To test Clerity, Feldman and his team collected some batch and CICS application code, sent it to Clerity and said he would be at Clerity's development center in 24 hours to see the results. Clerity passed.
Now that's service. I realize it's only compiling one code into another form but being able to take the code, compile it into what you need AND still have it work correctly in a 24 hour period is no easy feat.
If nothing else, other firms will look at this migration to an aix/linux platform and see the cost benefits of doing so. After all, if the NYSE has done it, it can't be a bad thing.
I worked for a financial services firm years ago and I too was fingerprinted. Granted, I was assisting several brokers but nonetheless, I was required to be fingerprinted. Three times. If memory serves, one copy went to the FBI, once copy went to the SEC and one copy to the firm I worked for.
If anything, being a programmer for a financial firm is just as sensitive a position as actually having access to client accounts. Programmers have access to all kinds of information that others do not.
Considering what business the firm is involved with, other people's money, it's a good thing she is being fingerprinted.
Of course, now that my fingerprints are on file from my former job, and an interview with another government agency, I have to wear gloves lined with tin foil to keep them guessing.
claiming that the "poor performance" was the fired attorney's failure to prosecute politically important cases.
Which means they weren't real cases but ones done for the benefit of one party. Which meant that if there was a conviction, the appeal would be upheld and the attorney would lose the case anyway.
So no, cherry picking cases to suit whatever party is in power is not a viable reason to fire a US attorney.
Bill Clinton fired those US Attorneys for political reasons, not performance reasons, and it was perfectly legal.
Apples and oranges. Bill Clinton, like his predecessors, cleared out everyone from the previous administration regardless of the political leanings of the people. There were both Republican and Democratic attorneys who were fired. This is standard procedure, as of late, for any incoming president.
What Bush and Gonzales, and apparently a few senators, have done was to fire people because they weren't filing politically motivated lawsuits and then lied about why the attorneys, who Bush had previously appointed, were fired. The claim was for performance reasons yet all had spotless records and as already pointed out, some were specifically told that they were being fired to make way for political appointees.
Gonzales and the White House then compounded this nonsense by lying about the real reasons behind the firings and Gonzales did it while under oath.
Further, throughout this whole performance, Gonzales has said all along he didn't know what was going on in his own department. What? You have US attorneys that are being fired and you know nothing about it? Either Gonzales is completely outside the loop of his own department or he is again lying when said he didn't know about the firings.
Nixon tried this same nonsense when his AG, Elliott Richardson, resigned rather than carry out Nixon's order to fire Special Prosecutor Archibold Cox in an effort to derail the Watergate investigation. Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus also resigned when he became AG because he too refused to carry out Nixon's orders.
Finally, it was left up to then Solicitor General Rober Bork, name sound familiar?, who became the acting AG who then carried out the orders. In effect, Nixon politicized both the AG's office and the Justice Department.
Bush, with the aid of Gonzales, is doing the exact same thing and anyone who has ever been involved with either the AG's office or the Justice Department knows that is wrong and completely out of bounds. These departments are supposed to act as neutral parties to the government and their actions should not be influenced by political considerations.
You are correct when you say the US Attorneys serve at the will of the President. Bill Clinton, when he came into office, fired all 83 US Attorneys and replaced them. So did Reagan and Bush, Sr.
Bush, however, not only did not do that, he waited until two years into his second term to fire eight attorneys which he had previously appointed!
Further, as is now becoming clear, the firings were not for performance reasons, but political reasons. In one case, the attorney was told he was being fired to make way for a former aide to Karl Rove. In another case, Iglesias, he was specificaly told his firing was not for performance reasons but political yet the White House and Gonzales kept saying, and still say to this day, that the firing was for performance issues.
As Iglesias said on Fox Noise, and as the transcript above shows, he asked for and was given permission to use the DOJ as a reference. If he was fired for performance reasons, why bother to give him a recommendation?
So what we have is an Attorney General who has been lying under oath about an incident which he apparently knew nothing about even though he heads the department. Let's see, lying under oath, can't recall information, doesn't know what's going on. Why does that sound familiar?
If screen four can be made a little more clear of explain that it has detected a Windows OS and lead the user from there, then we have a wonderful comfort level even before they get to see how Linux is so much better than Windows.
I have never contributed to any OSS project so this will be my first. Anyone working on Ubuntu who reads this, or if someone can pass this along to the appropriate person, you have my unconditional permission to use what I am about to say about this VERY important comment.
DO NOT simply say on the screen something to the effect, "Another operating system has been detected. Do you want to keep it or install over it?" 'Keep' 'Install'
If a newbie reads this, their first question will be, "What's an operating system?" The next question will be, after clicking 'Install' because they are installing something, "What the fuck happened to my stuff!?"
Instead, the message on the screen should read something to the effect:
The installation has detected that you already have a working system. Do you want to keep all your files and settings?
Selecting 'Yes' will keep everything you already have and allow you to load this copy of Linux without affecting your current system.
Selecting 'No' will erase all your files and settings and load this copy of Linux in their place.
By using the above phrases, you are telling the user in a clear and concise manner what will happen if they click Yes or No without them having to understand what an operating system is. Yes, those who install Ubuntu will probably get a chuckle out of the warning but then they already know what they are doing.
If the linux community wants the average user to try out a distro, making clear, concise but easily understandable comments such as the above will go a long way to making the transition easier.
It is far easier to keep cool when you have low humidity than go keep warm when its just fucking cold out.
Having been to Las Vegas over a July 4th holiday, I can categorically agree with the OP when they say it's easier to deal with 100+ temps in low humidity than it is cold temperatures. The first few days I was there the temps were ~120F.
Did I sweat? Just barely and ONLY under my shirt where the material kept the moisture in. I was outside from sun up to sun down and other than a small tan (sunscreen ya know), it was great being outside.
I got caught and I don't like it. I want to be able to steal from my employer and rip the taxpayers off. Everyone does it so why should I be penalized?
Wahhh! Wahhh!
For as much as we rip government agencies for wasting money, three cheers for NOAA for tracking down this asshat and firing him.
The real question is, and one which is not answered in the article, are they going to get the money back from him?
Anyone is free to look at the bible or other related holy documents from both those religions. Yes, there are certain other documents* that you cannot look at but on the whole, anyone can look at the religious documents of both religions.
The same cannot be said of scientology. It is verboten for anyone not part of the religion to look at any of their "holy" documents and even then, you can only see so much based on what you have paid to them. Further, if you are part of scientology, you cannot show anyone not part of scientology those documents or allow those documents to be released. If you do, the lawsuits ensue. See The Fishman Affidavit for evidence of this.
Sorry, your example doesn't fly.
*The Book of Mary being one that the Vatican refuses to allow anyone to look at. After all, can't have a woman's opinion be part of the male-only Catholic Church, can we?
Is Henson the only person to ever have this happen to them? Has anyone had the same treatment for speaking out against christianity, islam, judaism, buddhism, etc?
If so, who was it and what happened to them? If not, why?
How long until people wake up and realize that scientology is not a religion but a dangerous, money-grubbing, control-freak cult/business?
Name one other religion that refuses to open its documents so someone can look at them WITHOUT you having to pay to see them.
What crackheaded mods gave this an informative rating? It's typical Fox propaganda. Let's take each of the accusations in order.
for him to provide proof,
On December 7, 2002, Iraq submitted a 12,000 page document outlining what it claimed was evidence of its weapons of mass destruction capabilities. Much of the report was recycled from previous declarations (after all, if you've said you destroyed something you can't very well provide any new information) though some clarifications of previous declarations was also provided. The UN used this declaration to assist the inspectors which were in the country (see below) to verify Iraq's claims.
Further, as soon as the report came out, and before anyone had even looked at it, Donald Rumsfeld was saying the entire report was a bunch of lies.
Hey, here's an idea. Instead of shooting your mouth off and saying someone is lying, how about at least putting on a show of opening the documents and then lie about someone else lying.
Since we arrived in Iraq, we have conducted more than 400 inspections covering more than 300 sites. All inspections were performed without notice, and access was almost always provided promptly. In no case have we seen convincing evidencethat the Iraqi side knew in advance that the inspectors were coming.
A bit further down the page we find:
More than 200 chemical and more than 100 biological samples have been collected at different sites. Three-quarters of these have been screened using our own laboratory analytical capabilities at the Baghdad Centre (BOMVIC). The results to date have been consistent with Iraq's declarations.
The only thing Hans' report does say is that not all of the destroyed material that Iraq claimed it had destroyed twelve years prior could be verified to have been destroyed. However, the inspectors continuing to work with the Iraqi officials to verify this claim.
And this is what Blix himself had to say in 2003 about Saddam's declarations:
"With this long period, I'm inclined to think that the Iraqi statement that they destroyed all the biological and chemical weapons, which they had in the summer of 1991 may well be the truth," Blix told CNN television.
Further, it was the U.S. who didn't want the inspectors to continue their inspections because they weren't finding anything, even after the U.S. gave them specific locations to look at, and so were afraid that the longer the inspections went on without finding anything, the more public opinion would turn against their already conceived plans to invade and occupy Iraq.
of dismantling the weapons he did have at the time of the agreement.
He did not have any of the weapons despite Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld repeatedly stating, "We know he has them and we know where they are." If we knew where those weapons were, why didn't we provide that information to the UN inspectors who were on the ground looking for those weapons? Iraq's declaration showed that they had destroyed their wmd stockpiles and construction capabilities as directed to by previous UN resolutions and in those few cases where there were discrepancies, was working with the UN inspectors to clarify the questions. Continuing to state a lie enough times does not make it a fact.
Are we done now with the propaganda? It's not like poll after poll hasn't shown that people who watch Fox Noise are the most ill-informed people in the nation. You didn't need to offer proof of the validity of those polls.
I change channels or get up and go do something else when a commercial comes on.
DING! DING! DING! As I have said in many previous posts, this is exactly what I do now. I'll get off my fat ass (figuratively speaking) and put the dishes away or wash dirty dishes, play with my cat, put clothes away, etc. Anything for those two minutes commercials are on.
A) rising prices but no additional channels
B) removal of a channel from New York so I can't get my cute asian babe fix every morning and not getting a reduction in my bill or a replacement channel
C) the continual theft of the last ten minutes of every half hour segment of CNN Headline News by having it replaced with their, Comcast's, crappy "news" channel.
Shall I quote Princess Leia and how the tighter one closes their grip the more slip through their hands?
With 406 murders last year in Philadelphia and 128 this year already (as of 4/24), it wouldn't surprise me.
Philly streets are horrible, the drivers aren't much better, and there is massive corruption at all levels of government. Yeah, can't imagine why Satan didn't put an entrance there.
Where our school taxes run deep, Philadelphia and Pittsburgh are leeches and our governor is doing his best to increase the New Jerseyfication of the state.
I've told people for the longest time, any time PA is in the national news, it can't be a good thing.
Personally, I don't agree with Millersville (not too far from me) since the activity took place away from school and the teacher to be, as far as I know, has never advocated to anyone that getting drunk is a good thing.
Further, as others have pointed out, how is she promoting underage drinking if a) she was above the legal drinking age at the time the picture was taken and b) we have no idea what was in her cup.
Besides, if Millersville is going after her because of something she may have done, are they going to rescind degrees from those who have graduated and are later found to be doing something similar or are convicted of other crimes? Say, child molestation, rape or robbery? What if someone posts a picture of themselves in a thong at a party (as a guy) or some skimpy, revealing outfit (for a woman)? Are they going to withhold degrees for that too?
if these people get laid off, won't that mean they can fill some of those supposed jobs that Microsoft et al keep saying they can't fill because there aren't enough qualified workers in the U.S.?
Won't that in turn mean that Microsoft et al won't need as many H-1B visas since some of the positions will be filled?
If Microsoft et al don't attempt to fill their supposed empty positions with some of these people, does that mean they are lying when they say they have all these open positions and no one to fill them and must look overseas for qualified people?
If Disney wants to push the matter, all they have to do is stop having their crappy merchandise made in China.
That wouldn't stop China from continuing to make the same items, but then they would be responsible for trying to sell the same amount of stuff that Disney does.
Since Disney controls their own stores and theme parks, China wouldn't be able to open stores and such selling their products as Disney could then claim trademark infringement and other goodies to prevent the selling of these knockoffs.
that will withstand 175+ lbs of pressure for hours at a time.
Let me guess, you take the George Costanza approach and stick napkins under your other ass cheek so you don't have to sit at an angle.
Why do men insist on sitting on their wallets all day long? Take them out of your back pocket! Put it in your desk drawer, a backpack, any place but your back pocket. I leave mine in my car when I'm at work. Why bother bringing something else to work that you won't use and have to carry it back out at the end of the day?
And what are you doing, besides sitting on it, that you need to replace your card once a year? Mine always last the entire term of four years or so. Can't say the same for my signature on the card but that's not my problem since no one checks anyway.
Apparently the reason for the stoppage is being hidden from you because the rest of the world knows why. That fat-assed excuse for a human Goering said, as he would also say a year later, that his air force could take care of the British forces on the beaches.
Since Goering and Hitler were close buds, Hitler wanted to give some of the glory for destroying the British to Goering, to show how powerful the German luftwaffe was. As we now know, despite both the quantitative and qualitative advantage of the German air force at that time, air power alone, at that time in history, did not have the capability to destroy such a large force.
There are others who say that Guederian ordered the halt due to the lack of supporting infantry and the need for replenishment of the Panzers and that Hitler simply ok'd the order.
Take your pick. Either way, the halt was a military blunder of the highest order.
While it is true you, as a German, will forever bear the curse of Hitler upon your country, there are those who fought that you should look towards as true soldiers and examples of what can be done. Specifically, Erwin Rommel.
I have a book called 'Knights Cross' which is about Rommel. Try to find a copy and read it. While the book is written about him, it contains many of his own words and thoughts on his life. The book describes Rommel's opinion of the halt. He and his men could see the British on the beaches. All they needed was the order to advance and those troops would have been prisoners.
So what you're saying is, I should happy that my money is being used to keep down the medical expenses for my 250 pound, pack-a-day smoker who sucks down a two-liter bottle of Pepsi every day co-worker, right? Why should I, a healthy, never-had-anything-wrong-with-them, including never breaking a bone despite participating in sports for over a decade, have to finance someone elses bad habits?
While the concept of pooling resources sounds good, in the end it only ends up hurting more than it helps. You can look at any situation where pooling exists, except lowering drug prices, and the same applies.
Here's a great example. Both my parents are retired and in very good health. Each has one prescription drug they take yet pay over $6,000 a year for medical coverage ($3,000 each). $6,000! This was the result of the Bush administrations push to have everyone have some kind of medical coverage by forcing people into various programs but conveniently having a 'doughnout hole' gap in coverage. A gap where, in addition to paying for outlandish coverage premiums, people have to shell out tons of money out of their own pockets because these mandatory programs won't cover the expenses until you reach certain levels. See this breakdown of how much people will have to pay in addition to their yearly premiums to cover this gap.
And for the record, I'm 40 and in perfect health. Since it's my money and body, I should be the one to decide if I want health insurance, and the high premiums that go along with them, or if I want to pay out of my own pocket.
Anyone in an HMO is either dirt poor and has no choice or a total idiot
Or option 3, has no choice but to be in an HMO because that's all their employer offers.
I'm in that situation and almost all medical expenses are taken care of. Then again, I'm a basic user. Twice a year dentist check is all I need.
Granted, I wish I could opt out of paying for any medical and get the money in hand and pay my own, rare, expenses but I don't have that option. It would be cheaper for me to get the money and pay when I go to a visit than it is to piss away money every paycheck and not use it.
While HMOs have a bad reputation, if you're a basic user, you can generally find decent medical care.
Thompson is so eloquent when you calls people "liberal intolerants" and "Stalinists."
S'ok. I've written to the headquarters of a few stores to complain about their lack of selection and referred to their buyers as "either incompetent or stupid". Granted, that didn't help my case to get them to change their selection but it felt good to let them know what I thought of the people who do their buying.
Jack's probably the same way. It makes him feel good even if it doesn't get results.
Threatening and doing are two different things. You can threaten all you want but if you don't follow through on your words, all you have is a threat. Besides, as I said and you conveniently ignore, what the leaders of Iran say are merely for internal consumption.
Compare that to the U.S. who has not only threatened to attack other countries, but has done so, is now occupying a country, has installed its own shill government, and is now threatening another country.
In fact, it is stated U.S. policy to go after any country it deems a threat to world peace and Israel continues to threaten Iran saying it should not be allowed to have nuclear power and has threatened to attack it. We know Israel will attack its neighbors and in so doing contributing to the destabilization of the region. Are you saying we should be going after Israel as well?
Slashdot Mirror
See my sig which I put up last week.
Now that's service. I realize it's only compiling one code into another form but being able to take the code, compile it into what you need AND still have it work correctly in a 24 hour period is no easy feat.
If nothing else, other firms will look at this migration to an aix/linux platform and see the cost benefits of doing so. After all, if the NYSE has done it, it can't be a bad thing.
I worked for a financial services firm years ago and I too was fingerprinted. Granted, I was assisting several brokers but nonetheless, I was required to be fingerprinted. Three times. If memory serves, one copy went to the FBI, once copy went to the SEC and one copy to the firm I worked for.
If anything, being a programmer for a financial firm is just as sensitive a position as actually having access to client accounts. Programmers have access to all kinds of information that others do not.
Considering what business the firm is involved with, other people's money, it's a good thing she is being fingerprinted.
Of course, now that my fingerprints are on file from my former job, and an interview with another government agency, I have to wear gloves lined with tin foil to keep them guessing.
Which means they weren't real cases but ones done for the benefit of one party. Which meant that if there was a conviction, the appeal would be upheld and the attorney would lose the case anyway.
So no, cherry picking cases to suit whatever party is in power is not a viable reason to fire a US attorney.
Next!
Apples and oranges. Bill Clinton, like his predecessors, cleared out everyone from the previous administration regardless of the political leanings of the people. There were both Republican and Democratic attorneys who were fired. This is standard procedure, as of late, for any incoming president.
What Bush and Gonzales, and apparently a few senators, have done was to fire people because they weren't filing politically motivated lawsuits and then lied about why the attorneys, who Bush had previously appointed, were fired. The claim was for performance reasons yet all had spotless records and as already pointed out, some were specifically told that they were being fired to make way for political appointees.
Gonzales and the White House then compounded this nonsense by lying about the real reasons behind the firings and Gonzales did it while under oath.
Further, throughout this whole performance, Gonzales has said all along he didn't know what was going on in his own department. What? You have US attorneys that are being fired and you know nothing about it? Either Gonzales is completely outside the loop of his own department or he is again lying when said he didn't know about the firings.
Nixon tried this same nonsense when his AG, Elliott Richardson, resigned rather than carry out Nixon's order to fire Special Prosecutor Archibold Cox in an effort to derail the Watergate investigation. Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus also resigned when he became AG because he too refused to carry out Nixon's orders.
Finally, it was left up to then Solicitor General Rober Bork, name sound familiar?, who became the acting AG who then carried out the orders. In effect, Nixon politicized both the AG's office and the Justice Department.
Bush, with the aid of Gonzales, is doing the exact same thing and anyone who has ever been involved with either the AG's office or the Justice Department knows that is wrong and completely out of bounds. These departments are supposed to act as neutral parties to the government and their actions should not be influenced by political considerations.
Nice troll. Too bad it's not correct.
You are correct when you say the US Attorneys serve at the will of the President. Bill Clinton, when he came into office, fired all 83 US Attorneys and replaced them. So did Reagan and Bush, Sr.
Bush, however, not only did not do that, he waited until two years into his second term to fire eight attorneys which he had previously appointed!
Further, as is now becoming clear, the firings were not for performance reasons, but political reasons. In one case, the attorney was told he was being fired to make way for a former aide to Karl Rove. In another case, Iglesias, he was specificaly told his firing was not for performance reasons but political yet the White House and Gonzales kept saying, and still say to this day, that the firing was for performance issues.
As Iglesias said on Fox Noise, and as the transcript above shows, he asked for and was given permission to use the DOJ as a reference. If he was fired for performance reasons, why bother to give him a recommendation?
So what we have is an Attorney General who has been lying under oath about an incident which he apparently knew nothing about even though he heads the department. Let's see, lying under oath, can't recall information, doesn't know what's going on. Why does that sound familiar?
Keep up the trolling. We need the laughs.
I have never contributed to any OSS project so this will be my first. Anyone working on Ubuntu who reads this, or if someone can pass this along to the appropriate person, you have my unconditional permission to use what I am about to say about this VERY important comment.
DO NOT simply say on the screen something to the effect, "Another operating system has been detected. Do you want to keep it or install over it?" 'Keep' 'Install'
If a newbie reads this, their first question will be, "What's an operating system?" The next question will be, after clicking 'Install' because they are installing something, "What the fuck happened to my stuff!?"
Instead, the message on the screen should read something to the effect:
By using the above phrases, you are telling the user in a clear and concise manner what will happen if they click Yes or No without them having to understand what an operating system is. Yes, those who install Ubuntu will probably get a chuckle out of the warning but then they already know what they are doing.
If the linux community wants the average user to try out a distro, making clear, concise but easily understandable comments such as the above will go a long way to making the transition easier.
It is far easier to keep cool when you have low humidity than go keep warm when its just fucking cold out.
Having been to Las Vegas over a July 4th holiday, I can categorically agree with the OP when they say it's easier to deal with 100+ temps in low humidity than it is cold temperatures. The first few days I was there the temps were ~120F.
Did I sweat? Just barely and ONLY under my shirt where the material kept the moisture in. I was outside from sun up to sun down and other than a small tan (sunscreen ya know), it was great being outside.
I got caught and I don't like it. I want to be able to steal from my employer and rip the taxpayers off. Everyone does it so why should I be penalized?
Wahhh! Wahhh!
For as much as we rip government agencies for wasting money, three cheers for NOAA for tracking down this asshat and firing him.
The real question is, and one which is not answered in the article, are they going to get the money back from him?
The same cannot be said of scientology. It is verboten for anyone not part of the religion to look at any of their "holy" documents and even then, you can only see so much based on what you have paid to them. Further, if you are part of scientology, you cannot show anyone not part of scientology those documents or allow those documents to be released. If you do, the lawsuits ensue. See The Fishman Affidavit for evidence of this.
Sorry, your example doesn't fly.
*The Book of Mary being one that the Vatican refuses to allow anyone to look at. After all, can't have a woman's opinion be part of the male-only Catholic Church, can we?
Is Henson the only person to ever have this happen to them? Has anyone had the same treatment for speaking out against christianity, islam, judaism, buddhism, etc?
If so, who was it and what happened to them? If not, why?
How long until people wake up and realize that scientology is not a religion but a dangerous, money-grubbing, control-freak cult/business?
Name one other religion that refuses to open its documents so someone can look at them WITHOUT you having to pay to see them.
for him to provide proof,
On December 7, 2002, Iraq submitted a 12,000 page document outlining what it claimed was evidence of its weapons of mass destruction capabilities. Much of the report was recycled from previous declarations (after all, if you've said you destroyed something you can't very well provide any new information) though some clarifications of previous declarations was also provided. The UN used this declaration to assist the inspectors which were in the country (see below) to verify Iraq's claims.
Further, as soon as the report came out, and before anyone had even looked at it, Donald Rumsfeld was saying the entire report was a bunch of lies.
Hey, here's an idea. Instead of shooting your mouth off and saying someone is lying, how about at least putting on a show of opening the documents and then lie about someone else lying.
let inspectors do their inspecting,
Straight from Hans Blix's report from February 14, 2003:
Since we arrived in Iraq, we have conducted more than 400 inspections covering more than 300 sites. All inspections were performed without notice, and access was almost always provided promptly. In no case have we seen convincing evidencethat the Iraqi side knew in advance that the inspectors were coming.
A bit further down the page we find:
More than 200 chemical and more than 100 biological samples have been collected at different sites. Three-quarters of these have been screened using our own laboratory analytical capabilities at the Baghdad Centre (BOMVIC). The results to date have been consistent with Iraq's declarations.
The only thing Hans' report does say is that not all of the destroyed material that Iraq claimed it had destroyed twelve years prior could be verified to have been destroyed. However, the inspectors continuing to work with the Iraqi officials to verify this claim.
And this is what Blix himself had to say in 2003 about Saddam's declarations:
"With this long period, I'm inclined to think that the Iraqi statement that they destroyed all the biological and chemical weapons, which they had in the summer of 1991 may well be the truth," Blix told CNN television.
Common Dreams link
Further, it was the U.S. who didn't want the inspectors to continue their inspections because they weren't finding anything, even after the U.S. gave them specific locations to look at, and so were afraid that the longer the inspections went on without finding anything, the more public opinion would turn against their already conceived plans to invade and occupy Iraq.
of dismantling the weapons he did have at the time of the agreement.
He did not have any of the weapons despite Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld repeatedly stating, "We know he has them and we know where they are." If we knew where those weapons were, why didn't we provide that information to the UN inspectors who were on the ground looking for those weapons? Iraq's declaration showed that they had destroyed their wmd stockpiles and construction capabilities as directed to by previous UN resolutions and in those few cases where there were discrepancies, was working with the UN inspectors to clarify the questions. Continuing to state a lie enough times does not make it a fact.
Are we done now with the propaganda? It's not like poll after poll hasn't shown that people who watch Fox Noise are the most ill-informed people in the nation. You didn't need to offer proof of the validity of those polls.
DING! DING! DING! As I have said in many previous posts, this is exactly what I do now. I'll get off my fat ass (figuratively speaking) and put the dishes away or wash dirty dishes, play with my cat, put clothes away, etc. Anything for those two minutes commercials are on.
I even wrote a short piece on how bad things have gotten.
I'm just about ready to drop Comcast due to:
A) rising prices but no additional channels
B) removal of a channel from New York so I can't get my cute asian babe fix every morning and not getting a reduction in my bill or a replacement channel
C) the continual theft of the last ten minutes of every half hour segment of CNN Headline News by having it replaced with their, Comcast's, crappy "news" channel.
Shall I quote Princess Leia and how the tighter one closes their grip the more slip through their hands?
With 406 murders last year in Philadelphia and 128 this year already (as of 4/24), it wouldn't surprise me.
Philly streets are horrible, the drivers aren't much better, and there is massive corruption at all levels of government. Yeah, can't imagine why Satan didn't put an entrance there.
Where our school taxes run deep, Philadelphia and Pittsburgh are leeches and our governor is doing his best to increase the New Jerseyfication of the state.
I've told people for the longest time, any time PA is in the national news, it can't be a good thing.
Personally, I don't agree with Millersville (not too far from me) since the activity took place away from school and the teacher to be, as far as I know, has never advocated to anyone that getting drunk is a good thing.
Further, as others have pointed out, how is she promoting underage drinking if a) she was above the legal drinking age at the time the picture was taken and b) we have no idea what was in her cup.
Besides, if Millersville is going after her because of something she may have done, are they going to rescind degrees from those who have graduated and are later found to be doing something similar or are convicted of other crimes? Say, child molestation, rape or robbery? What if someone posts a picture of themselves in a thong at a party (as a guy) or some skimpy, revealing outfit (for a woman)? Are they going to withhold degrees for that too?
if these people get laid off, won't that mean they can fill some of those supposed jobs that Microsoft et al keep saying they can't fill because there aren't enough qualified workers in the U.S.?
Won't that in turn mean that Microsoft et al won't need as many H-1B visas since some of the positions will be filled?
If Microsoft et al don't attempt to fill their supposed empty positions with some of these people, does that mean they are lying when they say they have all these open positions and no one to fill them and must look overseas for qualified people?
If Disney wants to push the matter, all they have to do is stop having their crappy merchandise made in China.
That wouldn't stop China from continuing to make the same items, but then they would be responsible for trying to sell the same amount of stuff that Disney does.
Since Disney controls their own stores and theme parks, China wouldn't be able to open stores and such selling their products as Disney could then claim trademark infringement and other goodies to prevent the selling of these knockoffs.
Or, to slim down the quote:
Thos who can, Teach;
Those who can't, become Management
Let me guess, you take the George Costanza approach and stick napkins under your other ass cheek so you don't have to sit at an angle.
Why do men insist on sitting on their wallets all day long? Take them out of your back pocket! Put it in your desk drawer, a backpack, any place but your back pocket. I leave mine in my car when I'm at work. Why bother bringing something else to work that you won't use and have to carry it back out at the end of the day?
And what are you doing, besides sitting on it, that you need to replace your card once a year? Mine always last the entire term of four years or so. Can't say the same for my signature on the card but that's not my problem since no one checks anyway.
Apparently the reason for the stoppage is being hidden from you because the rest of the world knows why. That fat-assed excuse for a human Goering said, as he would also say a year later, that his air force could take care of the British forces on the beaches.
Since Goering and Hitler were close buds, Hitler wanted to give some of the glory for destroying the British to Goering, to show how powerful the German luftwaffe was. As we now know, despite both the quantitative and qualitative advantage of the German air force at that time, air power alone, at that time in history, did not have the capability to destroy such a large force.
There are others who say that Guederian ordered the halt due to the lack of supporting infantry and the need for replenishment of the Panzers and that Hitler simply ok'd the order.
Take your pick. Either way, the halt was a military blunder of the highest order.
While it is true you, as a German, will forever bear the curse of Hitler upon your country, there are those who fought that you should look towards as true soldiers and examples of what can be done. Specifically, Erwin Rommel.
I have a book called 'Knights Cross' which is about Rommel. Try to find a copy and read it. While the book is written about him, it contains many of his own words and thoughts on his life. The book describes Rommel's opinion of the halt. He and his men could see the British on the beaches. All they needed was the order to advance and those troops would have been prisoners.
While the concept of pooling resources sounds good, in the end it only ends up hurting more than it helps. You can look at any situation where pooling exists, except lowering drug prices, and the same applies.
Here's a great example. Both my parents are retired and in very good health. Each has one prescription drug they take yet pay over $6,000 a year for medical coverage ($3,000 each). $6,000! This was the result of the Bush administrations push to have everyone have some kind of medical coverage by forcing people into various programs but conveniently having a 'doughnout hole' gap in coverage. A gap where, in addition to paying for outlandish coverage premiums, people have to shell out tons of money out of their own pockets because these mandatory programs won't cover the expenses until you reach certain levels. See this breakdown of how much people will have to pay in addition to their yearly premiums to cover this gap.
And for the record, I'm 40 and in perfect health. Since it's my money and body, I should be the one to decide if I want health insurance, and the high premiums that go along with them, or if I want to pay out of my own pocket.
Or option 3, has no choice but to be in an HMO because that's all their employer offers.
I'm in that situation and almost all medical expenses are taken care of. Then again, I'm a basic user. Twice a year dentist check is all I need.
Granted, I wish I could opt out of paying for any medical and get the money in hand and pay my own, rare, expenses but I don't have that option. It would be cheaper for me to get the money and pay when I go to a visit than it is to piss away money every paycheck and not use it.
While HMOs have a bad reputation, if you're a basic user, you can generally find decent medical care.
Marge: "Does anyone need that much porn?"
Homer (drooling): "One million times faster...."
S'ok. I've written to the headquarters of a few stores to complain about their lack of selection and referred to their buyers as "either incompetent or stupid". Granted, that didn't help my case to get them to change their selection but it felt good to let them know what I thought of the people who do their buying.
Jack's probably the same way. It makes him feel good even if it doesn't get results.
Threatening and doing are two different things. You can threaten all you want but if you don't follow through on your words, all you have is a threat. Besides, as I said and you conveniently ignore, what the leaders of Iran say are merely for internal consumption.
Compare that to the U.S. who has not only threatened to attack other countries, but has done so, is now occupying a country, has installed its own shill government, and is now threatening another country.
In fact, it is stated U.S. policy to go after any country it deems a threat to world peace and Israel continues to threaten Iran saying it should not be allowed to have nuclear power and has threatened to attack it. We know Israel will attack its neighbors and in so doing contributing to the destabilization of the region. Are you saying we should be going after Israel as well?
Nice hypocrisy there, huh?