Not physical books.
Joking aside I've also kept every book I've ever had (pretty much) and have less than 50... I don't know how anyone can afford to have thousands, the cheapest book I've got is a second hand copy of Marx's selected works that was £8, if we take an average of just £5 having 800 would cost £4000 - and that's a lot of money by anyone's standards. 3500 would cost £17,500 which really is a lot.
as I understand it, they are. But they lose money in the sense that if they would almost certainly make more money if people weren't buying them to sell on ebay, this is because the inflated price means people have less money to spend on games - so whilst it might seem like they make money either way (which they do), they make less than they would have done
"Conspiracy believers suggest this is an orchestrated move on behalf of Nintendo"
Then they would be idiots, do people think that when someone sells one on ebay for £320 (as I have seen happen, that's more than the PS3) they send off a nice cheque to nintendo just to say "thanks"? no. Nintendo loses money on each of these (since they only get the original sale and after the inflated price people are less likely to buy a lot of games). Nintendo really wants to meet demand, it's stupid to suggest otherwise.
as I understand it though if you block beacon using blocksite firefox extension (there is a wikihow on it) then whether or not you've opted in/out you'll be protected from this - so we have some protection (if I'm wrong I'd really like to know...)
As for people who don't come to/. but would still care if they knew I guess all we can do is to keep up the pressure on them to drop this all together - but they won't because this is where they'll make the money. Maybe some kind of warning (perhaps a giant group we could all join) might be enough to get anyone who cares to use blocksite and FF... still not perfect but it might be the best we have...
there is nothing really wrong with digital restrictions management as a name for it, it does describe what it does, but it is the best name we could give it to communicate our point?
For me I have to side with the parent poster, playback prevention communicates the message so quickly and easily that when inevitably members of our family ask us why their music won't play we can just say "ah, you bought the stuff with playback prevention...". It's a little political but thats just the way these things go...
I'm not 100% sure about the new laws because I haven't studied law since they brought them in but the way it used to work is they could only stop you contacting members of your family to explain the situation if they have reasonable suspicion that this will directly lead to the people you will contact destroying evidence (or carrying out other crimes). They need to convince a magistrait (who are just a members of the public) of this and then it is (or at least was) only for a limited time (it was about 2 days). I think it would be a lot harder to do this then you think, and it certainly isn't practical as a "weapon"
I don't really like the situation that much either - but the way to correct it is to get involved and volunteer to be a magistrait.
I think (in the UK anyway) that this is considered a crime with relevant case law to back this up (I'd look for it but it's gone 3am now and I don't feel like it) but I really can't see why it should be illegal or how anyone can consider it to be wrong morally.
No analogy is going to be perfect when trying to think about these situations (and has been mentioned it is nothing like walking into someone's house) but when you look at what happens I don't get where the immorality comes in, consider;
It is actually more effort to set up a router with no security than with a little WEP key
Given that the person who is running the network could easily be responsible for the data which is downloaded (warez, child porn, etc.) you'd think that there is a serious incentive to actually put some security on
So whoever leaves their wifi open must be willing to take these risks just to help out the 99% of the population out their who won't screw them over... so I think we can reasonably conclude that anyone who does it really wants to do so, a bit like becoming root - you know the dangers but push ahead because when push comes to shove it is your computer, and you want it to serve you. In the same way, it is your router. Take charge.
Also if we could get the law changed regarding responsibility for other's criminal action's I'd be happy to share, but until then I don't trust random strangers enough to entrust my reputation/living/freedom to them. I think some companies have an open system linked to logins, that seems like a good idea...
It doesn't seem that sensitive. I've not looked right through it but it seems to show the camp in quite a good light, see for example this;
f. Do not use the left hand to give a detainee food.
Muslims use their left hand to clean themselves and it
is culturally inappropriate to offer food with the left
hand.
g. Do not relate terrorism to Islam. It is
inappropriate to equate any religion to such heinous
activity.
h. Do not point a finger at detainees as it is
considered very disrespectful and derogatory.
i. Avoid using foul language as it displays a lack of
composure.
These all seem to be fairly positive things, from the point of view of respecting the ways of the people who are detained. This is far less a smoking gun from what I've read and more a guide on how to make people feel as secure and happy as possible when in the camp (which I know won't be a bed of roses for them...). I really wouldn't be amazed if this was "leaked" by a supporter of the guantanamo bay compound. But maybe that's just my cynical nature, it is possible that a lot of the people in the military really do just want to make the situation as good as possible for the people who they happen to have there
This is indeed an important point, just to bring up a more extreme point point though, In England and Wales (not sure about Scotland, their rules can be different) the sentence for scratching the paint on a garden wall carries a potential penalty of life in prison. This would of course never happen, but you need the potential punishment to be this high because the same criminal damage act which would be used to prosecute someone who scratched a wall would be used to punish an arsonist who could have, and might have tried, to kill people (although if they succeed in killing you can go with manslaughter/murder as well). So hacking really needs a potential punishment this high, just because of the broad spectrum of crimes it would cover
I've pretty much completed the game now and I've had a fair amount of game-play out of it, probably more than the 15 hours that ign suggested you would get out of it. I loved the sailing elements which is FAR less annoying than wind waker, the oceans are just smaller and you learn how to warp to sufficiently specific places that there is never really any extended periods of annoyance with it. I liked the touch style play - I was unsure at first but I think it really won through, bombchus have become genuinely useful.
What I think I will really remember this game for in terms of the history of video games will be the ability to write on the maps (I'm not sure if this is actually the first time this has happened, but its the first time I've come across it). Being able to write on maps allows for more complexity in puzzles as well as interesting ideas of connecting lines which you draw to find items which are buried. I think this will have so much life in it as an idea.
All in all it is a really good game which so long as you don't play so much that your having really crazy dreams about it and get forced to take a break then it is a jolly good game
I'm confused as to why you (and the person who replied above me) are so scathing about this research. They took people who would not have been circumcised and did it to some but not to others (so maybe making some better off than others but there was a Pareto improvement in utility). According to the article you quoted;
"All participants were extensively counseled in HIV prevention and risk reduction techniques."
I've not heard anything which has made me think that this is untrue, nor can I see why they would want to do anything other than this (as it also allows them to have a look at how effective education is at the same time). IIRC they actually reported the results early because they considered the findings to be so strong that it would be unethical not to report them early. I would think that the people who carried out the study probably met the very strict ethical requirements of research (hell, even I had to consider the ethical implications of political theory... medical research would be twice as strict).
I mean, it might be true that this research genuinely did abuse the people in it, but I have seen nothing which suggests that it was, and without you providing credible sources against this, then I see what you say as a needless attack on what seems like good quality research which could save thousands (or millions) of lives
I'd be interested to know if you could make money on the "up-side", I suspect that you could but probably wouldn't try because it seems like a lot of effort for a fairly small reward and I assume that it is illegal (and probably fairly easy to get caught).
But what I wanted to pick up from your post was "These are the people who know it's wrong" - I don't really get why it is considered immoral by people who play the game anyway. I understand the argument that capitalist accumulation is inherently immoral, indeed I can see why people view the stock market as particularly so, but isn't half the point of capital markets that everyone is trying to screw everyone else so that they make money whilst others lose (because we know it's only really relative inequalities which can significantly improve quality of life individually within a capitalist, individualist market society)... so why the worries that some people will lose when that was the idea in the first place?
Still, if it is illegal (as it probably is) then it's a bit silly... a trail straight to your door.
"So for those in the know, is Storm just a way to propagate spam and annoy people? Or is it something even more dangerous?"
I'm not "in the know" per se, but my analysis of the situation - especially given the developments mentioned above - is that Storm probably is both. If all you want to do is to make money then it really doesn't matter if you're selling your power for spam or for attacking governments. Money is money. So if a black hat decides that instead of just sending the usual spam out he'd really like to have a crack at a government he doesn't like then I guess he could just cough up the money and away they go.
Call me paranoid but I wouldn't be that amazed if certain regimes consider going the owner of Storm (assuming they can find someone who knows who it is... or how to get in contact with people who do) in order to attack other governments. It would be a great proxy for an attack.
I seem to remember hearing about a group who wanted to do something like this in the UK, but as far as I remember it was illegal. It could well be in Australia as well. The idea is that we have a representative democracy, things like this go against the fundamental ideals of our democracies.
Representative democracies are valuable because they are a good way to avoid the tyranny of the majority whilst still allowing people to express a preference every (4/5-ish) years if the representatives express poor judgment or are corrupt...
I had an Amiga, they were ace. It was so long ago though and all I really used it for was Pang (what a game) so I can't really say how good the boot time was to full gui and fractal... But I am reminded of a saying that I read somewhere I can no longer remember (perhaps wikipedia); software is getting slow faster than hardware is getting fast - or at least "faster" than the software can take advantage of. I'd say that we might never get back to one second boots with any major OS (although I have heard good things about the insanely obscure Amiga 4 OS - but don't even think you can buy hardware to run it on).
I'm amazed that your fair account of the bible as it applies here has been modded as flamebait - I agree with pretty much everything you have said here based on my readings of the book... Although it bears remembering that all the girls who had not "known" men were free game for rape rather than just being killed. If the person who modded you had only replied so we could know why he thought what you said was wrong...
As I am fond of advocating, you really ought to consider reading Tom Paine's "the age of reason" (both parts, the second part is particularly devastating from the point of view of biblical accuracy and the level of trust you should place in the "laws" of the bible. He even suggests why they might have been added. It's free on Gutenburg!
in Europe wasn't backwards compatibility done at a software level? I can't really see where any saving has been made apart from maybe £1 (at most) for a memory card slot...
For something that costs £300 I can't see why they are being so tight over such a small thing when I think to most people it would add real value and enable them to sell more games (which is where the money must come from, because they are losing so much on hardware).
firstly, what the hell are you talking about? plausible deniability of what?
But what really annoys me about your comment is the shear stupidity of it. Is the UK a nazi-esque state? no. If it were would the media be able to report about when the police did make a bad call and kill an innocent man? would the independent police complaints commission investigate? would it be possible to criticise the government at all?...
So tell me how many death camps does the UK have? I can count... none.
Calling the UK a Nazi state is an insult to all the people who died because of the Nazi regime.
No idea why you've been marked as offtopic, this is exactly the problem with Amiga (well, other than the whole closed source thing they've got going on...). Say I want to buy their OS (I've gone mad and think it might be loads better than linux even though it has worse hardware support, is closed source and wouldn't run hardly any of the software I like). So I want to buy it, I need to put it on my laptop... but no.
From the interview;
"3) Is there any hope of OS4 capable hardware released in 2007?
That is the plan, and hope."
You can't even run it on any hardware! there is hope that you might be able to buy it sometime in the future. maybe.
So they take out back compatibility, and cut the market for the PS2 games that they are still producing? Are they just sick of the fact that PS2 sales keep being bigger than PS3 sales? Maybe they feel that reducing PS2 sales might, as a % of their total sales, make their crap-tacular PS3 sales look better...
Not to mention that software seem to be the only element of that "business" which actually makes money.
...is that most people just don't know what is worth investing in when it comes to getting a better audio (and visual) experience. My speakers for my computer (which is also my primary music device) cost £100, my wireless headphones cost £35-ish. I have no idea if this is more than I need. Could I have got the same out of stuff that cost half that (in the case of the headphones maybe - they are Sony, I know, I'm sorry...). Would paying twice the amount buy something which sounds twice as good...? Would some Bang & Oulafson (I forget how that's spelt exactly...) sound 20x as good?
Where can you go to find out answers to these questions other than magazines which are run by audiophiles?
After I've bought them and realised it sounds the same what can I do? admit I've been a twat or claim they are genuinely better?... I think I'd be doing the latter
whilst I would like to see some research done into this I think that it seems like a fairly sensible policy if there is insufficient knowledge currently to be sure of the effect that it might have. If it saves even one life it seems to be worth the inconvenience (which is pretty minor anyway).
I take a certain amount of pride in the market adoption of linux. Granted I haven't written a single line of code on the whole of my computer, but I have helped many a new user on the forum of my preferred (yet not current) distro, fedora. I think that this is a nice way of helping out within the community, and it is the whole community who builds the system, packages it, ships it, distributes it, and gets others to consider adopting it. When I have more money I'll probably donate as well, and I feel that what I've done - and what everyone else in that system does - makes us all a kind of "we". And that leads to a certain pride.
as someone mentioned before, call the country Burma. That's the name which signifies that you don't accept the legitimacy of the murders who have stolen the country and ruled over it for all these years.
Also, I don't get the anti-bush tag, he seems to be doing a lot more than most to help the situation...
Slashdot Mirror
"Do nerds no longer enjoy reading?"
Not physical books.
Joking aside I've also kept every book I've ever had (pretty much) and have less than 50... I don't know how anyone can afford to have thousands, the cheapest book I've got is a second hand copy of Marx's selected works that was £8, if we take an average of just £5 having 800 would cost £4000 - and that's a lot of money by anyone's standards. 3500 would cost £17,500 which really is a lot.
as I understand it, they are. But they lose money in the sense that if they would almost certainly make more money if people weren't buying them to sell on ebay, this is because the inflated price means people have less money to spend on games - so whilst it might seem like they make money either way (which they do), they make less than they would have done
"Conspiracy believers suggest this is an orchestrated move on behalf of Nintendo"
Then they would be idiots, do people think that when someone sells one on ebay for £320 (as I have seen happen, that's more than the PS3) they send off a nice cheque to nintendo just to say "thanks"? no. Nintendo loses money on each of these (since they only get the original sale and after the inflated price people are less likely to buy a lot of games). Nintendo really wants to meet demand, it's stupid to suggest otherwise.
as I understand it though if you block beacon using blocksite firefox extension (there is a wikihow on it) then whether or not you've opted in/out you'll be protected from this - so we have some protection (if I'm wrong I'd really like to know...)
/. but would still care if they knew I guess all we can do is to keep up the pressure on them to drop this all together - but they won't because this is where they'll make the money. Maybe some kind of warning (perhaps a giant group we could all join) might be enough to get anyone who cares to use blocksite and FF... still not perfect but it might be the best we have...
As for people who don't come to
there is nothing really wrong with digital restrictions management as a name for it, it does describe what it does, but it is the best name we could give it to communicate our point?
For me I have to side with the parent poster, playback prevention communicates the message so quickly and easily that when inevitably members of our family ask us why their music won't play we can just say "ah, you bought the stuff with playback prevention...". It's a little political but thats just the way these things go...
I'm not 100% sure about the new laws because I haven't studied law since they brought them in but the way it used to work is they could only stop you contacting members of your family to explain the situation if they have reasonable suspicion that this will directly lead to the people you will contact destroying evidence (or carrying out other crimes). They need to convince a magistrait (who are just a members of the public) of this and then it is (or at least was) only for a limited time (it was about 2 days). I think it would be a lot harder to do this then you think, and it certainly isn't practical as a "weapon"
I don't really like the situation that much either - but the way to correct it is to get involved and volunteer to be a magistrait.
I think (in the UK anyway) that this is considered a crime with relevant case law to back this up (I'd look for it but it's gone 3am now and I don't feel like it) but I really can't see why it should be illegal or how anyone can consider it to be wrong morally.
No analogy is going to be perfect when trying to think about these situations (and has been mentioned it is nothing like walking into someone's house) but when you look at what happens I don't get where the immorality comes in, consider;
It is actually more effort to set up a router with no security than with a little WEP key
Given that the person who is running the network could easily be responsible for the data which is downloaded (warez, child porn, etc.) you'd think that there is a serious incentive to actually put some security on
So whoever leaves their wifi open must be willing to take these risks just to help out the 99% of the population out their who won't screw them over... so I think we can reasonably conclude that anyone who does it really wants to do so, a bit like becoming root - you know the dangers but push ahead because when push comes to shove it is your computer, and you want it to serve you. In the same way, it is your router. Take charge.
Also if we could get the law changed regarding responsibility for other's criminal action's I'd be happy to share, but until then I don't trust random strangers enough to entrust my reputation/living/freedom to them. I think some companies have an open system linked to logins, that seems like a good idea...
It doesn't seem that sensitive. I've not looked right through it but it seems to show the camp in quite a good light, see for example this;
f. Do not use the left hand to give a detainee food.
Muslims use their left hand to clean themselves and it
is culturally inappropriate to offer food with the left
hand.
g. Do not relate terrorism to Islam. It is
inappropriate to equate any religion to such heinous
activity.
h. Do not point a finger at detainees as it is
considered very disrespectful and derogatory.
i. Avoid using foul language as it displays a lack of
composure.
These all seem to be fairly positive things, from the point of view of respecting the ways of the people who are detained. This is far less a smoking gun from what I've read and more a guide on how to make people feel as secure and happy as possible when in the camp (which I know won't be a bed of roses for them...). I really wouldn't be amazed if this was "leaked" by a supporter of the guantanamo bay compound. But maybe that's just my cynical nature, it is possible that a lot of the people in the military really do just want to make the situation as good as possible for the people who they happen to have there
This is indeed an important point, just to bring up a more extreme point point though, In England and Wales (not sure about Scotland, their rules can be different) the sentence for scratching the paint on a garden wall carries a potential penalty of life in prison. This would of course never happen, but you need the potential punishment to be this high because the same criminal damage act which would be used to prosecute someone who scratched a wall would be used to punish an arsonist who could have, and might have tried, to kill people (although if they succeed in killing you can go with manslaughter/murder as well). So hacking really needs a potential punishment this high, just because of the broad spectrum of crimes it would cover
I've pretty much completed the game now and I've had a fair amount of game-play out of it, probably more than the 15 hours that ign suggested you would get out of it. I loved the sailing elements which is FAR less annoying than wind waker, the oceans are just smaller and you learn how to warp to sufficiently specific places that there is never really any extended periods of annoyance with it. I liked the touch style play - I was unsure at first but I think it really won through, bombchus have become genuinely useful.
What I think I will really remember this game for in terms of the history of video games will be the ability to write on the maps (I'm not sure if this is actually the first time this has happened, but its the first time I've come across it). Being able to write on maps allows for more complexity in puzzles as well as interesting ideas of connecting lines which you draw to find items which are buried. I think this will have so much life in it as an idea.
All in all it is a really good game which so long as you don't play so much that your having really crazy dreams about it and get forced to take a break then it is a jolly good game
I'm confused as to why you (and the person who replied above me) are so scathing about this research. They took people who would not have been circumcised and did it to some but not to others (so maybe making some better off than others but there was a Pareto improvement in utility). According to the article you quoted;
"All participants were extensively counseled in HIV prevention and risk reduction techniques."
I've not heard anything which has made me think that this is untrue, nor can I see why they would want to do anything other than this (as it also allows them to have a look at how effective education is at the same time). IIRC they actually reported the results early because they considered the findings to be so strong that it would be unethical not to report them early. I would think that the people who carried out the study probably met the very strict ethical requirements of research (hell, even I had to consider the ethical implications of political theory... medical research would be twice as strict).
I mean, it might be true that this research genuinely did abuse the people in it, but I have seen nothing which suggests that it was, and without you providing credible sources against this, then I see what you say as a needless attack on what seems like good quality research which could save thousands (or millions) of lives
I'd be interested to know if you could make money on the "up-side", I suspect that you could but probably wouldn't try because it seems like a lot of effort for a fairly small reward and I assume that it is illegal (and probably fairly easy to get caught).
But what I wanted to pick up from your post was "These are the people who know it's wrong" - I don't really get why it is considered immoral by people who play the game anyway. I understand the argument that capitalist accumulation is inherently immoral, indeed I can see why people view the stock market as particularly so, but isn't half the point of capital markets that everyone is trying to screw everyone else so that they make money whilst others lose (because we know it's only really relative inequalities which can significantly improve quality of life individually within a capitalist, individualist market society)... so why the worries that some people will lose when that was the idea in the first place?
Still, if it is illegal (as it probably is) then it's a bit silly... a trail straight to your door.
"So for those in the know, is Storm just a way to propagate spam and annoy people? Or is it something even more dangerous?"
I'm not "in the know" per se, but my analysis of the situation - especially given the developments mentioned above - is that Storm probably is both. If all you want to do is to make money then it really doesn't matter if you're selling your power for spam or for attacking governments. Money is money. So if a black hat decides that instead of just sending the usual spam out he'd really like to have a crack at a government he doesn't like then I guess he could just cough up the money and away they go.
Call me paranoid but I wouldn't be that amazed if certain regimes consider going the owner of Storm (assuming they can find someone who knows who it is... or how to get in contact with people who do) in order to attack other governments. It would be a great proxy for an attack.
I seem to remember hearing about a group who wanted to do something like this in the UK, but as far as I remember it was illegal. It could well be in Australia as well. The idea is that we have a representative democracy, things like this go against the fundamental ideals of our democracies.
Representative democracies are valuable because they are a good way to avoid the tyranny of the majority whilst still allowing people to express a preference every (4/5-ish) years if the representatives express poor judgment or are corrupt...
I had an Amiga, they were ace. It was so long ago though and all I really used it for was Pang (what a game) so I can't really say how good the boot time was to full gui and fractal... But I am reminded of a saying that I read somewhere I can no longer remember (perhaps wikipedia); software is getting slow faster than hardware is getting fast - or at least "faster" than the software can take advantage of. I'd say that we might never get back to one second boots with any major OS (although I have heard good things about the insanely obscure Amiga 4 OS - but don't even think you can buy hardware to run it on).
I'm amazed that your fair account of the bible as it applies here has been modded as flamebait - I agree with pretty much everything you have said here based on my readings of the book... Although it bears remembering that all the girls who had not "known" men were free game for rape rather than just being killed. If the person who modded you had only replied so we could know why he thought what you said was wrong...
As I am fond of advocating, you really ought to consider reading Tom Paine's "the age of reason" (both parts, the second part is particularly devastating from the point of view of biblical accuracy and the level of trust you should place in the "laws" of the bible. He even suggests why they might have been added. It's free on Gutenburg!
in Europe wasn't backwards compatibility done at a software level? I can't really see where any saving has been made apart from maybe £1 (at most) for a memory card slot...
For something that costs £300 I can't see why they are being so tight over such a small thing when I think to most people it would add real value and enable them to sell more games (which is where the money must come from, because they are losing so much on hardware).
firstly, what the hell are you talking about? plausible deniability of what?
But what really annoys me about your comment is the shear stupidity of it. Is the UK a nazi-esque state? no. If it were would the media be able to report about when the police did make a bad call and kill an innocent man? would the independent police complaints commission investigate? would it be possible to criticise the government at all?...
So tell me how many death camps does the UK have? I can count... none.
Calling the UK a Nazi state is an insult to all the people who died because of the Nazi regime.
No idea why you've been marked as offtopic, this is exactly the problem with Amiga (well, other than the whole closed source thing they've got going on...). Say I want to buy their OS (I've gone mad and think it might be loads better than linux even though it has worse hardware support, is closed source and wouldn't run hardly any of the software I like). So I want to buy it, I need to put it on my laptop... but no.
From the interview;
"3) Is there any hope of OS4 capable hardware released in 2007?
That is the plan, and hope."
You can't even run it on any hardware! there is hope that you might be able to buy it sometime in the future. maybe.
So they take out back compatibility, and cut the market for the PS2 games that they are still producing? Are they just sick of the fact that PS2 sales keep being bigger than PS3 sales? Maybe they feel that reducing PS2 sales might, as a % of their total sales, make their crap-tacular PS3 sales look better...
Not to mention that software seem to be the only element of that "business" which actually makes money.
...is that most people just don't know what is worth investing in when it comes to getting a better audio (and visual) experience. My speakers for my computer (which is also my primary music device) cost £100, my wireless headphones cost £35-ish. I have no idea if this is more than I need. Could I have got the same out of stuff that cost half that (in the case of the headphones maybe - they are Sony, I know, I'm sorry...). Would paying twice the amount buy something which sounds twice as good...? Would some Bang & Oulafson (I forget how that's spelt exactly...) sound 20x as good?
Where can you go to find out answers to these questions other than magazines which are run by audiophiles?
After I've bought them and realised it sounds the same what can I do? admit I've been a twat or claim they are genuinely better?... I think I'd be doing the latter
I agree completely. It's taken me ages to figure out what the hell it actually is. Why not use product?
whilst I would like to see some research done into this I think that it seems like a fairly sensible policy if there is insufficient knowledge currently to be sure of the effect that it might have. If it saves even one life it seems to be worth the inconvenience (which is pretty minor anyway).
I take a certain amount of pride in the market adoption of linux. Granted I haven't written a single line of code on the whole of my computer, but I have helped many a new user on the forum of my preferred (yet not current) distro, fedora. I think that this is a nice way of helping out within the community, and it is the whole community who builds the system, packages it, ships it, distributes it, and gets others to consider adopting it. When I have more money I'll probably donate as well, and I feel that what I've done - and what everyone else in that system does - makes us all a kind of "we". And that leads to a certain pride.
as someone mentioned before, call the country Burma. That's the name which signifies that you don't accept the legitimacy of the murders who have stolen the country and ruled over it for all these years.
Also, I don't get the anti-bush tag, he seems to be doing a lot more than most to help the situation...