning to program (moderately well) isn't out of reach of a 17-year old
I don't want to sound condescending, but you have much to learn yet. Why doesn't the average 17 year old know how to program moderately well? Find the answer to that, and you'll begin to see the problem I was hinting at. Besides that, until you've entered the working world, your reference to "moderately well" is based upon your peers. It's a whole new ballgame. My 10 years experience I mentioned didn't take into account what I learned on my own or in school, and I wasn't talking about knowledge of programming languages either. My friend runs a security guard company and he knows C very well, but he is not a programmer.
Knowledge is power. Power without wisdom(which comes from maturity, which comes from the process of learning) is a disaster waiting to happen.
even I could learn it [hacking] in a weekend or two.
Don't dirty that term with the mainstream usage of it. If you code now for fun, you are hacking. That's what it originally meant. And seriously, you ought to consider trying to do what you consider hacking on your system(or a spare system) yourself(without using scripts). This statement betrays a lack of knowledge, experience, and a world of assumptions.
And about, the military training, I'd just run. Very, very fast. Maybe pick up a metal pipe somewhere along the line, but most importantly, run.
You just didn't understand my post at all. Imagine columbine where the students responsible had access to the knowledge of taking down the areas phone system, or jamming the police frequencies in the area, or knowledge of urban assault strategies. Yes, they could have found that knowledge, but they didn't, because it would take time to acquire and they didn't have the discipline or maturity to do it. If that knowledge was available without the work required to attain it, that `whole scene could have been alot worse. Not that it wasn't bad as it was.
There is much you don't understand yet. When I was younger, I was the same way. There is still much I don't understand even now, but I understand enough to understand that.
If I hadn't posted on this thread already, I'd mod you up...
:)
You have good points and I really do appreciate you taking the time you took to post this, but honestly, I had the habit and 1 month bit figured out already. The problem I really have right now is that I am so tired and worn out most of the time from work and baby, that it's just so much easier than going through the process AGAIN. As I said before, I quit for 8 years previously.
As for nicotine containing stop smoking aids, the reason the gum worked for me is it took the edge off long enough to establish new habits. I was on the gum heavily for about 4 months, then it faded in use over a period of 2 years. It works, but TMJ(this is a painful jaw joint disorder) flares up if I have just one peace of gum now. The instructions say not to chew it, but when you're "in the zone" on a project, you're not thinking about not chewing it. And if I'm not in the zone, I'm typically not doing my work very effectively.
Yeah, nicotine addiction sucks. I would never advocate outlawing cigarettes, but I would still consider using something that made me immune. I'm not so sure about the brain receptor argument with regards to nicotine. I would have to read about how such a treatment speficially and actually works in practice before I pass judgement.
thanks again for the reply. I enjoyed reading it. It is motivating on one level. yeah, IRC is bad stuff. I broke my addiction years back, saved my eyes too. Now I'm careful to monitor my slashdot usage as well. I see addicts throughout these threads.
I share your sentiment about the potential for this. It would be a fundamental change, no doubt.
But I foresee problems with huge amounts of technical information being available to the minds of severely immature people. Schools today suck, that's my opinion based on my experience, but what I did do in school, was mature. If I had access to the programming knowledge that has taken me over a decade to amass, available in my brain when I was 17, I would have used it to wreak havoc. And that's just the programming knowledge I've acquired. I shudder to think about my military training, aikido, iaido, etc...
Interesting times ahead.
A hearty agreement. I quit smoking for *8* years, and after my first child was born, the stress got to me in a weak moment, and within a week I was smoking a pack a day again! If I could pay for a shot that would make me immune to the effects of cigarettes, I would pay for it without thinking. I'd sell assetts if it was expensive. God I hate cigarettes. Now I have to go have one. And I can't do the nicotine gum again, because though it worked last time, now I have TMJ. The thing I don't get, I went through a 2 year period in my younger days when I got stoned every day. Then I decided I had enough and I quit cold turkey, no withdrawal, no nothing. But tabacco is legal and pot is the villainized drug? the US has it back ass wards.
Order the deportation of all Saudi Citizens? Have you considered that Saudi Arabia is one of our closest allies in the middle east? Not to mention a very important source of oil? Put aside PC thought for a second, and consider the diplomatic and geopolitical ramifications of villainizing that people? That people, the vast majority of whom have not attacked America? Why not just send them an open letter and ask them to join Al Qaeda and to stop selling us oil?
As for your analogy with the other world powers in history, let me ask you something about them. Where are they? Where is their power now? If we walk in their path, we will reach the same destination they did. We are not Romans, we are not Germans, we are Americans. We ought to blaze our own trails, ahdering to the principals upon which this nation was founded.
Yes it is racist to look at someone from a particular race/nationality and judge them by their group identity. The cornerstone of a free society is the recognition of individual identity and individual rights. Every day in America, 3,000 people die from a combination of tobacco, alcohol, and medical malpractice. That's 9/11 everyday. Every single day, 3,000 avoidable deaths occur. We do not take away individual liberty because of them. We do not give up the principle of freedom because of it. Why then, should we compromise our principals for a singular incident where 3,000 people died?
Give me Liberty or give me death.
Live free or die. Better to be dead right, than alive wrong, in chains, bowing the knee. And that is the fate that awaits everyone who gives up their liberty and rights for security. They will bow the knee, they will see lady liberty bow the knee, and the blood of all those who have fought for the principals of our nation, will have been shed in vain.
FYI: Those products have gotten alot better. They now do biologicals including viruses. They typically go for between 40 and 50 bucks for a simple water bottle. You just fill it up with water and drink. I haven't tried it with urine yet, as the more contaminated the water, the shorter the filter life, but it has worked great with water that didn't look very appetizing.
t Id=1747445&cp=713364.1341396.1807556&parentPage=fa mily
http://www.sportmart.com/product/index.jsp?produc
Good call.
You might be on to something legally, but then again you might not. I think the law should hold website operators responsible for the security of their websites and hold them accountable to their website users to provide information that could potentially save them from being the victims of crime, especially when they would in effect, be a participant(though unwilling) in that crime.
The sad thing is, this will come back and hit those businesses in the ass later when it is inevitably revealed(and it will be by someone) who they are, what happened, how many users were estimated to be affected, and that they didn't do anything to warn their users. the long term damage of that is going to be far more traumatic than if they simply were forthcoming in the first place. That's what I think anyway.
"I really don't understand the "we went to war for oil" charge. It doesn't make economic sense. First of all, the war and subsequent reconstruction cost much more than all the oil Iraq will generate for many years." Ask who is footing the bill, then ask who is profiting most. Then ask yourself if you really believe we have selfless politicians who only look out for our good. I've already answered these questions for myself. Yes, this is cynical, and I believe I have good reason for being cynical. "Second, it would have been much easier for the evil Republicans/neo-cons/(oil companies) to just make oil money from the already corrupt Oil for Food program run by the UN." Oh, hold on a sec... I don't blame the evil Republicans/neo-cons solely. The democrats are in on this, they only pretend not to be for political reasons. I remember the aggression on Yugoslavia... Wasn't for oil, it was for all those mass killings that were occuring, and then later no evidence was found to support the 100,000 number we were told. And a few years later, a pipeline was built through Kosovo... But you are right about one thing though, there is a deeper motive than oil behind all this. It is about control. There is alot more on the line in Iraq than oil, and it has nothing to do with terrorists. "A google news search for "oil food corruption UN" will let you choose the sources you find most credible, but I'm pretty sure they all say roughly the same things." Yeah, I know all about that. We shouldn't even be in the UN as it is now, IMO. "The best prewar intelligence we had indicated that Iraq was a threat. Also, Saddam never cooperated with the inspections that were the condition for the cessation of hostilities in the Gulf War." In the end he did cooperate with inspectors. Yes, he played games, didn't for a while, etc... But our government doesn't exist to police the world. We should learn what happened to the Brits back in the day when they took that burden upon themselves. "2) Saddam's regime was bad enough that whatever we leave in its place has a very good chance of at least being better." You know, I keep hearing this, but I've seen no evidence that it was so bad. He treated the Kurds about on par with how we treated Indian uprisings. Yeah, people are tortured and in our prisons, people are routinely raped. Yeah, he used gas, the same type of gas we sold to him. And we used gas in Waco on the branch davidians. Our allies in Saudi Arabia cut peoples hands off. I haven't seen evidence to support this villanization, so I choose not to believe it until I see it. Remember, before Yugoslavia we were told 100,000 people were killed. No evidence to support that after the fact. "3) The sanctions weren't sustainable because of the harm done to the Iraqi people, but sanctions couldn't be lifted until inspections were allowed." You're forgetting, before the war he agreed. In fact, there were many years that he did let the inspectors in, and the sanctions weren't lifted. Then there were times he didn't. It was an on again off again game. Sanctions weren't going to be lifted any time soon whether he cooperated or not, and I think he knew that. "4) By the time we knew for certain Saddam was again a threat, it would be too late to avoid major consequences." We should have thought of that before we decided to do business with the guy way back in the day. How'd you like law enforcement to hear through the grapevine that you're going to commit some crime and have them break into your house and arrest you before you do it? Same principle. Dangerous principle. Unamerican. As for that bit about me character assinating Bush, I'd take it a step further, I don't believe Bush, or 99 percent of any of our politicians have any character that can be assinated. This goes for the democrats and republicans equally. I think their records speak for themselves. Follow the money. But kudos to you for presenting your views in a very civilized and rational manner. I have different views than you, but I welcome hearing yours any day. That anon guy I responded to could learn a lesson from you.
Personally, I don't think we should have to file income tax returns. Terrorists could use that information to determine who to target for blackmail. Also, I don't think we should have to pay income taxes. Terrorists could find a way to take that money and fund terrorist acts. Think about it, our money is safer if we all just hold on to it.
I also don't think we should have license plates on our cars. Terrorists can use the information on a license plate to track down anyone with anti-terrorist bumperstickers on their cars and commit terrorist acts against them.
I think we should stop having our government in Washington and should have it in a secret place, in case terrorists try to attack our government again.
I think we should ban newspapers because terrorists could use them to kindle fires in terrorist acts of arson.
I think we should ban gasoline and motor oil, because terrorists might use them to build Weapons of Mass Destruction.
I think we should ban guns because terrorists could use them to shoot people.
I think we should ban belts, rope, and anything that can be used in any way to harm someone, because terrorists might use them to harm someone.
I think we should ban words, because terorrists might use them to recruit other terrorists. Think about that for a while. Do you really want terrorists here on our soil recruiting other terrorists? Words have to go. Don't you see how important it is to fight terror in the name of freedom!?!?
I think we should ban water because terrorists could drown people in it.
I think we should ban wet noodles, because terrorist might attempt to slap us with them. And believe me, if terrorists don't, and you agree with anything in this post, I will.
Ah, anon-cow, no, I am quite American. I was against an invasion because I believe, unlike you apparently, that war is a serious matter, with American lives on the line, and because of that, there should be a damned good reason for going to war. Which as we know now, we had no good reason(other than oil). But we don't hear that on Fox every day, do we?
And before you start into some mindless neo-con character assination, no I'm not a liberal, I'm a libertarian who has served in the military(Regular Army). I was against the war for very similar reasons that this person was... www.hackworth.com. Thanks for trying to spin things though, I don't appreciate it but I figure I'll be polite.