Super User About me
I'm a "Super User"
Noticed that little blue "s" icon attached to my name?
Being a Super User, I try to assist in the smooth and fair running of the Game.
Hubdub recognizes that I am an experienced Hubdubber with a deep knowledge of the Game, and trusts me to possess special "super" powers to help keep the Game fair, consistent and fun.
Feel free to give me, or any other Super User, a shout if you feel uncomfortable or have any questions.
http://www.hubdub.com/public/help#superuser
Friends
kruijs has 1066 friends
mtf0528
jessieray3
melofan
marshall_flinkmankruijs
Net worth: H$429,894
Predictions made: 7347
Member since Sat 2nd Feb
Comments
kruijs left these comments.
*Eddie Merckx (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddy_Merckx)
Hey, if I didn't understand what you were saying, I would too ask again.
See: There is no such thing like a "dumb" question. There is something like a "dumb" answer, though.
See: There is no such thing like a "dumb" question. There is something like a "dumb" answer, though.
@dragon, you are constantly saying that Bush has no powers and does not decide anything. It's all the congress' job, and therefor everything is the democrats' fault. and now your saying you did not even say that.
pfew, happy they do not have to fear Belgium any longer.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3012106.stm
@dragon,
I don't know how often I have to say this: I think you are wrong. Remember: "Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists"?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3012106.stm
@dragon,
I don't know how often I have to say this: I think you are wrong. Remember: "Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists"?
... starting to be running in circles again ...
dragon, please read the comments above.
the machine has been turned on - you are right - but that alone does not suffice not settle this question.
dragon, please read the comments above.
the machine has been turned on - you are right - but that alone does not suffice not settle this question.
did you know:
to get well, sometimes some other things besides just medical help can help:
http://www.google.com/search?q=clown+hospital
to get well, sometimes some other things besides just medical help can help:
http://www.google.com/search?q=clown+hospital
please reconsider the situation as Harris decided to forbid the recount. the winning was all but secure. so, it's not about the actual result of the vote count but about what was likely to happen: a defeat. therefor it's about the court deciding in favor of this candidate. in this decision lays a conflict of interest.
I think calling people who do not agree with your personal position affectively "loony" not appropriate
@notable: no, I just recalled a similar thing dragon was trolling for
@dieseldog: a conflict of interest is always hard to prove - but obvious, in this case
@dieseldog: a conflict of interest is always hard to prove - but obvious, in this case
"America has never seen voter fraud on such a large level!"
one was the Bush election which was determined by a judge which was "payed" by the Bush clan. now if that ain't a fraud on a similar level ...
one was the Bush election which was determined by a judge which was "payed" by the Bush clan. now if that ain't a fraud on a similar level ...
Intentionally, the fourth option was thought to be an extension of the 3rd. So if the 4th settles, it would have been like the 3rd, extended by the condition of arrival on Tuesday. This was impossible to word out explicitly because the labels for those options are length-restricted. :(
To make it a new world record, at least 4,079,381 domino stones must fall.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domino_Day
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domino_Day
"A lawyer for Osama bin Laden's son says Spain has rejected her client's final appeal for asylum and will deport him."
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gio3S2gfkS5OuRvQumjGb399kGWwD94AOR780
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gio3S2gfkS5OuRvQumjGb399kGWwD94AOR780
Option "Yes, transport brought to full stop by blockades" has been met already.
"Two men and a woman chained themselves to the rail track at the small border town of Berg. A police spokesman said it would be difficult to cut them free. Protesters said the train was waiting at Lauterbourg on the French side of the border."
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,3774426,00.html
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jbmaddlSIE1jPKznkdXPUPYlxxrAD94AUP280
"Two men and a woman chained themselves to the rail track at the small border town of Berg. A police spokesman said it would be difficult to cut them free. Protesters said the train was waiting at Lauterbourg on the French side of the border."
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,3774426,00.html
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jbmaddlSIE1jPKznkdXPUPYlxxrAD94AUP280
That's true, dragon. Both are theorems. But there just ain't any serious evidence to back up the creationists' one.
Often, creationism is promoted in relation with religion. And that makes it hard to take it seriously. Remember: Those religious guys killed critics who said the earth is spheric and circulating around the sun!
Often, creationism is promoted in relation with religion. And that makes it hard to take it seriously. Remember: Those religious guys killed critics who said the earth is spheric and circulating around the sun!
@dragonfangxl: If you say you support the Iraqi and Afghanistan wars, I can't see, why you call Bush "a great man" - he didn't decide these wars ... ?
If I recall correctly: "We will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation in every region now has a decision to make: Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists." That sounds quite like a man who decides what the US was going to do. But actually, I agree, Bush hasn't decides much by himself. The men behind him did that for him mostly IMO.
From your point of view, Bush might be a great man. But remember, for most of the world's population he is not. You might say, "who cares?" - I can understand. But hey, the USA is world dominant in many ways. Let me point out the following: I personally have no general aversion against the US or the people of the US. Really, I have none of these bad feelings. But I really do not like the politics of Bush and his companions. This opinion doesn't make me a communist or a socialist - I'm just a democrat and a capitalist like most of you. Some would call me "left" - but that's mostly because there is not much spare room on the right side of them.
The congress did not intervened in the credit crisis or in the economy for a long time is due to the freedom of the market. If they would have done earlier, you would have called them socialists, wouldn't you?
Why they did not act in a adequate way when Katrina hit the US, as you put it, I can't tell you. What do you think?
If I recall correctly: "We will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation in every region now has a decision to make: Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists." That sounds quite like a man who decides what the US was going to do. But actually, I agree, Bush hasn't decides much by himself. The men behind him did that for him mostly IMO.
From your point of view, Bush might be a great man. But remember, for most of the world's population he is not. You might say, "who cares?" - I can understand. But hey, the USA is world dominant in many ways. Let me point out the following: I personally have no general aversion against the US or the people of the US. Really, I have none of these bad feelings. But I really do not like the politics of Bush and his companions. This opinion doesn't make me a communist or a socialist - I'm just a democrat and a capitalist like most of you. Some would call me "left" - but that's mostly because there is not much spare room on the right side of them.
The congress did not intervened in the credit crisis or in the economy for a long time is due to the freedom of the market. If they would have done earlier, you would have called them socialists, wouldn't you?
Why they did not act in a adequate way when Katrina hit the US, as you put it, I can't tell you. What do you think?
the first three options require to have a SINGLE country. the last requires MULTIPLE countries. So if the US grand asylum and any other state does, the last option settles.
if you put up an argument, you ought to be ready to defend that argument.
so saying you do not want to "get into the semantics" - that disappoints me. I thought you would be open for discussion of the accusations and assumptions you make. seems your quite ignorant if it comes to that.
so if you don't want to defend your arguments and your position, than keep them it you in the first place.
so saying you do not want to "get into the semantics" - that disappoints me. I thought you would be open for discussion of the accusations and assumptions you make. seems your quite ignorant if it comes to that.
so if you don't want to defend your arguments and your position, than keep them it you in the first place.
"Imagine that...this is attempt #3...Someone at Hubdub is a mega socialist that hates me!"
why should one be a socialist when you write poor questions?
why should one be a socialist when you write poor questions?
"what i ment by birth rate is..i would say the USA has more births per year than canada."
A rate is no absolute number. And why should anyone compare the absolute numbers of births? Of course the US have a much higher number of births than Canada has.
"therefore the USA would have more infant-mortalities"
You started the conversation with the infant-mortality rate - no one has been talking about absolute numbers.
"only source i say you provide was a wikipedia site."
I provided a wikipedia site which showed two sources of statistics: One from the UN, one from the CIA. If these sources would have been cited incorrectly, I think someone would have noticed and corrected it to reflect the original sources.
"their nice but open to error."
But very likely to be corrected as soon someone notices the mistake. In printed media, you cannot expect that. In fact, in printed media you do not even have a change to track who has written something, nor why. Did you ever read the discussions behind the articles? I don't think any editor-written encyclopedia or similar has such activity behind the scenes.
"i have no confindence in anything the UN says"
If you do not trust the UN nor the CIA, I ask you, who do you trust anyway? Its hard to argument if you dismiss all sources ... (btw: the link you provided referred to the same source)
"you don't think a good health care system improves the succes of birth rates?"
I repeat: I do not think that there is a correlation between quality of health care system and birth rate. But: A good health care system does contribute to a low infant-mortality rate - but is certainly not the only factor.
Makes this clearer what I am trying to say to you?
A rate is no absolute number. And why should anyone compare the absolute numbers of births? Of course the US have a much higher number of births than Canada has.
"therefore the USA would have more infant-mortalities"
You started the conversation with the infant-mortality rate - no one has been talking about absolute numbers.
"only source i say you provide was a wikipedia site."
I provided a wikipedia site which showed two sources of statistics: One from the UN, one from the CIA. If these sources would have been cited incorrectly, I think someone would have noticed and corrected it to reflect the original sources.
"their nice but open to error."
But very likely to be corrected as soon someone notices the mistake. In printed media, you cannot expect that. In fact, in printed media you do not even have a change to track who has written something, nor why. Did you ever read the discussions behind the articles? I don't think any editor-written encyclopedia or similar has such activity behind the scenes.
"i have no confindence in anything the UN says"
If you do not trust the UN nor the CIA, I ask you, who do you trust anyway? Its hard to argument if you dismiss all sources ... (btw: the link you provided referred to the same source)
"you don't think a good health care system improves the succes of birth rates?"
I repeat: I do not think that there is a correlation between quality of health care system and birth rate. But: A good health care system does contribute to a low infant-mortality rate - but is certainly not the only factor.
Makes this clearer what I am trying to say to you?
"i would say the USA has more births per year."
correct: USA: 14, Canada 10.3 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_birth_rate)
"another thing to consider is the birth rate" - why?
"do you think they have a good health care system?" - I do not think that there is a correlation between quality of health care system and birth rate. But: A good health care system does contribute to a low infant-mortality rate - but is certainly not the only factor.
"*first link has the japan rate.": same source as I referred to, just an older publication. If you don't trust the CIA in this case, you can still take a look at the wikipedia article which contains the United Nations numbers too.
correct: USA: 14, Canada 10.3 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_birth_rate)
"another thing to consider is the birth rate" - why?
"do you think they have a good health care system?" - I do not think that there is a correlation between quality of health care system and birth rate. But: A good health care system does contribute to a low infant-mortality rate - but is certainly not the only factor.
"*first link has the japan rate.": same source as I referred to, just an older publication. If you don't trust the CIA in this case, you can still take a look at the wikipedia article which contains the United Nations numbers too.
NO how could we! HE is going to blow up the country! YOU told me so! I can't sleep at night no more!
a) in all 40 countries?
b) anyway, does it change you wrong comment into a correct comment?
think again before answering.
b) anyway, does it change you wrong comment into a correct comment?
think again before answering.
@diesel:
do you agree the CIA being a good source?
So: USA, Position 180, rate 6.3/1000
over 40 countries have a better rate than the US. Ups, including Canada. Even Cuba has a better rate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rate
Are we talking of the same infant-mortality?
do you agree the CIA being a good source?
So: USA, Position 180, rate 6.3/1000
over 40 countries have a better rate than the US. Ups, including Canada. Even Cuba has a better rate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rate
Are we talking of the same infant-mortality?
wasting money? what about so, let's say, hmmm, 340M US$ per day?
(http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home)
(http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home)
@notable:
providing all the data? thanks for keeping the balance by providing all that data which is intended to denigrate in a contemptuous way. and none of the data which could be interpreted in a negative way for McCain.
Obviously, because people are betting for Obama, the chances that he will win are around 93%. I think most of the Hubdub players know that this is not the prediction of the resulting percentages but the prediction of who will win.
I agree with you that I personally am not so sure that Obama will win, as you can see, my stakes are on McCain right now (already loosing because I was too early)
providing all the data? thanks for keeping the balance by providing all that data which is intended to denigrate in a contemptuous way. and none of the data which could be interpreted in a negative way for McCain.
Obviously, because people are betting for Obama, the chances that he will win are around 93%. I think most of the Hubdub players know that this is not the prediction of the resulting percentages but the prediction of who will win.
I agree with you that I personally am not so sure that Obama will win, as you can see, my stakes are on McCain right now (already loosing because I was too early)
I think I understand what you want to achieve, pullover (that ain't meant negatively) - but I still do not think that the question is able to be settled.
"Lindzen has claimed that the risks of smoking, including passive smoking, are overstated."
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Lindzen#Views_on_health_risks_of_smoking)
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Lindzen#Views_on_health_risks_of_smoking)
I don't think this question makes sense the way you put it.
how do you determine that debunking? what kind of reports do you expect and what, if not scientific, media do you want to report it?
But it's up to Tisha to decide anyway. I cannot void questions, just suspend them for being reviewed by an admin.
Sorry if you don't agree. I think the topic is a good one (although very long termed).
how do you determine that debunking? what kind of reports do you expect and what, if not scientific, media do you want to report it?
But it's up to Tisha to decide anyway. I cannot void questions, just suspend them for being reviewed by an admin.
Sorry if you don't agree. I think the topic is a good one (although very long termed).
well, over the last week, it just seems to be around 90% of all politically motivated comments (which were not responds to someone else's) were made by notible.
f_o_f
I really think your comment was the most honest, realistic, less negative, and most relaxed I read the last few days. this is what it will be like: not so much a change after all - regardless who will win the election. the US will stay the US (in both negative but also the positive ways) - no doubt about it.
f_o_f
I really think your comment was the most honest, realistic, less negative, and most relaxed I read the last few days. this is what it will be like: not so much a change after all - regardless who will win the election. the US will stay the US (in both negative but also the positive ways) - no doubt about it.
I think notable tried to dismiss you because he believes that socialists cannot love their country the way he does. hm, having a second thought: I think he's right
@notablenotices,
do you really think you can impress any Hubdubber by campaigning for McCain here all around?
I'm wondering what you will do IF Obama is elected in the end ... despite all your efforts here ...
do you really think you can impress any Hubdubber by campaigning for McCain here all around?
I'm wondering what you will do IF Obama is elected in the end ... despite all your efforts here ...
dieseldog: you do not understand me as good as you think you do. 1) Germany is on the front line. They just do not play the aggressive role. 2) the bailout honors the rich because it save the rich from getting broke. Quite simple, isn't it? How do you think things are decided (not only in the US)? It just lobbying. Who is lobbying for the plumber? No one.
roba, I think the bail out is correct - only it is wrongly addressed. That huge amount of money should not have been spend to pay the bonuses to the managers and scalpers, but to help those who can't pay the mortgage. In the end, it were these greedy bankers who sold them, well knowing these home-owners could not pay them. But nevertheless, with their own provisions in mind, they sold them.
Don't get me wrong: I am no communist. But I prefer fair play.
roba, I think the bail out is correct - only it is wrongly addressed. That huge amount of money should not have been spend to pay the bonuses to the managers and scalpers, but to help those who can't pay the mortgage. In the end, it were these greedy bankers who sold them, well knowing these home-owners could not pay them. But nevertheless, with their own provisions in mind, they sold them.
Don't get me wrong: I am no communist. But I prefer fair play.
but I also agree that the 2nd amendment must stay in place. just in case, just to protect yourself http://www.hubdub.com/m12077
I hope this ain't a translation mistake again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel#.22Wiped_off_the_map.22_or_.22Vanish_from_the_pages_of_time.22_translation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel#.22Wiped_off_the_map.22_or_.22Vanish_from_the_pages_of_time.22_translation
I made a good point and it was the one I intended. obviously you just did not understand my comment.
"convicted criminal" or not: the guy had a fire arm and feared a robbery. just the situation you have because of the 2nd amendment. a common constellation.
fear + fire arms = fatal
"convicted criminal" or not: the guy had a fire arm and feared a robbery. just the situation you have because of the 2nd amendment. a common constellation.
fear + fire arms = fatal
"Police in the US say a 12-year-old out trick-or-treating for the US Halloween holiday was killed when a convicted criminal fearing a robbery fired nearly 30 rounds with an assault rifle from inside a house."
http://ukpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5hej9ikqGtp1mtMRTKrzWf1KHY5QA
So this could happen to you too: Having fire aims at home at fearing robbery.
http://ukpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5hej9ikqGtp1mtMRTKrzWf1KHY5QA
So this could happen to you too: Having fire aims at home at fearing robbery.
diesel: remember Germany did not participate with Bush's axis of evil strategy. Germany decided to do so because the German people did not want it.
roba: didn't the US put up a bail out itself? how large was it? oh, right, that's not socialism because it just honors the mistakes of some greedy hedge fond managers and makes the rich only richer. That's capitalism.
roba: didn't the US put up a bail out itself? how large was it? oh, right, that's not socialism because it just honors the mistakes of some greedy hedge fond managers and makes the rich only richer. That's capitalism.
diesel: Election of Obama will surely have a positive impact on the image the US have throughout the world. The way you and others are trying to miscredit that guy balances that gain out - so in the end you missed a chance to make new friends. (I know you will now say: Uh, I don't want you to be my friend. So this is what I'd respond: http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f394/Ysabell/holgeratwork.jpg )
"Barack Obama sent a whole army of people up to Alaska to dig up dirt."
It is a fact that both Democrats and Replucans use the same strategies to push their own candidate and to denigrate the opponent. You should not throw dirt here.
It is a fact that both Democrats and Replucans use the same strategies to push their own candidate and to denigrate the opponent. You should not throw dirt here.
Again: That does not convince me at all, doesn't matter how often you repeat that. Repeating only shows that you do not accept me having another opinion on the topic - or do you?
they are following bush logic: someone who is enemy of my enemy is my friend.
quite simple, isn't it?
quite simple, isn't it?
wow,
what luck we discovered these quotes just a few days before the election,
after they have been publicly known since 6 months, at least.
what luck we discovered these quotes just a few days before the election,
after they have been publicly known since 6 months, at least.
@filanator
re your comic: that exactly what I'm trying to tell these guys!
LOL
thanks for sharing :)
re your comic: that exactly what I'm trying to tell these guys!
LOL
thanks for sharing :)
Notable, do you really fear an invasion of your country? I do not. But that might be because Europe has evolved politically over the last 50 years. Has the US?
Okay, lets put it this way: for certain reasons you think you must be (possibly) owner of a gun. I won't say you may not. I won't forbid you to be.
But I can't follow the reasons you come up with: In my eyes there is no such thread neither from robberies nor from "terrorists" nor from any enemy state which would justify the risk of unintended harm a fire arm in my home would bring. The argument of "freedom" is not affected in my opinion as there are certain rules we all accept in living together within a civilized society - we don't have to discuss that. So absolute freedom does not exist as long as you do not live completely isolated far away from any other humans. Allowing something because you can't prevent it even if you forbid it is just as when you say "I did because if I didn't do it, someone else would have done so" - that's poor in my eyes and is anything but moral courage.
You won't convince me being wrong, and I doubt I can even give you a moment to think about alternatives to your point of view.
Okay, lets put it this way: for certain reasons you think you must be (possibly) owner of a gun. I won't say you may not. I won't forbid you to be.
But I can't follow the reasons you come up with: In my eyes there is no such thread neither from robberies nor from "terrorists" nor from any enemy state which would justify the risk of unintended harm a fire arm in my home would bring. The argument of "freedom" is not affected in my opinion as there are certain rules we all accept in living together within a civilized society - we don't have to discuss that. So absolute freedom does not exist as long as you do not live completely isolated far away from any other humans. Allowing something because you can't prevent it even if you forbid it is just as when you say "I did because if I didn't do it, someone else would have done so" - that's poor in my eyes and is anything but moral courage.
You won't convince me being wrong, and I doubt I can even give you a moment to think about alternatives to your point of view.
yes, I think the sports aspect of the fire arms could be fun. I have no problem with that.
regarding taxes: that's just an example of a regulation which you cannot flee from (if your name is not Robinson, but hey, don't ask about Friday). There are many more, which we all would agree belong to a modern civilized society. I just don't think that the 2nd amendment still makes sense nowadays, just as the death sentence or the freedom of abortion under certain circumstances. ah, hear-hear: freedom to decide the abort of a pregnancy. would you restrict personal freedom?
regarding taxes: that's just an example of a regulation which you cannot flee from (if your name is not Robinson, but hey, don't ask about Friday). There are many more, which we all would agree belong to a modern civilized society. I just don't think that the 2nd amendment still makes sense nowadays, just as the death sentence or the freedom of abortion under certain circumstances. ah, hear-hear: freedom to decide the abort of a pregnancy. would you restrict personal freedom?
thanks putting us back on track, you're absolutely right, pullover.
one question: ain't the 2nd amendment not just a little bit outdated, just a tiny bit needless nowadays? I mean, the US have evolved since than, didn't they?
one question: ain't the 2nd amendment not just a little bit outdated, just a tiny bit needless nowadays? I mean, the US have evolved since than, didn't they?
@notablenotices
as well as US citizens don't have the complete and absolute "freedom" you claim to, the Europeans don't want to have every little thing dictated by authorities. See, there is "gray".
you pay taxes, don't you? why? because you don't have the freedom to decide yourself if you want to pay taxes. see, your freedom is limited. freedom is relative.
freedom depends on how much others tolerate you to do.
freedom as you proclaim is just an illusion. get realistic.
as well as US citizens don't have the complete and absolute "freedom" you claim to, the Europeans don't want to have every little thing dictated by authorities. See, there is "gray".
you pay taxes, don't you? why? because you don't have the freedom to decide yourself if you want to pay taxes. see, your freedom is limited. freedom is relative.
freedom depends on how much others tolerate you to do.
freedom as you proclaim is just an illusion. get realistic.
"our country has the best ideals in the world, the most powerful government in the world, and the best people in the world. Thats not arragance, thats scientific fact."
sentences like this just prove the prejudice to be correct. Saddam could have said these words - and it would have even been true in his eyes (and proven by his own scientists) as your words are true in your eyes. as soon as you put up words in this absolute way, leaving no alternatives, it can't be true.
sentences like this just prove the prejudice to be correct. Saddam could have said these words - and it would have even been true in his eyes (and proven by his own scientists) as your words are true in your eyes. as soon as you put up words in this absolute way, leaving no alternatives, it can't be true.
well, thanks for your responses. that 10 iq point really tease me :)
if it comes down to consider which risk to take:
1) having a firearm in my household with the risk that someone gets hurt just because of a incident
2) having someone breaking into my home and than hurt me (or my relatives)
I'd say I take option 2)
Really: A thief is not a murderer. So if a thief breaks into someones home, he'll make sure it is an easy robbery. He ensures himself that nobody is at home. He ensures himself of easy access to get into the home. He ensures himself to not getting disturbed while carrying away the stuff.
So the best way to defend yourselves against burglars is to put a good lock on your door (and windows), simulate being at home if you are not (by timed lights, for example), and get yourself a really laud alarm system. If you still do not feel safe, get yourself pepperspray or a dog.
For me, when "defending" myself against theft, it does not mean I should be preparing to kill.
There just is no need to have firearms which justify the risk to utilize them in an unintended or overhasty but fatal way.
if it comes down to consider which risk to take:
1) having a firearm in my household with the risk that someone gets hurt just because of a incident
2) having someone breaking into my home and than hurt me (or my relatives)
I'd say I take option 2)
Really: A thief is not a murderer. So if a thief breaks into someones home, he'll make sure it is an easy robbery. He ensures himself that nobody is at home. He ensures himself of easy access to get into the home. He ensures himself to not getting disturbed while carrying away the stuff.
So the best way to defend yourselves against burglars is to put a good lock on your door (and windows), simulate being at home if you are not (by timed lights, for example), and get yourself a really laud alarm system. If you still do not feel safe, get yourself pepperspray or a dog.
For me, when "defending" myself against theft, it does not mean I should be preparing to kill.
There just is no need to have firearms which justify the risk to utilize them in an unintended or overhasty but fatal way.
if someone breaks into my house, I don't expect them to do me (or my beloved, my neighbors or the pope) any harm because they are not after me but after my possessions. you see, I'm confident in having no personal enemies. so if I don't interrupt (whenever they managed to get into my home already) them - and I prefer not to - the risk of getting harmed should be quit low. But the risk of someone breaking into my house is negligible in the first place. You should consider moving to another place if the risk of getting robbed where you live makes you worry.
btw today we've got the first snow of the season over here (around 15cm over night)
btw today we've got the first snow of the season over here (around 15cm over night)
pull over that ass too phat, did you mean your own butt?
that one prejudice too: all Americans are fat.
Nicely said, potatp!
LOL
that one prejudice too: all Americans are fat.
Nicely said, potatp!
LOL
in the US, every citizen needs his own policeman to be safe? Is that the price of freedom you have to pay?
wow, I'm glad that I don't have to live there (yeah, I know, you guys don't want me to live there, and yeah, I know, nobody forces me to, and yeah, I know, I have the freedom to decide where I want to live) .
:-P
wow, I'm glad that I don't have to live there (yeah, I know, you guys don't want me to live there, and yeah, I know, nobody forces me to, and yeah, I know, I have the freedom to decide where I want to live) .
:-P
well, I just would rather having a thief rob my house than even considering to kill him right away. (side-note: I'm against death sentence)
does anyone of you wonder about the image the US has in foreign countries? being aggressive, militant, intolerant?
I thought these attributes were used to describe to Islamic fundamentalists ...
does anyone of you wonder about the image the US has in foreign countries? being aggressive, militant, intolerant?
I thought these attributes were used to describe to Islamic fundamentalists ...
maybe the government should be kind of "tyrannical" to reason that bunch of dumb-ass citizens constantly killing each others and make living together more peaceful from time to time?
jhouseholder,
GREAT point about the car wrecks.
consider so many people running around wearing fire arms as there are cars driving ...
GREAT point about the car wrecks.
consider so many people running around wearing fire arms as there are cars driving ...
some HD users would be pleased to see this happen after this:
http://www.hubdub.com/m15628/Will_Russell_Brand_apologize_for_calling_President_Bush_a_retard_cowboy_at_the_MTV_music_awards
http://www.hubdub.com/m15628/Will_Russell_Brand_apologize_for_calling_President_Bush_a_retard_cowboy_at_the_MTV_music_awards
don't "we" do so?
since "we" is mankind and as such "we" is not constantly the same group of people.
and since people do not learn from people, the new group members make the same mistakes as vanished group members.
and, as an aside: Did you know that a donkey doesn't bang his head against the same stone twice?
since "we" is mankind and as such "we" is not constantly the same group of people.
and since people do not learn from people, the new group members make the same mistakes as vanished group members.
and, as an aside: Did you know that a donkey doesn't bang his head against the same stone twice?
Well, I don't think that 3), 4) and 5) would make someone really popular anywhere in the western civilizations.
And 1) and 2), as I said before, are legit political positions.
And 1) and 2), as I said before, are legit political positions.
It's quite astounding how well the mud-throwing works out this time.
Although I'm not here to defend Barack Obama for anything, I just want to take position whenever I do not agree with statements people make.
1) notable: "the most radical position on abortion, including infantacide"
Obama: "On an issue like partial birth abortion, I strongly believe that the state can properly restrict late-term abortions. I have said so repeatedly. All I've said is we should have a provision to protect the health of the mother, and many of the bills that came before me didn't have that."
http://www.ontheissues.org/Social/Barack_Obama_Abortion.htm
2) notable: "a decidedly anti-second ammendment (sic!) stance"
2nd Amendment: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
Do the US people need to secure their own free state?! In western Europe, it's something which police can do for the people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
3) notable: "ties to terrorists"
"Ayers and his wife, Bernadine Dohrn, a Northwestern University professor who also was part of the Weather Underground (which embraced bombing in its effort to end the Vietnam War), spent years on the run. After Ayers surrendered in 1980, charges against him were dropped because of prosecutorial misconduct. Obama has deplored Ayers’ conduct but pointed out that it took place decades before the two met."
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/aug/22/nation/na-ad22
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0408/9730.html
4) notable: "the comunist party"
"Through Frank Marshall Davis, Obama had an admitted relationship with someone who was publicly identified as a member of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA)."
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-communist-mentor/
5) notable: "and ACORN!"
"Obama has had an intimate and long-term association with the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (Acorn), the largest radical group in America."
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDZiMjkwMDczZWI5ODdjOWYxZTIzZGIyNzEyMjE0ODI=
In my opinion, issues 1) and 2) are fair political points. Nothing radical in my eyes. Nothing which would disqualify someone for being president.
Points 3), 4) and 5) made me think. What if this is true? What if he is really that radical, militant communist guy as you suggestively describe him by these "facts"? Wouldn't the US be doomed with such a president? I admit that these connections existed. But is Obama automatically such a thread? Almost undoubtedly he will be influenced politically. And as such, would that be dangerous for the US? Actually, I don't think so.
What concerns me most: is that I see people stoking fears using suggestive, irrational assertions and overstatements (and pictures).
Just compare this:
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm172/dtothep_bucket/136312.jpg
with this:
http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org/holoprelude/images/advirtisement%20for%20Der%20ewige%20Jude.jpg
Although I'm not here to defend Barack Obama for anything, I just want to take position whenever I do not agree with statements people make.
1) notable: "the most radical position on abortion, including infantacide"
Obama: "On an issue like partial birth abortion, I strongly believe that the state can properly restrict late-term abortions. I have said so repeatedly. All I've said is we should have a provision to protect the health of the mother, and many of the bills that came before me didn't have that."
http://www.ontheissues.org/Social/Barack_Obama_Abortion.htm
2) notable: "a decidedly anti-second ammendment (sic!) stance"
2nd Amendment: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
Do the US people need to secure their own free state?! In western Europe, it's something which police can do for the people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
3) notable: "ties to terrorists"
"Ayers and his wife, Bernadine Dohrn, a Northwestern University professor who also was part of the Weather Underground (which embraced bombing in its effort to end the Vietnam War), spent years on the run. After Ayers surrendered in 1980, charges against him were dropped because of prosecutorial misconduct. Obama has deplored Ayers’ conduct but pointed out that it took place decades before the two met."
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/aug/22/nation/na-ad22
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0408/9730.html
4) notable: "the comunist party"
"Through Frank Marshall Davis, Obama had an admitted relationship with someone who was publicly identified as a member of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA)."
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-communist-mentor/
5) notable: "and ACORN!"
"Obama has had an intimate and long-term association with the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (Acorn), the largest radical group in America."
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDZiMjkwMDczZWI5ODdjOWYxZTIzZGIyNzEyMjE0ODI=
In my opinion, issues 1) and 2) are fair political points. Nothing radical in my eyes. Nothing which would disqualify someone for being president.
Points 3), 4) and 5) made me think. What if this is true? What if he is really that radical, militant communist guy as you suggestively describe him by these "facts"? Wouldn't the US be doomed with such a president? I admit that these connections existed. But is Obama automatically such a thread? Almost undoubtedly he will be influenced politically. And as such, would that be dangerous for the US? Actually, I don't think so.
What concerns me most: is that I see people stoking fears using suggestive, irrational assertions and overstatements (and pictures).
Just compare this:
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm172/dtothep_bucket/136312.jpg
with this:
http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org/holoprelude/images/advirtisement%20for%20Der%20ewige%20Jude.jpg
I still don't understand why someone must be exact "middle of the road" to do a good job !?
as long as you are either democrat or republican, you can never be "middle of the read" - you are either too liberal or too conservative (just depending on democratic or republican point of view)
I don't know much about US electoral processes. but if it has been illegal, shouldn't it have been retracted?
as long as you are either democrat or republican, you can never be "middle of the read" - you are either too liberal or too conservative (just depending on democratic or republican point of view)
I don't know much about US electoral processes. but if it has been illegal, shouldn't it have been retracted?
oh, ha, the "he is unexperienced" card.
well, since more people will elect him as people will elect McCain (as polls predict), I think this means that more people trust him becomming a "good" president than people trust McCain becomming a "good" president (good as subjective as there are hopes people associate with a new president). so, again, if more people trust him than McCain, why shouldn't he be able to "unify" at least as good as McCain?
Even Bush - who has been controversial since the start - was able to create a very strong "unity" amongst all Americans (liberals, republicans, rich, poor, black, white, just name it). Nobody was criticizing, all stood patriotically, nobody dared to ask.
All he had to do was start a war (or two).
well, since more people will elect him as people will elect McCain (as polls predict), I think this means that more people trust him becomming a "good" president than people trust McCain becomming a "good" president (good as subjective as there are hopes people associate with a new president). so, again, if more people trust him than McCain, why shouldn't he be able to "unify" at least as good as McCain?
Even Bush - who has been controversial since the start - was able to create a very strong "unity" amongst all Americans (liberals, republicans, rich, poor, black, white, just name it). Nobody was criticizing, all stood patriotically, nobody dared to ask.
All he had to do was start a war (or two).
Why can't Barack Obama - or Hussien as you deprecatingling and wrongly call him (his middle name is Hussein, but your strength has never been spelling other one's names) - "unify across the aisle"?
Why do polls show more confidence in him as in the other candidate? Maybe he might not be able to "unify" those who are afraid of a black man.
To narrow this "somewhat importance" of the US president on the current case:
Bush's cabinet has included figures that were prominent in past administrations, notably former Secretary of State Colin Powell who had served as United States National Security Advisor under Ronald Reagan. Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld had served as White House Chief of Staff and Secretary of Defense under Gerald Ford; Rumsfeld's successor, Robert Gates, served as Director of Central Intelligence under George H.W. Bush. Vice President Dick Cheney served as Secretary of Defense under George H. W. Bush.
Bush places a high value on personal loyalty and, as a result, his administration has high message discipline. He maintains a "hands-off" style of management that he believes prevents him from being tangled by intricacies that hinder sound decision-making. "I'm confident in my management style. I'm a delegator because I trust the people I've asked to join the team. I'm willing to delegate. That makes it easier to be President," he said in an interview with Diane Sawyer on ABC in December of 2003. Critics allege, however, that Bush is willing to overlook mistakes[10] made by loyal subordinates. There has been only one non-Republican present in Bush's cabinet: Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta, the first Asian American cabinet secretary, who had previously served as Secretary of Commerce under Bill Clinton, is a Democrat. Mineta resigned from Bush's cabinet on July 7, 2006 to pursue "other challenges".[11] Mary Peters, a Republican, was nominated and confirmed to succeed him as Transportation Secretary.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush_administration#Administration_and_Cabinet
So one of his somewhat importance is to build and arrange the government. OK, that might be not so important when you look at those who are connected to him and take affect on the decisions (and orientation of these) he draws.
Why do polls show more confidence in him as in the other candidate? Maybe he might not be able to "unify" those who are afraid of a black man.
To narrow this "somewhat importance" of the US president on the current case:
Bush's cabinet has included figures that were prominent in past administrations, notably former Secretary of State Colin Powell who had served as United States National Security Advisor under Ronald Reagan. Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld had served as White House Chief of Staff and Secretary of Defense under Gerald Ford; Rumsfeld's successor, Robert Gates, served as Director of Central Intelligence under George H.W. Bush. Vice President Dick Cheney served as Secretary of Defense under George H. W. Bush.
Bush places a high value on personal loyalty and, as a result, his administration has high message discipline. He maintains a "hands-off" style of management that he believes prevents him from being tangled by intricacies that hinder sound decision-making. "I'm confident in my management style. I'm a delegator because I trust the people I've asked to join the team. I'm willing to delegate. That makes it easier to be President," he said in an interview with Diane Sawyer on ABC in December of 2003. Critics allege, however, that Bush is willing to overlook mistakes[10] made by loyal subordinates. There has been only one non-Republican present in Bush's cabinet: Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta, the first Asian American cabinet secretary, who had previously served as Secretary of Commerce under Bill Clinton, is a Democrat. Mineta resigned from Bush's cabinet on July 7, 2006 to pursue "other challenges".[11] Mary Peters, a Republican, was nominated and confirmed to succeed him as Transportation Secretary.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush_administration#Administration_and_Cabinet
So one of his somewhat importance is to build and arrange the government. OK, that might be not so important when you look at those who are connected to him and take affect on the decisions (and orientation of these) he draws.
"EU lawmakers have joined U.S. civil liberty campaigners in criticizing a new scanner technology that allows airport security staff to see through passengers' clothes, calling it a virtual strip search that should only be used as a last resort. (...) The new system, which the European Union plans to authorize at the bloc's airports, allows guards to see an outline of passengers' bodies beneath their clothes, making it easier to detect any concealed objects.
It already is being introduced in several U.S. airports and has been tested in other countries around the world, including EU nations such as Britain and the Netherlands. However, EU officials said it could face a ban if the 27-nation bloc does not include it in a new regulation listing acceptable airport security equipment.
(...) the technology should not be used routinely on passengers, but could be introduced when suspicions are raised."
http://www.pr-inside.com/eu-lawmakers-criticize-virtual-strip-r873008.htm
It already is being introduced in several U.S. airports and has been tested in other countries around the world, including EU nations such as Britain and the Netherlands. However, EU officials said it could face a ban if the 27-nation bloc does not include it in a new regulation listing acceptable airport security equipment.
(...) the technology should not be used routinely on passengers, but could be introduced when suspicions are raised."
http://www.pr-inside.com/eu-lawmakers-criticize-virtual-strip-r873008.htm
what do think about this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-BmqxFpHn8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-BmqxFpHn8
oh, and why spend 500,000,000++ USD to get into that position
and why are you so afraid of Barack Obama, than?
dragon, you have many learning potentials. please use it.
and why are you so afraid of Barack Obama, than?
dragon, you have many learning potentials. please use it.
@dragon:
If you didn't understand so far, maybe this will help:
"Economists like to reference Robinson Carusoe’s (sic!) island, Caruso and Friday are on the island. Caruso fishes and Friday picks bananas. They work out an exchange. But put some more people on the island and you need money to have an easy exchange between fish, bananas, and coconuts. So one day a “Federal Reserve Banker” comes along and prints some paper “dollars”. The marketplace finds the right price for fish in terms of bananas, coconuts, or “dollars”. Now suppose our Federal Reserve Banker prints double the dollars. Just lots more “dollars”. Twice as many in fact. Now just printing more “dollars” doesn’t do anything to increase the wealth of the islanders. There are not twice the fish, bananas, or coconuts. Rather quickly the market price will double the price of fish, bananas, and coconuts. Increasing the money supply doesn’t make everyone rich. It just increases prices. Why do it? Because the printer are unjustly enriched. He gets to spend those dollars before the prices adapt. Money that has nothing backing it of value (i.e., gold; silver; or even tiki lamps) is just paper. Worthless the minute that the fraud is discovered.
(...)
So, sooner or later, the Arabs will get tired of getting pictures of dead presidents for oil. Ditto the Japanese for Toyotas. And the Chinese for plastics.
One needs to NOT hold paper money! But what should one “hold”. Things that appreciate in value (i.e., collectables). Real estate. Things that earn value (i.e., stocks that are recession / depression proof). Commodities. And precious metals. Debt in a recession is bad."
http://reinkefaceslife.com/2006/12/29/money-printing-press-money-impoverishes-us-all/
And you should really read this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monetary_policy
If you didn't understand so far, maybe this will help:
"Economists like to reference Robinson Carusoe’s (sic!) island, Caruso and Friday are on the island. Caruso fishes and Friday picks bananas. They work out an exchange. But put some more people on the island and you need money to have an easy exchange between fish, bananas, and coconuts. So one day a “Federal Reserve Banker” comes along and prints some paper “dollars”. The marketplace finds the right price for fish in terms of bananas, coconuts, or “dollars”. Now suppose our Federal Reserve Banker prints double the dollars. Just lots more “dollars”. Twice as many in fact. Now just printing more “dollars” doesn’t do anything to increase the wealth of the islanders. There are not twice the fish, bananas, or coconuts. Rather quickly the market price will double the price of fish, bananas, and coconuts. Increasing the money supply doesn’t make everyone rich. It just increases prices. Why do it? Because the printer are unjustly enriched. He gets to spend those dollars before the prices adapt. Money that has nothing backing it of value (i.e., gold; silver; or even tiki lamps) is just paper. Worthless the minute that the fraud is discovered.
(...)
So, sooner or later, the Arabs will get tired of getting pictures of dead presidents for oil. Ditto the Japanese for Toyotas. And the Chinese for plastics.
One needs to NOT hold paper money! But what should one “hold”. Things that appreciate in value (i.e., collectables). Real estate. Things that earn value (i.e., stocks that are recession / depression proof). Commodities. And precious metals. Debt in a recession is bad."
http://reinkefaceslife.com/2006/12/29/money-printing-press-money-impoverishes-us-all/
And you should really read this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monetary_policy
dragon, why elect a president anyway if he cannot decide or has political influence on political decisions?
So, you say "it will maybe happen" because someone says "definitely NOT".
That's the point I do not understand.
This contradiction is the reason this question got voided, btw.
That's the point I do not understand.
This contradiction is the reason this question got voided, btw.
err, sorry,
I really would like to know what you are saying, but I just do not understand it.
my apologies if you felt offended. I just summarized your last comment they way I understood it:
"he (Powell) makes the remark ("I'm definitely NOT interested) so it is a maybe question and should be 50/50"
I really would like to know what you are saying, but I just do not understand it.
my apologies if you felt offended. I just summarized your last comment they way I understood it:
"he (Powell) makes the remark ("I'm definitely NOT interested) so it is a maybe question and should be 50/50"
I was close to thinking you were talking about yourself in the third person
so, all others than "we" - ie. those who do not agree with you - are insane?
so, all others than "we" - ie. those who do not agree with you - are insane?
thanks, tisha.
Sorry, all, it was signalized that a decision would be made around this week (see background text).
Sometimes I have the impression that dragon just doesn't know how this game works. or even how to correctly typewrite someone else's name.
Sorry, all, it was signalized that a decision would be made around this week (see background text).
Sometimes I have the impression that dragon just doesn't know how this game works. or even how to correctly typewrite someone else's name.
North Korean diplomats prepare for 'Kim Jongil announcement'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/3221859/North-Korean-diplomats-prepare-for-Kim-Jong-il-announcement.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/3221859/North-Korean-diplomats-prepare-for-Kim-Jong-il-announcement.html
dragonfangxl
even if the organization consists of one single person, this one single person could still kill someone else.
even if the organization consists of one single person, this one single person could still kill someone else.
Amidst the raucous parties and frantic deal making of theFrankfurt Book Fair, the international publishing industry’s largest gathering of the year, there was a salient reminder that writing can be a dangerous business.
Roberto Saviano, the Italian writer who has been living under state protection for the past two years after penning a book about the shady business practices of the Camorra, the organized crime group that operates in his home region around Naples, was at the fair to receive an award for the movie that was based on his book, “Gomorrah.”
http://papercuts.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/17/writing-can-be-a-dangerous-business/
http://papercuts.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/17/writing-can-be-a-dangerous-business/
Roberto Saviano, the Italian writer who has been living under state protection for the past two years after penning a book about the shady business practices of the Camorra, the organized crime group that operates in his home region around Naples, was at the fair to receive an award for the movie that was based on his book, “Gomorrah.”
http://papercuts.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/17/writing-can-be-a-dangerous-business/
http://papercuts.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/17/writing-can-be-a-dangerous-business/
go, ask some people in Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, Dominican Republic, Cambodia, Laos, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Lebanon, Libya, Panama, Kuwait, Somalia, Bosnia, Yemen, Sudan.
just to number some countries. just to number the countries where US army has performed military interventions.
I'm still not referring to any economic issues. Or environmental stuff, or waste of fossil fuels, and such.
just to number some countries. just to number the countries where US army has performed military interventions.
I'm still not referring to any economic issues. Or environmental stuff, or waste of fossil fuels, and such.
Concerning Obama this question IS valid (re. KKK announcements: http://www.google.com/search?q=obama+assassination+kkk )
Concerning McCain (or anyone else), I doubt it.
Concerning McCain (or anyone else), I doubt it.
maybe the question should've been THIRD place (with low odds for Obama and McCain)
you could try that, I'm sure
you could try that, I'm sure
Original press release by the TRA:
http://www.toyretailersassociation.co.uk/press/presrels/Dream_Toys_press_release_08_-_FINAL.pdf
http://www.toyretailersassociation.co.uk/press/presrels/Dream_Toys_press_release_08_-_FINAL.pdf
something like wild-west films actor for president?
or axxxion film actor for governor, right?
that _is_ fun, lol !
or axxxion film actor for governor, right?
that _is_ fun, lol !
"Rumor has it that the Democrats are also already in the process of installing tiny microfiber antennas in Joe Biden’s hairpiece that are capable of rendering speech-correcting shock-waves to the gaffe-prone VP candidate just in time for next week’s VP debate with Gov. Sarah Palin."
ROFL
ROFL
Defending champion Viswanathan Anand's precise defense neutralized a small advantage for challenger Vladimir Kramnik in the opening game of the world chess championship Tuesday, and the game ended in a draw after 32 moves.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/20081014-1117-eu-germany-chess.html
Some more and recent background articles:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/14/crosswords/chess/14chess.html?ref=world
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2008/10/13/result081013.xml
Homepage of the tournament:
http://www.uep-worldchess.com/
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/20081014-1117-eu-germany-chess.html
Some more and recent background articles:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/14/crosswords/chess/14chess.html?ref=world
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2008/10/13/result081013.xml
Homepage of the tournament:
http://www.uep-worldchess.com/
BTW: The high-tech machines are already in use at Amsterdam's Schiphol airport, which introduced them in May 2007 following a year-long trial at crew security checkpoints.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idUKTRE4961CO20081007
http://www.infrastructure.gov.au
http://uk.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idUKTRE4961CO20081007
http://www.infrastructure.gov.au
Robbie Williams has ended his strike against his record label, EMI, and is scheduled to release a new album next year
The singer's manager, Tim Clark, told BBC Newsbeat that he couldn't guarantee a new album for 2009, but that that was Williams' aim..
http://www.nme.com/news/robbie-williams/40241
The singer's manager, Tim Clark, told BBC Newsbeat that he couldn't guarantee a new album for 2009, but that that was Williams' aim..
http://www.nme.com/news/robbie-williams/40241
Guns N' Roses to release new album next month
More than a decade after its conception, Guns N' Roses' "Chinese Democracy" will finally see the light of day before year's end, sources close to the situation told Billboard.
The set will be a Best Buy exclusive and will be available Sunday, November 23, rather than the usual Tuesday.
http://www.reuters.com/article/musicNews/idUSTRE49898V20081009
More than a decade after its conception, Guns N' Roses' "Chinese Democracy" will finally see the light of day before year's end, sources close to the situation told Billboard.
The set will be a Best Buy exclusive and will be available Sunday, November 23, rather than the usual Tuesday.
http://www.reuters.com/article/musicNews/idUSTRE49898V20081009
Guns N' Roses to release new album next month
More than a decade after its conception, Guns N' Roses' "Chinese Democracy" will finally see the light of day before year's end, sources close to the situation told Billboard.
The set will be a Best Buy exclusive and will be available Sunday, November 23, rather than the usual Tuesday.
http://www.reuters.com/article/musicNews/idUSTRE49898V20081009
More than a decade after its conception, Guns N' Roses' "Chinese Democracy" will finally see the light of day before year's end, sources close to the situation told Billboard.
The set will be a Best Buy exclusive and will be available Sunday, November 23, rather than the usual Tuesday.
http://www.reuters.com/article/musicNews/idUSTRE49898V20081009
The 12 hour rule doesn't forbid you to create "ultra short termed" markets.
It just isn't possible for the creator himself - and only for the creator himself - to bet on the question.
It isn't allowed to cash-out predictions within the 12 hours, but seen the "ultra short" terminess of such a market it doesn't make sense to cash-out in the first place.
In most occasions, the questions can be created well ahead of the event, so the need of "ultra short" term questions is IMO not that relevant. Please note that creating "ultra short term" (ie. 1 hour or less from creation to settlement) are often created in a hurry and as such are often ambiguous in wording and predictions options.
Another problem is where to put the startings odds. Say, you create a simple "Will it happen"-Yes/No question which will settle within one hour. Every minute of delay in the creation process makes the "No" option more apparent. And at a certain level, ie. just minutes before the end of a match, the outcome would even reach a 99% secure level.
0.02HD$
It just isn't possible for the creator himself - and only for the creator himself - to bet on the question.
It isn't allowed to cash-out predictions within the 12 hours, but seen the "ultra short" terminess of such a market it doesn't make sense to cash-out in the first place.
In most occasions, the questions can be created well ahead of the event, so the need of "ultra short" term questions is IMO not that relevant. Please note that creating "ultra short term" (ie. 1 hour or less from creation to settlement) are often created in a hurry and as such are often ambiguous in wording and predictions options.
Another problem is where to put the startings odds. Say, you create a simple "Will it happen"-Yes/No question which will settle within one hour. Every minute of delay in the creation process makes the "No" option more apparent. And at a certain level, ie. just minutes before the end of a match, the outcome would even reach a 99% secure level.
0.02HD$
@dieseldog
unfortunately, you can read it both ways because the question title refers to the month of October.
I personally tend to see it the way you do but am not sure myself how I would decide.
unfortunately, you can read it both ways because the question title refers to the month of October.
I personally tend to see it the way you do but am not sure myself how I would decide.
randburg might be right in stating this question being lame.
I wouldn't predict "no" neither. But hey, the guys at reuters are humans too after all. They have to learn what makes the difference just like anyone else of us here.
Just because of the market being not very attractive it not a reason to void it right away.
I wouldn't predict "no" neither. But hey, the guys at reuters are humans too after all. They have to learn what makes the difference just like anyone else of us here.
Just because of the market being not very attractive it not a reason to void it right away.
huuui "as the greatest source for good in this world"
even if it's true or close to, its quite vain just to say something like that
*ducking and awaiting angry comments telling US actually IS the greatest source - which I did not want to decide by posting this*
:-)
even if it's true or close to, its quite vain just to say something like that
*ducking and awaiting angry comments telling US actually IS the greatest source - which I did not want to decide by posting this*
:-)
duh, close
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jgQq_Pn5o6mQHLQWGyzBoiaz4nOwD93LIHI80
even more tragic, actually
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jgQq_Pn5o6mQHLQWGyzBoiaz4nOwD93LIHI80
even more tragic, actually
oh, well, seems to have been already answered.
sometimes it's even valuable to read the settlement details :)
sometimes it's even valuable to read the settlement details :)
well, close:
"Gourmet Hans Locher cooks up trouble with human milk recipes"
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/food_and_drink/article4776425.ece
but he did not do it, in the end.
"Gourmet Hans Locher cooks up trouble with human milk recipes"
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/food_and_drink/article4776425.ece
but he did not do it, in the end.
@meanderingsearcher
likelihood cannot be modified after the question has been published because it would affect any wagers made. only thing which can be done is to recreate the question with other likelihoods.
likelihood cannot be modified after the question has been published because it would affect any wagers made. only thing which can be done is to recreate the question with other likelihoods.
@thepeoplegeekllc and anyone else who thinks this question ought to be settled:
please, please read the background of the question carefully. you even might consider reading linked articles to really understand what these citations refer to ("first beams are injected", "first collisions"). you will recognize that the question just doesn't settle yet. the question will not change just because you repeat your questions. doing so, only shows that you did not fully read (or understood) the question background.
@anyone else: DFTT
please, please read the background of the question carefully. you even might consider reading linked articles to really understand what these citations refer to ("first beams are injected", "first collisions"). you will recognize that the question just doesn't settle yet. the question will not change just because you repeat your questions. doing so, only shows that you did not fully read (or understood) the question background.
@anyone else: DFTT
@bananaman22
if you'd requested settlement you'd probably get your money.
oh, you did not?
well, than I'll do it for you :-)
if you'd requested settlement you'd probably get your money.
oh, you did not?
well, than I'll do it for you :-)
@curios
it would have been possible just to flag this question asking the cated to correct the typo for you. that way you didn't have to get this question voided.
it would have been possible just to flag this question asking the cated to correct the typo for you. that way you didn't have to get this question voided.
no, the link is not dead. hudbud just doesn't parse the link correctly, look:
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/economic-preview-weakness-data-just/story.aspx?guid={EC801A3E-BB00-4914-B846-C8DC032F47B8}&dist=hplatest
you need to copy/paste the while link into the address field of your browser. it works fine than.
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/economic-preview-weakness-data-just/story.aspx?guid={EC801A3E-BB00-4914-B846-C8DC032F47B8}&dist=hplatest
you need to copy/paste the while link into the address field of your browser. it works fine than.
Hi, I just added an image to your question.
With this image your question can become one of the featured questions, promoted on the hubdub homepage. I deliberately chose an image which I though would match your question intentions best. If, however, you do not agree with it, please flag the question to the category editor.
Regards
Oh, and hey, I knew Fortis :-)
With this image your question can become one of the featured questions, promoted on the hubdub homepage. I deliberately chose an image which I though would match your question intentions best. If, however, you do not agree with it, please flag the question to the category editor.
Regards
Oh, and hey, I knew Fortis :-)
more than 2000 jobs each of the people? only within September? that's 66.7 jobs to loose per day!?
wow, employment must be horrible in the US
:-P
wow, employment must be horrible in the US
:-P
the first swap of super users promoted to be cat eds (partly) so new supers were needed.
but hey, they don't give these wings to some randomly chosen kind ;-)
but hey, they don't give these wings to some randomly chosen kind ;-)
Hi, I just added an image to your question.
With this image your question can become one of the featured questions, promoted on the hubdub homepage. I deliberately chose an image which I though would match your question intentions best. If, however, you do not agree with it, please flag the question to the category editor.
Regards
With this image your question can become one of the featured questions, promoted on the hubdub homepage. I deliberately chose an image which I though would match your question intentions best. If, however, you do not agree with it, please flag the question to the category editor.
Regards
These are the outlines of the plan:
- Issuing up to 700 billion US dollars of Treasury securities to finance the purchase of banks' "troubled" mortgage-related assets.
- The price of assets purchases will be established through "market mechanisms where possible, such as reverse auctions" (This would mean banks would compete to sell their assets at the lowest prices).
- It is to be funded through extending the US national debt, or in other words, the US taxpayer.
- The assets must have been originated or issued on or before September 17, 2008.
- Participating financial institutions must have "significant" operations in the US, but Mr Paulson has the capacity to widen the uptake if it is deemed "necessary to effectively stabilise financial markets"
If any of these are changed, or no agreement is made this week, the question settles as NO.
- Issuing up to 700 billion US dollars of Treasury securities to finance the purchase of banks' "troubled" mortgage-related assets.
- The price of assets purchases will be established through "market mechanisms where possible, such as reverse auctions" (This would mean banks would compete to sell their assets at the lowest prices).
- It is to be funded through extending the US national debt, or in other words, the US taxpayer.
- The assets must have been originated or issued on or before September 17, 2008.
- Participating financial institutions must have "significant" operations in the US, but Mr Paulson has the capacity to widen the uptake if it is deemed "necessary to effectively stabilise financial markets"
If any of these are changed, or no agreement is made this week, the question settles as NO.
Hi, I just added an image to your question.
With this image your question can become one of the featured questions, promoted on the hubdub homepage. I deliberately chose an image which I though would match your question intentions best. If, however, you do not agree with it, please flag the question to the category editor.
Regards
Leuk, trouwens, een Nederlander :-)
With this image your question can become one of the featured questions, promoted on the hubdub homepage. I deliberately chose an image which I though would match your question intentions best. If, however, you do not agree with it, please flag the question to the category editor.
Regards
Leuk, trouwens, een Nederlander :-)
Hi, I just added an image to your question.
With this image your question can become one of the featured questions, promoted on the hubdub homepage. I deliberately chose an image which I though would match your question intentions best. If, however, you do not agree with it, please flag the question to the category editor.
Regards
With this image your question can become one of the featured questions, promoted on the hubdub homepage. I deliberately chose an image which I though would match your question intentions best. If, however, you do not agree with it, please flag the question to the category editor.
Regards
especially regarding the 1,000,000,000,000 USD aid to the financial markets and the impact on the value of the USD
Yes it ended damaged.
But the damage was not result of the experiments. And the results of the experiments are topic of this question - not just the machine turned on. (OK, the title indicates it does, but it was never meant so: Please read question background)
The current headlines exactly indicate what is intended by this question: "Large Hadron Collider won't end world for months" (http://www.itexaminer.com/large-hadron-collider-wont-end-world-for-months.aspx) "Quest for 'Big Bang' delayed by fault in Hadron Collider" (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/quest-for-big-bang-delayed-by-fault-in-hadron-collider-936314.html)
But the damage was not result of the experiments. And the results of the experiments are topic of this question - not just the machine turned on. (OK, the title indicates it does, but it was never meant so: Please read question background)
The current headlines exactly indicate what is intended by this question: "Large Hadron Collider won't end world for months" (http://www.itexaminer.com/large-hadron-collider-wont-end-world-for-months.aspx) "Quest for 'Big Bang' delayed by fault in Hadron Collider" (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/quest-for-big-bang-delayed-by-fault-in-hadron-collider-936314.html)
"most americans favor more drilling" really? How do you know?
To answer your question:
Why are you restricted by a speed limit on highways? Didn't the politicians stop you from driving as fast as you want there?
Extreme example: Didn't they make a law which tells us killing people ain't allowed? Do you want a politician telling you how much people you can or cannot kill?
Politicians make laws. Politicians are telling us all along what we are allowed and what not.
It's their duty to protect people from doing stupid things, harm each other, and therefor to impose restrictions.
It's their job.
To answer your question:
Why are you restricted by a speed limit on highways? Didn't the politicians stop you from driving as fast as you want there?
Extreme example: Didn't they make a law which tells us killing people ain't allowed? Do you want a politician telling you how much people you can or cannot kill?
Politicians make laws. Politicians are telling us all along what we are allowed and what not.
It's their duty to protect people from doing stupid things, harm each other, and therefor to impose restrictions.
It's their job.
Hi, I just added an image to your question.
With this image your question can become one of the featured questions, promoted on the hubdub homepage. I deliberately chose an image which I though would match your question intentions best. If, however, you do not agree with it, please flag the question to the category editor.
Regards
With this image your question can become one of the featured questions, promoted on the hubdub homepage. I deliberately chose an image which I though would match your question intentions best. If, however, you do not agree with it, please flag the question to the category editor.
Regards
Hi, I just added an image to your question.
With this image your question can become one of the featured questions, promoted on the hubdub homepage. I deliberately chose an image which I though would match your question intentions best. If, however, you do not agree with it, please flag the question to the category editor.
Regards
With this image your question can become one of the featured questions, promoted on the hubdub homepage. I deliberately chose an image which I though would match your question intentions best. If, however, you do not agree with it, please flag the question to the category editor.
Regards
well said, lola
I'm confident that most americans see it this way which is way this question settled "no"
http://www.hubdub.com/m9649/Will_Drill_Here_Drill_Now_petition_reach_2_million_signatures_by_7152008
I'm confident that most americans see it this way which is way this question settled "no"
http://www.hubdub.com/m9649/Will_Drill_Here_Drill_Now_petition_reach_2_million_signatures_by_7152008
Hi, I just added an image to your question.
With this image your question can become one of the featured questions, promoted on the hubdub homepage. I deliberately chose an image which I though would match your question intentions best. If, however, you do not agree with it, please flag the question to the category editor.
Regards
With this image your question can become one of the featured questions, promoted on the hubdub homepage. I deliberately chose an image which I though would match your question intentions best. If, however, you do not agree with it, please flag the question to the category editor.
Regards
Pressure builds on Brown as minister quits
"A junior minister resigned from Prime Minister Gordon Brown's government on Tuesday, increasing the pressure for a leadership challenge against the embattled Labour Party leader.
(...)
Many in Brown's governing Labour Party are dismayed at opinion polls showing the main opposition Conservatives leading Labour by more than 20 points with a general election looming by May 2010.
(...)"
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gZeydG3fV7hgQQPsHWNef0hoUPJA
"A junior minister resigned from Prime Minister Gordon Brown's government on Tuesday, increasing the pressure for a leadership challenge against the embattled Labour Party leader.
(...)
Many in Brown's governing Labour Party are dismayed at opinion polls showing the main opposition Conservatives leading Labour by more than 20 points with a general election looming by May 2010.
(...)"
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gZeydG3fV7hgQQPsHWNef0hoUPJA
:)=