Poll

I get my news updates from...

TV
0 (0%)
MSNBC.com
3 (4.3%)
FOXNEWS.com
16 (22.9%)
CNN.com
3 (4.3%)
George Noory
10 (14.3%)
Other source
38 (54.3%)

Total Members Voted: 70

Author Topic: Recent World News  (Read 53581 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Recent World News
« Reply #30 on: November 17, 2010, 06:49:57 PM »
Stunning.  Millions of deserving (very poor) American citizens will never be able to afford some of the better "out of state" universities.  But! If you are not an American citizen, you get cut-rate in-state tuition in California! 


Perfectly logical. 


So, if American citizens renounce their citizenship, take a detour to Mexico, and then cross the border illegally, they can now afford to attend college!  I love the Liberal Mind.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40237454/ns/us_news-life/




Recent World News
« Reply #31 on: November 17, 2010, 07:02:57 PM »
Stunning.  Millions of deserving (very poor) American citizens will never be able to afford some of the better "out of state" universities.  But! If you are not an American citizen, you get cut-rate in-state tuition in California! 


Perfectly logical. 


So, if American citizens renounce their citizenship, take a detour to Mexico, and then cross the border illegally, they can now afford to attend college!  I love the Liberal Mind.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40237454/ns/us_news-life/

california needs a thrifty midwesterner with some common sense to run things for a while

Recent World News
« Reply #32 on: November 17, 2010, 11:14:25 PM »
Stunning.  Millions of deserving (very poor) American citizens will never be able to afford some of the better "out of state" universities.  But! If you are not an American citizen, you get cut-rate in-state tuition in California! 


Perfectly logical. 


So, if American citizens renounce their citizenship, take a detour to Mexico, and then cross the border illegally, they can now afford to attend college!  I love the Liberal Mind.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40237454/ns/us_news-life/

california needs a thrifty midwesterner with some common sense to run things for a while
if it weren't for california's government, i would be packing my bags and heading there tomorrow.  it's by far the most tempting state i've been to.  it's just too expensive to live there, and the state is run by clueless nancy pelosi clones.


North Korea Attacks South Korea
« Reply #33 on: November 23, 2010, 08:31:12 AM »
N. Korean artillery attack leaves island ablaze

SEOUL — North Korea bombarded a South Korean island with dozens of artillery shells Tuesday in one of the fiercest attacks on its neighbor since the Korean War ended in 1953.

link http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40329269/ns/world_news-asiapacific/


North Korea Attacks South Korea
« Reply #34 on: November 23, 2010, 10:40:27 AM »
N. Korean artillery attack leaves island ablaze

SEOUL — North Korea bombarded a South Korean island with dozens of artillery shells Tuesday in one of the fiercest attacks on its neighbor since the Korean War ended in 1953.

link http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40329269/ns/world_news-asiapacific/




Although skirmishes have occurred in the past, the blatancy and severity of this one can be attributed to the absolute weakness and indecisiveness demonstrated by the current US Administration. 


The wolves encroach as the midnight fire subsides....

North Korea Attacks South Korea
« Reply #35 on: November 23, 2010, 12:14:38 PM »
Iv been to south Korea before, such a nice place and people. Im just wondering why are they not striking back now, SK has an American Military presence there.

North Korea Attacks South Korea
« Reply #36 on: November 23, 2010, 12:29:33 PM »
Iv been to south Korea before, such a nice place and people. Im just wondering why are they not striking back now, SK has an American Military presence there.

 
One reason:
 
http://www.businessinsider.com/map-of-the-day-how-north-korea-could-destroy-seoul-in-two-hours-2010-5

North Korea Attacks South Korea
« Reply #37 on: November 23, 2010, 02:17:53 PM »
Iv been to south Korea before, such a nice place and people. Im just wondering why are they not striking back now, SK has an American Military presence there.
i have heard repeatedly that the youth of south korea are incessantly protesting against the american presence there.  fine.  let's get out.  see what happens the next day.

North Korea Attacks South Korea
« Reply #38 on: November 23, 2010, 08:39:51 PM »
Iv been to south Korea before, such a nice place and people. Im just wondering why are they not striking back now, SK has an American Military presence there.
i have heard repeatedly that the youth of south korea are incessantly protesting against the american presence there.  fine.  let's get out.  see what happens the next day.

To be fair, young people in most free countries protest things that they don't yet understand.  Youth is wasted on the young.

In my town, every Friday night the kids from the college protest the war on one side of Main street and veterans protest their protest on the other side of Main street.  It's been going on for at least five years.  What's unclear is if anyone's mind has been changed by seeing a picket sign.

Recent World News
« Reply #39 on: November 23, 2010, 09:35:59 PM »
so i anyone following what's happening on the Korean peninsula lately?  scary stuff. 

Recent World News
« Reply #40 on: November 24, 2010, 08:27:38 PM »
so i anyone following what's happening on the Korean peninsula lately?  scary stuff.


Have been trying not to think about it.  They have nukes - are crazy enough to use 'em - and that very craziness has us cornered.

Recent World News
« Reply #41 on: November 24, 2010, 09:44:03 PM »
right now spy satellites are counting the number of pores on kim jung il's head.  if NK does something stupid, the response will (hopefully) be swift and decisive.  and hopefully china won't throw its hat into the ring. 

cue /wargames::shallweplayagame(chess);

Recent World News
« Reply #42 on: November 29, 2010, 06:55:13 AM »
it looks like there's a good chance iran is next on the chopping block.  so be it.


i love what wikileaks is doing.  for too long, american citizens have been kept in the dark about what their government's REAL policies and observations are.  we're only given a homogenized, sterile accounting of geopolitical events and facts.  if we're going to be asked to send family members to potentially die in wars overseas, we should have the facts.  i'm not totally averse to the notion of government secrets, but the secrecy goes too far.  often, it's more like secrecy for secrecy's sake.


as noted in the above linked article, these diplomatic cables go back to 1966.  it should be very interesting to see what else is pulled from this data after wikileaks fully dumps it on the public.

Recent World News
« Reply #43 on: November 29, 2010, 11:44:46 AM »
it looks like there's a good chance iran is next on the chopping block.  so be it.


i love what wikileaks is doing.  for too long, american citizens have been kept in the dark about what their government's REAL policies and observations are.  we're only given a homogenized, sterile accounting of geopolitical events and facts.  if we're going to be asked to send family members to potentially die in wars overseas, we should have the facts.  i'm not totally averse to the notion of government secrets, but the secrecy goes too far.  often, it's more like secrecy for secrecy's sake.


as noted in the above linked article, these diplomatic cables go back to 1966.  it should be very interesting to see what else is pulled from this data after wikileaks fully dumps it on the public.


The issue needs to be looked at more critically, and realistically.  Information is a cause, and retribution can be an effect.  Besides committing an international crime, Wikileaks is not wise enough to weigh the potential effect of the information it is providing.  Will we ever know how many people will be executed because of this information?  Does anyone really care, or even think that deeply?  Perhaps not.

Recent World News
« Reply #44 on: November 29, 2010, 04:51:11 PM »
it looks like there's a good chance iran is next on the chopping block.  so be it.


i love what wikileaks is doing.  for too long, american citizens have been kept in the dark about what their government's REAL policies and observations are.  we're only given a homogenized, sterile accounting of geopolitical events and facts.  if we're going to be asked to send family members to potentially die in wars overseas, we should have the facts.  i'm not totally averse to the notion of government secrets, but the secrecy goes too far.  often, it's more like secrecy for secrecy's sake.


as noted in the above linked article, these diplomatic cables go back to 1966.  it should be very interesting to see what else is pulled from this data after wikileaks fully dumps it on the public.


The issue needs to be looked at more critically, and realistically.  Information is a cause, and retribution can be an effect.  Besides committing an international crime, Wikileaks is not wise enough to weigh the potential effect of the information it is providing.  Will we ever know how many people will be executed because of this information?  Does anyone really care, or even think that deeply?  Perhaps not.


i keep hearing this angle of wikileaks potentially having blood on their hands, and i hear it every time there's a document dump from them.  however, i have yet to be presented with any real evidence thus far, from anyone, of this actually being the case. 


in my estimation, dan rather and C-B.S. have more blood on their hands than wikileaks (if wikileaks even HAS any) as a result of the abu ghraib detainee photos containing dog-piles of guys named yousef and mouhammed.   despite CBS's decision to air those damaging photos against the wishes of the united states government, knowing the implications of their decision, people still continue referring to CBS as a news organization.  how is wikileaks any different?  because they disintermediate the traditional gatekeepers of information?  because they're a website? 


furthermore, of the information already published from this most recent round of document dumps, i don't think i recall seeing anything that would rise to the level described above.  sure, some governments are being embarrassed, but i say good.  governments suck, and i don't want them to be comfortable.


there's just something very disruptive about what wikileaks is doing, and i love it.

Recent World News
« Reply #45 on: November 29, 2010, 05:03:44 PM »
it looks like there's a good chance iran is next on the chopping block.  so be it.


i love what wikileaks is doing.  for too long, american citizens have been kept in the dark about what their government's REAL policies and observations are.  we're only given a homogenized, sterile accounting of geopolitical events and facts.  if we're going to be asked to send family members to potentially die in wars overseas, we should have the facts.  i'm not totally averse to the notion of government secrets, but the secrecy goes too far.  often, it's more like secrecy for secrecy's sake.


as noted in the above linked article, these diplomatic cables go back to 1966.  it should be very interesting to see what else is pulled from this data after wikileaks fully dumps it on the public.


The issue needs to be looked at more critically, and realistically.  Information is a cause, and retribution can be an effect.  Besides committing an international crime, Wikileaks is not wise enough to weigh the potential effect of the information it is providing.  Will we ever know how many people will be executed because of this information?  Does anyone really care, or even think that deeply?  Perhaps not.


i keep hearing this angle of wikileaks potentially having blood on their hands, and i hear it every time there's a document dump from them.  however, i have yet to be presented with any real evidence thus far, from anyone, of this actually being the case. 


in my estimation, dan rather and C-B.S. have more blood on their hands than wikileaks (if wikileaks even HAS any) as a result of the abu ghraib detainee photos containing dog-piles of guys named yousef and mouhammed.   despite CBS's decision to air those damaging photos against the wishes of the united states government, knowing the implications of their decision, people still continue referring to CBS as a news organization.  how is wikileaks any different?  because they disintermediate the traditional gatekeepers of information?  because they're a website? 


furthermore, of the information already published from this most recent round of document dumps, i don't think i recall seeing anything that would rise to the level described above.  sure, some governments are being embarrassed, but i say good.  governments suck, and i don't want them to be comfortable.


there's just something very disruptive about what wikileaks is doing, and i love it.


They don't give a shit.


""There was no consideration about civilian lives," Nadery said, noting a rise in assassinations of Afghan civilians seen as government collaborators."


http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/human-rights-groups-say-wikileaks-endangered-afghan-civilians




Recent World News
« Reply #46 on: November 29, 2010, 07:57:50 PM »
no kidding ... i drove through west virginia today and saw a billboard that had a picture of achmedijan(sp? - iranian leader) that read "every day we wait is another day iran can kill".  had a link to www.americanpower.com or something

scary

Recent World News
« Reply #47 on: November 30, 2010, 05:03:49 AM »
it looks like there's a good chance iran is next on the chopping block.  so be it.


i love what wikileaks is doing.  for too long, american citizens have been kept in the dark about what their government's REAL policies and observations are.  we're only given a homogenized, sterile accounting of geopolitical events and facts.  if we're going to be asked to send family members to potentially die in wars overseas, we should have the facts.  i'm not totally averse to the notion of government secrets, but the secrecy goes too far.  often, it's more like secrecy for secrecy's sake.


as noted in the above linked article, these diplomatic cables go back to 1966.  it should be very interesting to see what else is pulled from this data after wikileaks fully dumps it on the public.


The issue needs to be looked at more critically, and realistically.  Information is a cause, and retribution can be an effect.  Besides committing an international crime, Wikileaks is not wise enough to weigh the potential effect of the information it is providing.  Will we ever know how many people will be executed because of this information?  Does anyone really care, or even think that deeply?  Perhaps not.


i keep hearing this angle of wikileaks potentially having blood on their hands, and i hear it every time there's a document dump from them.  however, i have yet to be presented with any real evidence thus far, from anyone, of this actually being the case. 


in my estimation, dan rather and C-B.S. have more blood on their hands than wikileaks (if wikileaks even HAS any) as a result of the abu ghraib detainee photos containing dog-piles of guys named yousef and mouhammed.   despite CBS's decision to air those damaging photos against the wishes of the united states government, knowing the implications of their decision, people still continue referring to CBS as a news organization.  how is wikileaks any different?  because they disintermediate the traditional gatekeepers of information?  because they're a website? 


furthermore, of the information already published from this most recent round of document dumps, i don't think i recall seeing anything that would rise to the level described above.  sure, some governments are being embarrassed, but i say good.  governments suck, and i don't want them to be comfortable.


there's just something very disruptive about what wikileaks is doing, and i love it.


They don't give a shit.


""There was no consideration about civilian lives," Nadery said, noting a rise in assassinations of Afghan civilians seen as government collaborators."


http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/human-rights-groups-say-wikileaks-endangered-afghan-civilians
the article you've linked to is misleading, at best.  first of all, it leads the reader to believe amnesty international has thrown their hat in the ring against wikileaks.  they haven't.  you learn that when you click through to this article.

"Amnesty International spokeswoman Susanna Flood said that while other human rights groups had also sent a joint letter to WikiLeaks, Amnesty was not among its signatories."

however, that aspect of the story is probably not what's of the greatest importance here.

the deaths of "government collaborators" were on the rise in afghanistan after the previous wikileaks dump?  that claim might be true and it might not.  i don't know.  what i DO know is that in the course of implying wikileaks is culpable, one should provide specific evidence of such.  simply throwing that claim out there and expecting the reader to add two and two isn't going to cut it.  even if wikileaks IS culpable in the deaths of afghan citizens, i think that culpability is highly mitigated and assigned elsewhere due to the following which wasn't mentioned in that article you linked to:

wikileaks says they DID attempt to seek assistance from the feds in removing names where necessary.

"...we conveyed a request to the White House prior to the publication, asking that the International Security Assistance Force provide us with reviewers,' Schmitt said. 'That request remains open. However, the Pentagon has stated that it is not interested in 'harm minimization' and has not contacted us, directly, or indirectly to discuss this offer.'"

oddly enough, the above quoted paragraph is BURIED in the story.  at least it's there, though.

this argument about names being (or not) redacted is bogus.  the fact that the federal government wants nothing to do with helping in that process demonstrates it to be such.  if the government is truly concerned about the safety of innocent people, then help wikileaks protect them!  but they don't help.  why?  because that's not what this is about at all.  this whole "citizen safety" song and dance is just designed to get citizens to act against their own interests in believing it's better to have access to less information.  after all, the government knows best for us and they are in control.

"War is peace.  Freedom is slavery.  Ignorance is strength."


Recent World News
« Reply #48 on: November 30, 2010, 05:45:10 AM »
...and next, wikileaks is dumping documents pertaining to a major bank!  god i love these guys!

here's a short story on the matter.

Recent World News
« Reply #49 on: November 30, 2010, 02:04:10 PM »
In principle, WL is exceedingly important, and represents one of the best aspects of the freedom of the Internet.  I'd just like to see more deliberation and prudence as they handle and disseminate the material.

Recent World News
« Reply #50 on: November 30, 2010, 10:59:23 PM »
In principle, WL is exceedingly important, and represents one of the best aspects of the freedom of the Internet.  I'd just like to see more deliberation and prudence as they handle and disseminate the material.
i think the problem is that wikileaks typically dumps such large amounts of data that it becomes highly difficult to vet the data's sensitivity and appropriateness without government assistance.  i wish the government would just concede that they should help wikileaks redact the data (where appropriate) since this is going to continue whether the government helps or not.  at least they could mitigate what they CLAIM is a damaging revelation of innocent names.

Recent World News
« Reply #51 on: December 03, 2010, 09:15:38 PM »

Recent World News
« Reply #52 on: December 04, 2010, 01:02:19 AM »

Feds want to limit bake sales.   :P


http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=131792172
ok, look... someone needs to say it.  at what point are we going to violently overthrow this behemoth we call the federal government and start anew?  when!!???!!!???

Recent World News
« Reply #53 on: December 04, 2010, 12:41:20 PM »
i think an 'overthrow' at this point would just move the seat of power to the pentagon. and then we'd really be fucked

Recent World News
« Reply #54 on: December 05, 2010, 03:01:03 AM »
i think an 'overthrow' at this point would just move the seat of power to the pentagon. and then we'd really be fucked

How in the heck can we overthrow the government when we have more important issues at hand... Like gays in the military, the war on christmas, illegal aliens... just shoot me... please.

Recent World News
« Reply #55 on: December 05, 2010, 03:05:17 AM »
Just when I think we cant get into more crap...

Germany accuses US over 'missing' Afghan funds, WikiLeaks cables show

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/02/germany-us-afghan-funds-wikileaks

Recent World News
« Reply #56 on: December 05, 2010, 03:06:18 AM »
i think an 'overthrow' at this point would just move the seat of power to the pentagon. and then we'd really be fucked

How in the heck can we overthrow the government when we have more important issues at hand... Like gays in the military, the war on christmas, illegal aliens... just shoot me... please.
not to mention the number of purportedly helpless people whose very lives are dependent on the continued bloat of our government.

Recent World News
« Reply #57 on: December 05, 2010, 03:11:21 AM »
Just when I think we cant get into more crap...

Germany accuses US over 'missing' Afghan funds, WikiLeaks cables show

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/02/germany-us-afghan-funds-wikileaks
YIKES!!!

Recent World News
« Reply #58 on: December 05, 2010, 03:50:28 AM »
Just when I think we cant get into more crap...

Germany accuses US over 'missing' Afghan funds, WikiLeaks cables show

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/02/germany-us-afghan-funds-wikileaks
YIKES!!!

afghanistan is such a clusterphück. I do 'recreational' forex/trading stuff and follow the region pretty closely; it's been known for months now that Karzai's brother stole MILLIONS of dollars from afghani banks and ended up in [forget middle eastern country, oman or qatar] with a beachside  villa. The clown didn't even try to cover his tracks, he simply (metaphorically) loaded up his briefcase.

Guess who bailed out Kabul so there wasn't a run on the afghan banks.

Other news: from 2002-2008 you couldn't watch a minute of news without breathless reporting of  'another grim milestone'; apparently, Cindy Sheehan/troop casualties are only useful bludgeons against Republican administrations:

http://www.icasualties.org/oef/

Lest we forget.

Wikileaks -- who wants to bet there's info regarding information similar to climategate and WMDs being moved into Baqa'a Valley? I'll bet you my Dick Cheney decoder ring for your Valerie Plame poster.

Recent World News
« Reply #59 on: December 05, 2010, 04:20:04 AM »
afghanistan is such a clusterphück. I do 'recreational' forex/trading stuff and follow the region pretty closely; it's been known for months now that Karzai's brother stole MILLIONS of dollars from afghani banks and ended up in [forget middle eastern country, oman or qatar] with a beachside  villa. The clown didn't even try to cover his tracks, he simply (metaphorically) loaded up his briefcase.

Guess who bailed out Kabul so there wasn't a run on the afghan banks.

Other news: from 2002-2008 you couldn't watch a minute of news without breathless reporting of  'another grim milestone'; apparently, Cindy Sheehan/troop casualties are only useful bludgeons against Republican administrations:

http://www.icasualties.org/oef/

Lest we forget.

Wikileaks -- who wants to bet there's info regarding information similar to climategate and WMDs being moved into Baqa'a Valley? I'll bet you my Dick Cheney decoder ring for your Valerie Plame poster.

touché!