No, he just wants to be able to read your medical records, and any related to his political opponents. His are off limits, since that's part of his freedom, you know. Actually, many politicians release their medical records. I do agree with you though that mine should remain private. That's one of the reasons I'm against the government paying for my health care. Once they are the ones paying for it, they are the ones controlling it.
OK, now can you answer the rest of the questions? Here they are as the GP stated them:
Do you really want every hostile government and terrorist to know the locations, travel schedules, and arming codes for all US nuclear weapons? What do you think will happen if the names of undercover agents in foreign countries are publicized? How about the impact on fighting organized crime and terrorism of eliminating the Witness Protection program? Should all that stuff be public knowledge as well? Don't get me wrong, I'd love to know all the secrets the government has. Unfortunately, the government can't tell me without telling the people that they are trying to hide the stuff from in the first place, so I accept the fact that government needs secrets.
That's like saying, "take a human baby, put him in front of an Internet kiosk. Make sure the baby has no nervous system or brain of any kind. Once he figures out how to use his eyes and fingers, and starts googling for porn, you have true natural intelligence". Your requirements are way too restrictive; no human would pass them. My baby figured out how to use her hands and eyes all on her own. All we had to do is provide her with the necessities for life (food and diaper changing). She had the whole hair pulling thing down in no time!
As for a computer, you give it the necessities for life... power and cooling. Let it figure the rest out. I guess I'll give a little and say you can help it along some. Maybe give it a dictionary on the HDD or something and maybe teach it to read. But I'm afraid I'm going to have to stick to the no BIOS, no OS thing. People figure out their hardware on their own. Until a machine can do the same, it will be lacking.
just because it can pass the turing test does not mean the machine demonstrates real intelligence! in fact, just what is intelligence / conciousness? if we can't define it, how can we hope to produce it? First, AI is not consciousness. But you do have a point.
With all due respect to Turing, and he was a brilliant man, I don't think that his test is the definition of AI. True AI must be self programming. Here is the ArcherB test. When you can place a machine in a particular situation with no programming whatsoever, and it figures it does something on its own, then you have AI. For example, hook up a computer to an Internet connection. This computer can have no BIOS, OS, no programming at all. When it learns to use its own hardware, figures out network protocols and starts downloading web pages and porn, you have true AI.
I think it's going to be a pig-elephant. Maybe, but that really wouldn't take the work of Japanese scientists. All you need is a pot-bellied pig, an elephant, lots of alcohol, and some Isaac Hayes music.
However, it will probably end up that a closeted gay, balding school teacher did all the "real" work. Even then, what good will it be if only has one ass?
The celebration isn't fake, it's just taken out of context. So I go to your wedding and shoot some video you dancing and celebrating. The next month, people hijack planes and crash them into the WTC. Then I tell everyone that you supported the WTC attacks and show you celebrating (or course failing to mention that the celebration wasn't related to the WTC stuff at all). Sorry, but THIS doesn't look like any wedding I've ever been to.
As for the 9-11 celebrations:
The Palestinian Authority, which had immediately condemned the September 11th attacks, moved to censor further reports of public celebrations, claiming that they were unrepresentative of the Palestinian people. The Palestinian information minister Yasser Abed Rabbo said the Palestinian Authority would not allow "a few kids" to "smear the real face of the Palestinians". Ahmed Abdel Rahman, Arafat's Cabinet secretary, said the Palestinian Authority could not "guarantee the life" of an Associated Press cameraman if footage he filmed of post-9/11 celebrations was broadcast. Rahman's statement prompted a formal protest from the AP bureau chief, Dan Perry. Notice they didn't say that these were wedding celebrations or taken out of context. Notice they didn't deny them at all. They merely said they did not represent the Palestinian people.
Of course, Palestinians try to justify it:
Heliopolis, in the Bekaa Valley, was the Sun City of the ancients. Nowadays it is called Baalbek. Near its lavish temples stands the stronghold of the Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed Shiite Party of God. Along the clean alleys that lead to the Hezbolla's stronghold there are hand-made posters of bearded young men. "They are martyrs," explained a well-dressed, cultivated Arab man who had just gotten out of his Mercedes. "They fought until victory: the withdrawal of Israeli occupants. So they became a model for the all Arab world."
Weren't they terrorists? we asked.
"Terrorists? What about the Israelis who kill women and babies?" Now I'm not saying that Palestinian women and children have not died. I am saying that they were not the target. THAT is the difference. Something the Palestinians will never understand because their leaders tell them thingslike "Israelis are harvesting organs from Palestinian kids". Still, even if I thought a nation was kidnapping our kids and harvesting their organs, I would be angry and would plan revenge, but I would NOT want to see their kids die.
Yes. And I find the idea ludicrous. Especially when you consider: 1) How much power the pro-Israel lobby has in the US (i.e. how much money it spends on US politicians). Yeah, it's the all powerful, evil Jew lobby conspiracy theory again. Weren't they the ones who called 10,000 Jewish WTC workers on 9-10 and told them to call in sick? (assuming we could believe that 1/5 workers at the WTC were Jewish). Of course, I guess you can explain away any facts you want as long as you blame the all powerful JOOOOOish lobby.
3) In any case, when I see footage from the occupied territories on Canadian TV, it doesn't come from freelance Palestinians, but from Canadians. Really? Google "freelance Palestinian photographers" and you'll see hundreds of them. You can also google "Palestinian fauxtography" to see the examples of their work. HERE is a rather tame example. (notice that the blinds are drawn shut, it is daylight outside, but everyone is reading by candlelight. Hilarious!) If things are so bad, why do they need to fake pictures?
Has it ever occurred to you that: 1) Most Palestinians don't actually celebrate these kinds of attacks 2) A lot of these images are actually either fabricated(*) or at least amplified It doesn't matter. If I'm in a room with a bunch a people and a hornets nest... and someone is walking to the hornets nest with a stick, AGAIN, I'm gonna stop them. I hate hornets as much as the next guy, but I'm not going to cheer him on as he whacks it with a stick. I'm gonna kick his ass and do whatever it takes to get him to stop whacking the hornet's nest because I'm tired of getting stung.
I don't see the Palis doing that. They cheer when someone whacks the nest and blame the hornets when they get stung.
And Why TF would they fake a celebration over the death of school kids? Did you google Pallywood?
Both sides are 100% in the wrong. If someone came and took my land, I'd probably fight. The UN took their land. Not the Israelis. Besides, it was Jewish land long before Islam was even a religion. It was Jewish land first. Sorry, but if you want to play that "this land is my land" game, it was the Jew's land first.
If they had the military backing of the most armed nation on Earth If the Palestinians had the military might that Israel does, you'd find them carpet bombing neighborhoods. Something I don't see the Israelis doing. I see the Palestinians attempt to do it, but they just don't have the might.
Israel CAN'T have the whole damn pie, their going to have to settle for their own small slice, just like the original inhabitants. Uh, didn't they just give the West Bank back a few years ago as a sign of good will? What did it get them? Did it get Palestinians filling the streets with flowers and singing "We are the World"? Nope. Look at the links I provided in my last post to see what it got them.
and this lasted years with no REAL attempts at reasonable compromise, I'd probably get desperate Desperate enough to kill a bunch of kids? Really? Fuck off! We are done here. THERE IS NEVER EVER A GOOD FUCKING REASON TO KILL A BUNCH OF KIDS. EVER! The fact that you even consider defending such an action, much less attempting to do so, tells me that you don't deserve the right to breathe the same air as I do. Listen to this and listen well:
* Any nation or group of people that targets and attacks school children is an enemy of humanity.
* I support fully backing the group of country that is having their children targeted and attacked.
* Any nation of group of people that targets and attacks kids deserves to die, period.
If you don't agree with those three simple points with no exceptions, then you need to be over there with them, killing kids.
That means the only hope is for Israel to stop it, but I'm not too hopeful that will happen. They have, repeatedly. Then some angry young man kisses his wife and kids good-bye, straps a bomb/ball-bearing vest to his chest, finds a place where a bunch of teenagers are hanging out and then blows the place up in a deliberate attempt to kill as many kids as possible and derail any peace process that has been building for any amount of time. Of course, then you see Palestinians dance in the streets, shoot guns in the air and hand out candies to passing cars. Israel has every right to respond in any way they see fit for as long as they like and they will still be in the right. There is no reason to EVER blow up a pizza parlor full of kids, or shoot up a high school, attack a college cafeteria with a back-pack bomb, or any of the MANYattacks where the target is innocent civilians, including... or ESPECIALLY women and children. Also, note that all these attacks are celebrated by the so-called "innocent and peace loving" Palestinian people and the terrorists called heroes and martyrs. Sorry, but with a track record like that, Israel will always be in the right.
What about the Jews attacking the innocent Palestinians... Google "Pallywood" and watch the video.
It's like the old saying goes
There will be peace in the Middle East when the Palestinians love their children more than they hate the Jews. When that happens, and it won't in our life times, you'll have your peace. Not a second before.
You are correct to suggest that my experience with AF (and Army) personnel was limited. I got out in 1994, btw.
I didn't mean to imply that AF was not military, but from where I was sitting, it sure felt like it. Here is a story that explains why:
We had just come back from the field and were cleaning our equipment at the motor pool. We had been in the field for three weeks, with no shower, bathroom, mess hall or any of the other comforts of the rear (that didn't sound right!). When we slept, we slept where we were. I was a tanker (M1A1 Heavy Common) so where we were was always on the tank. We got about 4 hrs a night, with one hour radio watch. We were in the motor pool cleaning our equipment because we were scheduled to back to the field in a week. In the two years I was in (the bare minimum... there was no way in Hell I was re-upping), we never spent three solid weeks in the rear. OSUT (One Station Unit Training... Basic + AIT in one shot) was actually the easy part for me. Anyway, as we were in the motor pool, some AF guys pulled up asking where they could fuel up. I sent one of them to my XO since maybe the LT might know. That was his job, after all. While waiting I was talking to the rest of these guys (three guys and one... female). I asked them if they spent any time in the field. One of them responded "Oh yeah! Lots of time." I explained that we slept on our tanks and asked what the living conditions were for them. Another responded, "Last year we spent three months in the field, total. One month was in an AC tent. The other two was in a hotel." I walked away, disgusted at my choice of branches! Now, of course, there were some Army units that had the apartment style barracks, and things were starting to lighten up for us when I got out. We got a new SGT Major who saw that re-enlistment numbers sucked and wanted to make life better for us. He was single and didn't like the idea that married soldiers had it so much better than us single enlisted non-NCO's. He allowed us... actually encouraged us to paint our hallways and rooms however we liked. He even dropped by one Friday evening to check out the work. He stopped by one room where they had a painted a stripe around the room. We were in there smokin', jokin' and drinkin'.. heavily. He walked in, we called "AT EASE!". He put us at rest, checked the place out and said he liked it. He did not mention the mess the room was in and ignored that fact that about half the guys in the room were under drinking age. He just said he liked it, told us we could do more to our rooms if we liked and left. He was also starting to make it so that NCO's in need of a detail could not just raid the billets looking for warm bodies at all hours of the week. "If those living off post are not available for details, then neither are these guys." Inspections were scheduled well in advance and "pop-inspections" were only for contraband and hygiene (nothing that would attract roaches and so on) So, yeah, it was changing for us combat arms types, but nothing near the point where we had our own rooms. Still, since we were never really in our living quarters, it didn't really make much of a difference. Not all units got the treatment we did and some had it better. I don't know what happened to 3/18 Cav when the SGT Major left, either.
Also, I understand that AF jobs like Forward Air Controller had it just as bad as us Army types since he had to be attached to us Army types. I'm also sure that Search and Rescue type jobs had it much worse than I did as they needed to be anywhere with no notice ready to fight their ways in and back out. But, on average, IMHO, only, the AF guys had it much easier than us USArmy types.
Using people's suggestions is not the Air Force way. Though, in this instance, they can't rebut with the normal "Deal with it, you're in the military." Actually, the Air Force, or "Chair Force" as we in the Army liked to call it, was the most "civilian" military branch.
We in the Army had Billets (dorm like rooms). Air Force personnel had what looked like apartments.
Our Billets were subject to inspection at any time, 24/7. Air Force living quarters were more of less off limits to their NCO's and officers.
We worked from 7:00am to whenever we were done, weekends were worked about 50% of the time. Air Force personnel worked from 9:00 to 5:00, with weekends off.
When we went to the field, we slept on our tanks. Air Forcer personnel stayed in air conditioned tents or hotels(!!!).
It seemed to me that those in the Chair Force had jobs. We were in the military.
Of course, this is all from my personal experience. There are some more lax army positions that the one I had and I'm sure that there are some hard-core Air Force jobs, but on average, the Air Force people had it so much better than we did.
Why are you specifically stating Islam, and then forgetting all about those wonderful little people at the Discovery Institute. I understand that 'like religions' really does encompass all possible religions, singling out Islam by name is a bit unfair. They are no better, and no worse than any other major religion with extremist/fundamentalist groups. Actually, Islam is the only major religion who has flown planes into buildings, posted videos of beheadings, preaches that the penalty for leaving the religion is death and is responsible for really REALLY close to 100% of terrorist attacks around the world (Not just the US, but all over the world). So, yeah. I think they deserve an honorary mention on this one.
So, when you say, They are no better, and no worse than any other major religion with extremist/fundamentalist groups., I'm afraid I have to say that you are extraordinarily naive and just plain wrong And to compare Islam to the Discovery Institute... I'm sorry, how many people have been killed by people from the Discovery Institute? How many civilian markets and embassies have been bombed? How many children and mentally retarded people have they used to blow up innocent civilians? Did you say Zero? If you did, then you are correct. Any other answer is just plain ignorant.
All we need is for there to be a Chinese-Scientology link and we'll have the most commented-on story ever. Actually, it would have to be Evolution denying Chinese illegally tapping the phone lines of Scientologists causes Global Warming.
Scientology doesn't use hangings or suicide bombings to silence their critics and apostates. Are you sure?
Follow this link (http://youtube.com/watch?v=LYnu5Q6ONbo#) to see ex-members speak about their experiences with Scientology. Included among the commentors are the author who was framed for bomb threats and attempted to have put in a mental institution, and a former Scientologist Internal Security officer who spent 4 years spying on, intimidating, threatening, and attempting to ruin the lives of those who would criticize the "Church". In this video, ex-members accuse the organization of mind control techniques, totalitarianism, manipulation, and various forms of terrorism
If you look at your link, it says that the point where revenue starts to go down is probably around 80% tax. I think we can both agree we're still pretty far from this. The graph on the link is an example. What may be the top of the curve today may not be the top next year. It is always moving to the left, right, up and down, depending on the world's economies.
If they raised taxes to cover all costs of Iraq, the War on Drugs, and whatever else, there would be riots in the streets. You need to go back and play some civ, AOE, Empire Earth or sim city. People get PISSED when you raise taxes Well, according to the Laffer Curve, Raising taxes would give us LESS money to pay for things like Iraq, War on Drugs and whatever else. The government has been pulling in record receipts since Bush's tax cuts. Sorry, but raising taxes slows the economy and ends up with less tax revenue.
PIMF! Must be on the meds again!
And you know... that these will be successful. So many suckers, so little time. Not with me. I use Linux and get my meds from my doctor (or local dealer, depending on the "med").
I've 4 years in small business doing monkey work (tech support, some admin), and 2 years supporting a 1.5k user network with 9 servers including dedicated Exchange, proxy, and DHCP servers. I've experience with HP & Cisco managed switches, resolved some of the most horrible network issues you can think of (Ever seen what happens when a 12 year old little bastard plugs a patch lead into itself? Two words: CASCADING FAILURE.) I've even came up with an improved disaster recovery policy for my current employer, and been sub-contracted to another business based on performance.
I've no "theory of Computing - The Valve years" computing degree or MS "Our way or no way" brainwashing. I got a D in Computer Science at college. I work bottom-rung tech support changing print toners for a school because nobody wants an Sys or Network Admin without a degree.
THAT'S where your shortage is; managers who can look past the letters "BSc" after someone's name. Funny. I have a BSIT after my name and I'm sitting here doing technical support for banking software (ever see Office Space?). I can not get into an IT department because I've never worked in one (5+ years experience required), yet frequently, I find myself explaining to the IT guys at our corporate HQ that just because you can't ping a box, doesn't mean it's not running!
Over the course of last year I needed to hire 10 experienced J2EE developers. I literally interviewed hundreds, but was only able to find 6 suitable candidates. While it is true that there isn't a shortage of applicants, there is most certainly a shortage of people who can actually perform the advertised job. And I think that is the crux of your problem, or the industry as a whole. Employers have gotten so reluctant to take a chance on someone without 5+ years experience that they would rather do without. In your case, why don't you take the excess budget you have from the four people you DIDN'T hire and use that money to hire 6-8 programmers with less experience, but who are eager to gain it? In two years, you will have 12-14 experienced programmers for the price of 10!
Take my case for example. I am married with a child and a mortgage. I NEED a certain amount of money to keep a roof over our heads, the lights on and feed my family. I can not take an entry level job. I have over 15 years experience on the tech support and testing side, plus a degree in IT and a Linux certification. Yet, because I do not have 5+ years in an actual IT department, I can not even get an interview unless it's for an entry level job paying at most $15/hr. Yet, I see job postings all over various job sites begging for experienced IT people. Is no one hiring mid-level technicians any more? Which begs the question: How is anyone supposed to get experience if the only people hiring require it?
However, when I said politics, that is what I meant. Voting and "caucusing" to select the candidate for a a political party is politics. The general election won't be, but that is not what this was.
As for our voting, we voted early a week before the actual election. That was not an option for the caucusing.
As far as it being an inconvenience, yeah, it was. I have a 14 month old little girl, who was sick and has a normal bed time of 6:30pm. I assume that this is pretty common for your "typical" democrat voter (minus the sick part, of course), seeing how the Democrat party is supposed to represent those that can not afford little luxuries like a baby sitter for three hours on a Tuesday evening. The Republican party does not have caucuses in it's primary selection process. You vote, you are done. How the people vote is how the delegates are split among the candidates. I find it ironic that the party that was screaming about the "will of the people" in 2000 are the same party that limits 1/3 of its delegates based on the will of those who can spare the time show up at a time that is impossible for many of those same people. (Of course, that is just a Texas thing and I agree that the whole thing needs to be redone. However, after last nights experience, yesterday may have been my last day a Democrat in the Great state of Texas!)
I also voted twice in this primary. The poster you keep disagreeing with was right on. My wife and I showed up at 7:00pm. We were the first group to go through and some of the first in our group and we didn't get out of there until 10:45pm.
We are young, employed, new parents, and my wife goes to school. We had a sick child at home (stuffy nose, nothing major... thanx for your concern). We would not have been able to attend had it not been for my mother-in-law being in town to watch her.
Many people there had their kids with them. Someone brought up a motion that those with kids should be allowed to go first. It was denied.
There were not enough sheets for everyone to fill out their votes on. (ballots, if you will, but this is not a private vote. Everyone filled out the same sheets, 12 per page).
There was a lot of screeching from the two sides (Clinton and Obama) claiming the other may have an advantage. "There are too many Obama supporters running this. We need a Clinton supporter to observe..." and so on.
I kept thinking to myself. "These people can not run a local, one party caucus in a small town. What makes them think they can run the country?"
Who runs the primary caucus for the democrats? The local Democratic parties.
Something could have been done about the situation. Oh and that blurb was headlines on CNN Not once it started. That's when the bickering began.
Oh, my apologies. You're just a troll. Re-read your post. No, he was right. You were being a troll.
Besides, I'm sorry if you disapprove us having children, jobs, and going to school to better ourselves. We bust our asses to make ends meet and make sure we have a table, are able to put food on it and have a roof to cover it all. It was a pain in the ass for us to be there so late and disarray of the whole thing made it worse. So don't give me, the OP, or anyone else any shit if they had more important things to do than to vote in the primary. Not all of us can simply tell our mom we are going to vote and close the door to the basement. Some of us have obligations that take precedence over politics.
Never once did I state what you say I have stated. Challenge a theory all you want... that is the defining point of a theory. If it can survive challenges then it can stay. Replacing the theory from the start (ignoring all evidence gathered by the challenges to its statements) with a deeper theory that has to be correct because it can't be disproved has nothing to do with defining the question. We can agree on that. The point is that teachers should be allowed to challenge any theory:
'Every public school teacher in the state's K-12 school system shall have the affirmative right and freedom to objectively present scientific information relevant to the full range of scientific views regarding biological and chemical evolution in connection with teaching any prescribed curriculum regarding chemical or biological origins.' I believe this should be shortened to:
Every public school teacher in the state's K-12 school system shall have the affirmative right and freedom to objectively present scientific information relevant to the full range of scientific views I find it shocking that we even NEED a bill that states this. I find it even more shocking that so many people here, you included, think that such a bill is a bad idea. It has nothing to do with what is taught, but what is even allowed to be taught. If we start telling teachers what they may and may not teach, where does it end? I understand that slippery slope is a fallacy, but there are already schools that show "An Inconvenient Truth" with no counter to it at all.
This isn't about the theory, it's about totalitarianism. It's about telling teachers what they may and may not say in a classroom. Where will that end up? What could possibly go wrong there? That's a path I don't want to go down.
Slashdot Mirror
OK, now can you answer the rest of the questions? Here they are as the GP stated them: Do you really want every hostile government and terrorist to know the locations, travel schedules, and arming codes for all US nuclear weapons?
What do you think will happen if the names of undercover agents in foreign countries are publicized?
How about the impact on fighting organized crime and terrorism of eliminating the Witness Protection program? Should all that stuff be public knowledge as well? Don't get me wrong, I'd love to know all the secrets the government has. Unfortunately, the government can't tell me without telling the people that they are trying to hide the stuff from in the first place, so I accept the fact that government needs secrets.
As for a computer, you give it the necessities for life... power and cooling. Let it figure the rest out. I guess I'll give a little and say you can help it along some. Maybe give it a dictionary on the HDD or something and maybe teach it to read. But I'm afraid I'm going to have to stick to the no BIOS, no OS thing. People figure out their hardware on their own. Until a machine can do the same, it will be lacking.
With all due respect to Turing, and he was a brilliant man, I don't think that his test is the definition of AI. True AI must be self programming. Here is the ArcherB test. When you can place a machine in a particular situation with no programming whatsoever, and it figures it does something on its own, then you have AI. For example, hook up a computer to an Internet connection. This computer can have no BIOS, OS, no programming at all. When it learns to use its own hardware, figures out network protocols and starts downloading web pages and porn, you have true AI.
However, it will probably end up that a closeted gay, balding school teacher did all the "real" work. Even then, what good will it be if only has one ass?
As for the 9-11 celebrations: The Palestinian Authority, which had immediately condemned the September 11th attacks, moved to censor further reports of public celebrations, claiming that they were unrepresentative of the Palestinian people. The Palestinian information minister Yasser Abed Rabbo said the Palestinian Authority would not allow "a few kids" to "smear the real face of the Palestinians". Ahmed Abdel Rahman, Arafat's Cabinet secretary, said the Palestinian Authority could not "guarantee the life" of an Associated Press cameraman if footage he filmed of post-9/11 celebrations was broadcast. Rahman's statement prompted a formal protest from the AP bureau chief, Dan Perry. Notice they didn't say that these were wedding celebrations or taken out of context. Notice they didn't deny them at all. They merely said they did not represent the Palestinian people.
Of course, Palestinians try to justify it: Heliopolis, in the Bekaa Valley, was the Sun City of the ancients. Nowadays it is called Baalbek. Near its lavish temples stands the stronghold of the Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed Shiite Party of God. Along the clean alleys that lead to the Hezbolla's stronghold there are hand-made posters of bearded young men. "They are martyrs," explained a well-dressed, cultivated Arab man who had just gotten out of his Mercedes. "They fought until victory: the withdrawal of Israeli occupants. So they became a model for the all Arab world."
Weren't they terrorists? we asked.
"Terrorists? What about the Israelis who kill women and babies?" Now I'm not saying that Palestinian women and children have not died. I am saying that they were not the target. THAT is the difference. Something the Palestinians will never understand because their leaders tell them things like "Israelis are harvesting organs from Palestinian kids". Still, even if I thought a nation was kidnapping our kids and harvesting their organs, I would be angry and would plan revenge, but I would NOT want to see their kids die. Yes. And I find the idea ludicrous. Especially when you consider:
1) How much power the pro-Israel lobby has in the US (i.e. how much money it spends on US politicians). Yeah, it's the all powerful, evil Jew lobby conspiracy theory again. Weren't they the ones who called 10,000 Jewish WTC workers on 9-10 and told them to call in sick? (assuming we could believe that 1/5 workers at the WTC were Jewish). Of course, I guess you can explain away any facts you want as long as you blame the all powerful JOOOOOish lobby. 3) In any case, when I see footage from the occupied territories on Canadian TV, it doesn't come from freelance Palestinians, but from Canadians. Really? Google "freelance Palestinian photographers" and you'll see hundreds of them. You can also google "Palestinian fauxtography" to see the examples of their work. HERE is a rather tame example. (notice that the blinds are drawn shut, it is daylight outside, but everyone is reading by candlelight. Hilarious!) If things are so bad, why do they need to fake pictures?
1) Most Palestinians don't actually celebrate these kinds of attacks
2) A lot of these images are actually either fabricated(*) or at least amplified It doesn't matter. If I'm in a room with a bunch a people and a hornets nest... and someone is walking to the hornets nest with a stick, AGAIN, I'm gonna stop them. I hate hornets as much as the next guy, but I'm not going to cheer him on as he whacks it with a stick. I'm gonna kick his ass and do whatever it takes to get him to stop whacking the hornet's nest because I'm tired of getting stung.
I don't see the Palis doing that. They cheer when someone whacks the nest and blame the hornets when they get stung.
And Why TF would they fake a celebration over the death of school kids? Did you google Pallywood?
* Any nation or group of people that targets and attacks school children is an enemy of humanity.
* I support fully backing the group of country that is having their children targeted and attacked.
* Any nation of group of people that targets and attacks kids deserves to die, period.
If you don't agree with those three simple points with no exceptions, then you need to be over there with them, killing kids.
What about the Jews attacking the innocent Palestinians... Google "Pallywood" and watch the video.
It's like the old saying goes There will be peace in the Middle East when the Palestinians love their children more than they hate the Jews. When that happens, and it won't in our life times, you'll have your peace. Not a second before.
I didn't mean to imply that AF was not military, but from where I was sitting, it sure felt like it. Here is a story that explains why: We had just come back from the field and were cleaning our equipment at the motor pool. We had been in the field for three weeks, with no shower, bathroom, mess hall or any of the other comforts of the rear (that didn't sound right!). When we slept, we slept where we were. I was a tanker (M1A1 Heavy Common) so where we were was always on the tank. We got about 4 hrs a night, with one hour radio watch. We were in the motor pool cleaning our equipment because we were scheduled to back to the field in a week. In the two years I was in (the bare minimum... there was no way in Hell I was re-upping), we never spent three solid weeks in the rear. OSUT (One Station Unit Training... Basic + AIT in one shot) was actually the easy part for me. Anyway, as we were in the motor pool, some AF guys pulled up asking where they could fuel up. I sent one of them to my XO since maybe the LT might know. That was his job, after all. While waiting I was talking to the rest of these guys (three guys and one... female). I asked them if they spent any time in the field. One of them responded "Oh yeah! Lots of time." I explained that we slept on our tanks and asked what the living conditions were for them. Another responded, "Last year we spent three months in the field, total. One month was in an AC tent. The other two was in a hotel." I walked away, disgusted at my choice of branches! Now, of course, there were some Army units that had the apartment style barracks, and things were starting to lighten up for us when I got out. We got a new SGT Major who saw that re-enlistment numbers sucked and wanted to make life better for us. He was single and didn't like the idea that married soldiers had it so much better than us single enlisted non-NCO's. He allowed us... actually encouraged us to paint our hallways and rooms however we liked. He even dropped by one Friday evening to check out the work. He stopped by one room where they had a painted a stripe around the room. We were in there smokin', jokin' and drinkin'.. heavily. He walked in, we called "AT EASE!". He put us at rest, checked the place out and said he liked it. He did not mention the mess the room was in and ignored that fact that about half the guys in the room were under drinking age. He just said he liked it, told us we could do more to our rooms if we liked and left. He was also starting to make it so that NCO's in need of a detail could not just raid the billets looking for warm bodies at all hours of the week. "If those living off post are not available for details, then neither are these guys." Inspections were scheduled well in advance and "pop-inspections" were only for contraband and hygiene (nothing that would attract roaches and so on) So, yeah, it was changing for us combat arms types, but nothing near the point where we had our own rooms. Still, since we were never really in our living quarters, it didn't really make much of a difference. Not all units got the treatment we did and some had it better. I don't know what happened to 3/18 Cav when the SGT Major left, either.
Also, I understand that AF jobs like Forward Air Controller had it just as bad as us Army types since he had to be attached to us Army types. I'm also sure that Search and Rescue type jobs had it much worse than I did as they needed to be anywhere with no notice ready to fight their ways in and back out. But, on average, IMHO, only, the AF guys had it much easier than us USArmy types.
We in the Army had Billets (dorm like rooms). Air Force personnel had what looked like apartments.
Our Billets were subject to inspection at any time, 24/7. Air Force living quarters were more of less off limits to their NCO's and officers.
We worked from 7:00am to whenever we were done, weekends were worked about 50% of the time. Air Force personnel worked from 9:00 to 5:00, with weekends off.
When we went to the field, we slept on our tanks. Air Forcer personnel stayed in air conditioned tents or hotels(!!!).
It seemed to me that those in the Chair Force had jobs. We were in the military.
Of course, this is all from my personal experience. There are some more lax army positions that the one I had and I'm sure that there are some hard-core Air Force jobs, but on average, the Air Force people had it so much better than we did.
So, when you say, They are no better, and no worse than any other major religion with extremist/fundamentalist groups., I'm afraid I have to say that you are extraordinarily naive and just plain wrong And to compare Islam to the Discovery Institute... I'm sorry, how many people have been killed by people from the Discovery Institute? How many civilian markets and embassies have been bombed? How many children and mentally retarded people have they used to blow up innocent civilians? Did you say Zero? If you did, then you are correct. Any other answer is just plain ignorant.
I think we can both agree we're still pretty far from this. The graph on the link is an example. What may be the top of the curve today may not be the top next year. It is always moving to the left, right, up and down, depending on the world's economies.
that these will be successful. So many suckers, so little time. Not with me. I use Linux and get my meds from my doctor (or local dealer, depending on the "med").
(that looks better)
that these will be successful. So many suckers, so little time./quote.
Not with me. I us Linux and get my meds from my doctor (or local dealer, depending on the "med").
I've no "theory of Computing - The Valve years" computing degree or MS "Our way or no way" brainwashing. I got a D in Computer Science at college. I work bottom-rung tech support changing print toners for a school because nobody wants an Sys or Network Admin without a degree.
THAT'S where your shortage is; managers who can look past the letters "BSc" after someone's name. Funny. I have a BSIT after my name and I'm sitting here doing technical support for banking software (ever see Office Space?). I can not get into an IT department because I've never worked in one (5+ years experience required), yet frequently, I find myself explaining to the IT guys at our corporate HQ that just because you can't ping a box, doesn't mean it's not running!
Take my case for example. I am married with a child and a mortgage. I NEED a certain amount of money to keep a roof over our heads, the lights on and feed my family. I can not take an entry level job. I have over 15 years experience on the tech support and testing side, plus a degree in IT and a Linux certification. Yet, because I do not have 5+ years in an actual IT department, I can not even get an interview unless it's for an entry level job paying at most $15/hr. Yet, I see job postings all over various job sites begging for experienced IT people. Is no one hiring mid-level technicians any more? Which begs the question: How is anyone supposed to get experience if the only people hiring require it?
I agree that your post was not a troll.
However, when I said politics, that is what I meant. Voting and "caucusing" to select the candidate for a a political party is politics. The general election won't be, but that is not what this was.
As for our voting, we voted early a week before the actual election. That was not an option for the caucusing.
As far as it being an inconvenience, yeah, it was. I have a 14 month old little girl, who was sick and has a normal bed time of 6:30pm. I assume that this is pretty common for your "typical" democrat voter (minus the sick part, of course), seeing how the Democrat party is supposed to represent those that can not afford little luxuries like a baby sitter for three hours on a Tuesday evening. The Republican party does not have caucuses in it's primary selection process. You vote, you are done. How the people vote is how the delegates are split among the candidates. I find it ironic that the party that was screaming about the "will of the people" in 2000 are the same party that limits 1/3 of its delegates based on the will of those who can spare the time show up at a time that is impossible for many of those same people. (Of course, that is just a Texas thing and I agree that the whole thing needs to be redone. However, after last nights experience, yesterday may have been my last day a Democrat in the Great state of Texas!)
We are young, employed, new parents, and my wife goes to school. We had a sick child at home (stuffy nose, nothing major... thanx for your concern). We would not have been able to attend had it not been for my mother-in-law being in town to watch her.
Many people there had their kids with them. Someone brought up a motion that those with kids should be allowed to go first. It was denied.
There were not enough sheets for everyone to fill out their votes on. (ballots, if you will, but this is not a private vote. Everyone filled out the same sheets, 12 per page).
There was a lot of screeching from the two sides (Clinton and Obama) claiming the other may have an advantage. "There are too many Obama supporters running this. We need a Clinton supporter to observe..." and so on.
I kept thinking to myself. "These people can not run a local, one party caucus in a small town. What makes them think they can run the country?" Who runs the primary caucus for the democrats? The local Democratic parties. Something could have been done about the situation. Oh and that blurb was headlines on CNN Not once it started. That's when the bickering began. Oh, my apologies. You're just a troll. Re-read your post. No, he was right. You were being a troll.
Besides, I'm sorry if you disapprove us having children, jobs, and going to school to better ourselves. We bust our asses to make ends meet and make sure we have a table, are able to put food on it and have a roof to cover it all. It was a pain in the ass for us to be there so late and disarray of the whole thing made it worse. So don't give me, the OP, or anyone else any shit if they had more important things to do than to vote in the primary. Not all of us can simply tell our mom we are going to vote and close the door to the basement. Some of us have obligations that take precedence over politics.
This isn't about the theory, it's about totalitarianism. It's about telling teachers what they may and may not say in a classroom. Where will that end up? What could possibly go wrong there? That's a path I don't want to go down.
You mean I've been driving a Prius and spending my beer money on renewable energy only to have this happen!??!