I was thinking the same thing and figure the final word in tired, cheap ST plot devices would be a prequel about travelling back in time to meet Q in a runaway holodeck program.
Well, you may need the Borg in there somewhere and whatever the problem is, it must be fixed using some pseudo-science techno-solution that is redirected through the deflector dish.
I'm getting pretty tired of prequels and time travel. This seems to have a lot of both. Don't get me wrong, I'll still pay to go see it and drag my wife along kicking and screaming to see it with me. I'll probably have to fork out for good dinner to get her to come along.
Who knows. It can still be good. Let's hope it doesn't suck or I'll get more resistance from the Mrs when trying to go to the next SciFi movie.
Not only do you site a blog site as evidence, but you site Daily KOS! This is the same site that actually ran a story saying that we could end all wars with Islamic countries if we just submitted to the will of Allah and became a Muslim country.
While it appears from more than one point of view that the War in Iraq and the War on Terror are situations from which we may never be able to extricate ourselves, from the mountains of Pakistan comes a very simple solution: convert to Islam. (and no, it was not a joke)
Capitalism uses the power of the state to concentrate economic power into the hands of a few. Political power rapidly follows. Talk of "self determination" in the presense of radical imbalances in power and wealth is meaningless. Capitalism is inconsistent with economic and political self determination for the majority of citizens.
As opposed to Socialism, which uses the power of the state to concentrate economic power into the hands of the state leaders. Political corruption rapidly follows. Talk of "self determination" is immediately silenced, as it goes against the common good. Socialism is inconsistent with human rights, private property, economic or political self determination for all but the ruling class.
Good lord! What happened to Slashdot over the weekend? Why did a story from this conservative "news" site even get posted here?
Holy CRAP! You're right! How dare Slash post something that is not "left-approved". Truth is irrelevant if it does not tote the party line and must be silenced at all costs! /sarc off How is it that people from the right are called fascists when the left employs brownshirt tactics like this? Truth is truth. It doesn't have a political slant.
I, for one, do not welcome our conservatives overloads who call their political opponents traitors, communists, socialists, or un-American.
I would call ANSWER a political opponent. What does Wikipedia say about them?
ANSWER characterizes itself as anti-imperialist, and its steering committee consists of socialists, Marxists, civil rights advocates, and left-wing progressive organizations from the Muslim, Arab, Palestinian, Filipino, Haitian, and Latin American communities. Many of ANSWER's leaders were members of Workers World Party (WWP) at the time of ANSWER's founding, and are current members of the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL), a Marxist-Leninist organization that formed in 2004. Now why would we call them traitors, communists, socialists or un-American? I'm curious. What does a group have to do to be called these things?
(BTW, I signed and served. That's why I support the campaigns over there. That's how I know you are full of shit. If you had and actually got to meet these people and talk with them and see that they really really needed you there, you'd feel the same way.)
The fact that people complain and feel that Google is required to commemorate anything is pathetic. Seriously, people need to grow up and realize that not everything is just "perfect" as we want it. People take "equal" to crazy extremes. It is a free country and they can do as they wish, especially on something so fundamentally trivial as the appearance of their logo on a given day.
Free speech works two ways. They are free to honor whatever holiday they like. I am free to criticize them for it. Calling those that criticize Google "pathetic" is pretty pathetic itself.
Well by that token Fred Phelps and his "God Hates Fags" protesters are the face of the conservative movement. Casting the most radical of any faction as the norm is an easy way to dismiss any political movement.
Actually, Fred Phelps is a Democrat. Just as the Log Cabin Republicans. (actually, there are many others I could have chosen, but I thought the LCR would be most fitting)
Here, I'll even correct your first sentence for you:
Well by that token Fred Phelps and his "God Hates Fags" protesters are the face of the Democrat movement. I guess my only point here is to point out that conservatives, Christians, and just about everyone else with a brain has tossed out Phelps' cult as a representative of their organization. Something I have NOT seen progressives do with the likes of Rosie O'Donnell, Markos Molitas, Keith Olbermann, Code Pink, ANSWER, or Sandy Berger. Hell, these progressives have even gone so far as to embrace the likes of Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez!
Those of us on the right will unlump these guys from the progressive movement as soon as we see some progressives criticize them.
I just disabled Windows autorun and I'm equally safe.. *shrug*
I think the GP is implying that he doesn't have worry about things LIKE this.
An example I have would be a buddy of mine at work. He's a technician also, but not really a "geek". Anyway, he got a message from Time Warner the other day saying he was kicked off his cable Internet for sending out spam. Evidently, his desktop machine got infected. He said, "I don't get it. How did it get infected? I never use it. I always use my notebook. It's behind a firewall. It updates automatically. I just use it for remote access." Obviously, he runs a Windows product. I explained how my Linux box has been on the DMZ for years and I've never had a problem. (none of these are "production" machines, btw.)
Anyway, that is what the GP was talking about. When you run an obscure OS, you are secure through obscurity. That and Linux is pretty damn secure on its own.
You are partially correct. Afghanistan did sign the Geneva conventions. Rest assured that if we capture any Afghan soldiers, they will receive complete Geneva protections. Unfortunately for all of the people in custody at Gitmo, they are not Afghan soldiers. Many of them are not even Afghan!
Currently, we are in Afghanistan at the request of the government there. Same goes for Iraq. If either country requests that we return a citizen of theirs to their country, we will gladly do so. In the mean time, we are acting with the complete blessing of the freely elected governments of the two countries in question. If they feel that we are violating the Geneva conventions, they are free to make their case to the UN. Just because you don't like doesn't mean a thing. It's not up to you. It's up to the leaders of these countries to decide.
As to Al Qaeda, they are not a country...
Right. That's what I was saying in that last part. I think you said it better though.
As to us having to give them Constitutional protection, I say "not so fast". IANAL so I'll take your word for it when you say that the Geneva conventions states that illegal combatants are captured, they are to be treated under the laws of the capturing countries. Can you tell me what the laws in the US are for non-citizen, foreign captured "enemy combatants"? (This much I do know) Military Tribunal. That is what the US law states, so it is valid under the Geneva convention. The rules that are followed at Gitmo are in accordance with the procedures for military tribunals.
I definitely don't think that it is OK for any of those scenarios. The whole thing is messed up, and everyone involved probably needs a good spanking, and some time in the corner to reflect.
It's not about the Constitution. It's about the Geneva convention, and the lack of due process. Its about the invented designation of 'enemy combatant'. Is that so hard to understand?
Neither the Taliban, nor Al Qaeda signed the Geneva convention. I guess that's OK since they don't follow it. Even the Geneva convention doesn't expect a country to fight with one had tied behind its back. The Geneva convention does not force a country to give Geneva convention protections to prisoners that would not do the same.
The self-congratulation over giving them food and Qurans, it really makes me laugh. "Who cares about the rule of law - we gave them Fruit Loops! We're fucking heroes!"
Well, yeah. Here is what they faced in Afghanistan if left with the Northern Alliance:
Physicians for Human Rights visited a major detention facility for surrendered Taliban combatants, Shebarghan Prison, in January 2002 and publicized its findings widely in the media. The prison was freezing cold, food was minimal, and sanitation was dangerously squalid. The facility was overflowing with ten times as many men as it was built to hold, and thousands depended upon a small trickle of water and a half dozen latrines. Many had died from dysentery and exposure by the time of the visit by PHR.
Physicians for Human Rights researchers made an even more disturbing finding within a few miles of Shebarghan Prison: a large patch of disturbed earth with remains of bodies on the surface suggesting a mass grave site. The United Nations Human Rights Commission conducted a preliminary investigation of the site, located at Dasht-e Leili in April 2002. Working with a forensic expert, seconded by PHR, the Commission investigators uncovered fifteen bodies who appeared to have been smothered, in a small test trench dug at the site. In late August, Newsweek magazine released a special report on the issue of war crimes in Afghanistan about how negotiations among the U.S. special forces, the Northern Alliance, and captured Taliban combatants after the fall of Kunduz should have led to the release of most of them, but instead resulted in the death of hundreds. Reportedly Northern Alliance forces under the command of General Dostum packed the Taliban combatants into airless and waterless containers for days. Newsweek obtained testimonial evidence that the drivers of the container trucks were prevented from providing ventilation or water to the captives.
So yeah! We are fucking heroes.
(the site where I got that is a pretty non-partisan site. They are pretty hard on Bush as well. I'm not saying he is perfect, but I think he is right here. Sure, it would have been easy to quote the White House just as it would have been easy for you to quote Amnesty International or something)
Let me leave with a quote from Orwell. Since I've seen so many people who call this "Orwellian" because they think it reminds them of 1984, I thought it may be appropriate since you seem to be a pacifist.
Pacifism is objectively pro-Fascist. This is elementary common sense. If you hamper the war effort of one side you automatically help that of the other. Nor is there any real way of remaining outside such a war as the present one. In practice, 'he that is not with me is against me'. The idea that you can somehow remain aloof from and superior to the struggle, while living on food which British sailors have to risk their lives to bring you, is a bourgeois illusion bred of money and security. Mr Savage remarks that 'according to this type of reasoning, a German or Japanese pacifist would be "objectively pro-British".' But of course he would be! That is why pacifist activities are not permitted in those countries (in both of them the penalty is, or can be, beheading) while both the Germans and the Japanese do all they can to encourage the spread of pacifism in British and American territories. The Germans even run a spurious 'freedom' statio
"My point here, is that its not "black and white"..." And that was my point also, for the person I was replying to, I think I was that person. I got it and used to agree. My only thing is that when I see some kid blow up a pizza joint full of teenagers, it becomes black and white. When I see men set up a mortar and fire it from an elementary school, it becomes black and white. When I see rocket launchers set up in residential neighborhoods and fire into other residential neighborhoods, it becomes black and white.
Granted, I've seen bad things from the Israeli side as well. I've seen cars that were carrying terrorist leaders blown up on a busy street. I've seen bombs dropped into those neighborhoods that missiles were fired from. However their weapons are accurate, and few, if any civilians are killed. Even if they are, they obviously were not the target. My favorite was found when I ran across Pallywood.
I guess my point is that when Israel kills Palestinian civilians, Israel apologizes. When a Palestinian kills Israeli civilians, they take credit.
You are afraid of the boogie man. It's a nonsense threat that does not exist. I can't begin to tell you how wrong you are.
I converted to Islam ten years ago to marry my wife, who was an Egyptian graduate student at the time and is now a US citizen. There is most certainly a war, and there is most certainly a threat, although it is certain that you (and maybe he, as well) do not properly understand it. I know it bothers you to be proven wrong. I hope that you will take what he says to heart and not just get mad. I would guess that he knows what he's talking about. If you have not read his response yet, when you do, please do not reply by calling him the foulest words you can think of. He is right. You were wrong. Don't take it personally. There is nothing wrong with ignorance. There is something seriously wrong with refusing an education.
Think about what this guy told you. He's seen real Fascism. He has seen modern day brownshirts. He knows what Fascism is. Please think about that before you call Republicans fascist. It's not Republicans that invite and cheer world leaders that hang homosexuals to speak at a college and then shut-down via protest the people that want to point out that he truly is a fascist. These people that are preventing speakers from speaking in the name of "free speech" are not part of the right. They come from groups like MoveOn.org, ANSWER and the ACLU. None of these are what I would call right-leaning. While I wouldn't call them fasicsts yet, when I see them shout down and rush the stage to silence opposing views, I am reminded of the tactics used by brownshirts.
It's long and angry at times, but read to the end for the most important part. But tell that to the Guantanamo prisoners who have received no trial. But I suppose you feel that that's totally unimportant, since it doesn't affect you personally. Can you tell me what Constitutional right the prisoners at Gitmo have had taken away? Here's a hint, it rhymes with ZERO. There are no American citizens at Gitmo. For that matter, we are treating them much better than we should. Hell, those guys get better treatment than the prisoners here in the states that DO have Constitutional protection. Those guys really do eat better than I do. We don't have to give them gourmet meals. Hell, we could feed them nothing but pork if we wanted to. We don't have to tell them which way Mecca is. We don't have to provide them with Qurans. We don't have to give them prayer rugs. We don't have to do shit. We could have just as easily... wait, make that... IT WOULD HAVE BEEN EASIER to shoot them in Afghanistan. So don't give me any shit about the rights we are NOT giving to Gitmo prisoners. They literally, really and truly deserve none. Not by law. Not by simple morality. First they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Cute. How about this one:
First they came for the Jews. The police tried to stop them, but we protested to protect their freedom to express their feeling towards the Jews. They were poor minorities who needed our protection, whereas the Jews were able to provide for themselves by exploiting the resources of others. We blocked access to the roads that the police needed to get to the area with a classic street sit-in. It took so much time to clear us out that they didn't make it in time to suppress those that were coming for the Jews...
I don't see any bitching about having no rights. The bitching seems more worried that American ideals should not be thrown by the wayside without good cause.
Really? It's hard to get through a/. story without the seeing words Bush and Fascist a single post. Here is one.
...The only effects of 9/11 I'm still dealing with are the stupid airline searches that are less than 50% effective at detecting weapons, the reduction in human and civil rights that affect ~300,000,000 people in the U.S. and countless more in other countries, and having to listen to whiners like you who can't get it through your head that the 9/11 "terrorist" attacks were frankly indistinguishable from murder/arson. The murderers/arsonists are dead, and the people who trained them are dead or on the run at this point. What more can you possibly want besides a fascist police state?
Read the whole thing. It's got Bush, Fascist AND police state. It hit the trifecta. Bonus points for "war for oil" and "Saddam tried to kill my daddy". (no mention that his "daddy" was a former head of state. WWI was started over something similar)
I don't know if it's totalitarianism so much as it is fascism [wikipedia.org].
Check out this piece comparing Bush to Hitler [thepoliticaljunkies.net].
The Constitution was designed to alert the population when a president is changing the government into something else. That's why we hear so much about Bush violating the Constitution - he's trying to change our government into something else. Whether he's consciously targeting fascism, or it's a happy coincidence, I don't care - either way, it sucks and I'll be VERY GLAD to see him go.
First he compares our government to either totalitarianism or to fascism. Then he compares Bush to Hitler. Then, and this is best part, he say's he'll be glad when Bush steps down in little more than a year. He actually disproved the first half of his post with the second
The claim that these sites are used to monitor international internet traffic is made primarily by Bush apologists such as yourself. The factual observations point to a system for monitoring domestic (USA) internet traffic.
What "factual observations"? Can you point me to some? All we have is a guy who worked for AT&T who took pictures of the outside of a building saying that there is a super-secret closet inside that all Internet traffic that is on AT&T's wires travels through. He knows this in depth even though he is not authorized to enter the said closet and has no clearance to know anything about it.
I'm not a Bush apologist. I just don't like it when people have to make shit up to make the country look bad and get on TV. I also don't like people like you who take such claims and others like it and turn it into "factual observations." This guy's story has not come anywhere close to being proven and his "observations" are based on his words and a picture of a sign that says, "Camera in use." We have signs like that were I work. Does that mean the NSA has a super-secret closet here too?
Finally, why would the NSA need to rent a closet at these AT&T offices. Why wouldn't they just reprogram the routers to copy and send the traffic to Area-51 or wherever? Wouldn't that be cheaper, easier, and more secure?
Far, far more people die from traffic accidents than from terrorism. It would make far, far more sense to sacrifice freedom and democracy for the sake of saving traffic lives.
OK, let's take your driving argument and apply it to what we are talking about here.
The DOT is the governments SS wing. Those fascists are stomping all over the Constitution with their Gestapo agents patrolling our streets. The other day, I was literally pulled over and had to produce my papers. Yes, it's true! I'm not lying. When I was pulled over, I was forced to not only show ID, but I was forced to show papers proving my insurance status. I always thought that "papers please" crap was a joke made by tin-foil-hat types until a government agent actually made me show my papers.
On top of the papers, he asked me, "where ya headed in such a hurry". First, my private life is none of the government's damn business. Next, the "such a hurry" part. He was basically telling me I was guilty without so much as jury or even telling me what I was charged with. I was not read any rights and not even offered my Constitutional right to an attorney.
Of course, all of this was the latest trampling of my liberties. Others include: * Forcing me to have my personal property "inspected" by government agents. This is just government's kickbacks to the auto industry. They tell me it doesn't meet inspection so I have to go pay the auto-mafia to get it fixed. Their agent also got into my car without a warrant and searched under the hood. They also took down my mileage to see how far I had traveled and tapped into my car's computer. Who knows what they got out of there! I wouldn't be surprised if they implanted a tracking device so they can track me everywhere I go. I have committed no crime. Why am I being treated like a criminal? * Forcing me to have insurance on my personal property. This is just a kickback to the insurance industry for all those campaign contributions. Ever notice that in 2000, Progressive Insurance was the single largest contributor to the Democratic party? I guess they wanted to grease the palms that vote for mandatory insurance. * Telling me how and where I can drive. It's none of their damn business how I drive. If I don't want to use a signal, so what. Why is it their business? If I want to drive 100mph on the road that I paid for as a tax payer, I should be able to. Not according to the government. Why, just the other day, I saw a sign that said, "Road closed due to high water." High water, right! They are telling the public where they can't go. They are stripping away our Constitutional right to travel! * Telling me what I can do BEFORE driving. There is no law against drinking alcohol. As a matter of fact, according to the 18'th amendment, I have a Constitutional RIGHT to drink alcohol. But you mix that Constitutional right with the right to travel and they will throw you in a government detention center!
If you can't see that our fuhrer Bush is trampling all over our Constitution with these "traffic laws" then you are blind. Stand up for your rights and stop him from wiping his ass with the Constitution!
OK, it's a bit far fetched but it shows that while more people die in traffic accidents, we also have many MANY more laws restricting how, where and when we travel than we do to fight terrorism. You need to take a test to get a license to drive, but any old ID will allow you to fly. The only test is, "did you pack your bags yourself?" and "have they been in your possession since you packed them?". Hell, you know all the questions before you even take the test!
The WOT has not changed how I live my life in the least. NOTHING has changed at all except I see a bunch of people bitching about how they have no rights. (obviously their freedom of speech is still in tact!) If you really think about it, when it comes to terror related legislation, we have it pretty damn easy compared to all the other laws that are on the books. I just used driving as an example because you brought it up.
First, I'm not at all impressed by the images. Unfortunately that is all the evidence I see presented, other than his word.
Next, I don't buy it because it's not feasible. How many NSA agents would it take to monitor ALL Internet traffic. That means bit torrents, email (including spam), web traffic (html), tunnels, ATM transactions, credit card transactions, Windows updates, NNTP porn, remote backups, YouTube videos, streaming radio stations and so on. There is just way too much crap flowing over the wires to monitor it all. The NSA, CIA, FBI, US Army, Marines, Navy, Air Force and National Guard combined wouldn't have the man power to monitor that much data.
So, I call bullshit. And this guy needs to loosen his tinfoil hat. Whoever mods the parent troll, please look up Mesh network and tell me how 100% of the world's web traffic passes through a single closet in San Francisco.
You assuming at least a couple things here
A: That Agents are monitoring the traffic. Could be they are filtering for keywords. Storing for later review.
B: That they are looking at all the traffic. Well, the post says ALL TRAFFIC. (it does go on to say all of AT&T's traffic, however). Even so, it's not feasible. As another poster pointed out, if I ping the house next door, is it routed through this super secret black closet in San Francisco? No? Then how is the NSA using this to monitor all Internet traffic?
We learn in The Internet for Dummies that any two packet do not have to, and probably will not take the same route to get from A to B. The whole idea of the Internet is that it does not have a single point of failure. This super-secret-black-closet is such a single point of failure. I'm not buying it. Anyone with the most rudimentary knowledge of how mesh networks operate shouldn't buy it either.
(forgive the next OT part)
Britain decides for partition, and you have to give up your homeland, your business, your home so that a bunch of people who have been practicing terrorism in your country can have a home? If it were you, you would be pissed, and fighting back, so would I. First, it was the UN that partitioned that area, not Britain.
I understand( and support ) the idea of Israel having a homeland, but I also understand that the Palestinians want the same, The Palestinians have a homeland. The UN resolution did not give the land that Palestinians claim was Palestine and give it to the Israelis. They took a piece of land that was British and gave half to Israel and half to the Palestinians. When Israel was attacked for being there (notice that British were not) by every neighboring Arab nation, the said, "Screw you people, we're taking it all!" Since then, they have given it back. Still not good enough evidently. The Palestinians want to claim that all of the land that was once British was really Palestine and they want it all back.
If it were you, you would be pissed, and fighting back, That was 50+ years ago. At what point to give up? Would you support Native Americans lobbing mortars into New York from Jersey? Would you support them launching missiles into Detroit from a reservation in Michigan? What's the difference (other than this had always been Indian land)?
Howzabout Bandwidth. Does anyone actually believe there is basically a complete second internet that mirrors the first all to send it to some room an San Francisco? That if I ping my neighbor's router that traffic gets copied, along with every other little bit, out to the NSA?
I'd have a very tough time believing that they're routing all backbone traffic through something like this.
Excellent point! I ran a traceroute from Austin to Houston and it never went through San Francisco.
First, I'm not at all impressed by the images. Unfortunately that is all the evidence I see presented, other than his word.
Next, I don't buy it because it's not feasible. How many NSA agents would it take to monitor ALL Internet traffic. That means bit torrents, email (including spam), web traffic (html), tunnels, ATM transactions, credit card transactions, Windows updates, NNTP porn, remote backups, YouTube videos, streaming radio stations and so on. There is just way too much crap flowing over the wires to monitor it all. The NSA, CIA, FBI, US Army, Marines, Navy, Air Force and National Guard combined wouldn't have the man power to monitor that much data.
So, I call bullshit. And this guy needs to loosen his tinfoil hat.
What's worse is that this will be justified under the guise of anti-terrorism. As bills get passed to erode the freedom of American's, I'm watching the US slowly descend into totalitarianism. Lets face it, Americans just don't care. And why should they? They live comfortable lives, entertained with Britney Spears and Paris Hilton. If they follow the rules, they won't get hassled. Things will have to get pretty bad until people wake up and realize what has happened. How else do you fight terrorism? What would you suggest (other than that warm fuzzy "leave them alone and they'll leave us alone BS)". How would you FIGHT terrorism.
Ignoring the feasibility of it all, whose to say that they are looking at domestic data anyway. So what if they are reading emails between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Hell! I hope they ARE reading emails between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. It's called espionage. Not only is it perfectly legal, but it's something we SHOULD be doing.
Why exactly would a civilisation "pass thru" the radio phase? Radio is a damned useful technology, and always will be. We didn't stop using visible light when we discovered radio, and there's no reason to presume radio will be discarded simply because something new comes along.
Well, we stopped using light (visual) to detect objects in the sky. Radar replaced visual scanning for planes in WWII and we haven't looked back. Sure, we still use visual for detailed stuff like "is my landing gear down? My light is not on" type stuff. But if radar were more accurate, I'm sure it would replace that as well. We also use radar when looking for ships, ice bergs or whatever on the seas. Radar is complimenting rear view mirrors in new cars and may one day replace them once automated driving kicks in. We will never "replace" light with radar because our eyes see it naturally and the sun provides plenty of it for free 50% of the time. But if our eyes could see radio, I would be willing to bet that all of our light bulbs would be replaced by transmitters.
Slashdot Mirror
I was thinking the same thing and figure the final word in tired, cheap ST plot devices would be a prequel about travelling back in time to meet Q in a runaway holodeck program.
Well, you may need the Borg in there somewhere and whatever the problem is, it must be fixed using some pseudo-science techno-solution that is redirected through the deflector dish.
I'm getting pretty tired of prequels and time travel. This seems to have a lot of both. Don't get me wrong, I'll still pay to go see it and drag my wife along kicking and screaming to see it with me. I'll probably have to fork out for good dinner to get her to come along.
Who knows. It can still be good. Let's hope it doesn't suck or I'll get more resistance from the Mrs when trying to go to the next SciFi movie.
Capitalism uses the power of the state to concentrate economic power into the hands of a few. Political power rapidly follows. Talk of "self determination" in the presense of radical imbalances in power and wealth is meaningless. Capitalism is inconsistent with economic and political self determination for the majority of citizens.
As opposed to Socialism, which uses the power of the state to concentrate economic power into the hands of the state leaders. Political corruption rapidly follows. Talk of "self determination" is immediately silenced, as it goes against the common good. Socialism is inconsistent with human rights, private property, economic or political self determination for all but the ruling class.
Holy CRAP! You're right! How dare Slash post something that is not "left-approved". Truth is irrelevant if it does not tote the party line and must be silenced at all costs!
How is it that people from the right are called fascists when the left employs brownshirt tactics like this? Truth is truth. It doesn't have a political slant.
I, for one, do not welcome our conservatives overloads who call their political opponents traitors, communists, socialists, or un-American.
I would call ANSWER a political opponent. What does Wikipedia say about them? ANSWER characterizes itself as anti-imperialist, and its steering committee consists of socialists, Marxists, civil rights advocates, and left-wing progressive organizations from the Muslim, Arab, Palestinian, Filipino, Haitian, and Latin American communities. Many of ANSWER's leaders were members of Workers World Party (WWP) at the time of ANSWER's founding, and are current members of the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL), a Marxist-Leninist organization that formed in 2004. Now why would we call them traitors, communists, socialists or un-American? I'm curious. What does a group have to do to be called these things?
(See the whole thing HERE
Jesse Macbeth, is that you?
(BTW, I signed and served. That's why I support the campaigns over there. That's how I know you are full of shit. If you had and actually got to meet these people and talk with them and see that they really really needed you there, you'd feel the same way.)
The fact that people complain and feel that Google is required to commemorate anything is pathetic. Seriously, people need to grow up and realize that not everything is just "perfect" as we want it. People take "equal" to crazy extremes. It is a free country and they can do as they wish, especially on something so fundamentally trivial as the appearance of their logo on a given day.
Free speech works two ways. They are free to honor whatever holiday they like. I am free to criticize them for it. Calling those that criticize Google "pathetic" is pretty pathetic itself.
Actually, Fred Phelps is a Democrat. Just as the Log Cabin Republicans. (actually, there are many others I could have chosen, but I thought the LCR would be most fitting)
Here, I'll even correct your first sentence for you: Well by that token Fred Phelps and his "God Hates Fags" protesters are the face of the Democrat movement. I guess my only point here is to point out that conservatives, Christians, and just about everyone else with a brain has tossed out Phelps' cult as a representative of their organization. Something I have NOT seen progressives do with the likes of Rosie O'Donnell, Markos Molitas, Keith Olbermann, Code Pink, ANSWER, or Sandy Berger. Hell, these progressives have even gone so far as to embrace the likes of Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez!
Those of us on the right will unlump these guys from the progressive movement as soon as we see some progressives criticize them.
I just disabled Windows autorun and I'm equally safe.. *shrug*
I think the GP is implying that he doesn't have worry about things LIKE this.
An example I have would be a buddy of mine at work. He's a technician also, but not really a "geek". Anyway, he got a message from Time Warner the other day saying he was kicked off his cable Internet for sending out spam. Evidently, his desktop machine got infected. He said, "I don't get it. How did it get infected? I never use it. I always use my notebook. It's behind a firewall. It updates automatically. I just use it for remote access." Obviously, he runs a Windows product. I explained how my Linux box has been on the DMZ for years and I've never had a problem. (none of these are "production" machines, btw.)
Anyway, that is what the GP was talking about. When you run an obscure OS, you are secure through obscurity. That and Linux is pretty damn secure on its own.
You are partially correct. Afghanistan did sign the Geneva conventions. Rest assured that if we capture any Afghan soldiers, they will receive complete Geneva protections. Unfortunately for all of the people in custody at Gitmo, they are not Afghan soldiers. Many of them are not even Afghan!
Currently, we are in Afghanistan at the request of the government there. Same goes for Iraq. If either country requests that we return a citizen of theirs to their country, we will gladly do so. In the mean time, we are acting with the complete blessing of the freely elected governments of the two countries in question. If they feel that we are violating the Geneva conventions, they are free to make their case to the UN. Just because you don't like doesn't mean a thing. It's not up to you. It's up to the leaders of these countries to decide.
As to Al Qaeda, they are not a country...
Right. That's what I was saying in that last part. I think you said it better though.
As to us having to give them Constitutional protection, I say "not so fast". IANAL so I'll take your word for it when you say that the Geneva conventions states that illegal combatants are captured, they are to be treated under the laws of the capturing countries. Can you tell me what the laws in the US are for non-citizen, foreign captured "enemy combatants"? (This much I do know) Military Tribunal. That is what the US law states, so it is valid under the Geneva convention. The rules that are followed at Gitmo are in accordance with the procedures for military tribunals.
I definitely don't think that it is OK for any of those scenarios.
The whole thing is messed up, and everyone involved probably needs
a good spanking, and some time in the corner to reflect.
Here is where we agree.
nice talk.
Neither the Taliban, nor Al Qaeda signed the Geneva convention. I guess that's OK since they don't follow it. Even the Geneva convention doesn't expect a country to fight with one had tied behind its back. The Geneva convention does not force a country to give Geneva convention protections to prisoners that would not do the same.
The self-congratulation over giving them food and Qurans, it really makes me laugh. "Who cares about the rule of law - we gave them Fruit Loops! We're fucking heroes!"
Well, yeah. Here is what they faced in Afghanistan if left with the Northern Alliance:
Physicians for Human Rights visited a major detention facility for surrendered Taliban combatants, Shebarghan Prison, in January 2002 and publicized its findings widely in the media. The prison was freezing cold, food was minimal, and sanitation was dangerously squalid. The facility was overflowing with ten times as many men as it was built to hold, and thousands depended upon a small trickle of water and a half dozen latrines. Many had died from dysentery and exposure by the time of the visit by PHR.
Physicians for Human Rights researchers made an even more disturbing finding within a few miles of Shebarghan Prison: a large patch of disturbed earth with remains of bodies on the surface suggesting a mass grave site. The United Nations Human Rights Commission conducted a preliminary investigation of the site, located at Dasht-e Leili in April 2002. Working with a forensic expert, seconded by PHR, the Commission investigators uncovered fifteen bodies who appeared to have been smothered, in a small test trench dug at the site. In late August, Newsweek magazine released a special report on the issue of war crimes in Afghanistan about how negotiations among the U.S. special forces, the Northern Alliance, and captured Taliban combatants after the fall of Kunduz should have led to the release of most of them, but instead resulted in the death of hundreds. Reportedly Northern Alliance forces under the command of General Dostum packed the Taliban combatants into airless and waterless containers for days. Newsweek obtained testimonial evidence that the drivers of the container trucks were prevented from providing ventilation or water to the captives.
So yeah! We are fucking heroes.
(the site where I got that is a pretty non-partisan site. They are pretty hard on Bush as well. I'm not saying he is perfect, but I think he is right here. Sure, it would have been easy to quote the White House just as it would have been easy for you to quote Amnesty International or something)
Let me leave with a quote from Orwell. Since I've seen so many people who call this "Orwellian" because they think it reminds them of 1984, I thought it may be appropriate since you seem to be a pacifist.
Pacifism is objectively pro-Fascist. This is elementary common sense. If you hamper the war effort of one side you automatically help that of the other. Nor is there any real way of remaining outside such a war as the present one. In practice, 'he that is not with me is against me'. The idea that you can somehow remain aloof from and superior to the struggle, while living on food which British sailors have to risk their lives to bring you, is a bourgeois illusion bred of money and security. Mr Savage remarks that 'according to this type of reasoning, a German or Japanese pacifist would be "objectively pro-British".' But of course he would be! That is why pacifist activities are not permitted in those countries (in both of them the penalty is, or can be, beheading) while both the Germans and the Japanese do all they can to encourage the spread of pacifism in British and American territories. The Germans even run a spurious 'freedom' statio
Granted, I've seen bad things from the Israeli side as well. I've seen cars that were carrying terrorist leaders blown up on a busy street. I've seen bombs dropped into those neighborhoods that missiles were fired from. However their weapons are accurate, and few, if any civilians are killed. Even if they are, they obviously were not the target. My favorite was found when I ran across Pallywood.
I guess my point is that when Israel kills Palestinian civilians, Israel apologizes. When a Palestinian kills Israeli civilians, they take credit.
I converted to Islam ten years ago to marry my wife, who was an Egyptian graduate student at the time and is now a US citizen. There is most certainly a war, and there is most certainly a threat, although it is certain that you (and maybe he, as well) do not properly understand it. I know it bothers you to be proven wrong. I hope that you will take what he says to heart and not just get mad. I would guess that he knows what he's talking about. If you have not read his response yet, when you do, please do not reply by calling him the foulest words you can think of. He is right. You were wrong. Don't take it personally. There is nothing wrong with ignorance. There is something seriously wrong with refusing an education.
Think about what this guy told you. He's seen real Fascism. He has seen modern day brownshirts. He knows what Fascism is. Please think about that before you call Republicans fascist. It's not Republicans that invite and cheer world leaders that hang homosexuals to speak at a college and then shut-down via protest the people that want to point out that he truly is a fascist. These people that are preventing speakers from speaking in the name of "free speech" are not part of the right. They come from groups like MoveOn.org, ANSWER and the ACLU. None of these are what I would call right-leaning. While I wouldn't call them fasicsts yet, when I see them shout down and rush the stage to silence opposing views, I am reminded of the tactics used by brownshirts.
But tell that to the Guantanamo prisoners who have received no trial. But I suppose you feel that that's totally unimportant, since it doesn't affect you personally.
Can you tell me what Constitutional right the prisoners at Gitmo have had taken away? Here's a hint, it rhymes with ZERO. There are no American citizens at Gitmo. For that matter, we are treating them much better than we should. Hell, those guys get better treatment than the prisoners here in the states that DO have Constitutional protection. Those guys really do eat better than I do. We don't have to give them gourmet meals. Hell, we could feed them nothing but pork if we wanted to. We don't have to tell them which way Mecca is. We don't have to provide them with Qurans. We don't have to give them prayer rugs. We don't have to do shit. We could have just as easily... wait, make that... IT WOULD HAVE BEEN EASIER to shoot them in Afghanistan.
So don't give me any shit about the rights we are NOT giving to Gitmo prisoners. They literally, really and truly deserve none. Not by law. Not by simple morality.
First they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Cute. How about this one:
First they came for the Jews. The police tried to stop them, but we protested to protect their freedom to express their feeling towards the Jews. They were poor minorities who needed our protection, whereas the Jews were able to provide for themselves by exploiting the resources of others. We blocked access to the roads that the police needed to get to the area with a classic street sit-in. It took so much time to clear us out that they didn't make it in time to suppress those that were coming for the Jews...
I don't see any bitching about having no rights. The bitching seems more worried that American ideals should not be thrown by the wayside without good cause.
/. story without the seeing words Bush and Fascist a single post. Here is one.
Really? It's hard to get through a
...The only effects of 9/11 I'm still dealing with are the stupid airline searches that are less than 50% effective at detecting weapons, the reduction in human and civil rights that affect ~300,000,000 people in the U.S. and countless more in other countries, and having to listen to whiners like you who can't get it through your head that the 9/11 "terrorist" attacks were frankly indistinguishable from murder/arson. The murderers/arsonists are dead, and the people who trained them are dead or on the run at this point. What more can you possibly want besides a fascist police state?
Read the whole thing. It's got Bush, Fascist AND police state. It hit the trifecta. Bonus points for "war for oil" and "Saddam tried to kill my daddy". (no mention that his "daddy" was a former head of state. WWI was started over something similar)
Here is another
I don't know if it's totalitarianism so much as it is fascism [wikipedia.org].
Check out this piece comparing Bush to Hitler [thepoliticaljunkies.net].
The Constitution was designed to alert the population when a president is changing the government into something else. That's why we hear so much about Bush violating the Constitution - he's trying to change our government into something else. Whether he's consciously targeting fascism, or it's a happy coincidence, I don't care - either way, it sucks and I'll be VERY GLAD to see him go.
First he compares our government to either totalitarianism or to fascism. Then he compares Bush to Hitler. Then, and this is best part, he say's he'll be glad when Bush steps down in little more than a year. He actually disproved the first half of his post with the second
The claim that these sites are used to monitor international internet traffic is made primarily by Bush apologists such as yourself. The factual observations point to a system for monitoring domestic (USA) internet traffic.
What "factual observations"? Can you point me to some? All we have is a guy who worked for AT&T who took pictures of the outside of a building saying that there is a super-secret closet inside that all Internet traffic that is on AT&T's wires travels through. He knows this in depth even though he is not authorized to enter the said closet and has no clearance to know anything about it.
I'm not a Bush apologist. I just don't like it when people have to make shit up to make the country look bad and get on TV. I also don't like people like you who take such claims and others like it and turn it into "factual observations." This guy's story has not come anywhere close to being proven and his "observations" are based on his words and a picture of a sign that says, "Camera in use." We have signs like that were I work. Does that mean the NSA has a super-secret closet here too?
Finally, why would the NSA need to rent a closet at these AT&T offices. Why wouldn't they just reprogram the routers to copy and send the traffic to Area-51 or wherever? Wouldn't that be cheaper, easier, and more secure?
I see you were modded (-1 Truth)
Far, far more people die from traffic accidents than from terrorism. It would make far, far more sense to sacrifice freedom and democracy for the sake of saving traffic lives.
OK, let's take your driving argument and apply it to what we are talking about here.
The DOT is the governments SS wing. Those fascists are stomping all over the Constitution with their Gestapo agents patrolling our streets. The other day, I was literally pulled over and had to produce my papers. Yes, it's true! I'm not lying. When I was pulled over, I was forced to not only show ID, but I was forced to show papers proving my insurance status. I always thought that "papers please" crap was a joke made by tin-foil-hat types until a government agent actually made me show my papers.
On top of the papers, he asked me, "where ya headed in such a hurry". First, my private life is none of the government's damn business. Next, the "such a hurry" part. He was basically telling me I was guilty without so much as jury or even telling me what I was charged with. I was not read any rights and not even offered my Constitutional right to an attorney.
Of course, all of this was the latest trampling of my liberties. Others include:
* Forcing me to have my personal property "inspected" by government agents. This is just government's kickbacks to the auto industry. They tell me it doesn't meet inspection so I have to go pay the auto-mafia to get it fixed. Their agent also got into my car without a warrant and searched under the hood. They also took down my mileage to see how far I had traveled and tapped into my car's computer. Who knows what they got out of there! I wouldn't be surprised if they implanted a tracking device so they can track me everywhere I go. I have committed no crime. Why am I being treated like a criminal?
* Forcing me to have insurance on my personal property. This is just a kickback to the insurance industry for all those campaign contributions. Ever notice that in 2000, Progressive Insurance was the single largest contributor to the Democratic party? I guess they wanted to grease the palms that vote for mandatory insurance.
* Telling me how and where I can drive. It's none of their damn business how I drive. If I don't want to use a signal, so what. Why is it their business? If I want to drive 100mph on the road that I paid for as a tax payer, I should be able to. Not according to the government. Why, just the other day, I saw a sign that said, "Road closed due to high water." High water, right! They are telling the public where they can't go. They are stripping away our Constitutional right to travel!
* Telling me what I can do BEFORE driving. There is no law against drinking alcohol. As a matter of fact, according to the 18'th amendment, I have a Constitutional RIGHT to drink alcohol. But you mix that Constitutional right with the right to travel and they will throw you in a government detention center!
If you can't see that our fuhrer Bush is trampling all over our Constitution with these "traffic laws" then you are blind. Stand up for your rights and stop him from wiping his ass with the Constitution!
OK, it's a bit far fetched but it shows that while more people die in traffic accidents, we also have many MANY more laws restricting how, where and when we travel than we do to fight terrorism. You need to take a test to get a license to drive, but any old ID will allow you to fly. The only test is, "did you pack your bags yourself?" and "have they been in your possession since you packed them?". Hell, you know all the questions before you even take the test!
The WOT has not changed how I live my life in the least. NOTHING has changed at all except I see a bunch of people bitching about how they have no rights. (obviously their freedom of speech is still in tact!) If you really think about it, when it comes to terror related legislation, we have it pretty damn easy compared to all the other laws that are on the books. I just used driving as an example because you brought it up.
Next, I don't buy it because it's not feasible. How many NSA agents would it take to monitor ALL Internet traffic. That means bit torrents, email (including spam), web traffic (html), tunnels, ATM transactions, credit card transactions, Windows updates, NNTP porn, remote backups, YouTube videos, streaming radio stations and so on. There is just way too much crap flowing over the wires to monitor it all. The NSA, CIA, FBI, US Army, Marines, Navy, Air Force and National Guard combined wouldn't have the man power to monitor that much data.
So, I call bullshit. And this guy needs to loosen his tinfoil hat. Whoever mods the parent troll, please look up Mesh network and tell me how 100% of the world's web traffic passes through a single closet in San Francisco.
A: That Agents are monitoring the traffic. Could be they are filtering for keywords. Storing for later review.
B: That they are looking at all the traffic. Well, the post says ALL TRAFFIC. (it does go on to say all of AT&T's traffic, however). Even so, it's not feasible. As another poster pointed out, if I ping the house next door, is it routed through this super secret black closet in San Francisco? No? Then how is the NSA using this to monitor all Internet traffic?
We learn in The Internet for Dummies that any two packet do not have to, and probably will not take the same route to get from A to B. The whole idea of the Internet is that it does not have a single point of failure. This super-secret-black-closet is such a single point of failure. I'm not buying it. Anyone with the most rudimentary knowledge of how mesh networks operate shouldn't buy it either.
(forgive the next OT part) Britain decides for
partition, and you have to give up your homeland, your business, your home
so that a bunch of people who have been practicing terrorism in your country
can have a home? If it were you, you would be pissed, and fighting back,
so would I. First, it was the UN that partitioned that area, not Britain. I understand( and support ) the idea of Israel having a homeland, but I also understand that the Palestinians want the same, The Palestinians have a homeland. The UN resolution did not give the land that Palestinians claim was Palestine and give it to the Israelis. They took a piece of land that was British and gave half to Israel and half to the Palestinians. When Israel was attacked for being there (notice that British were not) by every neighboring Arab nation, the said, "Screw you people, we're taking it all!" Since then, they have given it back. Still not good enough evidently. The Palestinians want to claim that all of the land that was once British was really Palestine and they want it all back. If it were you, you would be pissed, and fighting back, That was 50+ years ago. At what point to give up? Would you support Native Americans lobbing mortars into New York from Jersey? Would you support them launching missiles into Detroit from a reservation in Michigan? What's the difference (other than this had always been Indian land)?
Howzabout Bandwidth. Does anyone actually believe there is basically a complete second internet that mirrors the first all to send it to some room an San Francisco? That if I ping my neighbor's router that traffic gets copied, along with every other little bit, out to the NSA?
I'd have a very tough time believing that they're routing all backbone traffic through something like this.
Excellent point! I ran a traceroute from Austin to Houston and it never went through San Francisco.
Some people feel that respecting and protecting freedom and democracy is more important than fighting terrorism.
How does monitoring bits over a wire limit your freedom or prevent you from voting?
Next, I don't buy it because it's not feasible. How many NSA agents would it take to monitor ALL Internet traffic. That means bit torrents, email (including spam), web traffic (html), tunnels, ATM transactions, credit card transactions, Windows updates, NNTP porn, remote backups, YouTube videos, streaming radio stations and so on. There is just way too much crap flowing over the wires to monitor it all. The NSA, CIA, FBI, US Army, Marines, Navy, Air Force and National Guard combined wouldn't have the man power to monitor that much data.
So, I call bullshit. And this guy needs to loosen his tinfoil hat. What's worse is that this will be justified under the guise of anti-terrorism. As bills get passed to erode the freedom of American's, I'm watching the US slowly descend into totalitarianism. Lets face it, Americans just don't care. And why should they? They live comfortable lives, entertained with Britney Spears and Paris Hilton. If they follow the rules, they won't get hassled. Things will have to get pretty bad until people wake up and realize what has happened. How else do you fight terrorism? What would you suggest (other than that warm fuzzy "leave them alone and they'll leave us alone BS)". How would you FIGHT terrorism.
Ignoring the feasibility of it all, whose to say that they are looking at domestic data anyway. So what if they are reading emails between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Hell! I hope they ARE reading emails between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. It's called espionage. Not only is it perfectly legal, but it's something we SHOULD be doing.
My question is this:
Did he get to keep the bribe?
Why exactly would a civilisation "pass thru" the radio phase? Radio is a damned useful technology, and always will be. We didn't stop using visible light when we discovered radio, and there's no reason to presume radio will be discarded simply because something new comes along.
Well, we stopped using light (visual) to detect objects in the sky. Radar replaced visual scanning for planes in WWII and we haven't looked back. Sure, we still use visual for detailed stuff like "is my landing gear down? My light is not on" type stuff. But if radar were more accurate, I'm sure it would replace that as well. We also use radar when looking for ships, ice bergs or whatever on the seas. Radar is complimenting rear view mirrors in new cars and may one day replace them once automated driving kicks in. We will never "replace" light with radar because our eyes see it naturally and the sun provides plenty of it for free 50% of the time. But if our eyes could see radio, I would be willing to bet that all of our light bulbs would be replaced by transmitters.