"If one can grow the Sterne strain in these units, one could also grow the Ames strain, which is quite lethal."
Oops, is that your whole point going down the gully I see here?
Nope. You are making the mistake of confusing "could" and "will likely" in the top statement. *Anything* could happen but paranoia has a bad record on likely.
...production of bulk quantities of a non-virulent strain of anthrax...
...the Sterne strain is not thought to be harmful to humans and is used for vaccination...
the contracts have caused major concern. 'It raises a serious question over how the US is going to demonstrate its compliance with obligations under the Biological Weapons Convention...
Americans, perhaps, who do not realize just how fortunate they are (even while their government engages in folly -- but Bush too, will pass).
Funny thing -- Bush agrees with you about mandatory unescapeable state healthcare while the more enlightened politicians do not! That little jab aside, thanks for braving the abuse while warning people about a bad idea... especially considering that Canadian style healthcare is the Holy Grail for pandering US politicians and we may get to try it next.
USA's support of Israel has a big effect on many people's freedom.
Yes. It helps maintain Israeli citizens freedom. Good on us!
I assume you are suggesting Israel is somehow quashing others freedom by not ceasing to exist. How wicked of them.
Should the US perhaps support the surrounding dictatorships instead? (as we have in the past) That will hardly add to peoples freedom.
The "freedom fighters" would once again disagree. They hate infidels because they have murdered many innocent people.
Wrong. An infidel is anyone who is not a muslim.
Most infidels have not murdered anyone. They hate infidels because they are required to by their version of islam with dictates every aspect of their life. An infidels existence is an offense in this twisted worldview.
These people commit horrible acts that do not advance any fight for freedom because they do not value life. Osama Bin Laden reportedly said something along the lines of "Americans love life. We love death." People like that do not want freedom. They want total control of those around them. This is a yearning for facism not a fight for freedom.
Just think how happy you would be if another country (say France) sets up military bases all over the US to look after their economic interests in the US?
I would immediately set off a car bomb in a public square killing hundreds of my countrymen. I would then procede to a local elementary school and execute several children. Oh wait. No I wouldn't because that would turn me from freedom fighter into terrorist.
Hell, in Iraq it's not even most of the terrorists own country they are "fighting for" by slaughtering Iraqis.
Guess what? The "terrorists" turned out to be right, and they're now running the country and everyone's better off.
Terrorists surrender any claim they have to just cause by virtue of their methods. Freedom fighters fight their enemies; Terrorists fight humanity.
If he accidentally ran into several people while trying to kill one specific person, knowing it was likely the other people would get hit? Absolutely.
This is very similar to the case of police in high speed pursuit of criminals. Is it really better for society to not enforce laws if there is a chance of an innocent being harmed? Military engagements raise the possibilty of innocents hurt to a certainty. Should we have no more wars ever no matter the enemy?
It's sad to see that someone still believes that Bush did not lie.
Many folks are doomed to a life of sadness it would seem.
He told the rest of the world that Iraq had WMD and the means to deliver them to other countries.
Bush stated that Iraq MOST LIKELY had WMD. This was an educated guess based on apparently flawed intel combined with the fact that Iraq previously had WMD. Being wrong does not constitute a lie.
Further Saddam hated the religious Al-Qaida as he saw religion as a threat to his power.
The enemy of my enemy may not be my friend, but he can be used.
There was NO 9/11-link.
No Iraq to 9/11 link was ever seriously proposed. The link argued is between state sponsers of terror and danger to the US.
It has been noted that serial killers often torture animals in their younger years. Ignoring Iraq in light of Afghanistan would be akin to not dealing with a child found torturing animals and expecting him to become a healthy member of society.
Are you referring to Islamic extremists or neocons here, because it applies nicely to both groups, which is the point that the grandparent post was trying to make.
I would call the terrorist a freedom fighter if those he was trying to wipe out were witholding his freedom. Perhaps you can pretend a murderer and hang-man are the same but I can't.
In what way was the actions of al-Qaeda more evil than the actions of US army in the past few years? By all the criteria that I can think of, the US Army is way ahead, e.g. number of attacks, number of innocent people killed, damage done to infrastructure etc.
By your logic someone who accidently kills several people in an auto accident would be morally worse that a murderer who kills but one person.
Can you really not seperate "Trying to kill civilians" from "Trying to kill people who intentionally kill civilians"?
At their meetings they call it "indiscriminately killing *infidels*". What does what you call the people want to kill have to do with anything?
They are called different names because they ARE different. The terrorist has commited a crime in fact (murder) while the infidel has commited a crime only in the mind of the terrorist (different belief).
"Who could have believed... the administration would use lies about WMD to invade a nation with no connection to 9/11?"
You say Iraq has no connection to 9/11. I think what you mean is Iraq was not responsible for 9/11. I see a connection between Iraq and Afghanistan in that both were states that trained/financed terrorists (Saddam made cash payments to the families of palestinian suicide bombers) led by madmen who had expressed interest in doing harm to the US. The fact that saddam had an airplane set up for practicing hi-jackings is frankly all the connection I require. You seem to be looking for revenge. That is not what Iraq is about. It is about not ingnoring conditions like those ignored in afghanistan that led to 9/11.
Iraqi WMDs. If I remember correctly this was not Bushs primary reason when he began mentioning invading Iraq. I remember arguments resembling my previous paragraph. He did claim Iraq probably had WMD citing Saddams gassing of Kurds. The thrust of his argument was that a man who hated the US might give WMD to terrorists who would use them on the US (Remember that Saddam already supported palestinian terrorists and had communicated with al-Qaida members). It was also part of the argument that if he DID NOT have WMD he might use his vast resources to develop them if left alone (He had tried in the past). These seemed like reasonable assumptions considering Iraq was one of the few governments that embraced the 9/11 attacks. Over time "Going to Iraq to get Saddams WMD before he uses it" became the popular "sound bite way" of explaining why invading Iraq was needed among proponents. It did not accurately represent Bush's reasons and the administration should never have embraced it.
"That a nation which prides itself in being a beacon of freedom would be torturing prisoners in Abu Ghraib..."
This nation did not torture anyone. Some sick people did humiliate some prisoners.
"I barely even recognize the country anymore."
It's not surprising. You seem unable to see reality clearly through your loathing.
It SHOULD go without saying, but "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter".
This statement tends to fall apart when you realise that the freedom the terrorist is fighting for is freedom from your existence.
If you consider what either side offers in this conflict, I think you would be led to conclude that there ARE no good guys....
That's cruel hard. Even President Chirac would concede that the USA is less bad than al-Qaeda.
Whereas Muslim terrorists want to enslave the WORLD to their retarded religious extremism, the neocons want to ENSLAVE the world to their retarded religious extremism.
The Terrorists seem a bit more forward to me; The Neocons hardly ever kill you for not converting.
Whereas Muslim terrorists want to keep their women in the home covered from head to toe and pregnant, neocons want to keep their women in the home BAREFOOT and pregnant.
I read that if it continues at this rate barefoot/pregnant women will soon outnumber sasquatches in North America.
And whereas Muslim terrorists hope to spread their ideology by indiscriminantly torturing and killing white people, neocons hope to spread their ideology by indiscriminantly torturing and killing Muslims.
I checked the minutes of our Neocon meeting and we definitely had it down as "indiscriminantly killing *terrorists*".
My greatest hope is that the Rapture comes soon and hoovers up all these assholes so that the world can be left to rational people.
With that kind of idiocy, I bet many people will try the Vista.ISO Edition (Not available in stores).
My hope is that they continue support on Win2k, drop in the new graphics dll's and rebrand it as Vista Useable Edition because I know the XP Mongoloids can't make a stable system.
Stealing content online... It's illegal and it's wrong.
Certainly it's illegal, and it *should* be wrong and yet I don't think it is wrong. Let me try an analogy: Murder is wrong. Killing someone who is trying to murder you is not wrong. I believe the movie industry is at war with consumers so I feel it is justified to be at war with them. I would like to have a hi-definition digital video recorder. The industry is trying to make sure it can only record what they allow and degrades analog outputs. I would like to watch ultra high resolution movies on my computer but again they plan to degrade signals to non "secure" monitors. They have attacked people for decrypting DVD content that they have legally purchased. They have planned to fuck over people who bought early HDTVs by refusing hi-res content since they may have a non secure signal path. They insult movie goers with anti-piracy ads. Who the fuck but a paying customer is going to see those guilt trips on film-stock? Myself I don't care to download movies. I just rent from the cheapest place I can find and my disgust has led me to many fewer DVD purchases.
Holy Hell! It seems like there's a new "story" on how many times Firefox has been downloaded every week. I use Moz Suite myself and have converted several, uh, normal people to Firefox but maybe somone could set the milestones be a little farther apart. Plus, I think they might be inflating the downloads with all those hosed security realeases!
DarkWolf0 writes "...I wonder how easy it would be to associate any particular activity with 'terrorism.'"
And I wonder why terrorists sites weren't shut down years ago. I guess I'm just less of an asshole.
Even though few people are likely to read this due to my -1 "troll" rating, I will go ahead and bid you all farewell. An un P.C. joke here and there along with some well reasoned (to my thinking), non-mainstream (here) opinions has left me aparently equal to posts such as "Fuck All Gay Niggers". OK. I'll admit it. I'm a wiseass and to be honest my recent posts are mostly trash (see above). However there is no incentive to provide well thought out posts that will go largely unread. While I don't want to give the impression that I believe any of my posts should achieve +5 visibility, I also feel the current mod system makes it far too easy to have all future posts completely disregarded. Perhaps a system that allowed posts to be rated down but had less long term damage would lead to a greater diversity of opinion.
I shall now slather myself with sunscreen and go... Outside!
C'mon Kai-Fu. Don't put up with that kind of crap. Use your inate Ninja skills (are POSITIVE racial stereotypes still allowed? I forget.) to sneak back into the campus and set-them-up-the-bomb. You know who they'll blame. Or if you're the non-violent type, at least lock the XP mongoloids in a closet so Longhorn turns out OK.
Slashdot Mirror
Paranoid Schizophrenia plus a distaste for Republicans. No fucking way.
Then stop "stabbing" her.
Uh, no. Europe is VERY different from the US!
It will make my day if a hill on Mars gets named "Dry Hump"
Oops, is that your whole point going down the gully I see here?
Nope. You are making the mistake of confusing "could" and "will likely" in the top statement. *Anything* could happen but paranoia has a bad record on likely.
the contracts have caused major concern. 'It raises a serious question over how the US is going to demonstrate its compliance with obligations under the Biological Weapons Convention...
(emphasis mine) and since I like quotes:
Did IQ's just drop suddenly while I was away?
Well you can solve the debate for us then. Go check in a mirror -- do dinosaurs have feathers or not!?
Funny thing -- Bush agrees with you about mandatory unescapeable state healthcare while the more enlightened politicians do not! That little jab aside, thanks for braving the abuse while warning people about a bad idea... especially considering that Canadian style healthcare is the Holy Grail for pandering US politicians and we may get to try it next.
Did Mr Griffin cancel a pet project of yours or something Mr Anonymous?
Yes. It helps maintain Israeli citizens freedom. Good on us!
I assume you are suggesting Israel is somehow quashing others freedom by not ceasing to exist. How wicked of them.
Should the US perhaps support the surrounding dictatorships instead? (as we have in the past) That will hardly add to peoples freedom.
The "freedom fighters" would once again disagree. They hate infidels because they have murdered many innocent people.
Wrong. An infidel is anyone who is not a muslim. Most infidels have not murdered anyone. They hate infidels because they are required to by their version of islam with dictates every aspect of their life. An infidels existence is an offense in this twisted worldview.
These people commit horrible acts that do not advance any fight for freedom because they do not value life. Osama Bin Laden reportedly said something along the lines of "Americans love life. We love death." People like that do not want freedom. They want total control of those around them. This is a yearning for facism not a fight for freedom.
Just think how happy you would be if another country (say France) sets up military bases all over the US to look after their economic interests in the US?
I would immediately set off a car bomb in a public square killing hundreds of my countrymen. I would then procede to a local elementary school and execute several children. Oh wait. No I wouldn't because that would turn me from freedom fighter into terrorist.
Hell, in Iraq it's not even most of the terrorists own country they are "fighting for" by slaughtering Iraqis.
Guess what? The "terrorists" turned out to be right, and they're now running the country and everyone's better off.
Terrorists surrender any claim they have to just cause by virtue of their methods. Freedom fighters fight their enemies; Terrorists fight humanity.
This is very similar to the case of police in high speed pursuit of criminals. Is it really better for society to not enforce laws if there is a chance of an innocent being harmed? Military engagements raise the possibilty of innocents hurt to a certainty. Should we have no more wars ever no matter the enemy?
Many folks are doomed to a life of sadness it would seem.
He told the rest of the world that Iraq had WMD and the means to deliver them to other countries.
Bush stated that Iraq MOST LIKELY had WMD. This was an educated guess based on apparently flawed intel combined with the fact that Iraq previously had WMD. Being wrong does not constitute a lie.
Further Saddam hated the religious Al-Qaida as he saw religion as a threat to his power.
The enemy of my enemy may not be my friend, but he can be used.
There was NO 9/11-link.
No Iraq to 9/11 link was ever seriously proposed. The link argued is between state sponsers of terror and danger to the US.
It has been noted that serial killers often torture animals in their younger years. Ignoring Iraq in light of Afghanistan would be akin to not dealing with a child found torturing animals and expecting him to become a healthy member of society.
I would call the terrorist a freedom fighter if those he was trying to wipe out were witholding his freedom. Perhaps you can pretend a murderer and hang-man are the same but I can't.
In what way was the actions of al-Qaeda more evil than the actions of US army in the past few years? By all the criteria that I can think of, the US Army is way ahead, e.g. number of attacks, number of innocent people killed, damage done to infrastructure etc.
By your logic someone who accidently kills several people in an auto accident would be morally worse that a murderer who kills but one person.
Can you really not seperate "Trying to kill civilians" from "Trying to kill people who intentionally kill civilians"?
At their meetings they call it "indiscriminately killing *infidels*". What does what you call the people want to kill have to do with anything?
They are called different names because they ARE different. The terrorist has commited a crime in fact (murder) while the infidel has commited a crime only in the mind of the terrorist (different belief).
You say Iraq has no connection to 9/11. I think what you mean is Iraq was not responsible for 9/11. I see a connection between Iraq and Afghanistan in that both were states that trained/financed terrorists (Saddam made cash payments to the families of palestinian suicide bombers) led by madmen who had expressed interest in doing harm to the US. The fact that saddam had an airplane set up for practicing hi-jackings is frankly all the connection I require. You seem to be looking for revenge. That is not what Iraq is about. It is about not ingnoring conditions like those ignored in afghanistan that led to 9/11.
Iraqi WMDs. If I remember correctly this was not Bushs primary reason when he began mentioning invading Iraq. I remember arguments resembling my previous paragraph. He did claim Iraq probably had WMD citing Saddams gassing of Kurds. The thrust of his argument was that a man who hated the US might give WMD to terrorists who would use them on the US (Remember that Saddam already supported palestinian terrorists and had communicated with al-Qaida members). It was also part of the argument that if he DID NOT have WMD he might use his vast resources to develop them if left alone (He had tried in the past). These seemed like reasonable assumptions considering Iraq was one of the few governments that embraced the 9/11 attacks. Over time "Going to Iraq to get Saddams WMD before he uses it" became the popular "sound bite way" of explaining why invading Iraq was needed among proponents. It did not accurately represent Bush's reasons and the administration should never have embraced it.
"That a nation which prides itself in being a beacon of freedom would be torturing prisoners in Abu Ghraib..."
This nation did not torture anyone. Some sick people did humiliate some prisoners.
"I barely even recognize the country anymore."
It's not surprising. You seem unable to see reality clearly through your loathing.
This statement tends to fall apart when you realise that the freedom the terrorist is fighting for is freedom from your existence.
If you consider what either side offers in this conflict, I think you would be led to conclude that there ARE no good guys. ...
That's cruel hard. Even President Chirac would concede that the USA is less bad than al-Qaeda.
Whereas Muslim terrorists want to enslave the WORLD to their retarded religious extremism, the neocons want to ENSLAVE the world to their retarded religious extremism.
The Terrorists seem a bit more forward to me; The Neocons hardly ever kill you for not converting.
Whereas Muslim terrorists want to keep their women in the home covered from head to toe and pregnant, neocons want to keep their women in the home BAREFOOT and pregnant.
I read that if it continues at this rate barefoot/pregnant women will soon outnumber sasquatches in North America.
And whereas Muslim terrorists hope to spread their ideology by indiscriminantly torturing and killing white people, neocons hope to spread their ideology by indiscriminantly torturing and killing Muslims.
I checked the minutes of our Neocon meeting and we definitely had it down as "indiscriminantly killing *terrorists*".
My greatest hope is that the Rapture comes soon and hoovers up all these assholes so that the world can be left to rational people.
But where will you end up?
Or maybe not.
My hope is that they continue support on Win2k, drop in the new graphics dll's and rebrand it as Vista Useable Edition because I know the XP Mongoloids can't make a stable system.
Certainly it's illegal, and it *should* be wrong and yet I don't think it is wrong. Let me try an analogy: Murder is wrong. Killing someone who is trying to murder you is not wrong. I believe the movie industry is at war with consumers so I feel it is justified to be at war with them. I would like to have a hi-definition digital video recorder. The industry is trying to make sure it can only record what they allow and degrades analog outputs. I would like to watch ultra high resolution movies on my computer but again they plan to degrade signals to non "secure" monitors. They have attacked people for decrypting DVD content that they have legally purchased. They have planned to fuck over people who bought early HDTVs by refusing hi-res content since they may have a non secure signal path. They insult movie goers with anti-piracy ads. Who the fuck but a paying customer is going to see those guilt trips on film-stock? Myself I don't care to download movies. I just rent from the cheapest place I can find and my disgust has led me to many fewer DVD purchases.
Holy Hell! It seems like there's a new "story" on how many times Firefox has been downloaded every week. I use Moz Suite myself and have converted several, uh, normal people to Firefox but maybe somone could set the milestones be a little farther apart. Plus, I think they might be inflating the downloads with all those hosed security realeases!
If wonder what environmentalists will say if this melted "Perma"frost turns into rain forest.
I like to assume everything Daryl says is true. Of course, I also like to assume I have a 12 inch penis. No need to measure, really.
And I wonder why terrorists sites weren't shut down years ago. I guess I'm just less of an asshole.
Even though few people are likely to read this due to my -1 "troll" rating, I will go ahead and bid you all farewell. An un P.C. joke here and there along with some well reasoned (to my thinking), non-mainstream (here) opinions has left me aparently equal to posts such as "Fuck All Gay Niggers". OK. I'll admit it. I'm a wiseass and to be honest my recent posts are mostly trash (see above). However there is no incentive to provide well thought out posts that will go largely unread. While I don't want to give the impression that I believe any of my posts should achieve +5 visibility, I also feel the current mod system makes it far too easy to have all future posts completely disregarded. Perhaps a system that allowed posts to be rated down but had less long term damage would lead to a greater diversity of opinion.
I shall now slather myself with sunscreen and go ... Outside!
I wonder if they take the time to sedate and cut the rats spines or if it's the old two hand crack.
C'mon Kai-Fu. Don't put up with that kind of crap. Use your inate Ninja skills (are POSITIVE racial stereotypes still allowed? I forget.) to sneak back into the campus and set-them-up-the-bomb. You know who they'll blame. Or if you're the non-violent type, at least lock the XP mongoloids in a closet so Longhorn turns out OK.
Funny, I use the term "Whiney Bitches who Can't Take a Fucking Joke". I keed. I keed.