brainless

kasm: The bombings did not end the war, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were two of the few cities left which hadn't been destroyed yet by a firestorm like in the german city of Dresden in late February of 1945 (test run, in the middle of march the same tactic began to be used against japanese cities). The japanese government was about to surrender even without the bombs being dropped... To quote President Truman [the maniac who gave the order to use those bombs]: Actually, this was the Manhattan Project's ultimate goal, developing _and_ using a nuclear bomb. There was no other way to justify employing about 100,000 people and spending billions of tax dollars. That Truman said the bombs have to be used as a means of war according to the "Haager Landkriegsordnung" [sorry, I don't know the english name of this document ... it's about regulating warfare...] but there are two points which show that they were not used like that: a) together with the bombs, some probes were dropped to measure the amount of radiation etc around the cities (which might have been meant to give useful information to doctors after the war but since the american scientist/medic teams which were sent to Hiroshima and Nagasaki only documentated the destruction and suffering but refused to help, this was obviously not the reason), the US military put pressure on the japanese government to refuse medical aid by the Red Cross and, most interesting when talking about this aspect of the nuclear bombings, it took the US about 7 years to grant japanese medics and scientists access to information about radiational effects to the human body; just like before in other cities, the US military leadership definitely did not mean to spare civilians because once again, two cities were nearly completely destroyed; both nukes together killed about 150,000 people immediately, another 75,000 within the following months and even now the number of diseases related to radiation is very high compared to the rest of the world [except places like Chernobyl; areas around nuclear power plants or areas where some army used depleted uranium ammunition]... ----- I did not mean to justify any nations war crimes here, there's just one little difference: After WWII, most nation's populations were forced to face the crimes done by their armies and sometimes themselves (and were rightfully forced); the US people however did not realize the crime done on their behalf but swallowed the justifications...

well, personally I don't support the "Intelligent Design" [iD] theory but I fully accept the point "both sides ought to be taught properly" - at least if it's really meant this way. Let's wait and see whether Bush speaks in favor of education in marxism or the islam as well during the next few weeks...

that's cheating well, I figured that out myself but I consider myself rather a mass murderer than a serial killer

*none*by the way, did anyone of you notice that many people are afraid of a human body itself nowadays, including its smell?

happy birthday (and now take some hosting credits from me for this one-liner)

I'm a rather good swimmer (well, if you compare my swmming skills to the masses'; I'm more in the middle field in my swimming group but hey, who cares?) and absolutely love swimming.I've turned to the lifeguarding swimming styles about 11 years ago and am very happy that I've learned not only how to swim but also how to pull someone out. Unfortunately, most people spend their free time at the lake during summer but quite a lot can't swim, probably because they never learned it. That's not a problem as long as they stick to a rule of thumb for non-swimmers, "go in until the water reaches your breast maximum", but if they go in further someone has to be there to pull 'em out and sadly, it's usually children who go in further than what they can cope with. Since I'm working at the local outdoor swimming pool I'm noticing children struggling with water too deep for them way more often than at the lake - but for some stupid reason, the parents at the pool don't notice that their children have problems as often as at the lake :/Did I mention that I consider basic swimming a skill as necessary as first aid or something? You don't have to like being in the water, you should just be able to get yourself out of it when you fall in by accident (and accidents happen more often than you'd like them to...)

I suppose we can ignore the threat a ground-based laser weapon [those like in CD-drives are not considered a weapon in this case ] poses to anything in its path since that's just some insects, birds, sometimes planes and as it's supposed to be, an unfriendly missile. When a plane fires a laser at a missile below it might hit something it wasn't supposed to but that will be called "collateral damage" :/anyways, assuming a hit quote of 100% it might be pretty safe since a missile has metal shielding on all sides and not only where the laser hits it, so you'd have to cut through the first layer of metal and the navigation system (or the explosives, causing them to explode before the missile reaches its destination, thereby rendering it undangerous) before the laser hits the second layer of metal, which will probably take another couple of seconds...

yeah, and radar-guided rays are way less likely to miss the target and it's way more likely that they actually leave the ground *cough* didn't the Pentagon declare the last Star Wars-test launch as successful even though the counter-missile didn't leave the launch platform? ;D

finally a development which I don't dislike for being de facto useless though it might be interesting to see what a person with destructive ideas could do to a plane when he or she somehow receives control over one of these systems... ;p

I avoid members of police forces on duty as much as possible, among other things I tend to work trouble with other people out without police assistance... ... and no, it's not against my principles to ask other people with the equipment necessary to help me for help. If the next person with such equipment available happens to be a cop - who cares? -> http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ ...no comment...

sorry guys and gals but I'll have to bring this back up again. I've just discovered an article about a person who survived sitting near one of the bombs when it went off. This is about what he says about the bomb: -> http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ well, we'll see what the investigation results are but keep in mind that we're talking about an eye-witness' report (and there should be at least one police officer who might be able to confirm this story though I don't think he'll do this or even be allowed to). I just hope the result doesn't say "intelligence failed" (9/11/2001 -- attacks were expected, others knew about the hijacked planes, others believed they were part of a wargame involving hijacked planes) or "high level-police and secret service were involved" (11/3/2004 -- members of the secret service provided explosives and detonators, high-ranked people in the police provided logistical support)... oh, and before I forget: I found this picture of the tube Mr Lait was on on the BBC website: -> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/4722775.stm (pic 4 of 9) I couldn't make out much yet but maybe someone can identify anything that might fit to the theory of the bomb having been beneath the train?

Yes, I've got it in for the British police - and for the german and for the US american and for the french and for the russian and for any other armed forces. It's just that the UK's in the press right now, at any given day I could fetch you reports about human rights violations by any given nation's security forces (be it police, be it military, be it paramilitary, be it secret service -- about some there are more reports, less about others). As you have realized, an innocent person has been killed. Now you offer your sympathies, just as your government, the police and many other people do. But what good do these sympathies do Jean Charles de Menezes (aka victim of a racist system)? Can you undo the terrible mistake like you could release him from jail when he turns out to be innocent? Yes, someone will be held accountable - but this person will not receive the death penalty, this person will not even be imprisoned as long as the court will sentence him to (it has happened before, it will happen again) and walk out of prison as a free man. Did you keep in mind tha Sir Ian predicted that "someone else will be shot" in London's 'war on terrorism'? Who can promise that the next person shot by police officers will not be innocent, again? Can you? You shouldn't, because when the next innocent dies you won't remember this promise... Yeah, London's citizens might be a bit upset after some people carried the war they keep up back to them. In some places in the "Middle East", innocent people are killed by security forces (namely police, military and foreign military) every day, and no one who is being listened to complains about this. Why do british leaders apologize to Mr. Menezes' friends and family but not to the Iraqi people? Is it ok to kill hundreds of thousands innocent people abroad while it's not ok to kill one innocent person "at home"? Yes, we live in uncertain times and yes, we need some form of stability - but if it's instability or racism (after all, the "good guys" are from the USA, Canada, EU-Europe, Japan, Australia, New Zealand and sometimes South Africa while the "bad guys" are from "Eastern Europe", the "Middle East", South America, all Asia which isn't Japan and sometimes India and Africa), I'll opt for instability. Do we need them to kill (or injure) people? During most of my encounters with the police I felt rather felt threatend by them and not protected (did you ever feel how a Tonfa feels like when it hits your head? It's not nice ... and I was only sitting on the ground... Yep, but I'm about to move to London for some months, even though "your" police is just as bad as ours. By the way, I'm rather anti-violence than anti-British police, no matter under which circumstances (though I respect the right to self-defence, which was not given in this case)... Just a short explanation why I think I may criticize the British police just as much as the US police, german police and Irani police: Due to bi- and multilateral agreements, german law is somewhat near to british law and usually, the situation in Germany becomes similar to the situation in the UK and the USA a few years later. I don't want it to go into this direction so I raise my voice against it, both on national and international basis [oh, and to make things more complex: I object Nationalism as well...]. I suppose I'm right when I see this forum as an international forum. You're free to criticize the german police, people, whatever as well. You're also free to criticize people who don't fit into your view on the world, just as I accept that there are people who think it's ok the way it is...

He didn't carry a bag and some eye-witness gave false reports (in early BBC stories there where witness quoted who said that some wires sticked out of his coat).A co-worker of mine and I just figured out that we shouldn't appear in public anymore since we're way more dangerous than someone who simply lived in the same block of flats as a terrorist -- we're working at a swimming pool and have access to three brand-new bottles of chlorine, about 500 liters (about 120 gallons if I'm not mistaken) each. Guess what one single person could do with those - and we could order another set of those without anyone becoming suspicious. ok, the next subway station is a few cities away but the next large train station is just a few kilometres from the pool......so why don't people get the idea of executing us? we actually figured out how to kill and severely injure hundreds of people and probably won't encounter any problems while doing this...

*update* Here's the police story on BBC (for those who'd like to have an english source and not a german one): http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4712061.stm And, according to BBC News, well, might be somebody just as innocent. Just another note towards police incompetence: A friend of mine whom I trust about finding valuable informations has read somewhere that the person shot left a house with a couple appartements to rent. So the reason why he was suspected to be linked to a terrorist group is that he lived in the same block of flats. Maybe the London police should execute all of London citizens, just to make sure that no person who could be linked to a terrorist group in any way remains in the city? well, I don't want to stray off-topic here by suggesting who profits the most from the "terrorist threat", cheers to the world's leaders...

As many news corporations reported, the british police shot a person suspected to be linked to the "failed" London bombings earlier this month because he refused to stop when a police officer in civilian clothing asked him to do so but ran into a subway station, where an police officer killed him with five shots into the head after he tripped and fell. Eye witnesses described the killing as if it was rather a cold-blooded murder than as an act of maintaining public security: -> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4706787.stm The official story is that the man shot refused to obey police instructions. What most news sites do not mention while they write about the police instructions is that they came from cops in civilian clothing. In my opinion the "suspect" was absolutely right to make a run for it because about two weeks ago, a muslim has been beaten to death due to his religion: -> http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ And as if this wasn't enough - I just read [unfortunately on a german-only news site] that Scotland Yard announced that the man shot was an innocent person, a spokesperson said: -> http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ oh, and by the way, he's been suspected to be involved in the "failed" bombings for leaving a house which was observed by the police. That's all. Leave the wrong house, run when people on the street ask you to stop - and be killed... To say it with the words of a favorite band of mine:

I suppose he's complaining because he really thinks that she's not interested in him anymore.My advice would be that you tell him to speak with her about his feelings, otherwise the two of them won't be able to work this out...

if it's a small file I suggest you ask the person who shall receive the file to overwrite the existing file, thereby starting the transfer from scratch.If you can resume DCC sends to other users it might be something with the other person's settings ... just ask someone else [especially someone who knows that DCC resume usually works for him/her] to help you figuring out the problem and send him a file, interrupt the send and try to resume...

I know, some time ago someone else started a debate on the same topic but somehow (I suppose it was not intentionally) twisted the facts so that the message was "China threatened the USA". This statement is _not_ true but the issue is interesting even without a current threat. So what happened that makes me bring this topic onto the agenda? According to the Financial Times, the chinese General Zhu Chenghu told a group of forein journalists that China might start a nuclear war if the USA decide to attack China in order to protect Taiwan, which is considered chinese territory by the chinese government. As you might see yourself, Gen Zhu's war threat is harmless unless the USA decide to attack China and devastate one third of the country first (-> Map of China in the CIA World Factbook). As this is currently very unlikely to happen, the chinese response to this is just as unlikely. And, one more quote to comfort the US citizens (and all others who might feel threatend by China now) among us: Sources (both Financial Times): (1) "Top chinese general warns US over attack" (2) "Beijing plays down general's threats" so much about the story, let's start the debate: As the FT quoted the chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, China does not intend to be the first to use nuclear weapons against an enemy but does not object to strike back. So where's the real threat now? I'd say it's the US since the Pentagon has plans to develop "Mini nukes" which shall be used to destroy bunkers and similar targets without harming the surroundings (which is, physically, nearly impossible). These nuclear weapons might be ready to use when the US government decides to intervene in the China-Taiwan-dispute and will probably be used since US military officials strongly deny that mini nukes might affect the area around a bunker. Only when this happens, the chinese government has a reason to strike back with their own nukes. by the way: China has "only" about 20 nukes without "first strike"-option while the USA have several thousands and do have plans for doing a nuclear first strike...

actually, while some of the leaders you mentioned would be pretty good for a leftist party in the conventional understanding of politics, I chose "other" because I am against hierarchies like we have in political parties but support "flat" hierarchies where anyone is able to take the lead with the consent of the basis (and can lose it just as fast...). When I see how political parties develop their programs around here, I'm kind of disgusted - all the people who are already at the top are allowed to state their opinion while next to none from the base are allowed to speak...

My first screen's an 17" CRT running 1280x1024@85Hz, my second screen's an 15" CRT running 800x600@60Hz [unfortunately it can't go higher than 800x600]...

I've spent something like 7 or 8 years learning english by now, I suppose I can read it, have a good understanding of what I read about and am somewhat capable of dealing with conversations [but I'm gonna give spanish a try when I've got some time to spare; right now I've got an unqualified full-time job for the summer in which I earn quite a bit, which is hard to get around here...]

hiya everyone, I'd like to hear some opinions on my newest plan for the next year in my life:Half a year ago I considered applying for exchange programmes to some african nations [in the end I settled for Ghana or Nigeria] but except for one organization they all took an application fee of about 50 Euros which I absolutely couldn't afford back then and unfortunately I didn't get an answer to my application from the organization which didn't take an application fee.I just researched this topic again and found some other programs but all of them would require me to pay more than I can afford...... but when I read about a "Work Experience Program" to several nations [which would require 50 euros application fee plus about 400 euros participation fee] I had another thought: Wouldn't it be possible to travel to London for something like two weeks or a month, try to find some small job in a pub or supermarket and check up with the bureaucracy so I can make a living for something like half a year and go back home then?...and if I don't make it within the two weeks, I could just go back home to mom and dad just as if I'd been on holiday, couldn't I?sounds like a plan to me but what do you people think about it? Is there maybe someone from the UK around who could give me some legal advice?

we've got the Vent for the moaning and complaining [with post count - but you still have to think before you post] :Pas I tend to try to avoid thinking in extremes, I say that the meaning which the word "hate" has is way too extreme to use it easily. But as you said - yes, even I think that I don't only strongly dislike but really hate it when car drivers ignore bike riders. During the last two weeks, I've prevented four or five accidents which would have hurt me pretty much without the persons in the car even noticing me - and these incidents happened in the middle of the day when drivers should pay attention when crossing bike lanes or sidewalks 'cause when people start noticing that they're safer on the streets those will become pretty crowded...

This topic is already being discussed here: http://forums.xisto.com/topic/24209-multiple-explosions-rock-london-blasts-in-london/

ok, so some African countries get the possibility of a $50 billion relief program. But: This has been decided by the G8-nation's secretaries of finances about half a year ago, the only thing they've done now was presenting this to the public. Actually, the secretaries said they'd manage to raise $56 billion and not just $50 billion.The sad thing: Those countries who are supposed to be in this program from the start already did so and the 20 nations who might get involved within the next few years - will have to fulfill the extremes of the neoliberal dogma before they can get some of the money. A hint: Since Argentine, the world should know that open, unregulated markets can become very instable and in the World Development Report 2004 [published by the WTO], the WTO finally admitted indirectly that Neoliberalism is not the source of wealth...