Bend over, here it comes...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...-84125052.html

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

Jim Thompson wrote:
Bend over, here it comes...



This is exactly what chris matthews and others have been wanting all
along... he's been waiting for that tingle to go up a little higher for far
too long.

"Jim Thompson" wrote in
message ...
Bend over, here it comes...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...-84125052.html

...Jim Thompson


Then everyone will be saying "Miss me yet?"
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2010/02/11/bush_fans_beckon_from_minn_billboard/

Cheers

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:17:53 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:44:34 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Bend over, here it comes...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...-84125052.html

...Jim Thompson

Dick Cheney was right when he said Obama was a charlatan.

And turn off your cell phones...

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10451518-38.html

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 19:14:17 -0500, "Martin Riddle"
wrote:



"Jim Thompson" wrote in
message ...
Bend over, here it comes...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...-84125052.html

...Jim Thompson


Then everyone will be saying "Miss me yet?"
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2010/02/11/bush_fans_beckon_from_minn_billboard/

Cheers


That's all the more amazing when you realize that Minnesota is almost
as leftist a state as Massachusetts.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:20:27 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:17:53 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:44:34 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Bend over, here it comes...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...-84125052.html

...Jim Thompson

Dick Cheney was right when he said Obama was a charlatan.

And turn off your cell phones...

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10451518-38.html

...Jim Thompson


You would rather they hadn't caught the bank robbers?

"Herbert John "Jackie" Gleason" wrote in
message ...
On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:20:27 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:17:53 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:44:34 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Bend over, here it comes...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...-84125052.html

...Jim Thompson

Dick Cheney was right when he said Obama was a charlatan.

And turn off your cell phones...

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10451518-38.html

You would rather they hadn't caught the bank robbers?

You shall not have door locks, curtains/shades. And do not forget to report
all you movement to the nearest NKVD station.
You have nothing to hide, don't you?
--
Andrew

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 23:38:32 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 19:44:57 -0800, "Herbert John \"Jackie\" Gleason"
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:20:27 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:17:53 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:44:34 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Bend over, here it comes...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...-84125052.html

...Jim Thompson

Dick Cheney was right when he said Obama was a charlatan.

And turn off your cell phones...

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10451518-38.html

...Jim Thompson


You would rather they hadn't caught the bank robbers?

That's poor logic. For one, it presumes there was no other way to
catch them and it further presumes the government's position is the
only procedural mechanism for accomplishing it.

As a general principle the ends do not justify the means and, to wit,
routine warrantless searches of all homes, say once a week, would
catch a lot of criminals too but would you support that idea? No?
You'd rather not catch crooks?

If the government's position really is as stated, that "any record
held by a third party about us, no matter how invasively collected, is
not protected by the Fourth Amendment" is accurate then the 4'th
amendment is effectively eviscerated since, in this day and age,
virtually everything you do shows up in some 'third party record'
somewhere.

That is a damned sight better than the way the profiling *******s
currently solve ZERO crime unless it falls in their laps, which is why
they do the profiling thing. The only way they can nab a dealer is if
they perform as many illegal searches they can. The sad part is that it
invariably ends up causing problems for the regular citizenry.

Herbert John "Jackie" Gleason wrote:
On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 23:38:32 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 19:44:57 -0800, "Herbert John \"Jackie\" Gleason"
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:20:27 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:17:53 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:44:34 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Bend over, here it comes...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...-84125052.html

...Jim Thompson
Dick Cheney was right when he said Obama was a charlatan.
And turn off your cell phones...

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10451518-38.html

...Jim Thompson

You would rather they hadn't caught the bank robbers?
That's poor logic. For one, it presumes there was no other way to
catch them and it further presumes the government's position is the
only procedural mechanism for accomplishing it.

As a general principle the ends do not justify the means and, to wit,
routine warrantless searches of all homes, say once a week, would
catch a lot of criminals too but would you support that idea? No?
You'd rather not catch crooks?

If the government's position really is as stated, that "any record
held by a third party about us, no matter how invasively collected, is
not protected by the Fourth Amendment" is accurate then the 4'th
amendment is effectively eviscerated since, in this day and age,
virtually everything you do shows up in some 'third party record'
somewhere.

That is a damned sight better than the way the profiling *******s
currently solve ZERO crime unless it falls in their laps, which is why
they do the profiling thing. The only way they can nab a dealer is if
they perform as many illegal searches they can. The sad part is that it
invariably ends up causing problems for the regular citizenry.
Partial solutions, IN ORDER:
1) ALL searches are illegal by anybody for any reason unless agreed upon
by ALL directly affected parties, PERIOD.
2) ALL drugs are made legal, just tax them like is (now) done with alcohol.
3) Abandon, discard, forbid the so-called TSA (security? what is that?
Oh...5 gov paid snoozing idiots for each awake dunderhead).
4) Pass a law that EVERY congress critter MUST follow exactly all laws
and regulations that they have passed and will pass; AND that they shall
have NO privileges other than US "voters".
5) Pass a law that cannot be broken that for ANY lawmaking group to pass
a law that group MUST FIRST repeal at least three other laws.
(oops! we have so many...make that "repeal at least 100 laws" ; slightly
more equitable).
A start....small start; better than none.

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 05:28:12 -0600, flipper wrote:

The "profiling thing?" Like what? Like if a victim says it was a 6
foot male they 'profile' for 6 foot males instead of also rounding up
a 'politically correct' number of 4 foot females?


You're a ****ing idiot. Have you never watched "Cops"? The profiling
behavior is blatant.

Then, there is experiencing it first hand as well, of course.

You have never seen a cop pull someone over for a ticket, and it
requires 3 cops to show up so they can shake down the car?

You are a ****ing loon. And no, there was no politically motivated
reaction at all, you stupid twit.

And NO, you stupid ****, I gave no endorsement for any of the practices
mentioned by the thread either.

Do you always make **** up about people?

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 05:35:28 -0600, flipper wrote:


Well, that would certainly ensure that only the certifiably brain dead
criminal ever gets searched because no one with a better than room
temperature I.Q. would ever agree to it.


Now ask yourself why, ya dumb little *******.

"Jim Thompson" wrote in
message ...
Bend over, here it comes...

You bend over - I'm not into that sort of thing.

flipper wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 19:44:57 -0800, "Herbert John \"Jackie\" Gleason"
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:20:27 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:17:53 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:44:34 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Bend over, here it comes...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...-84125052.html

...Jim Thompson

Dick Cheney was right when he said Obama was a charlatan.

And turn off your cell phones...

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10451518-38.html

...Jim Thompson


You would rather they hadn't caught the bank robbers?

That's poor logic. For one, it presumes there was no other way to
catch them and it further presumes the government's position is the
only procedural mechanism for accomplishing it.

As a general principle the ends do not justify the means and, to wit,
routine warrantless searches of all homes, say once a week, would
catch a lot of criminals too but would you support that idea? No?
You'd rather not catch crooks?

If the government's position really is as stated, that "any record
held by a third party about us, no matter how invasively collected, is
not protected by the Fourth Amendment" is accurate then the 4'th
amendment is effectively eviscerated since, in this day and age,
virtually everything you do shows up in some 'third party record'
somewhere.


If they ever make Dimbulb have a competency hearing, his record on
Usenet would have him committed for life.


--
Greed is the root of all eBay.

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:03:48 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


flipper wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 19:44:57 -0800, "Herbert John \"Jackie\" Gleason"
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:20:27 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:17:53 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:44:34 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Bend over, here it comes...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...-84125052.html

...Jim Thompson

Dick Cheney was right when he said Obama was a charlatan.

And turn off your cell phones...

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10451518-38.html

...Jim Thompson


You would rather they hadn't caught the bank robbers?

That's poor logic. For one, it presumes there was no other way to
catch them and it further presumes the government's position is the
only procedural mechanism for accomplishing it.

As a general principle the ends do not justify the means and, to wit,
routine warrantless searches of all homes, say once a week, would
catch a lot of criminals too but would you support that idea? No?
You'd rather not catch crooks?

If the government's position really is as stated, that "any record
held by a third party about us, no matter how invasively collected, is
not protected by the Fourth Amendment" is accurate then the 4'th
amendment is effectively eviscerated since, in this day and age,
virtually everything you do shows up in some 'third party record'
somewhere.


If they ever make Dimbulb have a competency hearing, his record on
Usenet would have him committed for life.

We just had a settlement announced today here between the Arizona
Attorney General and Western Union whereby Western Union agrees to let
the AG peruse all records of money transfers, at will!

Now I understand that the issue at hand has to do with illegal
immigrants (and drug dealers) transferring money to/from Mexico. But
it sure opens too many doors :-(

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

Leftist weenies are like watermelons...
GREEN on the outside, RED on the inside.

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 12:19:42 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 06:15:44 -0800, "Herbert John \"Jackie\" Gleason"
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 05:35:28 -0600, flipper wrote:


Well, that would certainly ensure that only the certifiably brain dead
criminal ever gets searched because no one with a better than room
temperature I.Q. would ever agree to it.


Now ask yourself why, ya dumb little *******.

I already said why.

"Herbert John \"Jackie\" Gleason"

is just another nym of that doofus-of-all-doofi, AlwaysWrong.

Please ignore him.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

The Green Police are like watermelons...
GREEN on the outside, RED on the inside.
Treat them as in "The Day of the Jackal"

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:14:05 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:21:21 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:03:48 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


flipper wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 19:44:57 -0800, "Herbert John \"Jackie\" Gleason"
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:20:27 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:17:53 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:44:34 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Bend over, here it comes...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...-84125052.html

...Jim Thompson

Dick Cheney was right when he said Obama was a charlatan.

And turn off your cell phones...

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10451518-38.html

...Jim Thompson


You would rather they hadn't caught the bank robbers?

That's poor logic. For one, it presumes there was no other way to
catch them and it further presumes the government's position is the
only procedural mechanism for accomplishing it.

As a general principle the ends do not justify the means and, to wit,
routine warrantless searches of all homes, say once a week, would
catch a lot of criminals too but would you support that idea? No?
You'd rather not catch crooks?

If the government's position really is as stated, that "any record
held by a third party about us, no matter how invasively collected, is
not protected by the Fourth Amendment" is accurate then the 4'th
amendment is effectively eviscerated since, in this day and age,
virtually everything you do shows up in some 'third party record'
somewhere.


If they ever make Dimbulb have a competency hearing, his record on
Usenet would have him committed for life.

We just had a settlement announced today here between the Arizona
Attorney General and Western Union whereby Western Union agrees to let
the AG peruse all records of money transfers, at will!

Now I understand that the issue at hand has to do with illegal
immigrants (and drug dealers) transferring money to/from Mexico. But
it sure opens too many doors :-(


While I can't say I'm 100% sanguine about it my understanding is the
'agreement' is for wire transfers above $500 between and to points
within 200 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border so the door is not quite as
open as you may think.


...Jim Thompson

The local radio news (KFYI) didn't put in much detail, except they
seemed to imply that no court order was required.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

The Green Police are like watermelons...
GREEN on the outside, RED on the inside.
Treat them as in "The Day of the Jackal"

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:23:38 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 12:29:22 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:14:05 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:21:21 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:03:48 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


flipper wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 19:44:57 -0800, "Herbert John \"Jackie\" Gleason"
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:20:27 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:17:53 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:44:34 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Bend over, here it comes...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...-84125052.html

...Jim Thompson

Dick Cheney was right when he said Obama was a charlatan.

And turn off your cell phones...

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10451518-38.html

...Jim Thompson


You would rather they hadn't caught the bank robbers?

That's poor logic. For one, it presumes there was no other way to
catch them and it further presumes the government's position is the
only procedural mechanism for accomplishing it.

As a general principle the ends do not justify the means and, to wit,
routine warrantless searches of all homes, say once a week, would
catch a lot of criminals too but would you support that idea? No?
You'd rather not catch crooks?

If the government's position really is as stated, that "any record
held by a third party about us, no matter how invasively collected, is
not protected by the Fourth Amendment" is accurate then the 4'th
amendment is effectively eviscerated since, in this day and age,
virtually everything you do shows up in some 'third party record'
somewhere.


If they ever make Dimbulb have a competency hearing, his record on
Usenet would have him committed for life.

We just had a settlement announced today here between the Arizona
Attorney General and Western Union whereby Western Union agrees to let
the AG peruse all records of money transfers, at will!

Now I understand that the issue at hand has to do with illegal
immigrants (and drug dealers) transferring money to/from Mexico. But
it sure opens too many doors :-(


While I can't say I'm 100% sanguine about it my understanding is the
'agreement' is for wire transfers above $500 between and to points
within 200 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border so the door is not quite as
open as you may think.


...Jim Thompson

The local radio news (KFYI) didn't put in much detail, except they
seemed to imply that no court order was required.

Yeah, no court order required for WU to 'automatically' report the
above transactions.

I'm not quite sure what to think about it but I note that
Constitutional protections do not normally apply to foreign
transactions.


Unless you're a _foreign_terrorist_, then you get read your Miranda
rights, courtesy of the "Manchurian Candidate".

Movie Trivia Fact: Did you know that Frank Sinatra was so disturbed by
that movie he bought the redistribution rights to it and kept it from
circulation until he died?

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

Coming soon to the elementary school in your neighborhood...

I pledge allegiance to Dear Leader Barack Hussein Obama and to the
community organization for which he stands: one nation under
ACORN, unchallengeable, with wealth redistribution and climate
change for all.

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:49:29 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:36:42 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:23:38 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 12:29:22 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:14:05 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:21:21 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:03:48 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


flipper wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 19:44:57 -0800, "Herbert John \"Jackie\" Gleason"
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:20:27 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:17:53 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:44:34 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Bend over, here it comes...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...-84125052.html

...Jim Thompson

Dick Cheney was right when he said Obama was a charlatan.

And turn off your cell phones...

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10451518-38.html

...Jim Thompson


You would rather they hadn't caught the bank robbers?

That's poor logic. For one, it presumes there was no other way to
catch them and it further presumes the government's position is the
only procedural mechanism for accomplishing it.

As a general principle the ends do not justify the means and, to wit,
routine warrantless searches of all homes, say once a week, would
catch a lot of criminals too but would you support that idea? No?
You'd rather not catch crooks?

If the government's position really is as stated, that "any record
held by a third party about us, no matter how invasively collected, is
not protected by the Fourth Amendment" is accurate then the 4'th
amendment is effectively eviscerated since, in this day and age,
virtually everything you do shows up in some 'third party record'
somewhere.


If they ever make Dimbulb have a competency hearing, his record on
Usenet would have him committed for life.

We just had a settlement announced today here between the Arizona
Attorney General and Western Union whereby Western Union agrees to let
the AG peruse all records of money transfers, at will!

Now I understand that the issue at hand has to do with illegal
immigrants (and drug dealers) transferring money to/from Mexico. But
it sure opens too many doors :-(


While I can't say I'm 100% sanguine about it my understanding is the
'agreement' is for wire transfers above $500 between and to points
within 200 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border so the door is not quite as
open as you may think.


...Jim Thompson

The local radio news (KFYI) didn't put in much detail, except they
seemed to imply that no court order was required.

Yeah, no court order required for WU to 'automatically' report the
above transactions.

I'm not quite sure what to think about it but I note that
Constitutional protections do not normally apply to foreign
transactions.


Unless you're a _foreign_terrorist_, then you get read your Miranda
rights, courtesy of the "Manchurian Candidate".

Yeah, well, that get's back to my comment about Cheney being right
when he called Obama a charlatan.

I can't recall the government ever so overrun by arrogant two-faced
despotism and stupefying incompetence.

Movie Trivia Fact: Did you know that Frank Sinatra was so disturbed by
that movie he bought the redistribution rights to it and kept it from
circulation until he died?

I didn't know that. What was he worried about?


...Jim Thompson

I think he feared that the movie would give terrorist organizations
ideas on how to do it... like run an Islamist thug from Chicago,
cloaked in political correctness, evil-rich-banker platitudes and
promises of wealth redistribution... something like that.

Of course nothing like that could really happen, now could it ?:-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 19:31:42 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:00:51 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

[snip]

Movie Trivia Fact: Did you know that Frank Sinatra was so disturbed by
that movie he bought the redistribution rights to it and kept it from
circulation until he died?

I didn't know that. What was he worried about?


...Jim Thompson

I think he feared that the movie would give terrorist organizations
ideas on how to do it... like run an Islamist thug from Chicago,
cloaked in political correctness, evil-rich-banker platitudes and
promises of wealth redistribution... something like that.

That doesn't sound very likely as, at the time the book was written
and the movie made, we were hip deep in the "communist threat" and
'terrorists' were low on the security totem pole, if on the radar
screen at all.

Well, that made me wonder so I checked imdb and they have a note in
the trivia section saying that's an urban myth.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056218/trivia not quite half way down.


Of course nothing like that could really happen, now could it ?:-)

Not to ruin your joke but "brain washing" someone into roboticaly
doing what they would otherwise never do is quite a different thing
than 'selling' someone an idea based on it's alleged 'merits'. I.E.
Islamic terrorists are 'believers' in the morals and mission. They
may, if important to the mission, hide it from *you* but it's not
'submerged' in themselves nor does it run counter to their 'true
nature'.


...Jim Thompson

OK. Show me where it was shown between the original release and his
death. I tried to find even contraband videos, but none was to be
found (I saw it in-theater at original release). I did find "Name of
the Rose" (*) in Brazil YEARS before it was available in the US...
somewhat ratty, but it sufficed until the US caught up ;-)

I'm a bit of a nut with good (old) movies... 300+ DVD's in my
collection.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

The Green Police are like watermelons...
GREEN on the outside, RED on the inside.
Treat them as in "The Day of the Jackal"

"Jim Thompson" wrote in
message news
I'm a bit of a nut with good (old) movies... 300+ DVD's in my
collection.

You should post your top 10 or 25 favorites some day. :-)

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 17:55:24 -0800, "Joel Koltner"
wrote:

"Jim Thompson" wrote in
message news
I'm a bit of a nut with good (old) movies... 300+ DVD's in my
collection.

You should post your top 10 or 25 favorites some day. :-)

I need to update the whole list, I'm way behind, might number ~400
now.

I'll do that and indicate my favorites ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:03:48 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


flipper wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 19:44:57 -0800, "Herbert John \"Jackie\" Gleason"
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:20:27 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:17:53 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:44:34 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Bend over, here it comes...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...-84125052.html

...Jim Thompson

Dick Cheney was right when he said Obama was a charlatan.

And turn off your cell phones...

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10451518-38.html

...Jim Thompson


You would rather they hadn't caught the bank robbers?

That's poor logic. For one, it presumes there was no other way to
catch them and it further presumes the government's position is the
only procedural mechanism for accomplishing it.

As a general principle the ends do not justify the means and, to wit,
routine warrantless searches of all homes, say once a week, would
catch a lot of criminals too but would you support that idea? No?
You'd rather not catch crooks?

If the government's position really is as stated, that "any record
held by a third party about us, no matter how invasively collected, is
not protected by the Fourth Amendment" is accurate then the 4'th
amendment is effectively eviscerated since, in this day and age,
virtually everything you do shows up in some 'third party record'
somewhere.


If they ever make Dimbulb have a competency hearing, his record on
Usenet would have him committed for life.


Now we all know why I wish this dumb**** would just drop dead.

It would be nice if he had a little Chi Chi first. You know, like
hours of excruciating pain before an even more painful myocardial
infarction.

You are as bad as Joran's dad, and you deserve to die, just like he
did.

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 12:18:57 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 06:15:03 -0800, "Herbert John \"Jackie\" Gleason"
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 05:28:12 -0600, flipper wrote:

The "profiling thing?" Like what? Like if a victim says it was a 6
foot male they 'profile' for 6 foot males instead of also rounding up
a 'politically correct' number of 4 foot females?


You're a ****ing idiot.

You lose.

Have you never watched "Cops"? The profiling
behavior is blatant.

Then, there is experiencing it first hand as well, of course.

You have never seen a cop pull someone over for a ticket, and it
requires 3 cops to show up so they can shake down the car?

You are a ****ing loon. And no, there was no politically motivated
reaction at all, you stupid twit.

And NO, you stupid ****, I gave no endorsement for any of the practices
mentioned by the thread either.

Do you always make **** up about people?

No need to when you're so blatantly full of it.

You're the goddamned liar that claimed that I am for cell phone
tracking behaviors.

You're the one that is blatantly full of ****.

It isn't the pot calling the kettle black, it is the **** heap (you)
calling anyone anything. You're so full of ****, it is evident before
you even finish your first sentence.

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 12:19:42 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 06:15:44 -0800, "Herbert John \"Jackie\" Gleason"
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 05:35:28 -0600, flipper wrote:


Well, that would certainly ensure that only the certifiably brain dead
criminal ever gets searched because no one with a better than room
temperature I.Q. would ever agree to it.


Now ask yourself why, ya dumb little *******.

I already said why.

Then, you got that wrong too.

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:57:41 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 12:19:42 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 06:15:44 -0800, "Herbert John \"Jackie\" Gleason"
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 05:35:28 -0600, flipper wrote:


Well, that would certainly ensure that only the certifiably brain dead
criminal ever gets searched because no one with a better than room
temperature I.Q. would ever agree to it.


Now ask yourself why, ya dumb little *******.

I already said why.

"Herbert John \"Jackie\" Gleason"

is just another nym of that doofus-of-all-doofi, AlwaysWrong.

Please ignore him.

...Jim Thompson

You're a goddamned idiot, Thommpson. They ALL ALREADY know who I am.
They do not need your filters or your stupid, less than even peanut
gallery horse**** commentary, you dumb, retarded old *******.

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:16:10 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:57:41 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 12:19:42 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 06:15:44 -0800, "Herbert John \"Jackie\" Gleason"
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 05:35:28 -0600, flipper wrote:


Well, that would certainly ensure that only the certifiably brain dead
criminal ever gets searched because no one with a better than room
temperature I.Q. would ever agree to it.


Now ask yourself why, ya dumb little *******.

I already said why.

"Herbert John \"Jackie\" Gleason"

is just another nym of that doofus-of-all-doofi, AlwaysWrong.

Please ignore him.

...Jim Thompson

Yes, I recognized the signature 'doofusness'.

Jeez. Both of you are utterly retarded.

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:34:01 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:03:48 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


flipper wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 19:44:57 -0800, "Herbert John \"Jackie\" Gleason"
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:20:27 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:17:53 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:44:34 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Bend over, here it comes...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...-84125052.html

...Jim Thompson

Dick Cheney was right when he said Obama was a charlatan.

And turn off your cell phones...

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10451518-38.html

...Jim Thompson


You would rather they hadn't caught the bank robbers?

That's poor logic. For one, it presumes there was no other way to
catch them and it further presumes the government's position is the
only procedural mechanism for accomplishing it.

As a general principle the ends do not justify the means and, to wit,
routine warrantless searches of all homes, say once a week, would
catch a lot of criminals too but would you support that idea? No?
You'd rather not catch crooks?

If the government's position really is as stated, that "any record
held by a third party about us, no matter how invasively collected, is
not protected by the Fourth Amendment" is accurate then the 4'th
amendment is effectively eviscerated since, in this day and age,
virtually everything you do shows up in some 'third party record'
somewhere.


If they ever make Dimbulb have a competency hearing, his record on
Usenet would have him committed for life.

And no warrant needed to gather the information either because Usenet
really does fit the notion of 'public'.


You really do not know just how deep in the dark you are.

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:36:42 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:


Unless you're a _foreign_terrorist_, then you get read your Miranda
rights, courtesy of the "Manchurian Candidate".

Movie Trivia Fact: Did you know that Frank Sinatra was so disturbed by
that movie he bought the redistribution rights to it and kept it from
circulation until he died?

...Jim Thompson


WRONG!

The movie was shown for two weeks in 1962, and then got pulled by Uncle
Sam himself.

It never aired again until AFTER it was made into a Laser Disc release
in the mid 80s.

Sinatra died AFTER the Laser Disc and VHS releases in 1998.

Try again, asshole. Try for a real fact next time.

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:49:29 -0600, flipper wrote:


I didn't know that. What was he worried about?


It would be just like you to believe his utter bull****.

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 18:43:33 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 19:31:42 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:00:51 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

[snip]

Movie Trivia Fact: Did you know that Frank Sinatra was so disturbed by
that movie he bought the redistribution rights to it and kept it from
circulation until he died?

I didn't know that. What was he worried about?


...Jim Thompson

I think he feared that the movie would give terrorist organizations
ideas on how to do it... like run an Islamist thug from Chicago,
cloaked in political correctness, evil-rich-banker platitudes and
promises of wealth redistribution... something like that.

That doesn't sound very likely as, at the time the book was written
and the movie made, we were hip deep in the "communist threat" and
'terrorists' were low on the security totem pole, if on the radar
screen at all.

Well, that made me wonder so I checked imdb and they have a note in
the trivia section saying that's an urban myth.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056218/trivia not quite half way down.


Of course nothing like that could really happen, now could it ?:-)

Not to ruin your joke but "brain washing" someone into roboticaly
doing what they would otherwise never do is quite a different thing
than 'selling' someone an idea based on it's alleged 'merits'. I.E.
Islamic terrorists are 'believers' in the morals and mission. They
may, if important to the mission, hide it from *you* but it's not
'submerged' in themselves nor does it run counter to their 'true
nature'.


...Jim Thompson

OK. Show me where it was shown between the original release and his
death.

You really are a ****ing idiot. Did you even READ the page he linked
you to?

It AIRED in '65. I would bet completely cropped and chopped all to
hell.

It was ALSO RELEASED on Laser Disc BEFORE he died. And United Artists
owns the damned thing anyway!

I tried to find even contraband videos, but none was to be
found


You really ARE a complete idiot. Why would there be a video of a title
that is on VHS Laser Disc, and various forms of DVD?

(I saw it in-theater at original release).

Oh Boy. Now please croak for us like most of the cast has. The event
is a desirable one in your case, however.


I did find "Name of
the Rose" (*) in Brazil YEARS before it was available in the US...
somewhat ratty, but it sufficed until the US caught up ;-)

Yer dumber than dog ****, boy.

I'm a bit of a nut with good (old) movies... 300+ DVD's in my
collection.

Try "Fetiche" or "The Mascot" circa 1934 by Ladislas Starewicz. Also
known as "The Devil's Ball".

It will show you where you are heading. Exactly where you are heading.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-mkGqcvKPM

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 19:20:58 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 17:55:24 -0800, "Joel Koltner"
wrote:

"Jim Thompson" wrote in
message news
I'm a bit of a nut with good (old) movies... 300+ DVD's in my
collection.

You should post your top 10 or 25 favorites some day. :-)

I need to update the whole list, I'm way behind, might number ~400
now.

I'll do that and indicate my favorites ;-)

...Jim Thompson

700 DVDs and 200 Laser Discs. 200 HD DVDs and 200 BR-DVDs.

Almost 800 discreet titles.

Favorites:

Un Chein Andalou 1928

The Mascot 1934

La lune à un mètre 1898 (A Trip to the Moon)

Meet John Doe 1941

The Wizard of Oz 1939 (of course)

The Trouble With Harry 1955 (Hitcock's only comedy)

Jason and the Argonauts 1963

The Time Machine 1960

MacKenna's Gold 1969

The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly 1966

Can't forget: Arsenic and Old Lace 1944

Newer:

The Shawshank Redemption

The Fifth Element

Aliens

The Abyss

LOTR trilogy

Bourne trilogy

Die Hard trilogy (or is it 4?)

Lethal Weapon plurality

Mad Max set of flics

Young Frankenstein

Blazing Saddles


Many more that would be called favorites.

And of course Avatar, when it comes out this year!

snip

The Fifth Element

snip

If you can enjoy animation Jim, watch 'Heavy Metal' through to the end then
compare that with The Fifth Element.

It isn't for the young one.







--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

Robert Baer wrote:

not protected by the Fourth Amendment" is accurate then the 4'th
amendment is effectively eviscerated since, in this day and age,
...
Partial solutions, IN ORDER:
1) ALL searches are illegal by anybody for any reason unless agreed upon
by ALL directly affected parties, PERIOD.

Remember your post, some time back, about the U.S. Coast Guard searching
some poor shmuck's fishing boat EVERY time he took it out off the
Florida coast? We found out then that 4th Amendment rights against
unreasonable search only apply _inside_ your home. Not in your car,
boat, or even your own back yard. The Supreme Court has consistently
said so.

flipper wrote:
On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 23:03:31 -0800, Beryl wrote:

Robert Baer wrote:

not protected by the Fourth Amendment" is accurate then the 4'th
amendment is effectively eviscerated since, in this day and age,
...
Partial solutions, IN ORDER:
1) ALL searches are illegal by anybody for any reason unless agreed upon
by ALL directly affected parties, PERIOD.
Remember your post, some time back, about the U.S. Coast Guard searching
some poor shmuck's fishing boat EVERY time he took it out off the
Florida coast? We found out then that 4th Amendment rights against
unreasonable search only apply _inside_ your home. Not in your car,
boat, or even your own back yard.

I don't think so but if your version is correct then SOMEone on the
court needs to reread the 4'th because 'houses' is but ONE of the FOUR
specifics listed. And that's without making any 'interpretations'.

The Supreme Court has consistently
said so.

I'd like to see a cite for that claim.

There were a couple extensive wikipedia pages about it all. I'll look
again later.
There was one case cited, about cops ignoring "No Trespassing" signs,
entering someone's private property without any warrant or court order,
and finding drugs. I think they found a marijuana patch. The court ruled
that since no privacy could be reasonably expected outdoors, no "search"
had occurred. And since there was no search, there was no unreasonable
search. Simple as that.

flipper wrote:
On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 23:03:31 -0800, Beryl wrote:

Robert Baer wrote:

not protected by the Fourth Amendment" is accurate then the 4'th
amendment is effectively eviscerated since, in this day and age,
...
Partial solutions, IN ORDER:
1) ALL searches are illegal by anybody for any reason unless agreed upon
by ALL directly affected parties, PERIOD.
Remember your post, some time back, about the U.S. Coast Guard searching
some poor shmuck's fishing boat EVERY time he took it out off the
Florida coast? We found out then that 4th Amendment rights against
unreasonable search only apply _inside_ your home. Not in your car,
boat, or even your own back yard.

I don't think so but if your version is correct then SOMEone on the
court needs to reread the 4'th because 'houses' is but ONE of the FOUR
specifics listed. And that's without making any 'interpretations'.

The Supreme Court has consistently
said so.

I'd like to see a cite for that claim.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

Okay, cars have a "reduced expectation of privacy", but not none. Unless
they're in the vicinity of an international airport, of course, which
could turn an unreasonable search into a Border Search Exception.

Here's the catchall that nailed the pot grower I mentioned:
"Not all actions by which governmental authorities obtain information
from or about a person constitute a search. Therefore, government action
triggers the amendment's protections only when the information or
evidence at issue was obtained through a "search" within the meaning of
the amendment. If no search occurs, no warrant is required. Generally,
authorities have searched when they have impeded upon a person's
reasonable expectation of privacy."

flipper wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

If they ever make Dimbulb have a competency hearing, his record on
Usenet would have him committed for life.

And no warrant needed to gather the information either because Usenet
really does fit the notion of 'public'.


Don't forget that Dimbulb isn't fit to be out in the public.


--
Greed is the root of all eBay.

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 19:31:42 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:00:51 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:49:29 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:36:42 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:23:38 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 12:29:22 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:14:05 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:21:21 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:03:48 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


flipper wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 19:44:57 -0800, "Herbert John \"Jackie\" Gleason"
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:20:27 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:17:53 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:44:34 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Bend over, here it comes...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...-84125052.html

...Jim Thompson

Dick Cheney was right when he said Obama was a charlatan.

And turn off your cell phones...

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10451518-38.html

...Jim Thompson


You would rather they hadn't caught the bank robbers?

That's poor logic. For one, it presumes there was no other way to
catch them and it further presumes the government's position is the
only procedural mechanism for accomplishing it.

As a general principle the ends do not justify the means and, to wit,
routine warrantless searches of all homes, say once a week, would
catch a lot of criminals too but would you support that idea? No?
You'd rather not catch crooks?

If the government's position really is as stated, that "any record
held by a third party about us, no matter how invasively collected, is
not protected by the Fourth Amendment" is accurate then the 4'th
amendment is effectively eviscerated since, in this day and age,
virtually everything you do shows up in some 'third party record'
somewhere.


If they ever make Dimbulb have a competency hearing, his record on
Usenet would have him committed for life.

We just had a settlement announced today here between the Arizona
Attorney General and Western Union whereby Western Union agrees to let
the AG peruse all records of money transfers, at will!

Now I understand that the issue at hand has to do with illegal
immigrants (and drug dealers) transferring money to/from Mexico. But
it sure opens too many doors :-(


While I can't say I'm 100% sanguine about it my understanding is the
'agreement' is for wire transfers above $500 between and to points
within 200 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border so the door is not quite as
open as you may think.


...Jim Thompson

The local radio news (KFYI) didn't put in much detail, except they
seemed to imply that no court order was required.

Yeah, no court order required for WU to 'automatically' report the
above transactions.

I'm not quite sure what to think about it but I note that
Constitutional protections do not normally apply to foreign
transactions.


Unless you're a _foreign_terrorist_, then you get read your Miranda
rights, courtesy of the "Manchurian Candidate".

Yeah, well, that get's back to my comment about Cheney being right
when he called Obama a charlatan.

I can't recall the government ever so overrun by arrogant two-faced
despotism and stupefying incompetence.

Movie Trivia Fact: Did you know that Frank Sinatra was so disturbed by
that movie he bought the redistribution rights to it and kept it from
circulation until he died?

I didn't know that. What was he worried about?


...Jim Thompson

I think he feared that the movie would give terrorist organizations
ideas on how to do it... like run an Islamist thug from Chicago,
cloaked in political correctness, evil-rich-banker platitudes and
promises of wealth redistribution... something like that.

That doesn't sound very likely as, at the time the book was written
and the movie made, we were hip deep in the "communist threat" and
'terrorists' were low on the security totem pole, if on the radar
screen at all.

Well, that made me wonder so I checked imdb and they have a note in
the trivia section saying that's an urban myth.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056218/trivia not quite half way down.


Of course nothing like that could really happen, now could it ?:-)

Not to ruin your joke but "brain washing" someone into roboticaly
doing what they would otherwise never do is quite a different thing
than 'selling' someone an idea based on it's alleged 'merits'. I.E.
Islamic terrorists are 'believers' in the morals and mission. They
may, if important to the mission, hide it from *you* but it's not
'submerged' in themselves nor does it run counter to their 'true
nature'.


...Jim Thompson

I guess I got sucked up by someone's urban legend, then validated it
in my own mind when I couldn't get it on DVD :-(

Though my platitudes still fit the situation don't they ?:-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 19:25:20 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 16:49:28 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 19:31:42 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:00:51 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

[snip]
I think he feared that the movie would give terrorist organizations
ideas on how to do it... like run an Islamist thug from Chicago,
cloaked in political correctness, evil-rich-banker platitudes and
promises of wealth redistribution... something like that.

That doesn't sound very likely as, at the time the book was written
and the movie made, we were hip deep in the "communist threat" and
'terrorists' were low on the security totem pole, if on the radar
screen at all.

Well, that made me wonder so I checked imdb and they have a note in
the trivia section saying that's an urban myth.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056218/trivia not quite half way down.


Of course nothing like that could really happen, now could it ?:-)

Not to ruin your joke but "brain washing" someone into roboticaly
doing what they would otherwise never do is quite a different thing
than 'selling' someone an idea based on it's alleged 'merits'. I.E.
Islamic terrorists are 'believers' in the morals and mission. They
may, if important to the mission, hide it from *you* but it's not
'submerged' in themselves nor does it run counter to their 'true
nature'.


...Jim Thompson

I guess I got sucked up by someone's urban legend, then validated it
in my own mind when I couldn't get it on DVD :-(

It's certainly easy enough to do because 'things (seem to) fit', so to
speak.

That's one reason I'm typically a skeptic (and a 'look it up'). Not
because I think people are 'lying' but because I've found that to be
one of the most common deductive flaws.

Some people even do it as a matter of form: having a conclusion and
then looking for 'evidence' of the conclusion. The problem is: the
supposed 'evidence' is usually consistent with not only the
'preferred' conclusion but a gaggle of others as well.

It takes 'effort', though, because we have a natural 'built in'
information reduction system where things are screened in light of
what we already consider 'plausible' or 'reasonable'.

Though my platitudes still fit the situation don't they ?:-)

I'm not sure which ones you mean.


"...like run an Islamist thug from Chicago, cloaked in political
correctness, evil-rich-banker platitudes and promises of wealth
redistribution... something like that."

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

Leftist weenies are like watermelons...
GREEN on the outside, RED on the inside.
Test them as done in "Day of the Jackal"

flipper wrote:

That, btw, does not mean I necessarily object to the way cell pone
records were used in the 'bank robber' case but I strongly object to
the argument being used to justify it.

Tracking time and location of calls bothers you?
Read this.
http://news.cnet.com/2100-1029_3-6140191.html
"mobile providers can remotely install a piece of software on to any
handset, without the owner's knowledge, which will activate the
microphone even when its owner is not making a call."

flipper wrote:
On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 20:55:32 -0800, Beryl wrote:

flipper wrote:

That, btw, does not mean I necessarily object to the way cell pone
records were used in the 'bank robber' case but I strongly object to
the argument being used to justify it.
Tracking time and location of calls bothers you?

I didn't say it bothered me. In fact I said, after a discussion of the
4'th amendment you snipped out, that it "does not mean I necessarily
object to..."

Read this.
http://news.cnet.com/2100-1029_3-6140191.html
"mobile providers can remotely install a piece of software on to any
handset, without the owner's knowledge, which will activate the
microphone even when its owner is not making a call."

Okay, I read it. Now what?

Don't fret over the small stuff.