|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
server
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 8:00 am Post subject: Blu-Ray dead: WalMart throws it's support behind the HD-DVD |
 |
|
| message unavailable |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Google
Sponsor
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 8:00 am Post subject: Advertisement |
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan White
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 8:00 am Post subject: Re: Blu-Ray dead: WalMart throws it's support behind the HD- |
|
|
"Hank the Rapper" <no spam> wrote in message
news:abWdnV7og4v2bLbbnZ2dnUVZ_sOknZ2d@comcast.com...
| Quote: | Dan White wrote:
snip
But I bet you checked that last post a second time before hitting send
though, didn't you? :-)
No, I really don't care about spelling and grammar errors. But if this is
how you need to get your ego pumped up, pretend I did.
|
Sorry, I mistook you for someone who might have even the tiniest sense of
humour. My mistake.
--
Dan White
(dan@finex666.org.uk)
Perform an exorcism when replying. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul Murray
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 5:07 pm Post subject: Re: Micronesian Bites The Hand That Feeds Him |
|
|
On 2007-04-23, adm <adm1@fastmail.fm> wrote:
| Quote: | No. I think it's best to tackle all rogue states. However, I don't think
killing in the name of oil is the way to do it. After all - North Korea is
arguably far more dangerous to the USA as they actually have nuclear weapons
and ballistic delivery systems. They don't have much in the way of oil
though, and so America is taking the diplomatic route.
|
The obvious moral of the N. Korea/Iraq difference is that if you think the US
might be out to get you at some point, try to get nuclear weapons as soon as
possible, as that might give them pause. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Doug Jacobs
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 6:59 pm Post subject: Re: spin this one bligfuck: Sony to Restructure Games Divis |
|
|
In alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 nathantw <nathantw1@removethis-sbcglobal.net> wrote:
| Quote: | Hmmm, my company is cutting about 27,000 jobs, yet is my company
floundering? Quite the contrary. It makes billions of dollars quarterly.
Just because a company restructures and lays people off doesn't always mean
they're in trouble. In the case of my company the stockholders want our
stock to move. In Sony's case they want to become a bit more profitable.
Remember, these are companies trying to make money. They're not some charity
case in business to give money away.
|
While Sony may make "billions of dollars quarterly", do yourself a favor and
learn the difference between REVENUE and PROFIT. Sony maybe making a lot in
revenue, but they're not making a profit. In fact, they're posting record
LOSSES - hence the layoff. It's a very drastic, short-term "fix" to try to
improve their numbers by reducing their spending (fewer employees = less to
spend in payroll, etc.)
In most cases, a layoff only helps your numbers look good for a quarter or
two at most, which is why analysts seem to LOVE layoffs (why else would a
company's stock spike when it does one?) However, layoffs cause a lot of
problems, which will be felt for months after. Chief among these is the
huge hit to morale, disillusionment, and uncertainty for the future.
After all, many companies never stop with one layoff. It's like some sick
form of potato chip. They can't stop with just one layoff. The next
quarter comes up and nothing's improved...but, hey! Knock off another 10%
of the company, and suddenly it looks like you're "recovering"! And so it
goes. Good luck trying to convince your smarter employees to stay aboard
your sinking ship at that point...
--
Win cash and giftcards just for clicking your mouse!
http://www.netwinner.com/?signupCode=amuro98 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
adm
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 7:50 pm Post subject: Re: Micronesian Bites The Hand That Feeds Him |
|
|
"The alMIGHTY N" <natlee75@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1177356755.046352.126670@b58g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: | On Apr 21, 7:50 pm, "Android" <androv...@NOSPAMcomcast.net> wrote:
Let's start with the 50%+ that profess to believe in a big bloke with a
beard that sits in the sky and tells them what to do....
First of all, far more than 50% of the US population claim to believe in
God. In fact, it is a large majority of the population. Just because
you
don't apparently believe in God doesn't make you any smarter/better (or
dumber/worse) than the rest of us.
There's nothing wrong with religion on its own. I think it's good that
there's something people who need to can believe in. However, there
are far too many people who think that the beliefs and values of their
religion are the end all be all and try to impose such beliefs and
values onto everyone else, as if they had any right to tell other
people what to believe.
|
There are plenty of wonderful and uplifting things to believe in in this
huge and beautiful universe that have direct physical evidence without
needing to make up fairy tales. It's just an outmoded and needless concept.
Richard Dawkins writes well on the subject in "The God Delusion"
| Quote: |
Three huge issues in this country right now - abortion, gay marriage
and stem cell research - hinge significantly (although not
exclusively) on religious beliefs.
|
Which is bizarre - because why should people that believe in fairy stories
expect their opinions to matter any more than anyone else ?
What is it with religion that it's followers feel the need to dictate how
other people should run their lives - and especially what people do with
their own bodies behind closed doors ? As you mention above, just because
one person believes one thing, it doesn't give them the right to impose that
belief on anyone else. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rob
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 10:49 pm Post subject: Re: Blu-Ray dead: WalMart throws it's support behind the HD- |
|
|
"evadnikufesin" <evadnikufesin@gmail.invalidcom.domain> wrote in message
news:tOWdnR_2j76lqLHbnZ2dnUVZ_sDinZ2d@comcast.com...
| Quote: | Rob wrote:
Sorry - but bad use of English is the smallest problem in America today.
If I was Canadian, I'd be lobbying for a big tall wall on my border -
not just one in Baghdad.
Your an idiot.
It's "you're" in this particular usage.
Dumbass.
|
You're going after grammer errors? Probably not in your best interest, it
shows lack of brain power.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rob
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 10:59 pm Post subject: Re: Micronesian Bites The Hand That Feeds Him |
|
|
| Quote: |
The US did indeed help turn the tide of the war - but it could have been
done with a much lower cost in life if you had weighed in against fascism
in
1939 instead of sitting on the fence until the Japanese pushed you off it
in
1941.
|
LOL...the hypocrisy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bikini Whacks Jnrs
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 11:07 pm Post subject: Re: Blu-Ray dead: WalMart throws it's support behind the HD- |
|
|
In article <8KaXh.7715$3P3.2761@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
bucfan11@SPAMearthlink.net says...
| Quote: |
"evadnikufesin" <evadnikufesin@gmail.invalidcom.domain> wrote in message
news:tOWdnR_2j76lqLHbnZ2dnUVZ_sDinZ2d@comcast.com...
Rob wrote:
Sorry - but bad use of English is the smallest problem in America today.
If I was Canadian, I'd be lobbying for a big tall wall on my border -
not just one in Baghdad.
Your an idiot.
It's "you're" in this particular usage.
Dumbass.
You're going after grammer errors? Probably not in your best interest, it
shows lack of brain power.
LOL, LOL, and thrice LOL. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Doug Jacobs
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:06 am Post subject: Re: Micronesian Bites The Hand That Feeds Him |
|
|
In alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 Android <androvich@nospamcomcast.net> wrote:
| Quote: | Then at the top of the pyramid we have homicidal maniacs who say that god
told them to invade other sovereign countires to steal their oil - and
kill
hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians so obese tossers can drive
SUVs.
That's right...target your hatred at Bush. Ignore the maniac that the US
removed from Iraq (which was our responsibility, considering how we helped
him get there in the first place), the maniac running Iran that will gladly
nuke Israel the first chance he gets, the maniac running North Korea, etc.
I guess it is better to sit back, as most of the world's countries are
doing, and let these people threaten us all. Actually, I take it back--the
other countries aren't sitting around. Many are profiting by selling
weapons to or buying oil from these countries, thereby keeping the maniacs
in power. I suppose in your mind FDR and Churchill were maniacs too, since
they attacked sovereign nations. Why did the US wage war against Germany
anyway? Germany didn't bomb Pearl Harbor, did it? We should have kept to
ourselves, I suppose, and you would all be speaking German or Russian (or,
in your case, Japanese) right now.
|
Whether you support Bush's idea to go into Iraq in the first place or not,
you cannot deny the fact that he and his apointees have done a horrible job
managing it.
And don't you dare try to compare Iraq with Germany, Japan, or anything of
WW2... In the first place, the US was largely isolationist despite FDR's
desire to do something for our friends over in Europe against Germany.
Second, UNLIKE Iraq, both Germany and Japan not only had a sufficient
build up of military force, but they had clear intentions to use it
against their neighbors. With Japan, this arguably could go back to the
end of WW1 when they ended up claiming Korea and chunks of China in the
name of their empire.
When Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, FDR used this as a slam dunk to declare
war against Japan...AND ITS ALLIES (namely, Germany and Italy) While the
European theater was FDR's larger concern, he knew there was no way he
could ignore Japan's attack - nor would the American public let him.
I guess if you really stretched, you could say Bush was like FDR in that
both wanted to go to war against a country that not every American saw as
a threat, or thought was someone else's problem. Furthermore, declaring
war on Germany/Italy could be seen as ignoring what many Americans saw as
the "true" enemy - Japan. Just as Bush declaring war on Iraq seems to
ignore the terrorist problems elsewhere in the area, to say nothing of the
larger threats of Iran, and N. Korea... However, I'm really, really
stretching here.
--
Win cash and giftcards just for clicking your mouse!
http://www.netwinner.com/?signupCode=amuro98 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
evadnikufesin
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:33 am Post subject: Re: Blu-Ray dead: WalMart throws it's support behind the HD- |
|
|
Rob wrote:
| Quote: | "evadnikufesin" <evadnikufesin@gmail.invalidcom.domain> wrote in message
news:tOWdnR_2j76lqLHbnZ2dnUVZ_sDinZ2d@comcast.com...
Rob wrote:
Sorry - but bad use of English is the smallest problem in America today.
If I was Canadian, I'd be lobbying for a big tall wall on my border -
not just one in Baghdad.
Your an idiot.
It's "you're" in this particular usage.
Dumbass.
You're going after grammer errors? Probably not in your best interest, it
shows lack of brain power.
|
This coming from you? Now THAT IS laugh.
You're going to insult someone's intellect at least HAVE one, cocksnot!
--
"We are living in a gelded age..." -Savage
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rob
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 3:09 am Post subject: Re: Blu-Ray dead: WalMart throws it's support behind the HD- |
|
|
"Bikini Whacks Jnrs" <adirtysanchez@thevillagefeteiswrong.com> wrote in
message news:MPG.20974ca6c859b951989811@news.individual.net...
| Quote: | In article <8KaXh.7715$3P3.2761@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
bucfan11@SPAMearthlink.net says...
"evadnikufesin" <evadnikufesin@gmail.invalidcom.domain> wrote in message
news:tOWdnR_2j76lqLHbnZ2dnUVZ_sDinZ2d@comcast.com...
Rob wrote:
Sorry - but bad use of English is the smallest problem in America
today.
If I was Canadian, I'd be lobbying for a big tall wall on my border -
not just one in Baghdad.
Your an idiot.
It's "you're" in this particular usage.
Dumbass.
You're going after grammer errors? Probably not in your best interest,
it
shows lack of brain power.
LOL, LOL, and thrice LOL.
|
I don't think he "got it." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rob
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 3:19 am Post subject: Re: Micronesian Bites The Hand That Feeds Him |
|
|
<snip>
| Quote: | I know some people who carry, including myself and three
brothers. In 30 years there have been ZERO incidents [snip]
You have your anecdotes, and I have mine. Mine happen to pertain to
the campus per the subject.
|
Yeah, but mine was true. Here is a little something for you to spin:
U.S. firearm murder rates: *safer than ever* in 2000-2005 era compared to
1993, 1990, 1980, or 1974; thanks to the 37 States that have passed
conceal-carry ('shall issue') laws since Florida in 1987.
Only two States (Wisconsin and Illinois, plus Washington, DC) do not allow
*any* type of *legal* 'shall issue' laws, although some people are known to
do so.
On the contrary and in addition to the other 37 States, Vermont (age 16+)
and Alaska (age 21+) don't require *any* permit to legally carry any
firearm, as recognized it is a fundamental right of self-defense, and those
two States have among the lowest crime rates of any State.
Murder rates in U.S. using firearms, per 100,000
-----------------------------------------------------------
Year Rate
1973 6.2
1974 6.6
1977 5.5
1980 6.3
1983 4.8
1985 4.7
1987 4.9
1990 6.0
1991 6.5
1992 6.4
1993 6.7
1994 5.9
1995 5.5
1997 4.6
1998 4.0
1999 3.7
2000 3.6
2001 3.9
2002 3.8
2003 3.7
2004 3.6
2005 3.8
Firearm victims, non-fatal, per 1,000 residents (12+ yrs. age)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
1993 5.9
1994 6.0
1995 4.9
1996 4.5
1997 3.5
1998 3.0
1999 2.5
2000 2.2
2001 2.2
2002 1.9
2003 1.9
2004 1.3
2005 2.0
Sources: FBI, The Uniform Crime Reports; U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics,
National Crime Victimization Survey
So much for the anti-gun (incl. handguns) hysteria!
"Those who are trying to read the Second Amendment out of the Constitution
by claiming it's not an individual right are courting disaster."
--Alan Dershowitz, civil libertarian
Gun control laws never disarm the 'bad guys', only the 'good guys'; that's
why the 'bad guys' are called CRIMINALS.
Gun control - the theory that a 110lb. woman has the "right" to fight with
a
210lb. rapist.
"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of Liberty."
--Thomas Jefferson |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Android
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 4:30 am Post subject: Re: Micronesian Bites The Hand That Feeds Him |
|
|
"Doug Jacobs" <djacobs@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message
news:132qm0rrm78i536@corp.supernews.com...
| Quote: | In alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 Android <androvich@nospamcomcast.net
wrote:
Then at the top of the pyramid we have homicidal maniacs who say that
god
told them to invade other sovereign countires to steal their oil -
and
kill
hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians so obese tossers can drive
SUVs.
That's right...target your hatred at Bush. Ignore the maniac that the
US
removed from Iraq (which was our responsibility, considering how we
helped
him get there in the first place), the maniac running Iran that will
gladly
nuke Israel the first chance he gets, the maniac running North Korea,
etc.
I guess it is better to sit back, as most of the world's countries are
doing, and let these people threaten us all. Actually, I take it
back--the
other countries aren't sitting around. Many are profiting by selling
weapons to or buying oil from these countries, thereby keeping the
maniacs
in power. I suppose in your mind FDR and Churchill were maniacs too,
since
they attacked sovereign nations. Why did the US wage war against
Germany
anyway? Germany didn't bomb Pearl Harbor, did it? We should have kept
to
ourselves, I suppose, and you would all be speaking German or Russian
(or,
in your case, Japanese) right now.
Whether you support Bush's idea to go into Iraq in the first place or not,
you cannot deny the fact that he and his apointees have done a horrible
job
managing it.
And don't you dare try to compare Iraq with Germany, Japan, or anything of
WW2... In the first place, the US was largely isolationist despite FDR's
desire to do something for our friends over in Europe against Germany.
Second, UNLIKE Iraq, both Germany and Japan not only had a sufficient
build up of military force, but they had clear intentions to use it
against their neighbors. With Japan, this arguably could go back to the
end of WW1 when they ended up claiming Korea and chunks of China in the
name of their empire.
|
Saddam's Iraq had a build up of military force, and it did use it against
its neighbors...first against Iran (in which we were wrong to support him,
under the axiom that "an enemy of my enemy is my friend") and against
Kuwait, which prompted us to intervene in the first Gulf War.
| Quote: | When Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, FDR used this as a slam dunk to declare
war against Japan...AND ITS ALLIES (namely, Germany and Italy) While the
European theater was FDR's larger concern, he knew there was no way he
could ignore Japan's attack - nor would the American public let him.
|
Just as Bush used 9/11 to declare war against the Taliban in Afghanistan as
well as against Hussein in Iraq, which he thought was equally willing to do
us harm. Sixty years later we have this "greatest generation" patriotic
notion that the entire country was united after Pearl Harbor, but there was
opposition against war then even as there is now.
| Quote: | I guess if you really stretched, you could say Bush was like FDR in that
both wanted to go to war against a country that not every American saw as
a threat, or thought was someone else's problem. Furthermore, declaring
war on Germany/Italy could be seen as ignoring what many Americans saw as
the "true" enemy - Japan. Just as Bush declaring war on Iraq seems to
ignore the terrorist problems elsewhere in the area, to say nothing of the
larger threats of Iran, and N. Korea... However, I'm really, really
stretching here.
|
Yes, it is somewhat of a stretch, but I do think that there are some
parallels. Americans were isolationists until Pearl Harbor, but even then
many Americans opposed the war and thought it was none of our business to
get involved in European affairs. WWII took a huge toll in American lives,
but in retrospect, it seems that we think that ridding the world of a
dangerous despot was important. Likewise, Americans seemed to be
isolationists (against action in Somalia, in the Baltic's, etc.) until 9/11,
but even afterwards many Americans opposed the war and thought it was none
of our business to get involved.
Personally, I do think we should have removed Hussein. We should never have
supported him in the past, and leaving him in power during the Gulf War was
a big mistake. He wasn't about to go quietly--European countries were
buying oil from him in violation of UN resolutions, helping to keep him in
power, and the evidence suggested he was pursuing WMD (or at least wanted us
to think so) and was behind an assassination attempt on a former president.
Yes, there was no direct link to 9/11, but if that day taught us anything,
it should have taught us that we ignore threats at our own peril. Before
9/11, we did nothing despite the bombings and repeated threats (USS Cole,
embassies). That just emboldened our enemies.
The problem, of course, is that once Saddam is removed, what fills the void?
What stops age-old enemies from going at each other again? We removed a
dictator, but the country remains in shambles. The cost has been high, but
nowhere near the toll of WWII. Should we have left a ruthless dictator in
power just because we didn't know what the full consequences would be?
Wouldn't that have stopped us from acting against Germany, knowing that once
we removed Hitler, Russia was likely to come in and take over? We ended up
occupying Japan and Germany, and spent billions to help rebuild
countries...and none of them had oil.
We probably won't ever know what the right decision would have been. If we
hadn't done anything, would Saddam have continued to pursue WMD or not?
Would he, like Iran, still be trying to obtain nuclear weapons? We've been
told that our use of force has disrupted Islamic terrorists and helped us
thwart further attacks against the U.S., but does that mean if Bush had not
done anything after 9/11 we would have been hit again? He can't win no
matter what happens next--if there are no further attacks, critics will say
that the threat has been exaggerated; if there is another attack, critics
will say it was *because* we got involved in Iraq and exacerbated the
situation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul Murray
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 8:49 am Post subject: Re: Micronesian Bites The Hand That Feeds Him |
|
|
On 2007-04-24, Rob <bucfan11@SPAMearthlink.net> wrote:
| Quote: | Murder rates in U.S. using firearms, per 100,000
-----------------------------------------------------------
Year Rate
2003 3.7
2004 3.6
2005 3.8
|
For comparison, figures from The International Action Network on
Small Arms for 2003:
US 4.1
England and Wales 0.03
| Quote: | Firearm victims, non-fatal, per 1,000 residents (12+ yrs. age)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
2003 1.9
2004 1.3
2005 2.0
|
That must be a typo, right?
2 out of every thousand people are shot each year?
-Paul |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan White
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 9:03 am Post subject: Re: Micronesian Bites The Hand That Feeds Him |
|
|
"Android" <androvich@NOSPAMcomcast.net> wrote in message
news:ytadnSLRUMRkGrDbnZ2dnUVZ_qCmnZ2d@comcast.com...
<snip>
| Quote: |
" WWII took a huge toll in American lives"
|
Let's put that in perspective for a moment:
USA Fatalities in WW2: 295,000, from a 1940 population total of 132,164,000,
or approximately one fifth of one percent of the population.
Compare and contrast with fatalities of other nations:
Soviet : 25,568,000
Chinese: 11,324,000
German: 7,060,000
Polish: 6,850,000
Japanese: 1,806,000
In fact, deaths of US servicemen made up around half of one percent of the
total deaths in WW2. It doesn't make their sacrifice any less significant,
but it was by no means "a huge toll", compared to say 20% of the entire
Polish population or 14% of the Soviet population.
What America brought to the war was it's superior technical expertise and
massive manufacturing capacity, which undoubtedly shortened the war
significantly. Even the Japanese Admirals conceded that if the American
economy was placed on a war footing, they would have two or three years at
the most. Pretty spot on.
--
Dan White
(dan@finex666.org.uk)
Perform an exorcism when replying. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
