How many of you drive old cars, trucks, vans, or SUV's that say they are a joy to drive and run like the day they were brand new? No one would say that. Why NASA is using a shuttle that is 20 years old is beyond me......
You really don't know what you are talking about. Cars are one thing, aircraft and spacecraft are totally different. For example I just purchased a 1947 Cessna 140. I would stack that plane against a brand new model Cessna and probably win. Even after almost 60 years that plane stacks up well considering how much it can carry and how much fuel it uses. It is certaintly very air worthy. That is because aircraft are inspected EVERY year for corrosion and problems (they call it an annual). They are repaired if a problem is found and usually they are better than new. I know for a fact I can take my 140 into fields that a brand new 172 wouldn't dream of going into. The 172 is about 15 knots faster, it also burns twice as much gas (at $3.50/gal). Same thing with the shuttle. It is inspected very closely. Considering what is going on to push it up into space and return it, I think it is about as safe as it can be. New doesn't necessarily mean better.
20 years for a car is a very long time, 20 years for an aircraft really isn't. My son for example just flew on a 35 year old 747. B-52 jets used in Iraq were built in the 1950s (much older than the pilots flying them). Still safe. Cars will last indefinately too if you keep corrosion down and replace parts as they go bad. Most people get rid of cars because they are tired of them or want new features. Some cars do suck from the begining, however.
The design of the shuttle makes as much sense today as it did in the 1970s when Nixon signed the bill to start construction. He was badgered into doing it. Throughout the shuttles history it has been criticized. I'd ditch the environmentalist change on the foam for the tank (makes it flake off) and keep the shuttle until a space elevator can be built out of nanotubes HERE
Either that or bring back Saturn V rockets. They can take a heck of a payload at a time.
What are you talking about? I never mentioned terror cells existing in the US. In fact the article you refernce deals with Americans that went to Afghanistan, not terror cells hiding within the US. So what was your point, that you fear the most rediculous stories your government tells you?
Not sure anymore without looking at it all over again. This one was a week old on Thursday! Since then I have purchased a plane, met about 300 people, read 2 electronic journals and read a lot of e-mail. Amoung many other things. Maybe you were too busy to respond?
Seems to me that you said something about there not being any terrorist cells found. I presumed in the US since we are talking about the patriot act. I haven't thought about the Patriot act as it would pertain to someone going abroad. I sure don't remember it coming up in the hearings in an unusual manner. Their privacy would be protected as if they were here as well. You would still need to get a federal judge to go along with it and that isn't easy to do. In short, I don't see how an abuse would occur this way either. Congress has had time to think about it so it isn't "in the middle of the night" like some cried about last time. Studies have been done, I think it is much ado about nothing.
Listen to some of your politicians. They are trying to tell Europe about the EU and their quest to become the United States of Europe. Based in Brussels they will turn the British Parliament into a rubber stamp. They seem bent on doing it even though France and the Netherlands has rejected the EU's Constitution. Ever look at it? The US Constitution is like 7 articles, something like that. The EU's is around 109. Bound to be applied in ways to harm Europe.
Europe has nothing to worry about with the US. We offer protection but we have shown for over 50 years that we let the countries run themselves and help where needed. Sometimes even though it hurts the US. Sometimes I think the US should just let Europe fall flat on their face. We'll be there to help you back up again. We always are. Then you can do it all over again. I see Europe heading to another war. A very bloody one. Once again nobody can stop it. Not soon but it is coming.
Welcome to the club! It will be tough as your liable to be attacked in the papers, and elsewhere by sometimes very hateful things. Start up an equivelent of the NRA too. Get the right to defend yourself back. You will need it with the United States of Europe wanting to take you over.
I hope this will result in better music on the radio. This morning it was a real chore to find a station that didn't have either screaming, noise or classical stuff on it. Lot of no-talent out there, then there is RAP - crap. Thank goodness for MP3 players!
If you think about it, US has the same "penis thing" more or less.
Hummm... Sounds like someone with a small one himself and something to prove. Well, you expected someone would say that didn't you?
Besides, I don't think anyone in the world thinks the US is concerned about a small penis thing. If anything they say we have too big of one and they want the US to have a small one like they do.
Have to wonder what Japan will do with so much power. The old one was called "Earth Simulator". Next one - "Galaxy Simulator" maybe?
Oh really? Please name them. You'll be surprised when you actually do the research and find out that they have apprehended and convicted exactly 0 terrorists using the Patriot Act.
I did do my research and those numbers were given in the discussion for renewing the act. I also found out that the ACLU has done a lot of lawsuits trying to find wrongdoing and has fell flat on their face. Even to do with the library stuff.
Did you notice how it says 400 suspects and not 400 terrorists. There is a reason for that.
Nope, didn't notice, why did you? The "reason" is that they are following legal protocol and you should know that. Everyone is a suspect until they are convicted. What you are saying is like they have brought charges against X suspects and not X murderers in a discussion about arresting murderers. I would expect you to know this. You do remember the part where they say you are innocent until proven guilty, don't you? Maybe you would prefer "They brought charges against 400 Terrorists and convicted 200 of them."? What about those 200 innocent people? Why do you insist on calling them terrorists? Would you like to be refered to as a Rapist if they arrest you for rape? 'nuff said I hope.
That's clearly bogus since it has never even been shown that terrorist cells existed in anything more than a temporary capacity within the US. This is tin foil hat stuff.
What the hell are you talking about? You just contradicted yourself. You admit that they exist and then say that is bogus? Well here, there are many many examples that you obviously have no clue about, however I'll show one of the ones from Oregon -
here . What do you mean about a "tin foil hat"? You think somehow that I think the Government is listening in on us all? I have said nothing of the sort. I have a feeling you were Trolling, maybe?
So I guess we can give the entire government a free pass even though the CIA, NSA, FBI, and White House all knew about terrorist attacks in advance. We should blame Clinton for every single one of those agencies not doing their job. That's horseshit and you know it.
It isn't horseshit and you should know it. You cannot spend 8 years destroying time tested intellegence (hundreds of years) techniques and then right after leaving office blame all the bad stuff on the new guy. Maybe you forgot that originally they were going to do 9/11/01 on 9/11/00 - when Billy boy was STILL in office. Then who would you blame? Why should all the blame shift now to Bush? It still hasn't been established that they "knew" the attack was coming any more than they "knew" back in 2000, 1999 or 1998... on back. Bin Laden had been making those threats for years, indeed do you remember he tried to blow up the WTC in 1993? That was the first time. Clinton SHOULD have increased intelligence, instead he weakened it. He also didn't follow through on the Gulf War promises that were made. For that matter, Clinton even released convicted terrorists from Federal Prison before he left office. Even though Clinton may be to blame, I don't think we should arrest him or tar and feather him for it. I think he did what he thought was best, just as I think Bush does what he thinks is best. A lot of this stuff is designed to get a rise out of people - in case you didn't know. It is called politics.
Bottom line is that if you have a better way of doing this stuff, don't be shy. You have representatives that you can phone, write and even meet with. Approach them respectfully and if it makes sense they will persue it. Even if your representatives are of the opposite party that you are, they are people too in spite of what you might think. They really do put their pants on the same way you do and they really do care with a very few exceptions. Otherwise from what I see out there, the Patriot act is working and hasn't done bad stuff. There also seems to be sufficient oversight. Congress agrees and they passed it again with very good support.
The Patriot Act has done nothing to protect us from terrorists since its inception.
Nothing? How many terrorist attacks have we had in the US since 911? NONE. Your listening to the conspiracists. The government has disclosed a number of incidents on how the Patriot act has stopped terrorist plots. Perhaps you forget about those? When they went to renew it, it was brought out in congress and the newspapers that "The Patriot Act has been used to bring charges against more than 400 suspects, and more than half have been convicted. He also said it has been used to break up terrorist cells in New York, Oregon, Virginia and Florida." So don't say it has never been used or has done no good. They may have saved you life or someone you know already. Nobody has contested these figures nor the statement so I presume it is true.
As for the existing infrastructure you talked about, it wasn't there. That was done away with in 1993 when Clinton/Albright stripped the CIA. Then they passed rules (Gorelick) to prevent agencies from communicating with each other (Read the 911 report?). Some speculate the rule was to prevent the CIA from informing the FBI of the illegal activities of the Clinton administration, mostly to do with fund raising, amoung many other things. Gorelick claimed the rules were to preserve civil rights and civil liberties. Most people would be suspect of her motives since she is now a Democratic Congressman and her loyalties were clearly with the Clinton administration while she worked at the Justice Department.
This one sounds like a job for the Myth Busters. They will do anything. Recently they tried the "brown note", chinese water torture and some other potentially deadly tests.
This ship sailed over 20 years ago. There are literally millions, perhaps billions of ethernet jacks out there that won't be powered. People have a tough time programming their VCR and now they would have to figure out if their ethernet jack is powered or not? When it doesn't work, they wouldn't understand why. Bad jack, incompatible jack or idiot in the closet did something.
The only way I would see to get it to work would be to come up with a new jack for the connection. That would render millions of existing ethernet jacks obsolete. This could be like trying to get the USA to switch from Standard to Metric again. The only difference is that it would be on a global scale. Europe would want to have their standard (read France), then there would be the correct US standard, then others like China and Tiawan. Then it would get political. About a year later we would find out that Amazon has a patent on it somehow.
Darn it, your ruining some perfectly good fun. Poor sucker could start getting mail for Enzyte, Ladies home journal, Rosey O'Donnel show and so on. He would wonder how the heck he got on all of these opt-in lists! Maybe throw in some mail for Barney, would have to time it right though. Imagine subscribing a guy to the wrong political party's e-mail!
I have worked in all three environments. What they all have in common is that whatever their OS is that they know, it is the best OS ever developed. Everything else is trash. They will also try to convert you. Think of them as a strong Democrat, Republica, Green, etc.. Sometimes the arugments get about as heated.
Mainframe guys (we are talking IBM type mainframes, aka big iron) are still in shock and awe over the mainframe's big data pipes (mainframes have channeled I/O and therefore can move a lot of data fast), structure and stability of the software. Why they will make such bold statements as "a mainframe NEVER goes down." and "You cannot break into a mainframe, it is way more secure than anything else." The truth is that they do go down and it isn't that hard to do. Just mention filling up a dataset, something any user can do. They also get broken into (duh!). Mainframe users deal with something called JCL (job control language) and they think it is wonderful, best thing since sliced bread. Mainframes also deal with data as fixed records - usually. Most of them still use a language called COBOL or PL/I. Some die hards may still use assembler. Mainframe users also have the illusion that they have more control than they do, they have to specify everything.
Unix users know they have the best OS around. In fact Unix runs on mainframe style hardware. Your unix box may run on a S/390 mainframe. So you have to virtualize the machine wisely to take advantage of the impressive capability of that machine. While the CPU's may not be impressive, the I/O is. Again - big data I/O pipes via channeled I/O. Unix machines think of everything as a file. Well most everything and if you keep that in mind you will be ahead of most people. Languages galore. Unix has been extended so much from the original it can do anything. It is also very, very stable. So stable the phone company has used it for decades. I have machines out there I haven't seen in years. Still running. Just update it remotely.
Windows users - they think they have the best OS and everything else is trash. Sometimes they make silly statements like "everyone is using it" and "they have most of the market" to justify it is somehow the best. It is plagued with security holes throughout. The languages available are varied - some are common and others try to lock you into Microsoft. Most of these guys are not that smart, unfortunately (paper certified, recently a little girl got certified as a Microsoft professional). Microsoft tries to do everything for them so they think they are much better than they really are. As a result a lot of windows programs are poorly written. Sometimes I'm amazed at just how little these "professionals" know. Then there is the famous Blue Screen Of Death (BSOD). Windows users will try to gloss over or trivialize any problem with the OS. Sometimes they will even attack you saying you "should learn something new."
Dealing with these three groups can be very challenging. The mainframe group should realize that even IBM and the other mainframe companies are moving to Unix based or Linux OS machines. It is just a matter of time. They should migrate and start using Linux/Unix. Most Unix guys are eager to help them make the transition. The Windows guys are usually too limited to work with. They will often say "Unix is too hard." As if they would know, they haven't even tried it. The best thing is to insist that they learn more of it. Send them to courses and such. Most see just how bad Windows is and switch. For those that don't I recommend you fire them. Let them be someone else's problem.
I'm not sure. Without muscling some imagined US Christian persecution, politicians and commentators have no stupidity to capitalize on except "liberal is evil," a mantra becoming all the more naked as neo-con politicking becomes indistinguishable from the liberal socialism of its intellectual forebears. They need a wedge; as per my original reply, that wedge is Baby Gee.
Most people don't have a problem with Christians, but many take issue with some dickhead saying the religion is UNDER ATTACK by or AT WAR with the rest of us. See the difference?
This is funny, really it is. Know what a "red herring" is? You should live in Ireland for a while to understand what religion and war is about. Sometimes they show it in the US - grown (Protestent) adults throwing stones at (Catholic) children for example. It used to be much worse over there, bombings and the like. There are always a few people out there that think something out of the norm. If you talk to them, they are very convinced they are right. Is religion really under attack? Probably not, at least not more than it has been for a very long time. It is easy to get that feeling with the ACLU using God as a fund raiser lately. You see, they get paid for bringing these cases regardless if they loose or not (a 1972 rule allows for this, the state pays them either way). For some reason they classify the God cases as a civil rights case. So they see a pot of gold under anything that has to do with religon and something public. Clearly there is no "separation of church and state". We know this because Thomas Jefferson said so in a letter to a friend later, after all that stuff was signed. In his letter he said that he wished it were in there. Of course the right gets upset because the ACLU seems to only object to as you put it baby gee. Where are the lawsuits about making people use the Koran in college courses and the other clear abuses of establishing a religion? Again, the Democrats see themself (admitedly) as the party about abortion. They offset that as a struggle against religion, even in cases of clear murder. Look up what a partial birth abortion really is. Usually it is a viable baby, nearly to term and they suck the brains out, then deliver the dead baby. I support abortion but not that. Nobody does when they understand what it really is. At least I haven't found one yet and I know some VERY liberal people.
It's my personal feeling that the fundamental tenets of the religion will quite literally come under attack in the not-too-distant future, as they're flagrantly ridiculous, but from libertarians and not democrats. If you think the GOP's had a problem reconciling cheap labor with xenophobia, wait until the people with truly conservative fiscal policy talk frankly about mythology.
GOP and being xenophobic? That's funny. I have to wonder if you have the GOP and the Democrats/labor confused. Look at Judgeship denials too. I'm not sure which tenents of religion you are talking about, however I have a feeling they will remain. They have survived for 2000 years after all and this comes up about twice a decade. Quite few of those stories have even been confirmed by Scientists I understand. In fact some in academia go so far as to say the Bible isn't a bad history book. You may want to rethink this one. There is a surge in Religion and away from athiesm now. Athiest are finally realizeing that they are not here by chance. There is more to it than that.
I suggest you follow your own wisdom about current events. When you can't tell which stories Jon Stewart and SNL fabricate outright, versus when they take shots at real people for deserved reasons, you live in a bubble. Blowing steam out your ears at "those damn liberals" for their incisive material doesn't make your point of view attractive to educated people.
What the hell are you talking about? I know exactly which ones are and aren't spoofs. There are a lot of people out there that don't, however. Studies show that educated people tend to b
I was recalling the exit polls of the 2004 presidential election and my own discussions with die-hard, straight-ticket GOP voters. I think it's accurate to call these people the "base" targeted by the party's campaign strategy, but if you need Congressmen showboating religion as a partisan wedge issue:
"The long war on Christianity continues today on the floor of the United States House of Representatives...Like a moth to a flame, Democrats can't help themselves when it comes to denigrating and demonizing Christians."
John Hofstadtler, R-IN, US House, Defense Spending, 6-20-2005, CNN
The Senator is simply repeating what I already said. The Dems keep trying to bring stink on the Republicans by associating them with some sort of religous crusade, of which most people know they are full of it. The dems are the party of liberalism they tell us, loose morals and "tollerance". They want tollerance from us and are totally intollerant with conservatives (how dare you say God!). So what is a moral authority in America to "rebel" against? It is religon. Otherwise they are simply blithering idiots having a tantrum. So the Senator is right, they can't help but to keep repeating this propaganda about religon in an attempt to get others to believe it. Otherwise what would they say? The "their rich" monster is brought out from time to time, doesn't seem to go anyplace. A lot of Dems are rich, some very very wealthy - billionaires with a B.
Do you personally feel that you are being pushed into a religon? If so, which one and by whom? Did the state, county or someone from the city make you go to church? So how are these "terrible" religous people impacting your life? It is very tough to separate out what is truly religon and what is time tested wisdom. Wisdom that trancends even into those that are pure athiests. For example lets look at a very famous one - "thou shalt not kill". Religon or not? Since that trancends every civilization it is very difficult to say that is religon.
By the way, you might want to watch something other than the daily show. It is comedy. Stewart himself has expressed concern about people thinking they are getting real news from him.
post David Lazarus address, phone number and google map coords? I'm interested in, uh, how accessible his house is by large van
Dunno, but yours is very accessable. Came right up with google (slashdot userid=spun home map boom). By the way, your roof needs new shingles, put more water in your dog's water dish, there is cat dung in the play sand out back, there is a pocket knife 1 foot from the sidewalk and drivway in the grass and you need to hide the pot plants better.
Anything I said that is right is purely coincidental and was for fun purposes only. If the above google query actually works, let me know!
Not true. The Washington Times article is wrong. Wilson said that she was no longer covert the day Novak wrote the article - or rather, Novak's article caused her to lose her cover.
The article is right and many sources have shown that SHE made it known all over to the point that all of her neighbors knew she worked at the CIA. If her husband hadn't lied in the first place and said that Cheney sent him to Niger then none of this would have happened. That is, one of Wilson's many lies that he has been caught red handed in.
The real story here is how come she was able to get her husband, a man with NO experience for this mission to Niger (i.e. you needed a COP, not an old diplomat!), the job to go to Niger. The other story is how Rove was trying to get a reporter that had been told by Wilson himself that Cheney sent him and not his wife. Rove is getting in trouble for not letting Wilson get away with one of his many lies. If anyone should get in legal trouble over this, it should be Wilson and his wife.
Finally we know Rove didn't break the law after all because even the Democrats don't think so. They are trying to pass a law retroactively to get him. They were discussing it on CSPAN. If anyone compromised national security, it was Wilson and his wife in their attempt to get Bush.
For those who don't, anything listing her job would have had her working at that CIA front, 'Brewster Jennings & Associates'. Completely unrelated to the government.
In fact she made it no secret that she worked for the CIA. It was to the point that literally everyone in her neighborhood knew. Hardly "under cover". Most in official Washington didn't realize she had a cover, they thought she was one of the many civilian employees.
Pretty hard to avoid "giving up control" if everyone around the world starts using different root servers.
Good luck. If they use their own root servers then they cannot reach all the other sites out there. How could they get their Microsoft patches? That would be like the boy going to his room to play with himself. There are a lot of problems with doing this. Besides, what is the big deal? It isn't as if the US is dictating anything or trying to get others to do something they don't want to do. The European ICANN does that.
Move this sucker up to Federal Court since this deals with securities. Haul his butt to Washington DC and try him in Federal court. Then have him serve his time in Marion Ill (supermax facility). Go after the law firm, rinse lather repeat. Then go after their assets. Dole it out to stockholders of RedHat, IBM, Diamler Chrystler, Autozone and anyone else injured by these guys. Maybe with any luck he will get mugged while in Washington too (Red light camera, speed camera, friendly neighborhood thief).
Now my wife can watch her stupid Murder She Wrote (Hint, Angela Lansbury manages to blame someone else for all of those murders) and I can watch porn! Woo hoo! Now to manage to hide that fact. Yea honey, I'm watching MSW. How come your drooling honey! Don't think I could say Angela Lansbury looks hot. She wouldn't buy that.
Used to be off by about that much because the signal was intentionally encrypted. That was turned off years ago so now they are within 3 feet depending on terrain. Sometimes my handheld seems to work down to 6 inches.
Slashdot Mirror
You really don't know what you are talking about. Cars are one thing, aircraft and spacecraft are totally different. For example I just purchased a 1947 Cessna 140. I would stack that plane against a brand new model Cessna and probably win. Even after almost 60 years that plane stacks up well considering how much it can carry and how much fuel it uses. It is certaintly very air worthy. That is because aircraft are inspected EVERY year for corrosion and problems (they call it an annual). They are repaired if a problem is found and usually they are better than new. I know for a fact I can take my 140 into fields that a brand new 172 wouldn't dream of going into. The 172 is about 15 knots faster, it also burns twice as much gas (at $3.50/gal). Same thing with the shuttle. It is inspected very closely. Considering what is going on to push it up into space and return it, I think it is about as safe as it can be. New doesn't necessarily mean better.
20 years for a car is a very long time, 20 years for an aircraft really isn't. My son for example just flew on a 35 year old 747. B-52 jets used in Iraq were built in the 1950s (much older than the pilots flying them). Still safe. Cars will last indefinately too if you keep corrosion down and replace parts as they go bad. Most people get rid of cars because they are tired of them or want new features. Some cars do suck from the begining, however.
The design of the shuttle makes as much sense today as it did in the 1970s when Nixon signed the bill to start construction. He was badgered into doing it. Throughout the shuttles history it has been criticized. I'd ditch the environmentalist change on the foam for the tank (makes it flake off) and keep the shuttle until a space elevator can be built out of nanotubes HERE
Either that or bring back Saturn V rockets. They can take a heck of a payload at a time.
When do we start scooping up the anti-war protesters?
Pipe in Barney, watch them crash and burn... bla ha ha ha hah hahah cough snort ha ha ha ha ha.
They did a bond movie with the current shuttle - moonraker. In a way it kind of looks like a rocket powered tampon.
Not sure anymore without looking at it all over again. This one was a week old on Thursday! Since then I have purchased a plane, met about 300 people, read 2 electronic journals and read a lot of e-mail. Amoung many other things. Maybe you were too busy to respond?
Seems to me that you said something about there not being any terrorist cells found. I presumed in the US since we are talking about the patriot act. I haven't thought about the Patriot act as it would pertain to someone going abroad. I sure don't remember it coming up in the hearings in an unusual manner. Their privacy would be protected as if they were here as well. You would still need to get a federal judge to go along with it and that isn't easy to do. In short, I don't see how an abuse would occur this way either. Congress has had time to think about it so it isn't "in the middle of the night" like some cried about last time. Studies have been done, I think it is much ado about nothing.
Listen to some of your politicians. They are trying to tell Europe about the EU and their quest to become the United States of Europe. Based in Brussels they will turn the British Parliament into a rubber stamp. They seem bent on doing it even though France and the Netherlands has rejected the EU's Constitution. Ever look at it? The US Constitution is like 7 articles, something like that. The EU's is around 109. Bound to be applied in ways to harm Europe.
Europe has nothing to worry about with the US. We offer protection but we have shown for over 50 years that we let the countries run themselves and help where needed. Sometimes even though it hurts the US. Sometimes I think the US should just let Europe fall flat on their face. We'll be there to help you back up again. We always are. Then you can do it all over again. I see Europe heading to another war. A very bloody one. Once again nobody can stop it. Not soon but it is coming.
Welcome to the club! It will be tough as your liable to be attacked in the papers, and elsewhere by sometimes very hateful things. Start up an equivelent of the NRA too. Get the right to defend yourself back. You will need it with the United States of Europe wanting to take you over.
I hope this will result in better music on the radio. This morning it was a real chore to find a station that didn't have either screaming, noise or classical stuff on it. Lot of no-talent out there, then there is RAP - crap. Thank goodness for MP3 players!
Hummm... Sounds like someone with a small one himself and something to prove. Well, you expected someone would say that didn't you?
Besides, I don't think anyone in the world thinks the US is concerned about a small penis thing. If anything they say we have too big of one and they want the US to have a small one like they do.
Have to wonder what Japan will do with so much power. The old one was called "Earth Simulator". Next one - "Galaxy Simulator" maybe?
Of course - Yes, but will it run Linux?
What they should have done is instead of blocking it, redirect it to a penis enlargement site! That is so funny for so many reasons.
I did do my research and those numbers were given in the discussion for renewing the act. I also found out that the ACLU has done a lot of lawsuits trying to find wrongdoing and has fell flat on their face. Even to do with the library stuff.
Did you notice how it says 400 suspects and not 400 terrorists. There is a reason for that.
Nope, didn't notice, why did you? The "reason" is that they are following legal protocol and you should know that. Everyone is a suspect until they are convicted. What you are saying is like they have brought charges against X suspects and not X murderers in a discussion about arresting murderers. I would expect you to know this. You do remember the part where they say you are innocent until proven guilty, don't you? Maybe you would prefer "They brought charges against 400 Terrorists and convicted 200 of them."? What about those 200 innocent people? Why do you insist on calling them terrorists? Would you like to be refered to as a Rapist if they arrest you for rape? 'nuff said I hope.
That's clearly bogus since it has never even been shown that terrorist cells existed in anything more than a temporary capacity within the US. This is tin foil hat stuff.
What the hell are you talking about? You just contradicted yourself. You admit that they exist and then say that is bogus? Well here, there are many many examples that you obviously have no clue about, however I'll show one of the ones from Oregon - here . What do you mean about a "tin foil hat"? You think somehow that I think the Government is listening in on us all? I have said nothing of the sort. I have a feeling you were Trolling, maybe?
So I guess we can give the entire government a free pass even though the CIA, NSA, FBI, and White House all knew about terrorist attacks in advance. We should blame Clinton for every single one of those agencies not doing their job. That's horseshit and you know it.
It isn't horseshit and you should know it. You cannot spend 8 years destroying time tested intellegence (hundreds of years) techniques and then right after leaving office blame all the bad stuff on the new guy. Maybe you forgot that originally they were going to do 9/11/01 on 9/11/00 - when Billy boy was STILL in office. Then who would you blame? Why should all the blame shift now to Bush? It still hasn't been established that they "knew" the attack was coming any more than they "knew" back in 2000, 1999 or 1998... on back. Bin Laden had been making those threats for years, indeed do you remember he tried to blow up the WTC in 1993? That was the first time. Clinton SHOULD have increased intelligence, instead he weakened it. He also didn't follow through on the Gulf War promises that were made. For that matter, Clinton even released convicted terrorists from Federal Prison before he left office. Even though Clinton may be to blame, I don't think we should arrest him or tar and feather him for it. I think he did what he thought was best, just as I think Bush does what he thinks is best. A lot of this stuff is designed to get a rise out of people - in case you didn't know. It is called politics.
Bottom line is that if you have a better way of doing this stuff, don't be shy. You have representatives that you can phone, write and even meet with. Approach them respectfully and if it makes sense they will persue it. Even if your representatives are of the opposite party that you are, they are people too in spite of what you might think. They really do put their pants on the same way you do and they really do care with a very few exceptions. Otherwise from what I see out there, the Patriot act is working and hasn't done bad stuff. There also seems to be sufficient oversight. Congress agrees and they passed it again with very good support.
Nothing? How many terrorist attacks have we had in the US since 911? NONE. Your listening to the conspiracists. The government has disclosed a number of incidents on how the Patriot act has stopped terrorist plots. Perhaps you forget about those? When they went to renew it, it was brought out in congress and the newspapers that "The Patriot Act has been used to bring charges against more than 400 suspects, and more than half have been convicted. He also said it has been used to break up terrorist cells in New York, Oregon, Virginia and Florida." So don't say it has never been used or has done no good. They may have saved you life or someone you know already. Nobody has contested these figures nor the statement so I presume it is true.
As for the existing infrastructure you talked about, it wasn't there. That was done away with in 1993 when Clinton/Albright stripped the CIA. Then they passed rules (Gorelick) to prevent agencies from communicating with each other (Read the 911 report?). Some speculate the rule was to prevent the CIA from informing the FBI of the illegal activities of the Clinton administration, mostly to do with fund raising, amoung many other things. Gorelick claimed the rules were to preserve civil rights and civil liberties. Most people would be suspect of her motives since she is now a Democratic Congressman and her loyalties were clearly with the Clinton administration while she worked at the Justice Department.
This one sounds like a job for the Myth Busters. They will do anything. Recently they tried the "brown note", chinese water torture and some other potentially deadly tests.
The only way I would see to get it to work would be to come up with a new jack for the connection. That would render millions of existing ethernet jacks obsolete. This could be like trying to get the USA to switch from Standard to Metric again. The only difference is that it would be on a global scale. Europe would want to have their standard (read France), then there would be the correct US standard, then others like China and Tiawan. Then it would get political. About a year later we would find out that Amazon has a patent on it somehow.
Darn it, your ruining some perfectly good fun. Poor sucker could start getting mail for Enzyte, Ladies home journal, Rosey O'Donnel show and so on. He would wonder how the heck he got on all of these opt-in lists! Maybe throw in some mail for Barney, would have to time it right though. Imagine subscribing a guy to the wrong political party's e-mail!
Mainframe guys (we are talking IBM type mainframes, aka big iron) are still in shock and awe over the mainframe's big data pipes (mainframes have channeled I/O and therefore can move a lot of data fast), structure and stability of the software. Why they will make such bold statements as "a mainframe NEVER goes down." and "You cannot break into a mainframe, it is way more secure than anything else." The truth is that they do go down and it isn't that hard to do. Just mention filling up a dataset, something any user can do. They also get broken into (duh!). Mainframe users deal with something called JCL (job control language) and they think it is wonderful, best thing since sliced bread. Mainframes also deal with data as fixed records - usually. Most of them still use a language called COBOL or PL/I. Some die hards may still use assembler. Mainframe users also have the illusion that they have more control than they do, they have to specify everything.
Unix users know they have the best OS around. In fact Unix runs on mainframe style hardware. Your unix box may run on a S/390 mainframe. So you have to virtualize the machine wisely to take advantage of the impressive capability of that machine. While the CPU's may not be impressive, the I/O is. Again - big data I/O pipes via channeled I/O. Unix machines think of everything as a file. Well most everything and if you keep that in mind you will be ahead of most people. Languages galore. Unix has been extended so much from the original it can do anything. It is also very, very stable. So stable the phone company has used it for decades. I have machines out there I haven't seen in years. Still running. Just update it remotely.
Windows users - they think they have the best OS and everything else is trash. Sometimes they make silly statements like "everyone is using it" and "they have most of the market" to justify it is somehow the best. It is plagued with security holes throughout. The languages available are varied - some are common and others try to lock you into Microsoft. Most of these guys are not that smart, unfortunately (paper certified, recently a little girl got certified as a Microsoft professional). Microsoft tries to do everything for them so they think they are much better than they really are. As a result a lot of windows programs are poorly written. Sometimes I'm amazed at just how little these "professionals" know. Then there is the famous Blue Screen Of Death (BSOD). Windows users will try to gloss over or trivialize any problem with the OS. Sometimes they will even attack you saying you "should learn something new."
Dealing with these three groups can be very challenging. The mainframe group should realize that even IBM and the other mainframe companies are moving to Unix based or Linux OS machines. It is just a matter of time. They should migrate and start using Linux/Unix. Most Unix guys are eager to help them make the transition. The Windows guys are usually too limited to work with. They will often say "Unix is too hard." As if they would know, they haven't even tried it. The best thing is to insist that they learn more of it. Send them to courses and such. Most see just how bad Windows is and switch. For those that don't I recommend you fire them. Let them be someone else's problem.
Most people don't have a problem with Christians, but many take issue with some dickhead saying the religion is UNDER ATTACK by or AT WAR with the rest of us. See the difference?
This is funny, really it is. Know what a "red herring" is? You should live in Ireland for a while to understand what religion and war is about. Sometimes they show it in the US - grown (Protestent) adults throwing stones at (Catholic) children for example. It used to be much worse over there, bombings and the like. There are always a few people out there that think something out of the norm. If you talk to them, they are very convinced they are right. Is religion really under attack? Probably not, at least not more than it has been for a very long time. It is easy to get that feeling with the ACLU using God as a fund raiser lately. You see, they get paid for bringing these cases regardless if they loose or not (a 1972 rule allows for this, the state pays them either way). For some reason they classify the God cases as a civil rights case. So they see a pot of gold under anything that has to do with religon and something public. Clearly there is no "separation of church and state". We know this because Thomas Jefferson said so in a letter to a friend later, after all that stuff was signed. In his letter he said that he wished it were in there. Of course the right gets upset because the ACLU seems to only object to as you put it baby gee. Where are the lawsuits about making people use the Koran in college courses and the other clear abuses of establishing a religion? Again, the Democrats see themself (admitedly) as the party about abortion. They offset that as a struggle against religion, even in cases of clear murder. Look up what a partial birth abortion really is. Usually it is a viable baby, nearly to term and they suck the brains out, then deliver the dead baby. I support abortion but not that. Nobody does when they understand what it really is. At least I haven't found one yet and I know some VERY liberal people.
It's my personal feeling that the fundamental tenets of the religion will quite literally come under attack in the not-too-distant future, as they're flagrantly ridiculous, but from libertarians and not democrats. If you think the GOP's had a problem reconciling cheap labor with xenophobia, wait until the people with truly conservative fiscal policy talk frankly about mythology.
GOP and being xenophobic? That's funny. I have to wonder if you have the GOP and the Democrats/labor confused. Look at Judgeship denials too. I'm not sure which tenents of religion you are talking about, however I have a feeling they will remain. They have survived for 2000 years after all and this comes up about twice a decade. Quite few of those stories have even been confirmed by Scientists I understand. In fact some in academia go so far as to say the Bible isn't a bad history book. You may want to rethink this one. There is a surge in Religion and away from athiesm now. Athiest are finally realizeing that they are not here by chance. There is more to it than that.
I suggest you follow your own wisdom about current events. When you can't tell which stories Jon Stewart and SNL fabricate outright, versus when they take shots at real people for deserved reasons, you live in a bubble. Blowing steam out your ears at "those damn liberals" for their incisive material doesn't make your point of view attractive to educated people.
What the hell are you talking about? I know exactly which ones are and aren't spoofs. There are a lot of people out there that don't, however. Studies show that educated people tend to b
"The long war on Christianity continues today on the floor of the United States House of Representatives...Like a moth to a flame, Democrats can't help themselves when it comes to denigrating and demonizing Christians." John Hofstadtler, R-IN, US House, Defense Spending, 6-20-2005, CNN
The Senator is simply repeating what I already said. The Dems keep trying to bring stink on the Republicans by associating them with some sort of religous crusade, of which most people know they are full of it. The dems are the party of liberalism they tell us, loose morals and "tollerance". They want tollerance from us and are totally intollerant with conservatives (how dare you say God!). So what is a moral authority in America to "rebel" against? It is religon. Otherwise they are simply blithering idiots having a tantrum. So the Senator is right, they can't help but to keep repeating this propaganda about religon in an attempt to get others to believe it. Otherwise what would they say? The "their rich" monster is brought out from time to time, doesn't seem to go anyplace. A lot of Dems are rich, some very very wealthy - billionaires with a B.
Do you personally feel that you are being pushed into a religon? If so, which one and by whom? Did the state, county or someone from the city make you go to church? So how are these "terrible" religous people impacting your life? It is very tough to separate out what is truly religon and what is time tested wisdom. Wisdom that trancends even into those that are pure athiests. For example lets look at a very famous one - "thou shalt not kill". Religon or not? Since that trancends every civilization it is very difficult to say that is religon.
By the way, you might want to watch something other than the daily show. It is comedy. Stewart himself has expressed concern about people thinking they are getting real news from him.
Dunno, but yours is very accessable. Came right up with google (slashdot userid=spun home map boom). By the way, your roof needs new shingles, put more water in your dog's water dish, there is cat dung in the play sand out back, there is a pocket knife 1 foot from the sidewalk and drivway in the grass and you need to hide the pot plants better.
Anything I said that is right is purely coincidental and was for fun purposes only. If the above google query actually works, let me know!
The article is right and many sources have shown that SHE made it known all over to the point that all of her neighbors knew she worked at the CIA. If her husband hadn't lied in the first place and said that Cheney sent him to Niger then none of this would have happened. That is, one of Wilson's many lies that he has been caught red handed in.
The real story here is how come she was able to get her husband, a man with NO experience for this mission to Niger (i.e. you needed a COP, not an old diplomat!), the job to go to Niger. The other story is how Rove was trying to get a reporter that had been told by Wilson himself that Cheney sent him and not his wife. Rove is getting in trouble for not letting Wilson get away with one of his many lies. If anyone should get in legal trouble over this, it should be Wilson and his wife.
Finally we know Rove didn't break the law after all because even the Democrats don't think so. They are trying to pass a law retroactively to get him. They were discussing it on CSPAN. If anyone compromised national security, it was Wilson and his wife in their attempt to get Bush.
In fact she made it no secret that she worked for the CIA. It was to the point that literally everyone in her neighborhood knew. Hardly "under cover". Most in official Washington didn't realize she had a cover, they thought she was one of the many civilian employees.
Good luck. If they use their own root servers then they cannot reach all the other sites out there. How could they get their Microsoft patches? That would be like the boy going to his room to play with himself. There are a lot of problems with doing this. Besides, what is the big deal? It isn't as if the US is dictating anything or trying to get others to do something they don't want to do. The European ICANN does that.
Move this sucker up to Federal Court since this deals with securities. Haul his butt to Washington DC and try him in Federal court. Then have him serve his time in Marion Ill (supermax facility). Go after the law firm, rinse lather repeat. Then go after their assets. Dole it out to stockholders of RedHat, IBM, Diamler Chrystler, Autozone and anyone else injured by these guys. Maybe with any luck he will get mugged while in Washington too (Red light camera, speed camera, friendly neighborhood thief).
Now my wife can watch her stupid Murder She Wrote (Hint, Angela Lansbury manages to blame someone else for all of those murders) and I can watch porn! Woo hoo! Now to manage to hide that fact. Yea honey, I'm watching MSW. How come your drooling honey! Don't think I could say Angela Lansbury looks hot. She wouldn't buy that.
Used to be off by about that much because the signal was intentionally encrypted. That was turned off years ago so now they are within 3 feet depending on terrain. Sometimes my handheld seems to work down to 6 inches.