Jesus... Slashdot, where consipiracy isn't theory, it's accepted fact!
Just remember that 'children' means (typically) 10 and under. This is not *censorship* BTW. It's setting up a domain where anything that would probably be a "G" rating in the movies or shown on Cartoon Network (before 11PM) will be. Gawd, don't be so friggin sensitive.
For Bush to be re-elected he must first be elected, which would by necesity mean that he be elected in 2004 and then get the constitution changed to allow him to run a third time in 2008.
I have to admit, I stopped reading after this... Don't get me wrong, it's good anti-Bush propaganda, but it's just too over-worked, and too many people now understand how the electoral process works...
You praise Michael Moore and Jello Biafra for having 'the balls to stand up for what they believe in' and then bash people who follow Bush for doing the same? Remember, many supporters of Bush are *not* blind. Just because you say they are, doesn't make it true...
I bet this value includes things such as unemployment (which a company pays into for you), health care, etc. Possibly even other 'perks' (discounted stock program?)
Probably for a reason... A campaign takes a lot of time and money. It's only worth it if you think you can win. In Massachusetts senator Kennedy runs unopposed year after year. In case you're not from the area, in Massachusetts Kennedy == God.
Yes, but it's the same 'but'. There is no black and white here. There's many shades of gray. A guy pulls a gun on a cop, says "I'm going to shoot you." Should the cop wait until (s)he's shot just so they can be sure the guy is guilty? If so, we're going to have a difficult time convincing people to be police...
This is simplistic. Currently the police can hold a person in prison without bail for being suspected of a crime (though not yet proven) while awaiting their trial. BUT it's only if they state has gathered enough evidence to suspect the person of the crime.
Now, they're still considered 'innocent', but they're not exactly free anymore are they? This is the 'BUT'.
You state Oil as a possible motive. Good for you. Get some proof, we'll talk. We also could have gone in because GW likes sand (he's from Texas after all!). Or perhaps as 'revenge' as some have suggested. Maybe Ascroft likes the stylish looks in Iraq? Motive != Crime.
Iraq was no world threat. About the only sovereign place that would really find Iraq threatening was Israel.
Talk to Iran and Kuwait... Not to mention that Israel is an ally of the US. Yes, that still means something.
As for criminal negligence, you are in direct hypocritical peril considering how much of that charge can be levelled at the American CIA, FBI and military command (specifically the Commander in Chief, whom you may have heard of) when 911 was being planned and executed.
Yes, mistakes were made. And you're right, the CIA, FBI, and Clinton all have some responsibility here too. That's why there's the 911 commission to determine what was done poorly. Note this is NOT a total lack of effort. After 911, which Mid East nations had 911 commissions to see what they could do about terrorism?
Face facts, Ace: you've been bamboozled into thinking that America's assaults in the Middle East are not the Imperialist moves that they actually are.
First, don't call people you don't know 'ace'. Second, since when is handing sovereign control back to a nation after conquoring them 'imperialistic'? Talk to the UK about Imperialism...
Hippocracy, while a vice, is not a valid argument. A murderer claiming that murder is 'wrong', does not make murder 'right'.
Nor is it a strong defence.
Mistakes were made. They always will be. The US backed the wrong horse a few times in the middle east. But who hasn't? It doesn't change the fact that Saddam was a threat to the world. I think of the mid-east as a bees nest. It's a danger sitting there, and will become more so over time if you leave it be. But in getting rid of it, you've gotta stir up some angry bees!
Maybe I'm wrong, maybe you're wrong. Time will judge us both, and will do so with the convenience of hind-sight.
Right, there's the thing most people overlook. How do we know it's a real finger? Have a friggin guard inspect the persons hand!
It's like that scene in the movie of "Mission Impossible" with Tom Cruise on a wire surrounded by high tech detectors. The whole thing would have been a lot more difficult had they simply put a guard *in* the room!
By invading Iraq he's turned it into a hotbet of terrorist activity.
Because $Diety knows, there was no terrorism before the US invaded Iraq. Nope. None.
If the war *was* for oil, then this would be a very stupid move. Oil prices go way up due to middle eastern instability.
I guess it's very difficult for you to believe that somebody may actually believe Iraq was a threat to the world. This, after all, was what the stated purpose for the war was. Sure, Saddam may not have personally bank-rolled the terrorists, but he didn't exactly try to stop any terrorists in his country either. Failure to even try to police such activities is criminally negligent IMHO. It's like a guy in your neighborhood who knowingly allows a crack dealer to operate from his living room. You don't think he should be held liable?
And how exactly is one expected to code against this? Again, it's not the *developers* fault that memory returned a different value than was stored there.
I almost like the Aerons, save for the arm rests. They're in the worst possible place. The chair I have allows me to adjust the arm rests up and down, but also, and most importantly, 'in' and 'out'.
Re:Yeah, that's why I go kayaking
on
War Kayaking
·
· Score: 1
I specifically engage in athletic and recreational activity to get away from all that crap.
Well, bully for you. The whole world must follow in your example? Some of us actually think it's pretty 'neat' to be in the middle of 'nowhere' and have an internet connection. If you wanna be a luddite, fine. But let others enjoy their cell-phones, PDAs, and other assorted toys.
Slashdot Mirror
What are you gonna fuck up at age 16 that you can't bounce back from
Killing a mother of 4 while driving home from a rave?
Personally, I've found that I have a sort of natural morality built into my consciousness.
Natural morality? That's giving very little credit to your parents.
Jesus... Slashdot, where consipiracy isn't theory, it's accepted fact!
Just remember that 'children' means (typically) 10 and under. This is not *censorship* BTW. It's setting up a domain where anything that would probably be a "G" rating in the movies or shown on Cartoon Network (before 11PM) will be. Gawd, don't be so friggin sensitive.
Because a belief is religious in nature, does not mean it is wrong.
Would probably be very cool, but the number of machines actually supported by Linux BIOS is very small. And usually the machines are quite new...
For Bush to be re-elected he must first be elected, which would by necesity mean that he be elected in 2004 and then get the constitution changed to allow him to run a third time in 2008.
I have to admit, I stopped reading after this... Don't get me wrong, it's good anti-Bush propaganda, but it's just too over-worked, and too many people now understand how the electoral process works...
Bah! If you're going to arbitrarily bash Bush, at least do it well!
If Bush gets re-elected then fire and brimstone will rain from the sky! Thus rendering all small businesses destroyed.
Mark my words, fire and brimstone.
You praise Michael Moore and Jello Biafra for having 'the balls to stand up for what they believe in' and then bash people who follow Bush for doing the same? Remember, many supporters of Bush are *not* blind. Just because you say they are, doesn't make it true...
Cost per employee != wage per employee.
I bet this value includes things such as unemployment (which a company pays into for you), health care, etc. Possibly even other 'perks' (discounted stock program?)
Uh...Oh!
large numbers of incumbants run unopposed
Probably for a reason... A campaign takes a lot of time and money. It's only worth it if you think you can win. In Massachusetts senator Kennedy runs unopposed year after year. In case you're not from the area, in Massachusetts Kennedy == God.
Careful, you're using logic on slashdot... Most people here just have emotional rhetoric.
Yes, but it's the same 'but'. There is no black and white here. There's many shades of gray. A guy pulls a gun on a cop, says "I'm going to shoot you." Should the cop wait until (s)he's shot just so they can be sure the guy is guilty? If so, we're going to have a difficult time convincing people to be police...
This is simplistic. Currently the police can hold a person in prison without bail for being suspected of a crime (though not yet proven) while awaiting their trial. BUT it's only if they state has gathered enough evidence to suspect the person of the crime.
Now, they're still considered 'innocent', but they're not exactly free anymore are they? This is the 'BUT'.
The indisputable fact is that one day there will be no more oil left in the ground. Do you dispute that something needs to be done about that?
One day the Sun will explode. Shall we blow up the Earth now just to 'get it over with'?
Almost thought this would be a good debate *ace*, but I guess you are just a troll. Ahh well. Good one though.
Limbaugh eh? Don't listen to the man...
You state Oil as a possible motive. Good for you. Get some proof, we'll talk. We also could have gone in because GW likes sand (he's from Texas after all!). Or perhaps as 'revenge' as some have suggested. Maybe Ascroft likes the stylish looks in Iraq? Motive != Crime.
Iraq was no world threat. About the only sovereign place that would really find Iraq threatening was Israel.
Talk to Iran and Kuwait... Not to mention that Israel is an ally of the US. Yes, that still means something.
As for criminal negligence, you are in direct hypocritical peril considering how much of that charge can be levelled at the American CIA, FBI and military command (specifically the Commander in Chief, whom you may have heard of) when 911 was being planned and executed.
Yes, mistakes were made. And you're right, the CIA, FBI, and Clinton all have some responsibility here too. That's why there's the 911 commission to determine what was done poorly. Note this is NOT a total lack of effort. After 911, which Mid East nations had 911 commissions to see what they could do about terrorism?
Face facts, Ace: you've been bamboozled into thinking that America's assaults in the Middle East are not the Imperialist moves that they actually are.
First, don't call people you don't know 'ace'. Second, since when is handing sovereign control back to a nation after conquoring them 'imperialistic'? Talk to the UK about Imperialism...
Hippocracy, while a vice, is not a valid argument. A murderer claiming that murder is 'wrong', does not make murder 'right'.
Nor is it a strong defence.
Mistakes were made. They always will be. The US backed the wrong horse a few times in the middle east. But who hasn't? It doesn't change the fact that Saddam was a threat to the world. I think of the mid-east as a bees nest. It's a danger sitting there, and will become more so over time if you leave it be. But in getting rid of it, you've gotta stir up some angry bees!
Maybe I'm wrong, maybe you're wrong. Time will judge us both, and will do so with the convenience of hind-sight.
Right, there's the thing most people overlook. How do we know it's a real finger? Have a friggin guard inspect the persons hand!
It's like that scene in the movie of "Mission Impossible" with Tom Cruise on a wire surrounded by high tech detectors. The whole thing would have been a lot more difficult had they simply put a guard *in* the room!
Is that so?
By invading Iraq he's turned it into a hotbet of terrorist activity.
Because $Diety knows, there was no terrorism before the US invaded Iraq. Nope. None.
If the war *was* for oil, then this would be a very stupid move. Oil prices go way up due to middle eastern instability.
I guess it's very difficult for you to believe that somebody may actually believe Iraq was a threat to the world. This, after all, was what the stated purpose for the war was. Sure, Saddam may not have personally bank-rolled the terrorists, but he didn't exactly try to stop any terrorists in his country either. Failure to even try to police such activities is criminally negligent IMHO. It's like a guy in your neighborhood who knowingly allows a crack dealer to operate from his living room. You don't think he should be held liable?
Memory errors do indeed cause software bugs
And how exactly is one expected to code against this? Again, it's not the *developers* fault that memory returned a different value than was stored there.
Believe it or not, an iPod isn't the answer to every damn thing that involves music.
....
Exactly! This is the *perfect* situation for Gentoo... Hey... What are you guys doing in there? Hey, get out!
I almost like the Aerons, save for the arm rests. They're in the worst possible place. The chair I have allows me to adjust the arm rests up and down, but also, and most importantly, 'in' and 'out'.
I specifically engage in athletic and recreational activity to get away from all that crap.
Well, bully for you. The whole world must follow in your example? Some of us actually think it's pretty 'neat' to be in the middle of 'nowhere' and have an internet connection. If you wanna be a luddite, fine. But let others enjoy their cell-phones, PDAs, and other assorted toys.