Net "Neutrality" is government managed price controls and forced reduction of service quality, which will result in reduced investment in internet within the USA and slower speed for everyone, as well as increased regulation.
Substantiate your claims, especially in the face of overwhelming evidence that they are false, as evidenced by the UK where this system already exists and none of this is true. The evidence is overwhelming for, not against this claim, especially if you take the example of the UK, (where presumably you are talking about Ofcom?). I don't know everything there is to know about the regulatory environment of the UK, but the UK is perhaps the only greater surveillance state than the USA. There are more surveillance camera's per person there than anywhere. I do know that in the UK, there is a 'minimum quality' of service. There is no prevention from selling faster networks, only that it be provided wholesale to others that also want to carry over the same network and do their own customer management. This is somewhat less horrible, than the US proposals that prevent the tariff of QoS traffic entirely from the provider side. That this technology has been available for about 20 years to business networks to use internally and allow their applications to work and preventing it on the internet damages the internet, it does not 'protect' it. Second "Net Neutrality" does NOT exist in the UK regulatory environment, despite your imagination that it is already implemented. Third, the notion that some 'threat of commercial discrimination' justifies the mandate of actual commercial discrimination and the prevention of commercial sale of faster networks by government fiat is absurd. The BIGGEST LIE of the net "neutrality" hucksters is that the sale of QoS networks where quality can be guaranteed for applications that require it somehow slows everyone else down. You should be ashamed of yourself for propagating this nonsense. People that have even a passing understanding of MPLS QoS packet prioritization technology or some experience with it know better. To prevent the sale of these by some mythical claim of imagined anti-competitive activity (where there are already quite good laws to prevent this) is a smoke screen, and the apologists for this are simply uneducated sheep following some misguided notion of "fairness" to enforce abject unfairness and a theft of freedom. So since this law and new regulatory authority are entirely unnecessary, and actually harmful to the development of the internst, why add them? The surveillance state doesn't have anything to do with this discussion in my mind, not sure why you bring that up. I wasn't speaking of a specific instance (Ofcom? I'm not familiar with them), but more of the entire system. The treatment of the internet as a public utility in Britain has lead to more competition with the resulting lower prices, and they have faster internet speeds than America. Competition keeps prices down, not a government mandate, and there is no forced reduction in quality, and they have faster speeds than us already, which also suggests slower speeds because of reclassifying the internet under Title II won't bear out either. If you're inclined, Planet Money (an economics podcast) looked at the regulatory systems in the UK and US. http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2014/04/04/299060527/episode-529-the-last-mile It's 16 minutes long, and pretty good at showing how the US and UK were at the same point ten years ago, went in opposite directions, and now the US has no competition and anywhere in the UK you have no shortage of broadband companies competing for your business. UK has far cheaper rates and faster speed. In 2013, BBC looked at why that was and arrived at the same conclusions: http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24528383 The US system makes competition difficult, which is why there is none. It's why ISPs don't have to compete on price or speed. In more places than not in this country, they're the only game in town- you buy their service or you don't. The UK system enables competition, and as a result, they have faster speeds and lower prices. All the dire warnings you posted haven't proven true in the UK, where they already treat the internet as a public utility, which is why I'm not buying into them. I'm open to changing my opinion if a good case can be shown, but not on account of vague warnings that analogous situations have already discredited. |
|
|
|
....The mother meets these requirements, so Cruz is a "citizen at birth." I find it likely a court would equate "citizen at birth" with "natural born," but until it's codified in law, it's just speculation.
Interesting to note, until 1978, there was also a residency requirement that foreign-born citizens at birth had to meet within a specified time in order to keep their citizenship. This requirement was scrapped by a new law in 1978, but anyone who did not meet the residency requirement before it passed was not restored their citizenship. This isn't applicable to Cruz, just an aside of how citizenship at birth could be granted and still lost.
Sounds about right....OKAY, GO BACK TO anti-Cruz polemic, I'm sure we're going to hear a lot of it, but that darn "non citizen" thing, that dog ain't gonna hunt. I'm not saying non-citizen. My initial post on that matter was one of confusion as I did not have enough understanding of the circumstances of the situation. I feel I have a better understanding now. I accept he's a citizen, a citizen at birth, and very likely a natural born citizen, leaving open only the possibility that a court might decide otherwise. I'm no fan of Cruz, but I wouldn't support any legal challenge to the legitimacy of his presidential candidacy knowing what I know now. |
|
|
|
Poor guy is gonna spend the rest of his life with rapists and murderers.. He's gonna get so destroyed in there =(
He did try to get people bumped off. So spending time with murderers is something he shouldn't be complaining about. Was that the worst crime he commited ? I think generally murder or the attempt of is considered the worst crime there is, however he has not yet been charged of that. That's for another trial I believe. I think he was charged with attempted murder in this trial. The Maryland indictment against him includes two charges related to attempted murder: one charge for attempted murder of a federal witness, and another charge for use of interstate commerce to facilitate murder-for-hire. If no human being comes forward with the claim, "Ross threatened me. I want protection and retribution," and verifies it on the stand in open court, it's all hearsay. Ross can get out of it by requiring someone to come forward with a claim of attempted murder, and verify it on the stand.   They don't need someone to say Ross threatened him when they have all the evidence of him trying to hire a hitman. That's the opposite of hearsay, that's direct evidence. What you're describing is a defense for assault. He wasn't charged with assault, he was charged with attempted murder, and a murder-for-hire plot. Your legal ideas continue to be simplistic. Some of the defense attorneys may have thought of that. But they are disallowed from defending that way by their position as officers of the court and by the judge. There are several different kinds of courts. Ross is in a civil court hearing. If he fires his attorneys, and stands present as a man, not represented by himself or anyone else, the law is that he needs to be answered by a man/woman who was harmed or damaged. You and I and the world may know in our hearts that he is guilty of the worst kinds of sins and crimes, but if he stands as a man, drawing the court over into the common law side rather than letting it remain in the civil side, there are a whole different set of rules. This is standard law in America. He would probably need a friend passing him notes under the table, to be able to stand as a man, present, in a common law court of record. As I have said many times, start by reading the court cases that "The Secret is most judgments are Void on their face and not merely voidable," at http://voidjudgments.com/. Then you can start to learn how to get all your buddies who are in prison for virtually nothing, out of prison, because it was a void judgment that put them there. They simply didn't know how to swing the court over into the common law. Where are you getting your profoundly misinformed information? He is in a criminal proceeding, not a civil proceeding. None of the stuff you said is true at all, it hardly even makes sense. |
|
|
|
... and lots and lots of new taxes:First, President Obama’s plan marks a monumental shift toward government control of the Internet. It gives the FCC the power to micromanage virtually every aspect of how the Internet works. It’s an overreach that will let a Washington bureaucracy, and not the American people, decide the future of the online world. It’s no wonder that net neutrality proponents are already bragging that it will turn the FCC into the “Department of the Internet.” For that reason, if you like dealing with the IRS, you are going to love the President’s plan. Second, President Obama’s plan to regulate the Internet will increase consumers’ monthly broadband bills. The plan explicitly opens the door to billions of dollars in new taxes on broadband. Indeed, states have already begun discussions on how they will spend the extra money. These new taxes will mean higher prices for consumers and more hidden fees that they have to pay. Third, President Obama’s plan to regulate the Internet will mean slower broadband for American consumers. The plan contains a host of new regulations that will reduce investment in broadband networks. That means slower Internet speeds. It also means that many rural Americans will have to wait longer for access to quality broadband. Fourth, President Obama’s plan to regulate the Internet will hurt competition and innovation and move us toward a broadband monopoly. The plan saddles small, independent businesses and entrepreneurs with heavy-handed regulations that will push them out of the market. As a result, Americans will have fewer broadband choices. This is no accident. Title II was designed to regulate a monopoly. If we impose that model on a vibrant broadband marketplace, a highly regulated monopoly is what we’ll get. We shouldn’t bring Ma Bell back to life in this dynamic, digital age. Fifth, President Obama’s plan to regulate the Internet is an unlawful power grab. Courts have twice thrown out the FCC’s attempts at Internet regulation. There’s no reason to think that the third time will be the charm. Even a cursory look at the plan reveals glaring legal flaws that are sure to mire the agency in the muck of litigation for a long, long time. And sixth, the American people are being misled about what is in President Obama’s plan to regulate the Internet. The rollout earlier in the week was obviously intended to downplay the plan’s massive intrusion into the Internet economy. Beginning next week, I look forward to sharing with the public key aspects of what this plan will actually do. http://www.fcc.gov/document/comm-pais-stmt-president-obamas-plan-regulate-internet The US is far behind the times in regards to the Internet. This is a political victory for a free and open Internet. I'm not sure whether this is bait or not. It's classic bait, a bunch of fear mongering without specifics. Notice if you click through to the source, and read the whole thing, Mr. Pai's letter states that he will provide specifics about why this plan is so terrible at a later time. (OP truncated that part of the letter, he was too busy reposting all the non-specific talking points.) All this letter was meant to do was rile up the base. Let me know when Mr. Pai posts something substantive, not a bunch of conclusions without the evidence to support them. If mr. pai or myself are trying to lie to anyone, why can't the FCC and the people behind those 332 pages be upfront and let anyone read those pages? PDF please, with a search function, not 332 pages of paper toilet scanned at 72 dpi, saved as docx... I understand, for some, the government can do no wrong. Ever. Unlike happy people posting links of news on their favorite forum, links anyone can read to the fullest by checking the whole article themselves. Posting a part of a website here is wrong and bad. Letting the government change the whole entire internet, in secret and forever, is good. I guess some of us already read those 332 pages and know in advance to distrust Wilikon and mr. pai. That is a huge amount of faith on 332 pages called "net neutrality", doublespeak 101...  No, some of us read a bunch of conclusions and ask for the reasoning that lead to those conclusions so we can evaluate the merits of the conclusion for ourselves. When they are not provided, then those of us with the ability to think independently dismiss it a useless rhetoric. Mr. Pai's letter is rich in rhetoric and absent of information and reasoning that leads to his conclusions. Apparently, he hasn't had time yet to post anything substantive about why the plan is so terrible, only that it is. I've only come to distrust what you post because it's absent of critical thought. You're a fine parrot for conservative talking points, but you rarely provide anything that justifies the conclusions in the things you post. Rhetoric is what gets politicians elected, so it's very useful to have drones who just repeat that stuff without questioning it. You always seem to mistake that a critique of your rote dissemination of rhetoric is acceptance of the counterpoint, and it's not. The critique of the lack of substance of Mr. Pai's letter is the embodiment of this. He's provided no reasoning or evidence to support his conclusions, and until he does, it's impossible to either agree or disagree with any degree of informed opinion to the conclusions he has presented. Since his letter provides nothing substantive, it's useless rhetoric. I'll be waiting for him to give us the promised details which ostensibly will support his conclusions, so I can at that time determine whether they are justified conclusions or not.
Who has time to read 332 pages anyway...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hV-05TLiiLUBuilding a strawman instead of answering a critique isn't a rebuttal. You haven't said anything relevant to counter anything I've said. |
|
|
|
|
What an ugly list full of strawmen and hypocrisy, as if liberals are immune to every one of the complaints listed.
|
|
|
|
It would obviously be better if we could say "WTF?" and forget about these retarded people denying the holocaust.
But there are plenty of weak minds, unemployed losers, 15-year-old-kids, rich assholes ... and other people that do not understand why it's so awful to deny holocaust or to be a Nazi. The same applies to Islamic State, Al-Qaida and other hate groups recruiting young people brainwashing them. This kind of propaganda IS a problem.
It's not a "thought crime", because if you only think about it, you won't be punished. The problem is if you try to convince others.
questioning the holocaust is "awful" for the zionist parasite because when revisionism goes mainstream,and it will, they lose their privileged position in the world as eternal victims with the rest of us feeling like we owe them something, wars waged on their behalf by stupid yankee goyim, reparations from germany for 10000 years, carte blanche to abuse the palestine arabs and steal their land question the numbers of red indian dead and you're good to go, ditto the transatlantic slave trade, dresden casualties or the gulag, but dispute that 60 trillion jews were disintegrated with ray guns on the personal orders of hitler and you all of a sudden become persona non grata truth doesn't fear investigation Hyperbole doesn't do your argument any favors, but it sure does give away why you actually care about the topic. It's not about the search for truth or freedom of speech, it's about keeping your ability to rail against the Jews. |
|
|
|
|
Does this machine generate electricity? I guess I don't understand fully what it does. If it generates electricity, what does it use as fuel? The article says it's very expensive to turn on, so I don't understand what makes it so expensive to run. Is it the materials it requires to run, or the expertise of the personnel required to run it?
|
|
|
|
"even if Plaintiffs could establish standing, a potential Fourth Amendment Claim would have to be dismissed on the basis that any possible defenses would require impermissible disclosure of state secret information."
Here's the biggest problem. Even if you can prove you're being spied on, a Fourth Amendment claim by a citizen would be dismissed because the mere act of the government defending against such a claim would cause an impermissible disclosure of state secret information. So the court is taking the position that they can't even ask the government to prove they're not doing anything wrong, because national security. |
|
|
|
The UN was made for one purpose, and so far it has succeded in it: preventing a third world war, fought with nukes. That is how the security council was selected, and the purpose of the veto rights. Small-scale wars were considered unavoidable. Stuff like UNESCO is just fluffy bonus programs that don't hurt the great powers.
Global government? Fine for me if it was democratic and extremely decentralized... but that's not what someone like Gates has in mind, and illusionary in the current ideological climate. What he wants is the realistic version: a capitalist oligarchy with himself in a place in the politburo.
Bullshit, un was formed to create a world army for the elites once again. You really need stop sipping the cool aid and look and think for yourself because all media as been controlled by the mafia since 1940s when they brought it all up. You've lived all your life in a era where its all controlled and I mean all. Nothing you see or read or programmed at school is true. Its all double speak! Have a look and think for yourself what the un as done in the past and is pushing for! Its not peace! And they are the one with the armies that go into all these war zones in the guise of bringing peace! Army's do not bring peace! Wake up and smell the roses and stop drinking the bullshit coolaid! This is all probably too heavy for the people here because your obviously nowhere near opening your eyes to the truth. But remember, even in a minority of 1, the truth is still the truth! Also remember when your thinking about these things, even if your not thinking completely correctly, your still a danger to the few at the top because you are thinking! https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BHc8cdL9xQkSnap out of the daze your all under! So sad that this site is swamped by people who don't understand the importance of block chain technology! No government! Period is the only answer! People power! Otherwise, we are all fucked! No matter where your from if these sick fucks get what they want! It's hard to take your point on global conspiracy seriously when you can't master the difference between "your" and "you're." Get real, you know what it means and stop picking on semantics. Its just another case of people using the easy way out and labeling people instead of taking on the difficult challenge! No offence but it one of the biggest problems with society and why people who may not have great skills in language (anything derived from the Vatican's Latin is satanic anyways be it English, German or whatever) and belittle them instead. I k ow my English isn't great but I also don't have interest in it as I do other things. That's not right of me but were all human and were all falable ;-) I expect 90% of people call me crazy and what not but water off a ducks back. I'm also on a phone and don't proof read so that doesn't help. Doesn't make what I'm saying not worth looking I to as you can only teach yourself, my ramblings are just information for you to use as is everyone's. Unfortunitly if its not on TV or in the papers its not true for most people. Real sad state of affairs. And I k is my writing comes across as arrogant and personal to a lot but were in a shit place and political correctness is fucking things up even more! People need to learn to accept others, no matter how much they might not agree with a lot of what they say. Misinformation and disinformation makes it all hard to find the truth but that's all apart of the system that's been created so people just can't make sense of things. If there's a movie about it, its a cover up! It changes peoples perception and they don't even realise it. Titanic for example, which j p Morgan financed white star liners who changed the Olympics (insured for 1.5 million and had an accident in exercises that were said to be its fault) was swapped out to be the titanic (insured for 15.8 million) and to boot, putting a lot of people opposed to the federal reserve bank on there while j p Morgan and friends didn't travel on it last minute! Captain smith was also a level 33 mason. They always make multiple bennifits out of their 'accident' events! Another tell tale sign. Withing less than a year of the olympica been sank as the titanic the fed reserve bank was created. As I say, people have been programmed through social engineering on so many levels, they are pretty damn good at it now! Divide and conquer, they've won as I'm surrounded by brain dead zombie sheep incapable of critical thinking and questioning things and are just obiediant slaves. I'm obviously going look crazy to all these zombies and because most people are zombies they feel the false sense of security been around zombies! Its going take a long long time to start appreciating experience and wiseness over youth and stupidity which is what everyone does these days! Calling anyone a zombie who doesn't also believe in your conspiracy theories is not a convincing debate tactic. Also, just making wildly unbelievable assertions without any evidence is not convincing. You're right about sounding crazy, and you're perfectly free to be so, but if you hope to convince anyone to take you or your ideas seriously, grammar, sound logic, and proof-reading your posts are the first place to start. Then use sources to back up your claims, and it's now worth the time to read and consider your ideas. Phone and haste are acceptable excuses for typos, but lack of education is the excuse for poor grammar or confusing homophones, and as a rule, people with low education generally have poorly reasoned, overly simplistic, or incorrect ideas. Your ideas are only as good as the packaging they come in. If you have no credibility, the message you are trying to convey doesn't either. Wow! You fell for every bit of social engineering in that statement of yours! If you want me.to scratch the surface and your going take the time, i can do that for you. Let's start with no one can teach. You can only teach yourself! So as much information I put down its up to you to teach yourself. The idea of a 'teacher' is one of then biggest false hoods their is. If your not willing to educate yourself, no one can do it for you. I never let schooling get in the way of my education - mark twain School is programming ever since getes and Rockefeller's got their hands on it in 1903. Again, apart of the social engineering and I reccomend this documentary, human resources: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rnJEdDNDsIPlease note, Rome wasn't built in a day and to teach yourself isn't going be done in easy digestible pieces either! Look in many areas and many sources (even the bad ones like msm, false alternative news like alex jones, David icke, mark dice etc etc and just your common person who is really trying to help. This allows you to see the tactics in action. Something only you in time will teach yourself to spot. The joke about conpiricy theorist is that conspiracy theorist is the conspiracy! Your programmed to want a finger to point at, to label people x, y & z because that's easy and satisfying for you, at least immediately although its hollow with no substance and ultimatly peoples downfall. Its easy to label someone/something, to understand is hard and people don't like hard! Let's move on to the current controlling powers that are about today shall we. Namely, the military industrial estate, politicians & banksters. World wars were all written about back in 1780's and were planned for the late 1800's but tookna little longer than elthey expected. You got to remember that this as been going on since at least the Roman days. The romans faded away around 300ad but they just moved from Italy to the east. This was called the Byzantine empire which was essentially the roman empire moving so they could start to change the minds of then people away wlfrom the roman ideology. They used the roman mailing system as a spy network and from their the khazars were formed, an elite group of people that used the Jewish religion to charge people for the passage of the silk round, tax, or by any other sane persons description of tax, theft! Christianity and Muslims would never allow these charges to exist in their religion but jewism did! This is the only reason they move under the guisenof Jewish today and to find more about this sick undertaking, look up crypto Jew, not Zionist or any other name that's thrown around today for misinformation/disinformation. There's a brief background (real brief) but there's enough there to get you started. Now moving onto 1800 - today, instead of explaining, watch this and see the levels of deception that go on today after people have been schooled how to behave (not education) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1Qt6a-vaNMNames, groups and everything is given in that documentary. Its all so easy for them today with most people so dumbed down they don't know what happened yesterday, nevermind 100/500/1000+ years ago! You got to relied these people at the top lack empathy and would fuck their own trans over to save their own bacon! Thjsnis what is happening at butterfly labs incidently as they are using g the same social engineering tricks that the people.at the top do. This is why they are so brazen and seemingly don't care! They litterly don't and get kicks out of others suffering. JP Morgan was behind the switching of the titanic with the damaged olypica in 1912 because the olypica had a training exercise accident and it was claimed to be the ships fault so couldn't claim the 1.5 million insurance. White star liners were going under so jp Morgan who funded the shipyard no less switched the ships and sailed it out as the titanic with a lot of people who were incidently against the federal reserve bank as the titanic, which coincidentally was insured for 15.8 million! Nice little pay off hey, saving white star liners! Fed reserve bank was formed in 1913 and signified the death of america. 1913 america died! Over 100 years ago lol. This is where power of the people really started to shift from the church to the state are more so the bankers. The real rise of the Rothschild's and co. But don't think the religions all around the world don't still play their part in this, they do! They run the peodophile industry that's institutionalised the world.over. here, this is how they control a lot of people through dark satanic means Banned docu from the 80s/90s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5fgppAAgYYhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOfg3sandO4Jimmy saville was nothing but a pimp for the politicians and royal families. Prince Phillip was apart of the Nazi regime for starters. And BTW, the Nazi head quarters was in USA, and basically was the first time the rich and powerful ever made a army for themselves! It was called the unimaginative name of the Hitler project and he was nothing more than a pawn funded by the western bankers and royal families all over the world. The royal families are ALL related and even prince Phillip about why he hates communism and replied quote "because they killed half my family' talking about the killing of the Russian royality! When you start looking at what these people love to do in their spare time, you begin to see the real evil. And it doesn't matter if you believe what they believe, THEY DO! Here, watch this docu called sun, sea & Satan! About a little known island called jersey which is owned by the STATE of LONDON, not the city of London! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxZSxMuzZFsI could go on and on and on, but would never be able to explain in text the extent of the social engineering in the west or so called 'developed countries'. I've been lucky enough to live in south america, Asia and India and travel extensively the world over. You can't tell me that humans are not all the same and you can't tell me most people want exactly the same thing but there is centralised controls stopping people from achieving peace the world.over. its obvious once you snap out of the false security they give you and realise anarchy and decentralisation is the only answer to stopping the sick unempathetic satanic peodo's and finally taking what's rightfully away from the 0.000001%. About 50,000 at most with a core steering committee of 500-1000 at most! These people are truely steering this world to hell! And we the people are to blind, to satisfied with false security or just to dumb to realise this. Misinformation and disinformation surrounds us so we can't blame ourselves, we hardly have a chance with the level of social engineering that's going on today. CIA was formed by the bush family, who were good friends with the bin laden family. Saddam Hussain had to die as he knew to much, even having the key to Detroit given him in 1984! Of cause, when he stopped harassing Iran and was going stop using the petrol dollar, he had to go! Same in libyia. They were going stop using the petrodollar! UN nations are the terrorists! Snap out of your daze and realise our ignorance is what allows these fruit cakes to get away with it! The world already hates UN nations and the sheeple dontnunderatand why! Haha. So fucki g obvious were so wrapped up in false securities that we can't see the woods for the trees! I think I've give you enough to chew on, I can get into spiritual stuff like the flower of life, fruit of life, platonic solids and really show you powerful things but I'm pretty certain. You got a long way to go before you could even contiplate these kind of freeing things. For now, I'll leave you with this, a small solution to begin change (also, this is why I'm into the bitcoin protocol, not the 'currency' app its so good at, we can DECENTRALISE EVERYTHING sons few can't manipulate EVERYTHING!. The only thing that as value in life is peoples labour, NOTHIN& ELSE!). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X36aD3UbIPIP.S - if you don't like YouTube vids, understandable, go away and look for text, there's plenty to back it all up. Look up gladio b which goes into the FBI and cia drug running operation! Why you think Russ Ulbricht got fucked for running a web site! Stepping on their toes! Why do you think USA invaded afganistan! Poppies! It risen over 10,000% since they invaded lol. Now go ahead, label me whatever you like but by falling into that frame of mind of labelling people you are facilitating the people at the top and therefore allowing g what is happening to happen! You are as bad as them! If you can go and look, inquire, investigate YOURSELF you will realise that what I say is true! Even in a minority of 1 the truth is still the truth! And the truth is a hard pill to swallow! Infact a lot of people can't handle it and give up! And I can attest, realising that everything you know and been told is not true is hard for us humans to take in and grasp, but if your strong and brave, and have the courage to go on the truth sets you free, truely free! Then, we start to chip away at what as been allowed to happen. Slowly but surely we make steps in the right direction. No one said life was fair, but an even playing field is what I fight for for 8 billion people of my brothers and sisters! Most here are here for greed, I get that! But bitcoin protocol as the power of SO MUCH MORE!!! Everything isn't a conspiracy theory, but that seems to be the only thing you're offering here. The Roman Empire didn't fail, it was a conspiracy to move east and they just renamed themselves the Byzantine Empire. The Titanic: conspiracy. Schools: conspiracy. World Wars: conspiracy. Jews: conspiracy. Nazis: American conspiracy. It just keeps getting more ridiculous. If you think not learning the difference between your/you're and their/there is rejecting the social engineering that makes global conspiracies possible, then by all means, keep fighting The Man. But when you eschew education out of fear and attempt to teach only yourself, it's not surprising the result of your "education" is profound ignorance. |
|
|
|
Chef, again you are naive. You think Obama is the first US President to do this? No, it's a tactic of every President, every government, everyone with power and lacking of ethics high enough to do the right thing, the right way.
Don't be so shocked, you're worse than the mainstream media with your hype threads...
Just because other presidents have done it doesn't make it acceptable that Obama does. Wasn't he supposed to know better? He sure promised he did during his campaigns, all that talk about leading with diplomacy and embracing the international community, not subjecting American values (not the mention the military) on unwilling populations, etc. The US has been an international bully since, well basically the Monroe Doctrine, but on a global scale since 1945. But Obama promised we would be better, it's one of the things he highlighted to differentiate himself from an unpopular Bush, along with his his warnings that McCain would follow in Bush's footsteps. It's worth remembering that in this age of American hegemony, liberals are no different than conservatives when it comes to bullying foreign nations to advance our nationalistic interests. |
|
|
|
I caught 100x and I have watched it going to 1200x but sorry to say every time it touched highest I didnt see any bet. I meant to say it goes alone without having placed bets . May be some one succeed to catch that high but I didnt see.
The reason you never see anyone cash that high is because no one has any balls. 100x in hand is worth 1200x in the bush. Or something like that. |
|
|
|
FCC chief prepares to overrule state Web lawsThe head of the Federal Communications Commissionis urging his fellow commissioners to block state laws that would prevent cities and towns from building out their own government-run Internet services. Chairman Tom Wheeler this week will circulate a draft decision to nullify laws in Tennessee and North Carolina, after receiving a request from towns in each of those states. Cities across the country “should be able to make their own decisions about building the networks they need to thrive,” Wheeler said in a statement on Monday. “After looking carefully at petitions by two community broadband providers asking the FCC to preempt provisions of state laws preventing expansion of their very successful networks, I recommend approval by the commission so that these two forward-thinking cities can serve the many citizens clamoring for a better broadband future.” The move to preempt state laws limiting municipal broadband was long expected, and comes amid a broader effort by Wheeler to exert federal authority over people’s access to the Internet. http://thehill.com/policy/technology/231422-fcc-will-move-to-block-state-laws A victory for local autonomy. States want to be free of federal government restrictions in the same way local governments want to be free from state government restrictions. The fine print my friend. Always the fine print. I remember how amazing 0bamacare was supposed to be one day, how those billions for shovel ready jobs would boost the economy, not oil or shale gas, how all those billions in green energy would brighten our future, etc. Let's see how many pages of new rules will liberate the local autonomy first. Rules written by unknown faceless bureaucrats once more. I'll have a wait and see approach, as everything this government and its henchmen say has been lies or full scale doublespeak, dangling a shining object in the face of the gullible 0bomatons, until the next crisis... Right, I forgot conservatives are only in favor of local autonomy when the issue is right, not as a blanket rule in favor of freedom. Right, I do not forget liberalism is only in favor of a massive control of local economies, micro managing the issues the free thinkers have left, always under a stealth blanket of rules so the peasants can't see or vote against them until it's too late. Exactly what is happening with this so called "net neutrality", doublespeak 101. Just like using the word "freedom", not knowing its true meaning... How is the federal government stopping the state government from restricting city-level local autonomy "massive control of local economies?" Cities build local networks, cable companies lobby state governments to ban them because they compete with cable monopolies in the area, state governments do, thus instituting massive control of local economies. Feds pass a law saying states can't restrict the freedom of cities to build their own networks, fixing a problem the state governments created in the first place, and yet it's the feds who are massively controlling local economies? How? |
|
|
|
But what about the atheism?  Now he's going to prison just because he's an ordinary murderer? What an uncompelling story, we already got plenty of those! |
|
|
|
This matter is sad on so many levels:
1) clearly the kid was traumatized, but that was obviously the intent of the exercise,
2) the "scaring for life" is shared by the whole family as well as the coworker,
3) the state (via police and DA) is clearly trying to inflict their own brand of trauma and terror on the whole family, and their damages are not just physiological, but financial, and will very likely impact them socially for a very long time.
All of the responsible actors (family and state) went overboard and everyone did so in what they felt was the best interest of the kid, but obviously NONE of it is serving any short term good and the likelihood is that the "kidnapping" in all of its idiocy will likely serve as a far better lesson for the kid then the mass arrest, persecution, and prosecution of his family in an attempt to correct their internal injustice.
Depending how the narrative is written the story is either bad or worse, but the underlined fact is the child was not in any real or meaningful danger. The intent of the family is clear they were trying to protect their family member. As more rational and logical minds try to judge the family's foolish they should also hear of all of the child abduction stories to get a better understanding of how their fears provoked such irrational behavior.
It should not take a police officer, a DA, much less a criminal court judge to see this was just a case of magnificent stupidity. Unless the family has a history of child abuse this should not have risen above a civil matter (family services).
The wicked irony is through all of this the kid is now truly taken from his family, traumatize for substantially longer than 4 hours, and placed with real "strangers" who actually care less than his family about his actual welfare.
The bail provisions were additionally wicked, I'd really like to hear the whole story including the back story (family history).
Well, in the least, the coworker assaulted the kid with a gun by threatening to shoot him if he didn't stop crying. And also threatening to nail him to the wall of a shed is assault, and tying him up is felonious restraint. The fact the family asked this guy to "kidnap" him makes them culpable for these actions as well. I think the charges against all four actors are justified on those counts. |
|
|
|
So 3 human beings, picked up (not elected) by a president will decide the fate of the whole US internet.
Five human beings picked by the president and confirmed by the senate. But, details... |
|
|
|
... and lots and lots of new taxes:First, President Obama’s plan marks a monumental shift toward government control of the Internet. It gives the FCC the power to micromanage virtually every aspect of how the Internet works. It’s an overreach that will let a Washington bureaucracy, and not the American people, decide the future of the online world. It’s no wonder that net neutrality proponents are already bragging that it will turn the FCC into the “Department of the Internet.” For that reason, if you like dealing with the IRS, you are going to love the President’s plan. Second, President Obama’s plan to regulate the Internet will increase consumers’ monthly broadband bills. The plan explicitly opens the door to billions of dollars in new taxes on broadband. Indeed, states have already begun discussions on how they will spend the extra money. These new taxes will mean higher prices for consumers and more hidden fees that they have to pay. Third, President Obama’s plan to regulate the Internet will mean slower broadband for American consumers. The plan contains a host of new regulations that will reduce investment in broadband networks. That means slower Internet speeds. It also means that many rural Americans will have to wait longer for access to quality broadband. Fourth, President Obama’s plan to regulate the Internet will hurt competition and innovation and move us toward a broadband monopoly. The plan saddles small, independent businesses and entrepreneurs with heavy-handed regulations that will push them out of the market. As a result, Americans will have fewer broadband choices. This is no accident. Title II was designed to regulate a monopoly. If we impose that model on a vibrant broadband marketplace, a highly regulated monopoly is what we’ll get. We shouldn’t bring Ma Bell back to life in this dynamic, digital age. Fifth, President Obama’s plan to regulate the Internet is an unlawful power grab. Courts have twice thrown out the FCC’s attempts at Internet regulation. There’s no reason to think that the third time will be the charm. Even a cursory look at the plan reveals glaring legal flaws that are sure to mire the agency in the muck of litigation for a long, long time. And sixth, the American people are being misled about what is in President Obama’s plan to regulate the Internet. The rollout earlier in the week was obviously intended to downplay the plan’s massive intrusion into the Internet economy. Beginning next week, I look forward to sharing with the public key aspects of what this plan will actually do. http://www.fcc.gov/document/comm-pais-stmt-president-obamas-plan-regulate-internet The US is far behind the times in regards to the Internet. This is a political victory for a free and open Internet. I'm not sure whether this is bait or not. It's classic bait, a bunch of fear mongering without specifics. Notice if you click through to the source, and read the whole thing, Mr. Pai's letter states that he will provide specifics about why this plan is so terrible at a later time. (OP truncated that part of the letter, he was too busy reposting all the non-specific talking points.) All this letter was meant to do was rile up the base. Let me know when Mr. Pai posts something substantive, not a bunch of conclusions without the evidence to support them. If mr. pai or myself are trying to lie to anyone, why can't the FCC and the people behind those 332 pages be upfront and let anyone read those pages? PDF please, with a search function, not 332 pages of paper toilet scanned at 72 dpi, saved as docx... I understand, for some, the government can do no wrong. Ever. Unlike happy people posting links of news on their favorite forum, links anyone can read to the fullest by checking the whole article themselves. Posting a part of a website here is wrong and bad. Letting the government change the whole entire internet, in secret and forever, is good. I guess some of us already read those 332 pages and know in advance to distrust Wilikon and mr. pai. That is a huge amount of faith on 332 pages called "net neutrality", doublespeak 101... No, some of us read a bunch of conclusions and ask for the reasoning that lead to those conclusions so we can evaluate the merits of the conclusion for ourselves. When they are not provided, then those of us with the ability to think independently dismiss it a useless rhetoric. Mr. Pai's letter is rich in rhetoric and absent of information and reasoning that leads to his conclusions. Apparently, he hasn't had time yet to post anything substantive about why the plan is so terrible, only that it is. I've only come to distrust what you post because it's absent of critical thought. You're a fine parrot for conservative talking points, but you rarely provide anything that justifies the conclusions in the things you post. Rhetoric is what gets politicians elected, so it's very useful to have drones who just repeat that stuff without questioning it. You always seem to mistake that a critique of your rote dissemination of rhetoric is acceptance of the counterpoint, and it's not. The critique of the lack of substance of Mr. Pai's letter is the embodiment of this. He's provided no reasoning or evidence to support his conclusions, and until he does, it's impossible to either agree or disagree with any degree of informed opinion to the conclusions he has presented. Since his letter provides nothing substantive, it's useless rhetoric. I'll be waiting for him to give us the promised details which ostensibly will support his conclusions, so I can at that time determine whether they are justified conclusions or not. |
|
|
|
FCC chief prepares to overrule state Web lawsThe head of the Federal Communications Commissionis urging his fellow commissioners to block state laws that would prevent cities and towns from building out their own government-run Internet services. Chairman Tom Wheeler this week will circulate a draft decision to nullify laws in Tennessee and North Carolina, after receiving a request from towns in each of those states. Cities across the country “should be able to make their own decisions about building the networks they need to thrive,” Wheeler said in a statement on Monday. “After looking carefully at petitions by two community broadband providers asking the FCC to preempt provisions of state laws preventing expansion of their very successful networks, I recommend approval by the commission so that these two forward-thinking cities can serve the many citizens clamoring for a better broadband future.” The move to preempt state laws limiting municipal broadband was long expected, and comes amid a broader effort by Wheeler to exert federal authority over people’s access to the Internet. http://thehill.com/policy/technology/231422-fcc-will-move-to-block-state-laws A victory for local autonomy. States want to be free of federal government restrictions in the same way local governments want to be free from state government restrictions. The fine print my friend. Always the fine print. I remember how amazing 0bamacare was supposed to be one day, how those billions for shovel ready jobs would boost the economy, not oil or shale gas, how all those billions in green energy would brighten our future, etc. Let's see how many pages of new rules will liberate the local autonomy first. Rules written by unknown faceless bureaucrats once more. I'll have a wait and see approach, as everything this government and its henchmen say has been lies or full scale doublespeak, dangling a shining object in the face of the gullible 0bomatons, until the next crisis... Right, I forgot conservatives are only in favor of local autonomy when the issue is right, not as a blanket rule in favor of freedom. |
|
|
|
Let's not get off track. I don't know what this violent disturbed guy thinks. But all the athiests I know arrived at their decision because of science and not based on their delusional hatred. Just as most Christians and Muslims I know did not start believing so that they could wage a holly war on their neighbors.
It seems to me that the guy is just stupid. We had a crazy killer here in Wisconsin who shot dead a bunch of Indians because he thought they were Middle Easterners. That is how little he knew about what he was doing.
Shhhh, don't interrupt Wilikon when he's on his strawman crusade. In the interest of being Fair and Balanced©, just let him get it all off his chest. I agree. After all, it's only fair. That's what we do with you. I suppose you have no choice because I keep besting you.  |
|
|
|
Let's not get off track. I don't know what this violent disturbed guy thinks. But all the athiests I know arrived at their decision because of science and not based on their delusional hatred. Just as most Christians and Muslims I know did not start believing so that they could wage a holly war on their neighbors.
It seems to me that the guy is just stupid. We had a crazy killer here in Wisconsin who shot dead a bunch of Indians because he thought they were Middle Easterners. That is how little he knew about what he was doing.
Shhhh, don't interrupt Wilikon when he's on his strawman crusade. In the interest of being Fair and Balanced©, just let him get it all off his chest. |
|
|
|
... and lots and lots of new taxes:First, President Obama’s plan marks a monumental shift toward government control of the Internet. It gives the FCC the power to micromanage virtually every aspect of how the Internet works. It’s an overreach that will let a Washington bureaucracy, and not the American people, decide the future of the online world. It’s no wonder that net neutrality proponents are already bragging that it will turn the FCC into the “Department of the Internet.” For that reason, if you like dealing with the IRS, you are going to love the President’s plan. Second, President Obama’s plan to regulate the Internet will increase consumers’ monthly broadband bills. The plan explicitly opens the door to billions of dollars in new taxes on broadband. Indeed, states have already begun discussions on how they will spend the extra money. These new taxes will mean higher prices for consumers and more hidden fees that they have to pay. Third, President Obama’s plan to regulate the Internet will mean slower broadband for American consumers. The plan contains a host of new regulations that will reduce investment in broadband networks. That means slower Internet speeds. It also means that many rural Americans will have to wait longer for access to quality broadband. Fourth, President Obama’s plan to regulate the Internet will hurt competition and innovation and move us toward a broadband monopoly. The plan saddles small, independent businesses and entrepreneurs with heavy-handed regulations that will push them out of the market. As a result, Americans will have fewer broadband choices. This is no accident. Title II was designed to regulate a monopoly. If we impose that model on a vibrant broadband marketplace, a highly regulated monopoly is what we’ll get. We shouldn’t bring Ma Bell back to life in this dynamic, digital age. Fifth, President Obama’s plan to regulate the Internet is an unlawful power grab. Courts have twice thrown out the FCC’s attempts at Internet regulation. There’s no reason to think that the third time will be the charm. Even a cursory look at the plan reveals glaring legal flaws that are sure to mire the agency in the muck of litigation for a long, long time. And sixth, the American people are being misled about what is in President Obama’s plan to regulate the Internet. The rollout earlier in the week was obviously intended to downplay the plan’s massive intrusion into the Internet economy. Beginning next week, I look forward to sharing with the public key aspects of what this plan will actually do. http://www.fcc.gov/document/comm-pais-stmt-president-obamas-plan-regulate-internet The US is far behind the times in regards to the Internet. This is a political victory for a free and open Internet. I'm not sure whether this is bait or not. It's classic bait, a bunch of fear mongering without specifics. Notice if you click through to the source, and read the whole thing, Mr. Pai's letter states that he will provide specifics about why this plan is so terrible at a later time. (OP truncated that part of the letter, he was too busy reposting all the non-specific talking points.) All this letter was meant to do was rile up the base. Let me know when Mr. Pai posts something substantive, not a bunch of conclusions without the evidence to support them. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
