My shuffle did die after I yanked it hot from a PC, though...
Anyone could explain how is that physically possible? Sounds to me like your shuffle was just looking for an excuse to die.
Never understood why people unmounted USB stuff instead of just removing it right away. From my understanding, the worst that could happen is unplugging it during writes. Maybe I'm just lucky but until someone provides a reasonable explanation as to why I should bother to click/type unmount and wait a few seconds to withdraw my sticks/iPods, I'll keep doing it.
I was talking about court martialing them over what allegedly happened to the journalists, sorry for the confusion.
Chances are the orders concerning journalists must be coming from higher up.
I can't really put a lot of stock into the Afghans protesting. People in poor nations can be whipped up into a frenzy by people pretty easily, it seems.
There's no smoke without fire. And that wasn't a pun.
If they can come up with some credible evidence, I'll happily revise that belief, but for now I still think this story is as likely to have happened as my "report" on your road rage incident.
The US army is accused of covering up a massacre and you're complaining about lack of evidence? Am I the only one who sees a paradox in that?
I don't know if they should be court martialed or not. I mean, if I was in their position, I'd probably would have responded in the same way. They must be under tremendous pressure given the constant threat on their lives and the near-impossibility to distinguish between civilians and potential suicide bombers. I heard an interview with Robert Fisk two days ago. The guy has seen more wars than you could ever imagine and knows exactly what he's talking about when he uses words such as "panic-shooting". He described an incident on a highway during which the response of the Americans after being ambushed was "to kill everything in sight." The commander then believed that every single car was a potential suicide bomber and ordered his men to shoot at every single one. Women and children were, of course, among the victims. Fisk then talked to the platoon commander who said "I had to defend my men; I'm sorry if innocent civilians get killed."
As for the genuinity of the event, I'd give the benefit of the doubt to the AP report because of the subsequent protests by Afghans. Thousands and thousands of people took the streets.
That said, it was all for naught, because from day 1 of being sworn in this administration wanted to go into Iraq.
Very true. Here's something to corroborate that. On an interview on "Democracy Now!" the Tuesday before the last, General Wesley Clark relates insider's insight on 9/11:
What I did warn about when I testified in front of Congress in 2002, I said if you want to worry about a state, it shouldn't be Iraq, it should be Iran. But this government, our administration, wanted to worry about Iraq, not Iran.
I knew why, because I had been through the Pentagon right after 9/11. About ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me in. He said, "Sir, you've got to come in and talk to me a second." I said, "Well, you're too busy." He said, "No, no." He says, "We've made the decision we're going to war with Iraq." This was on or about the 20th of September. I said, "We're going to war with Iraq? Why?" He said, "I don't know." He said, "I guess they don't know what else to do." So I said, "Well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda?" He said, "No, no." He says, "There's nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq." He said, "I guess it's like we don't know what to do about terrorists, but we've got a good military and we can take down governments." And he said, "I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail."
So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, "Are we still going to war with Iraq?" And he said, "Oh, it's worse than that." He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, "I just got this down from upstairs" -- meaning the Secretary of Defense's office -- "today." And he said, "This is a memo that describes how we're going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran." I said, "Is it classified?" He said, "Yes, sir." I said, "Well, don't show it to me."
You're serious? The story is four days old and was covered everywhere. I didn't bother sourcing it because I assumed it was common knowledge.
U.S. Soldiers Force Reporters To Delete Photos of Casualties ---
Meanwhile the U.S. military is being accused of trying to cover up the civilian deaths. A freelance photographer working for the Associated Press said he took photos of a vehicle where three Afghans had been shot to death inside. An American soldier then took the photographer's camera and deleted the photos. A reporter for Afghanistan's largest television station, Tolo TV, said a US soldier also forced him to delete footage. The soldier reportedly told the journalist "Delete them, or we will delete you."
Two days ago, when the troops in Afghanistan were attacked by a suicide bomber, they replied by a panic shooting which killed a couple of dozens civilians (women and kids included). The journalists who recorded the event testified that US soldiers told them to "delete them [the pics and videos] or we will delete you!".
You're conveniently overlooking monopoly in your argument. It's like saying we should ditch MS Windows; I support the idea and run exclusively Linux on my machines. Yet, everytime I send a.odt to someone, he replies saying that he couldn't open it with MS Office. Same goes for the IE only websites.
What is needed is a grassroot opposition that takes back power from corporations for the common good.
Pandora knows what I am listening to every second of the day that I am listening to music. They have , literally, a perfect listener profile of me, created by myself!
If they cannot find a way to monitize the living daylights out of that, then they need to hire some better mathematicians...
There are people who prefer old-fashioned DJ-mixed music.
Broadening the spectrum of the music you listen to can definitely benefit your spirit. Pandora doesn't...
Hamas refuses to live with Israel under all circumstances, and refuses negotiations under all circumstances. Hamas chooses violence, and only violence. It's in the Hamas charter. Go read it yourself.
I read the Hamas charter. I don't condone their ways. However, there's a reason behind the Palestinian people electing Hamas other than the Arabs thirst for blood and guttural hatred for Jews that is so often portrayed in the media.
The conflict is very unlikely to be resolved during our lifetimes. For that reason, I urge you to read the following perspective on the origins of the conflict. It's a bit lengthy but comprehensive, very well documented and compiled by Jews. http://www.cactus48.com/truth.html
They're leader preaches for hate of everything non-muslim, and for the destruction of the western society.
This post brought to you by the self-proclaimed HATE BREEDER!
Seriously though, nobody likes the regime in Teheran, but they sure seem a lot less beligerent than the one in War-shington. Unless the US stops meddling with other countries' for their selfish buck-driven interests, gives up veto-ing every single resolution concerning Israel and agrees to implement partition plans approved by the international community, radicalism and extremism is likely to foster. Oh, and did I mention the majority of Americans wants their government to give up Veto power and stop agressing other countries. So much for democracy...
So, the hardware with the Iranian manufacturer's markings all over it is just an elaborate ruse? Fine. The actual Iranian operatives romping around in the country? Ah... they're part of the clever plan we have that includes actually running the Iranian government in secret, right? These aren't allegations, it's long history.
Exactly. Because Iran was then, and still is busy funding and arming some of the worst terrorist groups in the world.
I'm gonna need evidence for that other than the word of an administration that fabricated evidence about the Iraqi WMD's.
The US is busy terrorizing the world and it has been proven on numerous occasions; To only cite the most evident case, in 1986 the International Court of Justice found that the United States had violated international law by supporting Contra guerrillas in their war against the Nicaraguan government and by mining Nicaragua's harbors. The Court ruled in Nicaragua's favor, but the United States refused to abide by the Court's decision, on the basis that the court erred in finding that it had jurisdiction to hear the case, The court stated that the United States had been involved in the "unlawful use of orce". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_S tates
Just because the US says the same thing, that makes it all a US-based issue? Why?
Because it is the very likely that the US bully attitude that is driving every single country that aspires to some independence to look for desperate means to protect themselves from the hegemon. I actually live in Europe, and I know that no country around here put the ridiculous condition that the US maintains. Maybe if you got out once in a while...
So, accommodating that same radical, crazy regime, and sending them the message that indeed, arming up with nukes, stoking a religious civil war in Iraq, wiping Israel off the map - these are all good, reasonable things... that serves the reformers how?
How does ceasing to expand an existing weapons program as a precurser to negotiations equal "giving up" on it?
Bloody no! The US insists on them SHUTTING DOWN their reactors. That's very different from "ceasing to expand" which is much more reasonable. I'm not surprised that your media fed you distorted stuff.
If you knew anything about nuclear technology you'd realize that Iran is pretty far away from producing weapon-grade nuclear fuel. The current level of enrichment they reached is 3% which is enough for civil purposes. Weapons cannot be built with less than 90% enriched Uranium. That's gotta take 5 years to acheive.
Because the NPT, of which Iran is a signatory, puts different restrictions on different countries. To wit, the US, Britain, and the other original nuclear powers must work to reduce their nuclear weapons stockpiles (which they are doing), and every other signatory must not undertake to obtain nuclear weapons.
The US lost total credibility with regard to the NPT because of Israel's nuclear stockpile. Also, the five original nuclear powers didn't display much good faith when it comes to disarmament. They are getting rid of their old warheads and replacing them with updated more potent ones. By any interpretation, this is not what the NPT was intended for.
The NPT gives Iran the right to develop civil nuclear technology, and until proven otherwise, this is what they are doing.
The US has already done a good job at destabilizing the region. I doubt it could get much worse.
I agree with the first part of your statement but saying that it couldn't get any worse is very naive. In fact, the recent deployment of an aircraft carrier in the Persian gulf and other allegations of Iraqi insurgents getting weapons from Iran show that the worst is yet to come.
Think about it. Bush included Iran in his (in)famous "axis of evil" speech. Washington turned down Teheran's 2003 offer to open negociations. The US is cornering the Iranian regime and putting it in an impossible situation. Iranian reformists and moderates are extremely unhappy with the American attitude as it only radicalizes the regime in place. Everything indicates an imminent attack.
On the 21st of February 2007, the same day the UN deadline to suspend nuclear activities expired, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made the following statement: "If they say that we should close down our fuel production facilities to resume talks, we say fine, but those who enter talks with us should also close down their nuclear fuel production activities". The white house's spokesperson Tony Snow rejected the offer.
Think about it: the US is asking Iran to close its nuclear facilities before they agree to discuss closing down Iran's nuclear facilities. Let me reiterate: The US wants them to give up the very thing they want them to give up before considering negociating with them about that thing.
I use Linux at home, but it sure isn't on a Dell box; I built my own, as I guess a lot of Linux hobbists do.
I use Linux on two Dells and an iMac.
if they offer it and no one buys it, it just gives them and other retailers a reason not to offer it and will make it harder in the future to get pre-made Linux boxes from the major sellers.
If nobody buys them right now, what makes you think they may buy them in the future? The prospect of a stable Beryl/Compiz?
Give Chavez 5 more years... and then wait to see what happens.
The history of US interventionism in Latin America shows that in the last half century, Haiti, Panama, Bolivia, Grenada, Honduras, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Chile, Guatemala, Dominican Republic, Panama and Cuba have all suffered from America's interventions. It'll be impressive if he made it past a couple of years given what he's up against. Anyway, whatever results from it, the resilience of the people of Venezuela is something that I find quite inspiring.
Whatever the realities, things associated with Cuba and Venezuala are obviously not popular in certain circles in the US at least.
Circles? You mean McCarthy & co? I say, the hell with those circles!
Seriously though, Venezuela puts US democracy to shame. I don't agree with everything Chavez does, but when he -voluntarily- calls for referendums on government legitimacy, forgives the US-backed traitors involved in the 2003 coup and gives away heating petrol for poor families in the US, I can only bow to his achievements. Contrast with what Bush has done lately; e.g: Invaded Iraq and got more than half a million people killed, Fscked up on hurricane Katarina...
Slashdot Mirror
These guys ARE pirates and hackers!!!!! I feel membership applications are gonna flow from the /. community...
I was told by a Professor in my department that OLED's had trouble with the blue colour. Not blue enough according to him.
Anyway, nothing that can't be solved in three years time.
Never understood why people unmounted USB stuff instead of just removing it right away. From my understanding, the worst that could happen is unplugging it during writes. Maybe I'm just lucky but until someone provides a reasonable explanation as to why I should bother to click/type unmount and wait a few seconds to withdraw my sticks/iPods, I'll keep doing it.
Yet, Britain is following its inexorable fate. Loud-speakers are being added to CCTV cameras. http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/04/04/uk. cctv.reut/index.html
Trivia: A Londonian is caught around 300 times on camera each day.
One word: Momentum!
I don't know if they should be court martialed or not. I mean, if I was in their position, I'd probably would have responded in the same way. They must be under tremendous pressure given the constant threat on their lives and the near-impossibility to distinguish between civilians and potential suicide bombers. I heard an interview with Robert Fisk two days ago. The guy has seen more wars than you could ever imagine and knows exactly what he's talking about when he uses words such as "panic-shooting". He described an incident on a highway during which the response of the Americans after being ambushed was "to kill everything in sight." The commander then believed that every single car was a potential suicide bomber and ordered his men to shoot at every single one. Women and children were, of course, among the victims. Fisk then talked to the platoon commander who said "I had to defend my men; I'm sorry if innocent civilians get killed."
As for the genuinity of the event, I'd give the benefit of the doubt to the AP report because of the subsequent protests by Afghans. Thousands and thousands of people took the streets.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6419235.stm
http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/20
http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/World/2007/03/04/
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-03-05-afg
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,159
I hope you consider these credible sources enough.
Two days ago, when the troops in Afghanistan were attacked by a suicide bomber, they replied by a panic shooting which killed a couple of dozens civilians (women and kids included). The journalists who recorded the event testified that US soldiers told them to "delete them [the pics and videos] or we will delete you!".
No comment.
Try radioparadise.com
Chances are you'll love it!
You're conveniently overlooking monopoly in your argument. It's like saying we should ditch MS Windows; I support the idea and run exclusively Linux on my machines. Yet, everytime I send a .odt to someone, he replies saying that he couldn't open it with MS Office. Same goes for the IE only websites.
What is needed is a grassroot opposition that takes back power from corporations for the common good.
Good point. But all quality radios I know of, are listener supported. (i.e: voluntary contributions from listeners who like the service)
Broadening the spectrum of the music you listen to can definitely benefit your spirit. Pandora doesn't...
The conflict is very unlikely to be resolved during our lifetimes. For that reason, I urge you to read the following perspective on the origins of the conflict. It's a bit lengthy but comprehensive, very well documented and compiled by Jews. http://www.cactus48.com/truth.html
Seriously though, nobody likes the regime in Teheran, but they sure seem a lot less beligerent than the one in War-shington. Unless the US stops meddling with other countries' for their selfish buck-driven interests, gives up veto-ing every single resolution concerning Israel and agrees to implement partition plans approved by the international community, radicalism and extremism is likely to foster. Oh, and did I mention the majority of Americans wants their government to give up Veto power and stop agressing other countries. So much for democracy...
The US is busy terrorizing the world and it has been proven on numerous occasions; To only cite the most evident case, in 1986 the International Court of Justice found that the United States had violated international law by supporting Contra guerrillas in their war against the Nicaraguan government and by mining Nicaragua's harbors. The Court ruled in Nicaragua's favor, but the United States refused to abide by the Court's decision, on the basis that the court erred in finding that it had jurisdiction to hear the case, The court stated that the United States had been involved in the "unlawful use of orce". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_
I'm amazed at how people who don't speak Farsi keep on bringing the "wiped off the map" misinterpretation. Go learn some basic Persian and get back to me. http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/jonathan_stee
If you knew anything about nuclear technology you'd realize that Iran is pretty far away from producing weapon-grade nuclear fuel. The current level of enrichment they reached is 3% which is enough for civil purposes. Weapons cannot be built with less than 90% enriched Uranium. That's gotta take 5 years to acheive.
The NPT gives Iran the right to develop civil nuclear technology, and until proven otherwise, this is what they are doing.
Think about it. Bush included Iran in his (in)famous "axis of evil" speech. Washington turned down Teheran's 2003 offer to open negociations. The US is cornering the Iranian regime and putting it in an impossible situation. Iranian reformists and moderates are extremely unhappy with the American attitude as it only radicalizes the regime in place. Everything indicates an imminent attack.
On the 21st of February 2007, the same day the UN deadline to suspend nuclear activities expired, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made the following statement: "If they say that we should close down our fuel production facilities to resume talks, we say fine, but those who enter talks with us should also close down their nuclear fuel production activities". The white house's spokesperson Tony Snow rejected the offer. Think about it: the US is asking Iran to close its nuclear facilities before they agree to discuss closing down Iran's nuclear facilities. Let me reiterate: The US wants them to give up the very thing they want them to give up before considering negociating with them about that thing.
Mad world.
Too much overhead!
Also, I highly recommend watching this top-notch documentary by the widow of Jerry Garcia; http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0427276/