Keep in mind that this study was conducted by Jeffrey Eisenach (former head of Newt Gingrich's political action committee and longtime conservative activist) and Kevin Caves of Navigant Economics (a bunch of professional "experts" who spend most of their time testifying in favor of various pro-big oil, pro-energy concerns). The article that cites it is by Nick Schulz, of the conservative think-tank American Enterprise Institute.
And it also includes some data that I'm highly skeptical of, to say the least--like asserting that all but 1.5% of users in Montana had wired broadband access and all but 7 households in the whole state had access to 3G broadband prior to this funding. Those numbers are better than my own state, and we're not nearly as rural or mountainous as Montana.
Unfortunately, these days the Taliban and their radical ilk seem more interested in using science to blow shit up than in building up their culture. If you ever find yourself in a position of blowing up ancient statues because they might anger your sky god, that's a pretty good hint that your society has regressed significantly in its intellectual sophistication.
Most of us in the West complain when we don't have enough science grants or when some Bible-thumper questions our biology textbook.
These poor bastards have to practice astronomy in a country where 70% of the population is illiterate, where the Koran-thumpers cut people's heads off, and where the occupying military force takes a blow-them-the-fuck-up-and-ask-questions-later approach to anyone who looks like they have a scope.
Now *that's* rock-hard dedication to getting some astronomical observations.
On the upside, the piss-poor electrical service probably really cuts down on the light pollution.
You know, I've heard that story many times. It comes up every time the Gates Foundation is mentioned on/. But I have yet to see an actual reputable citation supporting the claim that this supposed requirement actually exists. The Gates Foundation Wikipedia article doesn't mention it under its "Criticism" section. I looked at the Economist articles on the Gates Foundation and don't see the article you describe. The closest thing I could find was this article in the L.A. times, which criticizes some of the Gates Foundation's investments.
The only stuff I can find on the Gates Foundation and IP at all seems to indicate that their only concern with IP is with the rights of the local researchers that they give grants (they generally are required to publicly publish their results). And nowhere have I seen any mention of a requirement that a country that gets a grant has to sign the WIPO treaty (or any other treaty).
I'm just curious how someone will find a way to spin this as a bad thing. Will it be "Gates will probably insist they use only Windows toilets!"? Or maybe it will be "This is just a ploy for him to sell more Windows copies to the poor people after they take a shit!" Or perhaps "I'll be he'll ban Linux and Apple from these shithouses!"
Come on, I know there are plenty of Slashdotters just ACHING to find SOME way, ANY way to bash him some more. Forget that Steve Jobs does NO charitable activities (Steve don't do charity) or that this has nothing to do with Linux. Someone will find a way. He's the guy with the Borg picture, after all.
The considered going with Apple, but Steve Jobs scared them way more than any enemy military.
Then they considered Unix, but couldn't find anyone who could still remember all the commands.
Then they considered going with Linux, but that started a huge argument over which distro was best. That was 10 years ago, and the argument is still going on.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me in four similar cases, all taking place within weeks or months after the accused crossed the U.S. government, one of which has already been shown to be a set-up--well, shame on the the sucker who thinks that's all just an incredible coincidence.
Everyone who crosses the U.S. is suddenly a rapist. And an army of suckers like you will swallow that fiction no matter how many times they use it. They've gotten so brazen now that they're staging their arrests within DAYS of the accused making speeches challenging the U.S. government. Hell, they're not even spacing the arrests apart anymore. Omar and Strauss Kahn were arrested within days of one another. Nor did they even bother to distance cutting Kahn loose with the election of the new IMF chief. On Tuesday a new IMF chief is elected, on Thursday the prosecutor suddenly admits he has no case. THAT'S how fucking stupid they know you are.
But keep being stupid. I can't stop you. Keep believing that all these people are suddenly becoming rapists right after they cross the U.S. Keep explaining away each individual case and blithely ignoring the larger pattern. Tell yourself that the U.S. doesn't give a shit about the IMF chief proposing abolishing the U.S. dollar as the world currency standard. Tell yourself that the CIA would never take covert action to discredit someone who threatens U.S. interests. Shit, tell yourself that the Tooth Fairy exists for all I care.
He won't even get nominated to run. He's finished. That was one of the two goals.
As for evidence, as I told another poster, I'll try to get the CIA to send you a signed confession. Because barring that, you're either going to have to wait 60 years for them to declassify the details, or accept that there are just too many coincidences here to dismiss it all as pure chance.
Strauss Kahn's political career is over and a pro-U.S. puppet is in charge of the IMF. I would call that a pretty successful operation. The goal was never an actual conviction.
And no Illuminati or tin foil hats necessary. Just an agency with a long and well-documented history of these sorts of operations to protect U.S. interests.
Exposing the nasty secret memos of the State Department (many of which have and will cause serious diplomatic problems for years to come) and also exposing serious weaknesses in their security, among other offenses. That's no laughing matter. People have been assassinated over MUCH less.
The point is that this is what Strauss Kahn was calling for right before his arrest on trumped-up charges. And literally within days of a new IMF chief being elected, the prosecutor in the case (who had previously made a public arrest and called the case rock solid) suddenly drops the case and admits that the only witness is a joke. If you think that's all just a coincidence, well then, what can I say?
Here is another excellent article on exactly what Strauss Kahn was calling for (and why it scared the U.S. government so much). Of course, with their puppet in place as IMF head now, this plan has been quickly dropped.
The CIA didn't screw up Strauss Kahn. It was actually a rather masterful piece of work. The accomplished both their goals with flying colors. Today a pro-American puppet is in charge of the IMF and Sarkozy is likely to win the presidency. The CIA has screwed up plenty of operations in the past, but this most certainly wasn't one of them.
It was never about convicting Strauss Kahn. It was about discrediting him.
Well none, obviously. What would the U.S. even have to gain from Assange's arrest? It's not like he was threatening them in any way. Besides, the CIA doesn't do bad stuff like frame people. Only other government's intelligence agencies do bad stuff like that.
Slashdot Mirror
Army of Darkness was the perfect end to the trilogy (sorry Sam, but the studio was right--that S-Mart ending was fucking awesome).
Please don't ruin it with some lame retread with a tired, old Ash. Just let it be what it is.
Not to quibble, but I think you're confusing the Rural Electrification Administration (REA) with the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA).
Keep in mind that this study was conducted by Jeffrey Eisenach (former head of Newt Gingrich's political action committee and longtime conservative activist) and Kevin Caves of Navigant Economics (a bunch of professional "experts" who spend most of their time testifying in favor of various pro-big oil, pro-energy concerns). The article that cites it is by Nick Schulz, of the conservative think-tank American Enterprise Institute.
And it also includes some data that I'm highly skeptical of, to say the least--like asserting that all but 1.5% of users in Montana had wired broadband access and all but 7 households in the whole state had access to 3G broadband prior to this funding. Those numbers are better than my own state, and we're not nearly as rural or mountainous as Montana.
Unfortunately, these days the Taliban and their radical ilk seem more interested in using science to blow shit up than in building up their culture. If you ever find yourself in a position of blowing up ancient statues because they might anger your sky god, that's a pretty good hint that your society has regressed significantly in its intellectual sophistication.
Most of us in the West complain when we don't have enough science grants or when some Bible-thumper questions our biology textbook.
These poor bastards have to practice astronomy in a country where 70% of the population is illiterate, where the Koran-thumpers cut people's heads off, and where the occupying military force takes a blow-them-the-fuck-up-and-ask-questions-later approach to anyone who looks like they have a scope.
Now *that's* rock-hard dedication to getting some astronomical observations.
On the upside, the piss-poor electrical service probably really cuts down on the light pollution.
I'm sure the locals have something they can use in lieu of sawdust.
Duh, why don't they just use all the leftover food they throw away? Problem solved. You're welcome, Africa.
You know, I've heard that story many times. It comes up every time the Gates Foundation is mentioned on /. But I have yet to see an actual reputable citation supporting the claim that this supposed requirement actually exists. The Gates Foundation Wikipedia article doesn't mention it under its "Criticism" section. I looked at the Economist articles on the Gates Foundation and don't see the article you describe. The closest thing I could find was this article in the L.A. times, which criticizes some of the Gates Foundation's investments.
The only stuff I can find on the Gates Foundation and IP at all seems to indicate that their only concern with IP is with the rights of the local researchers that they give grants (they generally are required to publicly publish their results). And nowhere have I seen any mention of a requirement that a country that gets a grant has to sign the WIPO treaty (or any other treaty).
Steve's only charity is Steve. And to that he gives generously.
I'm just curious how someone will find a way to spin this as a bad thing. Will it be "Gates will probably insist they use only Windows toilets!"? Or maybe it will be "This is just a ploy for him to sell more Windows copies to the poor people after they take a shit!" Or perhaps "I'll be he'll ban Linux and Apple from these shithouses!"
Come on, I know there are plenty of Slashdotters just ACHING to find SOME way, ANY way to bash him some more. Forget that Steve Jobs does NO charitable activities (Steve don't do charity) or that this has nothing to do with Linux. Someone will find a way. He's the guy with the Borg picture, after all.
In John's defense, he really needed to dig that ditch. And he don't understand them fancy electrical hoses, what with all their signal pumps and all.
Any BBS documentary, or a specific one?
I'll start gardening when someone invents a plant that grows Doritos.
The considered going with Apple, but Steve Jobs scared them way more than any enemy military.
Then they considered Unix, but couldn't find anyone who could still remember all the commands.
Then they considered going with Linux, but that started a huge argument over which distro was best. That was 10 years ago, and the argument is still going on.
I propose we pass a law requiring that the military win at least *one* of the wars they're already in before we let them have a new one.
Soon the toilet will flush on the Space Shuttle for the last time. The end of an era.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me in four similar cases, all taking place within weeks or months after the accused crossed the U.S. government, one of which has already been shown to be a set-up--well, shame on the the sucker who thinks that's all just an incredible coincidence.
Everyone who crosses the U.S. is suddenly a rapist. And an army of suckers like you will swallow that fiction no matter how many times they use it. They've gotten so brazen now that they're staging their arrests within DAYS of the accused making speeches challenging the U.S. government. Hell, they're not even spacing the arrests apart anymore. Omar and Strauss Kahn were arrested within days of one another. Nor did they even bother to distance cutting Kahn loose with the election of the new IMF chief. On Tuesday a new IMF chief is elected, on Thursday the prosecutor suddenly admits he has no case. THAT'S how fucking stupid they know you are.
But keep being stupid. I can't stop you. Keep believing that all these people are suddenly becoming rapists right after they cross the U.S. Keep explaining away each individual case and blithely ignoring the larger pattern. Tell yourself that the U.S. doesn't give a shit about the IMF chief proposing abolishing the U.S. dollar as the world currency standard. Tell yourself that the CIA would never take covert action to discredit someone who threatens U.S. interests. Shit, tell yourself that the Tooth Fairy exists for all I care.
He won't even get nominated to run. He's finished. That was one of the two goals.
As for evidence, as I told another poster, I'll try to get the CIA to send you a signed confession. Because barring that, you're either going to have to wait 60 years for them to declassify the details, or accept that there are just too many coincidences here to dismiss it all as pure chance.
I'll see if I can get the CIA to send you a signed confession.
There's a difference?
One has more morality than a politician, the other has *slightly* more morality than a politician.
Strauss Kahn's political career is over and a pro-U.S. puppet is in charge of the IMF. I would call that a pretty successful operation. The goal was never an actual conviction.
And no Illuminati or tin foil hats necessary. Just an agency with a long and well-documented history of these sorts of operations to protect U.S. interests.
Exposing the nasty secret memos of the State Department (many of which have and will cause serious diplomatic problems for years to come) and also exposing serious weaknesses in their security, among other offenses. That's no laughing matter. People have been assassinated over MUCH less.
The point is that this is what Strauss Kahn was calling for right before his arrest on trumped-up charges. And literally within days of a new IMF chief being elected, the prosecutor in the case (who had previously made a public arrest and called the case rock solid) suddenly drops the case and admits that the only witness is a joke. If you think that's all just a coincidence, well then, what can I say?
Here is another excellent article on exactly what Strauss Kahn was calling for (and why it scared the U.S. government so much). Of course, with their puppet in place as IMF head now, this plan has been quickly dropped.
The CIA didn't screw up Strauss Kahn. It was actually a rather masterful piece of work. The accomplished both their goals with flying colors. Today a pro-American puppet is in charge of the IMF and Sarkozy is likely to win the presidency. The CIA has screwed up plenty of operations in the past, but this most certainly wasn't one of them.
It was never about convicting Strauss Kahn. It was about discrediting him.
Well none, obviously. What would the U.S. even have to gain from Assange's arrest? It's not like he was threatening them in any way. Besides, the CIA doesn't do bad stuff like frame people. Only other government's intelligence agencies do bad stuff like that.