bmags

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 5, 2011 -> 06:31 PM) That was not the last time there was a source at a local hospital for a story. There was one 2 days ago...that was false.

QUOTE (oldsox @ May 5, 2011 -> 04:46 PM) Uh, talented? I don't think so. This is not a talented team. They prove it almost every day. And Hawk is being Hawk when he tries to convince his audience that they are indeed talented. They were overrated from the beginning. I don't think they are in a slump; they are playing to their level of skill. Talent is not defined by your paycheck. That said, I am interested in the exact quote, if anyone else caught it. So they were playing above their level of skill for their entire careers before this point?

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ May 5, 2011 -> 03:18 PM) And somehow not a single step has been taken to address the teams woes. No player has been sent down and no one on the coaching staff has been let go. Unbelievable. I'm not one of those knee jerk fire people...but i'm trying to think of another example of someone getting a gigantic budget and having the worst launch in its history, and keeping control of the project.

We're averaging less than 2 runs per game over a 21 game stretch. That is the most horrendous stat I've ever seen. Is it 1968?

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ May 4, 2011 -> 05:19 PM) Oh I didnt know you had a dictionary that listed all of the forms of torture and that waterboarding was explicitly listed, care to cite your source, perhaps the Geneva Convention? Dont allow it in our courts, I have no idea what you are talking about. Are you talking Military Courts? Are you talking Criminal Courts? What law are you exactly applying here? I get that certain people adamantly are against waterboarding, in a historical context waterboarding is not what "torture" meant when any torture law was written. Over time we have expanded torture to include mental cruelty, but that is a complete gray area. Im glad that you think the world is all black and white though, because Im not sure a single part of your post was anything more than your opinion. Unless of course you can find me a legal definition that explicitly states waterboarding is torture. As for being used by other regimes, Id apply the exact same argument. I dont make up different rules for the US or for other countries. And we do know torture is effective, if you threaten to rip some ones fingers off they are more likely to talk than if you let them run in a field and have 5 star meals. Being in jail is a form of torture, its just not "cruel and unusual". So I disagree with your opinion, although unlike you, Ill let you be entitled to it, instead of saying your statements are "false" when there is no right or wrong answer. I'm sorry, I didn't realize I was dealing with John Woo. US Civilian courts do not allow evidence obtained thru torture. Have you any evidence torture is effective? no. Have you any evidence Waterboarding is not considered torture? No, except for a few bogus legal documents from john woo. So you are plainly wrong, as you are on most every topic you speak on.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ May 4, 2011 -> 06:11 PM) I dont really think the results matter. The real issue is whether waterboarding is torture. We know that torture is effective, we just ban it because of our own moral beliefs. So if you believe waterboarding is torture, the ends dont justify the means. No, that's not the issue. Waterboarding is torture. When it's used by other regimes we dont' agree with we easily call it torture. And we don't know whether it's effective. That's why we don't allow it in our courts. Because it put thousands of innocent people to die because they false confessed. None of your post is true, none.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ May 4, 2011 -> 04:32 PM) 6'11" dudes at the end of their 16th season in the League don't do much punishing. Dude is a really old 35. TELL THAT TO BIG SEXY

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 3, 2011 -> 09:51 PM) Apple needs to have confidence its products will ultimately win out in the marketplace and realize that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Winning infringement cases on design, especially in the case of high-tech electronics, is going to be nearly impossible to achieve. Oftentimes there is simply a best way to design something functionally, and you cannot patent that. You can patent the technology that went into your own design, but you cannot prevent others from copying the design itself. It was put well in The Social Network. "Look, a guy who builds a nice chair doesn't owe money to everyone who has ever built a chair before..." But Apple mostly just owns intellectual property. Their designs are why people pay extra cash for their product. If people came out with the exact same product and design for 50% of the price, apple is done. And that social network line just is not similar to this type of IP.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 4, 2011 -> 05:54 PM) There is no win for Pakistan in this scenario. The only other possibility is that they are lying their asses off to their people to keep them from thinking that they turned Bin Laden over in an attempt to prevent further reprisals. True. But I'm not sure how much we should expect from pakistan. Their people DO NOT LIKE THE US yet their leaders at least comply with us and don't declare war on us while we do missile strikes into their country.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 4, 2011 -> 05:51 PM) If this is true, the tip that led them down the right path did come from this. They wouldn't have gotten the chance to get down that road without the name of the courier. From what I've read they got the name of the Courier thru phone tapping and other means.

Maybe. But it's a strange way of going about that. But like I said, I'm not sure it matters. The bulk of the reason we got OBL had nothing to do with torture, and I will not be convinced that we needed waterboarding to acquire this info.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 4, 2011 -> 05:23 PM) Both of these statements are accurate given what Panetta said. No, they aren't.

Agreed. I keep hoping they'll flip the switch. That said, my god, KG this could be your last playoffs! Punish those dudes that are punking you

if anyone makes a soap.com order whose never used it before, you can put in: BEN.3578 and they'll take off 20% of your first order. And they'll donate like $10 to charity in my name or something.

The American way.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 4, 2011 -> 03:41 PM) Are you reading the news at all? The planners of this gave it a 60-80% chance that he was there on the day of the mission. They didn't KNOW anything. They suspected that someone important was there, and they guessed it was him, and only since last August. So we had gathered all this evidence and tracked a courier there, and we only were 80% certain. That doesn't prove any point about why the pakistanis should have known. I'm not saying they didn't. But I'm not so sure they were so obviously hiding that they knew his whereabouts.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 4, 2011 -> 03:38 PM) Also, no one is saying the waterboarding led directly to Bin Laden, so I dunno who you're referring to there. I don't understand your point then. They were waterboarded. We KNOW the US tortured people. Whether or not that was a means to effectively gaining information, or whether or not that even matters, is a different point. I'm against torture whether it's useful or not. It's a disgusting stain on this country.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ May 4, 2011 -> 03:41 PM) Personally, I have nothing against advanced techniques in interviewing that can lead to critical information. I love when Jack Bauer shoots terrorists in the leg. But seriously, if it's vital information that is needed, tough words aren't going to make a f***ing difference. Well, neither is tough force, many studies indicate. The "ticking time bomb" narrative we feed on is not something to base policy on. There's no evidence it works any better than normal interrogations, but does make it incredibly difficult to prosecute them, because any civilized country knows that evidence obtained during torture is usually s***. See: Chicago, 1980 police dept.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 4, 2011 -> 03:38 PM) That's not clear enough for you? Also, no one is saying the waterboarding led directly to Bin Laden, so I dunno who you're referring to there. No, because here are two examples, that dictate two different things: We got the information from the detainees thru waterboarding. The detainees who gave us the information had been waterboarded. Just because they might have been waterboarded, does not dictate that the information came from that means.

so, this is cool:http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1766790 In his paper he finds that retaliatory violence is less common after the removal of Tier 1 leaders than Midlevel Tier 3 Leaders.

We knew he was there for "a while"

that doesn't clarify whether the detainees had waterboarding done to them or whether the info came thru waterboarding. Nonetheless the idea that this guys name came after torture and we showed up on its doorstep is stupid.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 3, 2011 -> 08:52 AM) It just bugs me that these analysts say "OH THEY DRAFTED THAT GUY 10 PICKS EARLIER THAN HE SHOULD HAVE" (exaggerating, but barely) when really it's a bit of crapshoot too. So many teams were chastised last year for passing on Jimmy Clausen, but those teams look pretty smart now, don't they? Teams were dumb for passing on Matt Leinart too. Teams were smart for passing on Chris Johnson and Jamaal Charles, but really, neither may be nearly as good in a different system. That's the main point that bugs me - these guys (generally) look at all of these players and teams in a vacuum and don't consider their actual preferences. This isn't a video game though, and you can't just plug and play these players and everything works out fine. Some will fit better in specific schemes than they will others, and that covers more than just a QB running an offense or a linebacker in a particular defense. Three different teams had Big Mike Williams and nobody got anything out of him, and then his old coach Pete Carroll comes in and he has a pretty damn good season. How about that? Everything I've read about Stefen Wisniewski suggests that he is a mauling run blocker. The Raiders were thin on their offensive line, the focus of their offense is going to be to running the ball, and they used their top pick on someone to help them out specifically in that area. That seems smart, even if they did "draft him a round or two too early," doesn't it? I've been saying this speech for a long time. Mel Kiper has given the bears great draft greats for most of the decade. We've drafted TERRIBLY.

we're f***ed. But yeah, they were hitting htose shots completely blind last night. You have to tip your cap to them.

Whoa, this is crazy http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/2011/05/...unterterrorism/