Get some balls and defend your rating system, or change it, or shut the Hell up. It's your country. If you're a voter, this is in your power.
i dont defend "self-policing" by our private enterprises, ever. i use my power as a voter, but im a minority it seems who absolutely has NO TRUST in privite industry to "do the right thing". private industry is a heartless, not mindless machine, like the borg, lol. i love free enterprise, dont get me wrong, but it needs to be tempered and regulated so it doesnt get "out of hand". because when it isnt, people get robbed, polluted, lied to, malnourished, diseased, burned, maimed, killed etc. and what im saying, isnt opinion, its fact, and it happens in the US. so all of you young republicans who say youre a democrat or liberal, should check your litmus to see where you reside on this general issue. i believe that the rights of citizens are paramount, and the right to sell trash is secondary.
this guy sounds like someone we should be praising for merely bringing this to light. i believe what he says, knowing the kind of game GTA is and the material that is NOT hidden in the general gameplay.
the DMCA cant change any law. it doesnt circumvent existing law. that itself is a law. but it does try, and succeeds, at defining boundaries in areas that would be considered "grey" by old fashioned copyright rules, as the digital era does presents new circumstances. a eula does not actually say anything contrary to what has been generally known about copyright rules for the past 100 years, you cant copy and redistribute for the purpose of making money. and whether that money comes from advetising on the site you host with, or whether the money comes from the direct sale of hacked or booted commercial products, doesnt matter. free distribution though, is still controversial. there is currently NO reason i cant copy the MOST aggresively gaurded commercial software and distribute it discretely among people I know other than the obstacles presented by the coperation manufacturing that software, such as anti-copy, hack coding, etc.
youre probably right. the 2 reasons you gave are the most dominant elements in overpopulation, i believe. moslems, chrsitians AND jews are all pushed by the religious leadership to procreate as much as possible, which goes to show the "corruption" in modern islam, for example. the koran gives explicit information and guidelines for having children, and states that if you are incapable of funding children, or four wives, then you dont have them.
youre fucking crazy. youre rambling on about the UN "let" those things happen, the US also "let" those things happen. i would agree that the UN is not exactly perfect, but for you to just sit there and bash the UN is kinda ugly. besides, how are bullets in rifles going to fix problems with the internet, like theft, scam, child porn, etc?
and your typical paranoia about "the liberal media", its old already, nobody's buying it anymore. if things like facts, events, science, reason, logic are "liberal", then "liberal" is synonomous with "intelligent".
our govt neither has the balls or even the capability of exercising any real control of this beast. it has grown and been allowed to "flourish", lol, to the point now that there is all kinds of scam and theft running rampant on the internet. but if a universally accepted commision can at least set the bar, and the rules, then it would be much, much easier to for individual contries to make the arrangements to correspond to the law, i think.
well if this is true, then that changes everything. im under the impression that it was an already existing module in the game as its purchased, that is "unlocked". if "hot coffee" is just a script that pulls the characters out of the game and puts them in silly positions, perhaps adds anatomy, etc, then rockstar cant be responsible for that. but somehow, it wouldnt surprise me if this is not the case. if i had to wager, id say that the "sex module" already exists in the package and a determined user, capable of scanning the code would be able to find a way to "unlock" the games mysteries. if this turns out to be the case, then rockstar is wrong.
dont be simple. its a fucked up day when our kids (M rating or not) 13, 14 , 15 years old whatever can have wierd ass computer sex in a game. that doesnt bother you? it should. running over homeless people, cops and pedestrians is bad enough.
and i dont want to hear another numbnutts cry about the meaningless "rating" or letter thats on the package of a game a 14 year old can buy without any trouble.
maybe you havent noticed this before now, simply because it wasent in your face, but pornography is now very easily accessable to anyone, children. it should be censored, as it always has been. but i guess the country's morality has changed in the past 50 years or so i guess. and im no prude, i just hate the idea of my kid getting their first sense of sexual intercourse from some wierdo computer porn. i remember the first time i had sex and there was a brief moment there when i noticed a similarity to a position i saw in a pornographic movie once, this was in the late '80's, computer porn wasnt big yet. it didnt exactly ruin my day, lol, but i guess i could have done without it.
you also happen to be flat wrong about your opinion about what a rating system should be. the mpaa or whatever rating system used for american movies today was initiated as an alternative to actual federal regulation, so it should be taken seriously. its currently against the law to allow a minor to see pornographic material. The COPA (child online protection act er something or other) is a law that declares that a person can be fined up to $50,000 and sentenced to six months in jail for providing children easy access to pornography. It was signed into law by President Clinton and is supported by the Bush administration. so my criticism that there is no govt control is a valid one, where's the law? who's going to be held responsible for promoting the viewing of porn by youngsters?
if you consider that some of those poor people you speak of are victims of overpopulation, a tragic side effect of... TOO MUCH SEX, then you might find a flaw in your arguement. sex is not always healthy, contrary to popular, "progressive" belief.
btw, speaking of the unfortunate masses in other parts of the world, did you know that among the 200--300 or so of africans dying every day of aids, the vast majority of them do not know how they contracted the disease? pneumonia or tuberculosis are common misclassifications of the disease.
you are misusing the word "illegal". either you dont know what a EULA is or says, or what the word "illegal" means. there is absolutely nothing "illegal" about hacking or modifying a commerical product. i dont know from where people have gotten this idea, but it is absolutely wrong. redistribution of a modified commercial product may be illegal, sometimes, but illegal in the civil sense, more pertenent to intellectual property rights, not the type of thing one usually labels as "illegal". like cheating on your spouse, you'll lose your divorce case and all that goes with it, but you'll never go to jail for it, unless you live in iran.
otherwise your post is very interesting, you've given me some avenues to investigate.
but this is. rockstar messed up. to put pornographic content into a product marketed mainly toward teenagers, (remember, your teens END at 19) is obviously asking for trouble. you dont put a pornographic picture in between pages of a coloring book and hope that no-one finds it. if it's not a mod, then rockstar is wrong. and a "mod" and a "hack" are NOT the same thing. the difference between a "hack" and a "mod", in this case, is like the difference between a translation of a book, where the content is essentially unchanged, and, scribbling your notes into a book, where you are adding content which does not necessarily correspond to the ideas of the author. the author is obviously not responsible for the content of those added notes, but would be responsible for the content of the translated work, unless he could prove the translation to be erroneous.
ratings dont prevent anything. they dont even work at the movies, i remember going to see all the R-rated horror fliks with my friends when we were young as twelve. they only ban children from R-fliks depending on the theatre's location. another "self-policing" scheme bites the dust. perhaps this is the reason that pornography is not just an "X" rating, pornography and the like has always been restricted to certain areas of the city. 42nd street in NY, for example. you'll also notice that all the (and there are many of them) nudey bars in NY are all in industrial areas. firm LAW, not a self-policing bs rating system, is the only way to keep porn from the general community. and i guess rockstar has merely done the inevitable by releasing pornography to children.
but rockstar is not the only porn-pushing company on the internet (computer-land, what ever you call it). there are many corperations MUCH larger than rockstar that have sponsored computer porn. yahoo is one that i know of that has sponsored sites that promote child pornography. AT&T has it's hands in the computer porn racket. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/porn/business/mainstream.html
so where's the law? i guess the law is waiting for the outrage? so where's the outrage? consumers are willing to trade their outrage for their orgasmatrons, i guess. its all pretty lame to me. we've never seen porn in our supermarkets, we never see porn as we drive our children to school, we dont sit and watch ads for porn at the movies, or on tv, so why is the internet so different? its different because it's new, thats all. and the test is now whether or not americans really want to remove porn from their computers, because now, the "modern" generation has the responsibility to do this, it hasnt been "taken care of" by the previous generations;). americans are obviously enjoying their new freedoms and access to great porn, free, anonymous, diverse selections, all tastes, kicks and trips, do they really want to get rid of it? i suspect the answer is "no".
i dont really understand this issue too much. but isn't it currently illegal to create free software designed to work with commercial products? http://www.eff.org/IP/Emulation/Blizzard_v_bnetd/ so any modding that goes on, and is distributed, valve is allowing. valve doesnt make it easy for modding of hl2? im not surprised, they release the junky stuff like counter strike as a platform for independent modders to go ape on. why not, instead, pool these communities to create your own games? i know that valve physics and graphics engine are kinda the reason everyone flocks around their stuff. i have a bootleg copy of hl2, that i did not buy btw, and it is pretty amazing, for a while anyway. but its not soo great that it couldnt be competed with by a group of determined modders. think about all those independent valve modders that could be creating their own stuff. organize that and you'll make a million dollars.
"What we see is that people actually want the product and are willing to pay for it."
What we see is that people buy whatever is available, and big business sees it too.
ok, so we're in it now for the long haul it seems. im american, first off, it gives me the right to criticize americans because i know what they are interested in and what they could care less about. just because people are willing to accept mediocrity, or worse, doesn't make it good. why do you think there exists govt regulation of private industry at all? why is not the govt's role strictly to legislate law and regulation that controls aspects of govt funded industry? if private industry is so much the product of what the populace demands of it, then why are there so many laws, regulations, etc that impose restrictions on said private industry? the answer, BECAUSE CONSUMERS DONT KNOW WHAT THE HELL THEY ARE DOING! imagine a populace of educated people who actually understood the power they wielded as consumers, they would be able to dictate terms to private industry, things like pollution, food with high cholesterol, unsafe automobiles (mustang, corsair), you name it, would be non-existant. is this such an outlandish idea because it's impossible, or is it so outlandish because fat americans suck up mediocrity like so much 86 octane?
"Sure some would bitch about it more than they do today, but a lot of people would still choose to give up the right to install the software on more than one box, or would be willing to register it in order to play the latest hotest game. That said, more education about options and license agreements can't hurt and companies that chose to offer less restrictive licenses would have a competitive advantage in the market place."
i am not fond of the notion that big business dictates the terms of my rights as a consumer, huh uh. i would rather see industry bust its ass to please my picky, self rightous, self. wouldnt you? i mean, thats the name of the game, why dont more people play? our toys, and tools would be far superior, safer and our lives, more convenient. as it stands now, i feel i can do without so much of the trash thats readily available to me now. i find myself with nothing to do with my money, other than to throw it at women, lol, i guess thats not so bad;)
yeah, it kinda pisses me off that american consumers mess things up for everyone. i, for one, am not happy to settle for shit, like so many americans seem to be. i suspect that if they actually knew better, they would change their buying habits. this is not a rant, its an arguement youve been unable to counter. you merely attack me on a personal level, saying, "im pissed", "im ranting", what ever. if you actually had the arguement to counter my point about american consumers being unable to make responsible choices, you would be making it. the closest you come to it is to essentially say, "well, if people are happy with it, then its ok". ever hear the expression, "ignorance is bliss"? its NOT ok, and remains as my assertion that there IS something wrong. people should wake up, and stop making foolish purchases with money they may or may not have to burn and supporting a fluffed up corperate economy that treats the needs and wishes of american consumers as irrelevant.
to the two of you who are critical of the parent post i would have to say that you are flat out, straight up WRONG. and you dont even realize it. he is correct when he says that your freedoms are being stepped on, and he is also right when he criticizes YOU for allowing it to happen. american consumers are historically a super-stupid breed. they are suckers for anything, like mice in a maze. americans made the ford mustang, for example, one of americas most sold cars and the pos is a death trap with its blasted drop-in-gastank. yes, american consumers, on the whole, are indeed unaware of the power they wield and make decisions with little knowledge about the product. in this case they are being tooled by digital big-business dictating the terms of THEIR rights as consumers. it is these consumers, for example, who have also allowed the software companies to restrict installation of their products to one machine. i hate this, i have 2 desktops and a laptop. i will be damned if im going to buy 3 copies of the same thing, damned. and im not currently a student, i dont get educational packages, i get professional editions.
so the answer is "YES" many, many american consumers are wrong and unaware of the fact that they are americans first, consumers second.
i saw a crow drop a walnut into an intersection from a street light. the crow then flew down to the side walk, WAITED FOR THE LIGHT TO CHANGE, then walked into the intersection to collect the edibles from the car-crushed walnut. he let out a loud in disapproval of how quickly the light had changed again as he was forced to retreat from the street and his score.
ive been thinking for over 2 years now that the iraq invasion isnt going to help our situation back home. the world trade center attack was a signal that the us really needed to overhaul its airline industry, for starters, and while 15 billion has been spent over the past 3 years to do so, only 250 million has been spent nation wide to beef up our transit system. and how many billions have been spent on iraq? with the money that was spent in iraq, we could have provided a safe environment for american citizens within the continental united states. the iraq war is not about defending the dirty masses from the enemy that hides itself, that has no particular national affiliation. the iraqi war in it execution, takes into account that americans are going to die, here and abroad. the iraqi war is more about domination than simple carefully laid plans to secure our borders, our industries. god forbid we should ask anything of our nations industries to help see to it that they are not used as weapons by a group of terrorists.
you know what i really think is odd, maybe you could explain it to me. why is it, that with the oil for food scandal, and saddam hussein making so many 10's of billions of dollars off of under-the-table oil sales, that the 9-11 commision ultimately could not find that saddam had anything to do with either negotiating with or funding groups like al-queda? why were we unable to prove his connection to al-queda? we believe that al-queda gets alot of its funding from oil. this was, i believe, a strong hawkish reason for invading and taking control of iraq. BUT, there was really no evidence that funding for al-queda came from iraq, in fact, it was rather proved by the 9-11 commision that saddam turned down solicitations, proposals or requests from al-queda.
i guess my real question is, why is iraq such a "strategic" strike? is the oil grab in iraq merely to benefit our economy? 61 $/barrel isnt so great for americans, it's good for american petroleum corps, to be sure. maybe the real benefit of staking a claim in such a large oil resource as iraqs is the fact that we can now raise the price of OUR oil. at any rate, how will iraqs invasion help prevent an attack in the us? will making the us economy even larger help prevent a terrorist attack, or will providing protection from a terrorist attack help defend against a terrorist attack? because the "fight them over there not here", is just some bullshit the american populace has been told, it has nothing to do with the reasoning in going to war with iraq. wmd is another good one, so much in fact of what most americans understand about iraq has nothing to do with the real reasons we invaded iraq, i believe. so what is it all about?
hey, i just call it as i see it. i prefer to argue over a post than agree, thats just me. no offense, its just that our society is being undermined. this is the part that drives me nuts. maybe you dont live in the city, you dont know what its like, you just watch foxnews and you think you know, but you dont know. spend some time in my neck of the woods, IT IS TENSE, because we know there is more to come, more for our children in endure, and you are trying to tell me that that isnt enough to undermine a fragile society like ours. guerilla warfare is ugly business. americans really need to start thinking about self-preservation. we need to expect the worse. with your attitude the cities will collapse before you even admit the terrorists had an effect. and like i said before, the strain is already taking its toll. and im no coward, but if you are not scared, then you are unaware of whats going on.
if its as you say, then i would agree. if some ambiant airwaves are just picked up and used without hacking anyones account, then i cant say that there is any precident for it to be considered "illegal". its up to the consumer to either maintain his purchase such that he or she has control over it. and/or its up to the consumer to know what he or she is buying, what is the functionality of the purchase, whether or not its lawful. i cant see that merely picking up some radio waves that are flooding a public street is a crime.
that's it, deny eveything, right? even when you get your teeth kicked in. do me a favor, keep comments like these, that belittle the deaths of innocent civilians, to yourself. no one with a brain would support you in your attempts at making the killing of over 50 people traveling to work an unimportant or "non-event". and another thing, if you think that this is the worse they can do, then you are even dumber than your post indicates. the british authorities have stated that this event was executed without the slightest notable increase in counter-intelligence chatter. they cant even figure out what kind of explosives were used or how they were detonated. the worst is yet to come, and they are saving the worst for the US.
the most dangerous enemy is one with nothing to lose. he also has all the time in the world to wait for his moment when backs are turned if for a second. he is also equipped with religious programing, the variety that lead millions of germans, blindly, without moral reason, into world war II. he is a perfect tool of death, more so than any marine with a family. and these enemies are everywhere, waiting, planning, thousands of them. they are in iraq, "working for us", they are in NY, London, DC, all over the world. and they are dangerous beyond your seemingly limited comprehension. and here you go, idiot american, underestimating your enemy, you fool.
And another thing, why do we always see super hightened levels of security only after an attack? Does this mean that when we don't see officers with mp5's and german shepards that we are not on guard against a possible attack? That doesn't make me feel very good. Why can't we be on guard all the time, in order to prevent another bombing, be it London, New York, Madrid, anywhere? And don't blame the unions or the mayor of your city, blame the federal gov't for spreading it's resources too thin.
Slashdot Mirror
i dont defend "self-policing" by our private enterprises, ever. i use my power as a voter, but im a minority it seems who absolutely has NO TRUST in privite industry to "do the right thing". private industry is a heartless, not mindless machine, like the borg, lol. i love free enterprise, dont get me wrong, but it needs to be tempered and regulated so it doesnt get "out of hand". because when it isnt, people get robbed, polluted, lied to, malnourished, diseased, burned, maimed, killed etc. and what im saying, isnt opinion, its fact, and it happens in the US. so all of you young republicans who say youre a democrat or liberal, should check your litmus to see where you reside on this general issue. i believe that the rights of citizens are paramount, and the right to sell trash is secondary.
the DMCA cant change any law. it doesnt circumvent existing law. that itself is a law. but it does try, and succeeds, at defining boundaries in areas that would be considered "grey" by old fashioned copyright rules, as the digital era does presents new circumstances. a eula does not actually say anything contrary to what has been generally known about copyright rules for the past 100 years, you cant copy and redistribute for the purpose of making money. and whether that money comes from advetising on the site you host with, or whether the money comes from the direct sale of hacked or booted commercial products, doesnt matter. free distribution though, is still controversial. there is currently NO reason i cant copy the MOST aggresively gaurded commercial software and distribute it discretely among people I know other than the obstacles presented by the coperation manufacturing that software, such as anti-copy, hack coding, etc.
youre probably right. the 2 reasons you gave are the most dominant elements in overpopulation, i believe. moslems, chrsitians AND jews are all pushed by the religious leadership to procreate as much as possible, which goes to show the "corruption" in modern islam, for example. the koran gives explicit information and guidelines for having children, and states that if you are incapable of funding children, or four wives, then you dont have them.
and your typical paranoia about "the liberal media", its old already, nobody's buying it anymore. if things like facts, events, science, reason, logic are "liberal", then "liberal" is synonomous with "intelligent".
our govt neither has the balls or even the capability of exercising any real control of this beast. it has grown and been allowed to "flourish", lol, to the point now that there is all kinds of scam and theft running rampant on the internet. but if a universally accepted commision can at least set the bar, and the rules, then it would be much, much easier to for individual contries to make the arrangements to correspond to the law, i think.
well if this is true, then that changes everything. im under the impression that it was an already existing module in the game as its purchased, that is "unlocked". if "hot coffee" is just a script that pulls the characters out of the game and puts them in silly positions, perhaps adds anatomy, etc, then rockstar cant be responsible for that. but somehow, it wouldnt surprise me if this is not the case. if i had to wager, id say that the "sex module" already exists in the package and a determined user, capable of scanning the code would be able to find a way to "unlock" the games mysteries. if this turns out to be the case, then rockstar is wrong.
and i dont want to hear another numbnutts cry about the meaningless "rating" or letter thats on the package of a game a 14 year old can buy without any trouble.
hillary is the real rockstar, cuz she rocks
you also happen to be flat wrong about your opinion about what a rating system should be. the mpaa or whatever rating system used for american movies today was initiated as an alternative to actual federal regulation, so it should be taken seriously. its currently against the law to allow a minor to see pornographic material. The COPA (child online protection act er something or other) is a law that declares that a person can be fined up to $50,000 and sentenced to six months in jail for providing children easy access to pornography. It was signed into law by President Clinton and is supported by the Bush administration. so my criticism that there is no govt control is a valid one, where's the law? who's going to be held responsible for promoting the viewing of porn by youngsters?
sorry, but its for your own good
btw, speaking of the unfortunate masses in other parts of the world, did you know that among the 200--300 or so of africans dying every day of aids, the vast majority of them do not know how they contracted the disease? pneumonia or tuberculosis are common misclassifications of the disease.
you are misusing the word "illegal". either you dont know what a EULA is or says, or what the word "illegal" means. there is absolutely nothing "illegal" about hacking or modifying a commerical product. i dont know from where people have gotten this idea, but it is absolutely wrong. redistribution of a modified commercial product may be illegal, sometimes, but illegal in the civil sense, more pertenent to intellectual property rights, not the type of thing one usually labels as "illegal". like cheating on your spouse, you'll lose your divorce case and all that goes with it, but you'll never go to jail for it, unless you live in iran. otherwise your post is very interesting, you've given me some avenues to investigate.
ratings dont prevent anything. they dont even work at the movies, i remember going to see all the R-rated horror fliks with my friends when we were young as twelve. they only ban children from R-fliks depending on the theatre's location. another "self-policing" scheme bites the dust. perhaps this is the reason that pornography is not just an "X" rating, pornography and the like has always been restricted to certain areas of the city. 42nd street in NY, for example. you'll also notice that all the (and there are many of them) nudey bars in NY are all in industrial areas. firm LAW, not a self-policing bs rating system, is the only way to keep porn from the general community. and i guess rockstar has merely done the inevitable by releasing pornography to children.
but rockstar is not the only porn-pushing company on the internet (computer-land, what ever you call it). there are many corperations MUCH larger than rockstar that have sponsored computer porn. yahoo is one that i know of that has sponsored sites that promote child pornography. AT&T has it's hands in the computer porn racket. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/porn /business/mainstream.html
so where's the law? i guess the law is waiting for the outrage? so where's the outrage? consumers are willing to trade their outrage for their orgasmatrons, i guess. its all pretty lame to me. we've never seen porn in our supermarkets, we never see porn as we drive our children to school, we dont sit and watch ads for porn at the movies, or on tv, so why is the internet so different? its different because it's new, thats all. and the test is now whether or not americans really want to remove porn from their computers, because now, the "modern" generation has the responsibility to do this, it hasnt been "taken care of" by the previous generations ;). americans are obviously enjoying their new freedoms and access to great porn, free, anonymous, diverse selections, all tastes, kicks and trips, do they really want to get rid of it? i suspect the answer is "no".
i dont really understand this issue too much. but isn't it currently illegal to create free software designed to work with commercial products? http://www.eff.org/IP/Emulation/Blizzard_v_bnetd/ so any modding that goes on, and is distributed, valve is allowing. valve doesnt make it easy for modding of hl2? im not surprised, they release the junky stuff like counter strike as a platform for independent modders to go ape on. why not, instead, pool these communities to create your own games? i know that valve physics and graphics engine are kinda the reason everyone flocks around their stuff. i have a bootleg copy of hl2, that i did not buy btw, and it is pretty amazing, for a while anyway. but its not soo great that it couldnt be competed with by a group of determined modders. think about all those independent valve modders that could be creating their own stuff. organize that and you'll make a million dollars.
What we see is that people buy whatever is available, and big business sees it too.
ok, so we're in it now for the long haul it seems. im american, first off, it gives me the right to criticize americans because i know what they are interested in and what they could care less about. just because people are willing to accept mediocrity, or worse, doesn't make it good. why do you think there exists govt regulation of private industry at all? why is not the govt's role strictly to legislate law and regulation that controls aspects of govt funded industry? if private industry is so much the product of what the populace demands of it, then why are there so many laws, regulations, etc that impose restrictions on said private industry? the answer, BECAUSE CONSUMERS DONT KNOW WHAT THE HELL THEY ARE DOING! imagine a populace of educated people who actually understood the power they wielded as consumers, they would be able to dictate terms to private industry, things like pollution, food with high cholesterol, unsafe automobiles (mustang, corsair), you name it, would be non-existant. is this such an outlandish idea because it's impossible, or is it so outlandish because fat americans suck up mediocrity like so much 86 octane?
"Sure some would bitch about it more than they do today, but a lot of people would still choose to give up the right to install the software on more than one box, or would be willing to register it in order to play the latest hotest game. That said, more education about options and license agreements can't hurt and companies that chose to offer less restrictive licenses would have a competitive advantage in the market place."
i am not fond of the notion that big business dictates the terms of my rights as a consumer, huh uh. i would rather see industry bust its ass to please my picky, self rightous, self. wouldnt you? i mean, thats the name of the game, why dont more people play? our toys, and tools would be far superior, safer and our lives, more convenient. as it stands now, i feel i can do without so much of the trash thats readily available to me now. i find myself with nothing to do with my money, other than to throw it at women, lol, i guess thats not so bad ;)
yeah, it kinda pisses me off that american consumers mess things up for everyone. i, for one, am not happy to settle for shit, like so many americans seem to be. i suspect that if they actually knew better, they would change their buying habits. this is not a rant, its an arguement youve been unable to counter. you merely attack me on a personal level, saying, "im pissed", "im ranting", what ever. if you actually had the arguement to counter my point about american consumers being unable to make responsible choices, you would be making it. the closest you come to it is to essentially say, "well, if people are happy with it, then its ok". ever hear the expression, "ignorance is bliss"? its NOT ok, and remains as my assertion that there IS something wrong. people should wake up, and stop making foolish purchases with money they may or may not have to burn and supporting a fluffed up corperate economy that treats the needs and wishes of american consumers as irrelevant.
so the answer is "YES" many, many american consumers are wrong and unaware of the fact that they are americans first, consumers second.
i saw a crow drop a walnut into an intersection from a street light. the crow then flew down to the side walk, WAITED FOR THE LIGHT TO CHANGE, then walked into the intersection to collect the edibles from the car-crushed walnut. he let out a loud in disapproval of how quickly the light had changed again as he was forced to retreat from the street and his score.
yes and no
i actually agree with everything you said, i missed judged you initially. i guess thats how it goes :)
why did that high school in the south show the nicholas berg beheading in class? the bolster and fortify the war effort.
you know what i really think is odd, maybe you could explain it to me. why is it, that with the oil for food scandal, and saddam hussein making so many 10's of billions of dollars off of under-the-table oil sales, that the 9-11 commision ultimately could not find that saddam had anything to do with either negotiating with or funding groups like al-queda? why were we unable to prove his connection to al-queda? we believe that al-queda gets alot of its funding from oil. this was, i believe, a strong hawkish reason for invading and taking control of iraq. BUT, there was really no evidence that funding for al-queda came from iraq, in fact, it was rather proved by the 9-11 commision that saddam turned down solicitations, proposals or requests from al-queda.
i guess my real question is, why is iraq such a "strategic" strike? is the oil grab in iraq merely to benefit our economy? 61 $/barrel isnt so great for americans, it's good for american petroleum corps, to be sure. maybe the real benefit of staking a claim in such a large oil resource as iraqs is the fact that we can now raise the price of OUR oil. at any rate, how will iraqs invasion help prevent an attack in the us? will making the us economy even larger help prevent a terrorist attack, or will providing protection from a terrorist attack help defend against a terrorist attack? because the "fight them over there not here", is just some bullshit the american populace has been told, it has nothing to do with the reasoning in going to war with iraq. wmd is another good one, so much in fact of what most americans understand about iraq has nothing to do with the real reasons we invaded iraq, i believe. so what is it all about?
hey, i just call it as i see it. i prefer to argue over a post than agree, thats just me. no offense, its just that our society is being undermined. this is the part that drives me nuts. maybe you dont live in the city, you dont know what its like, you just watch foxnews and you think you know, but you dont know. spend some time in my neck of the woods, IT IS TENSE, because we know there is more to come, more for our children in endure, and you are trying to tell me that that isnt enough to undermine a fragile society like ours. guerilla warfare is ugly business. americans really need to start thinking about self-preservation. we need to expect the worse. with your attitude the cities will collapse before you even admit the terrorists had an effect. and like i said before, the strain is already taking its toll. and im no coward, but if you are not scared, then you are unaware of whats going on.
if its as you say, then i would agree. if some ambiant airwaves are just picked up and used without hacking anyones account, then i cant say that there is any precident for it to be considered "illegal". its up to the consumer to either maintain his purchase such that he or she has control over it. and/or its up to the consumer to know what he or she is buying, what is the functionality of the purchase, whether or not its lawful. i cant see that merely picking up some radio waves that are flooding a public street is a crime.
the most dangerous enemy is one with nothing to lose. he also has all the time in the world to wait for his moment when backs are turned if for a second. he is also equipped with religious programing, the variety that lead millions of germans, blindly, without moral reason, into world war II. he is a perfect tool of death, more so than any marine with a family. and these enemies are everywhere, waiting, planning, thousands of them. they are in iraq, "working for us", they are in NY, London, DC, all over the world. and they are dangerous beyond your seemingly limited comprehension. and here you go, idiot american, underestimating your enemy, you fool.
majoroty of deaths in iraq are civilian, by far - fact
And another thing, why do we always see super hightened levels of security only after an attack? Does this mean that when we don't see officers with mp5's and german shepards that we are not on guard against a possible attack? That doesn't make me feel very good. Why can't we be on guard all the time, in order to prevent another bombing, be it London, New York, Madrid, anywhere? And don't blame the unions or the mayor of your city, blame the federal gov't for spreading it's resources too thin.