Last time I checked, it seems the only rights you have in the U.S. are to privacy and to not be offended.
Neither of these are guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
Not true. All rights with a very few exceptions are guaranteed by the Constitution. The bill of rights was merely an add on addendum which a lot of people disagreed with the necessity for at the time. It is a sad eulogy to those who forced it through that they were right to do it.
The constitution is mainly a granting of a few closely restricted powers granted to the government.
All other rights are yours.
You can define what it means to be a good American in one sentence from the Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal."
The biggest problem we face is (IMHO) the lack of the courage among too many in this country to live up to this creed.
None of this, of course, goes against your statement, "...tell that to the government that's imprisoned you."
Why should I waste my time disputing what you say?
You shouldn't. You should do some investigation of you own. The facts are the facts.
You haven't proved any of it. Your facts are occasionally wrong and definitely imcomplete and your insinuations are unprovable.
Which of these facts are wrong? Incomplete? Of course, you make no effort to prove your assertion. What did I insinuate?
Did Bush f things up before 9/11? Yes.
Agreed. You seem to be ignoring the fact that he and his administration systematically dismantled our investigations into terrorism, and specifically the terrorists who attacked on 9/11.
This link discusses Bush's ambassador to Yemen's refusal to allow the head of the investigation into the USS Cole bombing back in to Yemen. The source is just the first I found in a search, so if you don't like it feel free to find your own. It is a fact, and it has been widely reported. Buried mostly, but reported nonetheless.
This link
reports that the FBI was ordered to "Back off" the Bin ladens and the Saudi royal family.
I don't suppose you remember who Coleen Rowley is? Ashcroft refused to allow a search of the laptop of the 20th terrorist.
Did everyone else? Yes.
As demonstrated above, not everyone else fucked up. Some people were doing quite well before they had their knees taken out.
Further, as I said, We were warned of the specific attacks in advance by the intelligence services of multiple countries. Perhaps this is what you were talking about when you called my facts incomplete? I forgot to mention that Russia and several other Arab countries warned us as well.
You're a contentious fool. An ad hominem attack is the most base logical fallacy.
You have to prove the spirit of your attacks is true, or I'm not even going to be bothered responding.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. The facts are what they are.
"The time he wasted could have prevented the second WTC plane from hitting." Of course it could have.
So you agree that he could have prevented the second plane from hitting the second tower by taking the simple action of responding to the threat by doing his job rather than joking that That's some bad pilot (aside: My father is a pilot, so I have some slight understanding of how horrified the poor man's wife must have felt to hear Bush ridicule her murdered husband and joke at the deaths of all the innocent passengers and crew of the plane and those immediately killed in the building.)
He then continued to react to the single worst terrorist attack on US soil by going into a classroom and reading a book to a bunch of second graders.
You're a partisan hack to imply that his inaction is somehow his intentional irresponsibility.
Another ad hominem, this time with a red herring thrown in. You clearly learned your debating skills from some extremist right wing agitator. Refute facts and arguments with hatred. That lesson so many on the right have learned so well has poisoned public discourse in this country. Thanks for helping to propogate it.
What the reasons for his inaction are are irrelevant to the point which you already admitted which was that he could have stopped all of the attacks after the first had he done his job.
Where the partisanship comes in with expecting the President of the United States to do his job rathe
Gee, that's awfully hateful. Ignorant too if I do say so myself.
Nice try, shill. How is it either?
let's try this again:
The Liberal Media [cnn.com] [msnbc.com] [npr.com] [cbs.com] [abc.com]: Faking Centricity since Inception
Those are all right wing media outlets. They aren't even remotely centrist. If they were totally unbiased, they would be investigating the systematic dismantling of our terrorism investigations leading up to 9/11. They would be investigating and widely reporting the deep ties between the Bush family and the Saudi Royal family. The Saudi's, keep in mind, are a brutal repressive dictatorship who funded the 9/11 hijackers.
All of the major media outlets are completely ignoring the most important stories of the day and shilling for the current illegitimate administration.
This isn't even a question of liberalism. It's simple honesty, integrity, and patriotism that all of these right wing media outlets are lacking.
I'll vote for the better strategy against terror. Bush has done well so far. Kerry has to prove he has a better policy.
Wow, how many terrorist attacks was Kerry in charge during?
You have an extremely bizarre idea of "doing well"
Let's look at what happened that day. Bush was informed that a plane full of innocent American citizens has just crashed into the World Trade Center. His response was "Now that's a bad pilot". He then proceeded to go into a classroom full of children and read them a book. After he was informed that the second plane crashed he stayed in the classroom for an additional 10 to 20 minutes. The time he wasted could have prevented the second WTC plane from hitting. It could have prevented the pentagon plane from hitting.
Then we see from the 9-11 commission that there really was no intelligence failure.
The British, French, Germans, Egyptians, and Israelis all told us that Osama was planning plane attacks.
Clinton sent 200 members of a joint FBI CIA team led by John O'Neil to Yemen after the Cole bombing. They were running down those responsible and gathering massive amounts of intelligence on Osama and other terrorists. Bush's appointed ambassador to Yemen refused to allow John O'Neil back into the country to continue his investigation. Then Bush pulled them all out.
Bush ordered the FBI to "Back off" of the Bin Ladens and the Saudis. John O'Neil, the deputy director of the FBI was fired for protesting this.
If you would care to dispute any of these facts, feel free. "Rush said it isn't true" is not an argument though.
Seriously, how could Bush have performed any worse against terrorism?!?
If that was actually your criterion for who to vote for, Bush would be the last person in the world you would vote for.
The fact that the guy owns a company that makes voting machines does not preclude him from being allowed to vote or to campaign for someone else, as far as I know. Also, I can "promise to deliver Nebraska to Bush!", but if I say it, it means that I'll be donating, advertising, and cheering for him.
Ah, but if you read the Diebold memos which came out and were confirmed by Diebold as legitimate you would know that their machines already delivered Florida in the last election. One machine tallied -14,000 votes for Gore.
The man has already proven absolutely that he can not under any circumstances be trusted. How badly is your bullshit detector broken that you can trust an untrustable person after he's proved he will do his best to destroy democracy and freedom in America?!?
What if the hackers ARE the current administration? What's your guarantee that law enforcement will investigate its own bosses? (Or have we already forgotten Watergate?)
Watergate nothing. Look around. The current administration's crimes are far far worse than those of the Nixon administration.
Putting pressure on the press is something that I feel is incredibly important on this and every issue (The $700 million theft is my favorite). Without forcing our message out to the mainstream press, we're just preaching to the choir here.
I certainly appreciate your attitude, but I don't think it's even theoretically possible for it to have any affect whatsoever. What kind of "pressure" do you suggest that we apply that can compare to billions of dollars and the destruction of critical-to-democracy anti-media consolidation laws? You see, we are not the customers of these organizations. We are their product. The advertizers are their customers. Did you catch CNN last night? Did you see the Saudi media blitz? They are the customers of the media. They are also the major funders and suppliers of the terrorists who took down the world trade center. These terrorists are also deeply allied with the Bush family.
Now, I'm not saying not to call. I'll be doing that myself, thanks for the numbers.
I'm just saying don't waste any effort hoping it could make a difference. If you can propose some mechanism by which it would even be possible for us to change the media from their conscious decision to ignore any of the stories of the criminal teason of this administration and their terrorist buddies, I'd love to hear it.
There is a refining process, but the basic ingedients come from plants.
Certainly. In fact, in some cases alcohol actually does grow on plants. I've seen birds eating pyracantha berries and then slam into sliding glass doors as the berries had fermented.
In the commonly consumed forms though, alcohol has undergone a refining process whereas pot hasn't.
Right now, as far as I know, nobody has any real evidence that Diebold and evil right-wing entities are in it to manufacture a false election.
Well, there is the evidence that Gore got -14,000 votes in the last presidential election from a Diebold machine. This was backed up by them suing over copyright infringment when the memos were released. Further evidence came from the CEO of the company saying that they would deliver large numbers of votes for Bush in the next election.
This isn't proof that there is a plot afoot, but it is certainly proof that that company should not be allowed to be in any way involved with any election again.
Unless you believe the rumors that he ordered surveilence of Bin Laden's 'friends' cut back because his Saudi relatives were complaining)
That isn't a rumor, it's a fact. John O'Neill resigned as Deputy Director of the FBI in protest over that.
As for him 'reading a book to a bunch of kids', that's not such a bad thing. I mean, it's not like he helped plan the 9/11 attacks (did he?). My worry is that it may be his actual reading level.
The worrying thing about that is that had he instead ordered planes scrambled, the second tower would not have been hit. Instead of doing that, he sat around with a bunch of kids letting the "Pearl Harbor" required by the Project for a New American Century occur.
Both of those are acts of treason in my book. No ad hominem needed.
But then, maybe mine is the sort of attitude that let the aliens kill Kennedy, and get away with it.:)
No.
Yours is the type of attitude that lets one person go down for killing Kennedy when the absolutely proven fact is that more than one person was involved. There are plenty of theories as to who was involved, and I am certainly not going to add any actual facts to that particular discussion. The official story is far less believable than some of those theories though.
Of course, the complete official story is sealed until everybody involved is safely dead.
Diebold is not a person, but it has most of the rights and none of the responsibility. It might never be safely dead.
Right back at you, ignorant troll. Canada doesn't have a cowardly, lying traitor in office at the moment. Further, the PM of Canada hasn't been proven to have lied to the population of his country in the interests of starting a war which his administration has been screaming for since they got into office illegally. Further, he didn't allow a terrorist attack on our country to happen while reading a book to a bunch of kids.
Got it?
Yep. I clearly have your number you scumbag traitor.
When it comes to viruses, whoever is using the OS that is in the majority will be part of the problem. The reason that virus writers write for Windows is that most people are using windows.
So explain all the internet worms that have brought the internet to a crawl and infected from machine to machine with no user intervention. Windows has a 20% share in this market. Apache is 70%. *All* of the worms are for Windows and Windows only.
That was the sound of your argument crashing down around you.
Security through minority is an even worse idea than security through obscurity.
Nice try, but minority or majority, when it comes to security Windows is the absolute loser.
A lot of the recent France bashing is due to this, but that is hardly the only reason.
I personally do not like the French in general because both my father and step-father were in the Air Force in Vietnam.
That should be enough info for some of you out there, but for those who don't know:
Some Air Force personnel were shot down over North Vietnam and managed to get themselves safely to the French embassy thinking that since we were allies and we were fighting a war they had started in the first place that they would be smuggled back to their unit.
Instead the French, hoping to get in good for the after war profiteering, turned them over to the North Vietnamese who proceeded to torture and murder them.
That is one reason people (in general, not just Americans) hate the French.
Slashdot Mirror
Last time I checked, it seems the only rights you have in the U.S. are to privacy and to not be offended.
Neither of these are guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
Not true.
All rights with a very few exceptions are guaranteed by the Constitution. The bill of rights was merely an add on addendum which a lot of people disagreed with the necessity for at the time. It is a sad eulogy to those who forced it through that they were right to do it.
The constitution is mainly a granting of a few closely restricted powers granted to the government.
All other rights are yours.
You can define what it means to be a good American in one sentence from the Declaration of Independence:
"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal."
The biggest problem we face is (IMHO) the lack of the courage among too many in this country to live up to this creed.
None of this, of course, goes against your statement, "...tell that to the government that's imprisoned you."
Why should I waste my time disputing what you say?
You shouldn't. You should do some investigation of you own. The facts are the facts.
You haven't proved any of it. Your facts are occasionally wrong and definitely imcomplete and your insinuations are unprovable.
Which of these facts are wrong? Incomplete? Of course, you make no effort to prove your assertion.
What did I insinuate?
Did Bush f things up before 9/11? Yes.
Agreed.
You seem to be ignoring the fact that he and his administration systematically dismantled our investigations into terrorism, and specifically the terrorists who attacked on 9/11.
This link discusses
Bush's ambassador to Yemen's refusal to allow the head of the investigation into the USS Cole bombing back in to Yemen. The source is just the first I found in a search, so if you don't like it feel free to find your own. It is a fact, and it has been widely reported. Buried mostly, but reported nonetheless.
This link
reports that the FBI was ordered to "Back off" the Bin ladens and the Saudi royal family.
I don't suppose you remember who Coleen Rowley is? Ashcroft refused to allow a search of the laptop of the 20th terrorist.
Did everyone else? Yes.
As demonstrated above, not everyone else fucked up. Some people were doing quite well before they had their knees taken out.
Further, as I said, We were warned of the specific attacks in advance by the intelligence services of multiple countries. Perhaps this is what you were talking about when you called my facts incomplete? I forgot to mention that Russia and several other Arab countries warned us as well.
You're a contentious fool.
An ad hominem attack is the most base logical fallacy.
You have to prove the spirit of your attacks is true, or I'm not even going to be bothered responding.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. The facts are what they are.
"The time he wasted could have prevented the second WTC plane from hitting." Of course it could have.
So you agree that he could have prevented the second plane from hitting the second tower by taking the simple action of responding to the threat by doing his job rather than joking that That's some bad pilot (aside: My father is a pilot, so I have some slight understanding of how horrified the poor man's wife must have felt to hear Bush ridicule her murdered husband and joke at the deaths of all the innocent passengers and crew of the plane and those immediately killed in the building.)
He then continued to react to the single worst terrorist attack on US soil by going into a classroom and reading a book to a bunch of second graders.
You're a partisan hack to imply that his inaction is somehow his intentional irresponsibility.
Another ad hominem, this time with a red herring thrown in.
You clearly learned your debating skills from some extremist right wing agitator. Refute facts and arguments with hatred. That lesson so many on the right have learned so well has poisoned public discourse in this country. Thanks for helping to propogate it.
What the reasons for his inaction are are irrelevant to the point which you already admitted which was that he could have stopped all of the attacks after the first had he done his job.
Where the partisanship comes in with expecting the President of the United States to do his job rathe
Gee, that's awfully hateful. Ignorant too if I do say so myself.
Nice try, shill. How is it either?
let's try this again:
The Liberal Media [cnn.com] [msnbc.com] [npr.com] [cbs.com] [abc.com]: Faking Centricity since Inception
Those are all right wing media outlets. They aren't even remotely centrist.
If they were totally unbiased, they would be investigating the systematic dismantling of our terrorism investigations leading up to 9/11. They would be investigating and widely reporting the deep ties between the Bush family and the Saudi Royal family. The Saudi's, keep in mind, are a brutal repressive dictatorship who funded the 9/11 hijackers.
All of the major media outlets are completely ignoring the most important stories of the day and shilling for the current illegitimate administration.
This isn't even a question of liberalism. It's simple honesty, integrity, and patriotism that all of these right wing media outlets are lacking.
I'll vote for the better strategy against terror. Bush has done well so far. Kerry has to prove he has a better policy.
Wow, how many terrorist attacks was Kerry in charge during?
You have an extremely bizarre idea of "doing well"
Let's look at what happened that day.
Bush was informed that a plane full of innocent American citizens has just crashed into the World Trade Center.
His response was "Now that's a bad pilot".
He then proceeded to go into a classroom full of children and read them a book. After he was informed that the second plane crashed he stayed in the classroom for an additional 10 to 20 minutes.
The time he wasted could have prevented the second WTC plane from hitting. It could have prevented the pentagon plane from hitting.
Then we see from the 9-11 commission that there really was no intelligence failure.
The British, French, Germans, Egyptians, and Israelis all told us that Osama was planning plane attacks.
Clinton sent 200 members of a joint FBI CIA team led by John O'Neil to Yemen after the Cole bombing. They were running down those responsible and gathering massive amounts of intelligence on Osama and other terrorists. Bush's appointed ambassador to Yemen refused to allow John O'Neil back into the country to continue his investigation. Then Bush pulled them all out.
Bush ordered the FBI to "Back off" of the Bin Ladens and the Saudis. John O'Neil, the deputy director of the FBI was fired for protesting this.
If you would care to dispute any of these facts, feel free. "Rush said it isn't true" is not an argument though.
Seriously, how could Bush have performed any worse against terrorism?!?
If that was actually your criterion for who to vote for, Bush would be the last person in the world you would vote for.
The fact that the guy owns a company that makes voting machines does not preclude him from being allowed to vote or to campaign for someone else, as far as I know. Also, I can "promise to deliver Nebraska to Bush!", but if I say it, it means that I'll be donating, advertising, and cheering for him.
Ah, but if you read the Diebold memos which came out and were confirmed by Diebold as legitimate you would know that their machines already delivered Florida in the last election.
One machine tallied -14,000 votes for Gore.
The man has already proven absolutely that he can not under any circumstances be trusted.
How badly is your bullshit detector broken that you can trust an untrustable person after he's proved he will do his best to destroy democracy and freedom in America?!?
Everyone should show up at the polls for voting unless they have a valid legal excuse to vote absentee.
Unless you're in a district which are using electronic voting machines.
In that case, you should absolutely vote absentee.
What if the hackers ARE the current administration? What's your guarantee that law enforcement will investigate its own bosses? (Or have we already forgotten Watergate?)
Watergate nothing. Look around. The current administration's crimes are far far worse than those of the Nixon administration.
Putting pressure on the press is something that I feel is incredibly important on this and every issue (The $700 million theft is my favorite). Without forcing our message out to the mainstream press, we're just preaching to the choir here.
I certainly appreciate your attitude, but I don't think it's even theoretically possible for it to have any affect whatsoever.
What kind of "pressure" do you suggest that we apply that can compare to billions of dollars and the destruction of critical-to-democracy anti-media consolidation laws?
You see, we are not the customers of these organizations. We are their product. The advertizers are their customers.
Did you catch CNN last night?
Did you see the Saudi media blitz?
They are the customers of the media. They are also the major funders and suppliers of the terrorists who took down the world trade center.
These terrorists are also deeply allied with the Bush family.
Now, I'm not saying not to call. I'll be doing that myself, thanks for the numbers.
I'm just saying don't waste any effort hoping it could make a difference.
If you can propose some mechanism by which it would even be possible for us to change the media from their conscious decision to ignore any of the stories of the criminal teason of this administration and their terrorist buddies, I'd love to hear it.
There is a refining process, but the basic ingedients come from plants.
Certainly. In fact, in some cases alcohol actually does grow on plants. I've seen birds eating pyracantha berries and then slam into sliding glass doors as the berries had fermented.
In the commonly consumed forms though, alcohol has undergone a refining process whereas pot hasn't.
Right now, as far as I know, nobody has any real evidence that Diebold and evil right-wing entities are in it to manufacture a false election.
Well, there is the evidence that Gore got -14,000 votes in the last presidential election from a Diebold machine.
This was backed up by them suing over copyright infringment when the memos were released.
Further evidence came from the CEO of the company saying that they would deliver large numbers of votes for Bush in the next election.
This isn't proof that there is a plot afoot, but it is certainly proof that that company should not be allowed to be in any way involved with any election again.
Unless you believe the rumors that he ordered surveilence of Bin Laden's 'friends' cut back because his Saudi relatives were complaining)
That isn't a rumor, it's a fact.
John O'Neill resigned as Deputy Director of the FBI in protest over that.
As for him 'reading a book to a bunch of kids', that's not such a bad thing. I mean, it's not like he helped plan the 9/11 attacks (did he?). My worry is that it may be his actual reading level.
The worrying thing about that is that had he instead ordered planes scrambled, the second tower would not have been hit. Instead of doing that, he sat around with a bunch of kids letting the "Pearl Harbor" required by the Project for a New American Century occur.
Both of those are acts of treason in my book.
No ad hominem needed.
Why isn't it the same for marijuana? Both substances can be just as dangerous.
That's not even true.
Alcohol is far more dangerous.
Alcohol doesn't even grow on plants, unlike "Hemp For Victory".
I prefer boobies and butts to entrails and gaping wounds.
Fucking terrorist.
But then, maybe mine is the sort of attitude that let the aliens kill Kennedy, and get away with it. :)
No.
Yours is the type of attitude that lets one person go down for killing Kennedy when the absolutely proven fact is that more than one person was involved. There are plenty of theories as to who was involved, and I am certainly not going to add any actual facts to that particular discussion.
The official story is far less believable than some of those theories though.
Of course, the complete official story is sealed until everybody involved is safely dead.
Diebold is not a person, but it has most of the rights and none of the responsibility.
It might never be safely dead.
At least as long as attitudes like yours prevail.
as has been pointed out many times before, that
also means the person who might wish to buy your
vote can check you voted the right way.
The alternative being that you don't get any benefit from your vote going to someone else than who you intended to vote for?
Sigh... here we go again....
Right back at you, ignorant troll.
Canada doesn't have a cowardly, lying traitor in office at the moment. Further, the PM of Canada hasn't been proven to have lied to the population of his country in the interests of starting a war which his administration has been screaming for since they got into office illegally. Further, he didn't allow a terrorist attack on our country to happen while reading a book to a bunch of kids.
Got it?
Yep. I clearly have your number you scumbag traitor.
They should ban disney... Donald never has pants on! The pervert.
The truly scary thing is that this actually happened in some of the bible-belt states. For just that reason.
People are too damn patriotic to see thru the truth.
The word is "jingoistic", not "patriotic".
They're close to diametric opposites.
By the way, it's one command to mount a harddrive. =)
/etc/fstab and created the mountpoint.
Provided you edited
SuSE does this automatically as do (I assume) most other recent distros, and setting it up to automount when clicked on is easy.
When it comes to viruses, whoever is using the OS that is in the majority will be part of the problem. The reason that virus writers write for Windows is that most people are using windows.
So explain all the internet worms that have brought the internet to a crawl and infected from machine to machine with no user intervention.
Windows has a 20% share in this market. Apache is 70%.
*All* of the worms are for Windows and Windows only.
That was the sound of your argument crashing down around you.
Security through minority is an even worse idea than security through obscurity.
Nice try, but minority or majority, when it comes to security Windows is the absolute loser.
I think it's safe to say that MS isn't going to be able to touch SCO with a 10 foot stick anymore, much less give them...er buy more licenses.
Why is that safe to say? Have they been damaged in any way by doing exactly that?
A lot of the recent France bashing is due to this, but that is hardly the only reason.
I personally do not like the French in general because both my father and step-father were in the Air Force in Vietnam.
That should be enough info for some of you out there, but for those who don't know:
Some Air Force personnel were shot down over North Vietnam and managed to get themselves safely to the French embassy thinking that since we were allies and we were fighting a war they had started in the first place that they would be smuggled back to their unit.
Instead the French, hoping to get in good for the after war profiteering, turned them over to the North Vietnamese who proceeded to torture and murder them.
That is one reason people (in general, not just Americans) hate the French.
A sweet project would be a quick and dirty GUI for one of the opensource DBMS
There is mysqlcc for MySQL. It's more like a stripped down version of the MS SQL server interface, than it is like Access though.
Tomato is, and always has been, a fruit.
Nope.
Fruits are sweet and delicious.
Tomatoes are gross and disgusting, hence vegetables.
Just curious: What were the pieces of free software that y'all had so much trouble with?
I've had a lot of trouble finding a FTP over SSL Linux client that uses client certificates.
Any suggestions?