Re: Honest politicians are rare
>>>Honest politicians are rare and Alec Salmond is one of those rare ones.
Said in an article that reveals Alex Salmond spend £20k covering up a lie?
2434 publicly visible posts • joined 23 Jan 2007
Examples:
1) "You'll have to pay roaming fees for using your phone in England" A) No shit sherlock b) O2s roaming costs are LESS than they charge for domestic use, due to EU rules.
2) You'll need to carry your passport: Again no shit sherlock, foreign country and all that.
3) Englanmd will be a different country... another no shit sherlock, but wait, what's that, Scotland and England are different countries with different legal systems, school systems, health care systems, and even different forms of the English language.
So far their claims would struggle to meet the requirements of a "Not Proven" let alone "Guilty" of delivering the truth.
------
How can that be "Not proven" when you've just stipilated to the facts? You've just agreed that everything theyve said is true?
>>>The no campaign is grasping at straws here
>>>shows how terrifiied they are of us leaving the UK.
What straws? Alex Salmond did waste public money hiding the fact he hadnt asked for a legal opinion, right when legal opinions are coing out that makes him look like an idiot.
No matter your stance on environmental stuff, this can only be a good thing... not wasting all of that power blowing at us from the sun and using limited, costly, fossil stuff just makes sense.... (presuming of course its still neutral or better after creating the solar cells is factored in)
It's clear you don't get why corporate personhood is actually a good thing.
Laws apply to people. They don't apply to dogs and trees and things that aren't people.
Because corporations are legal people, they can sell you things, they can't commit crimes, and have to pay up if they hurt you. You can't sue a nonperson.
As other commenters have noted, including myself. There is the cost of bandwidth to provide a full service (apparently that Nasa closed page is 21k, as opposed to a browsing session in the Mbs per person), and the problem of noone patching out security flaws as they arise.
Lets say a new vulnerability is discovered next week that GovernmentProjectA.gov is vulnerable to. lets say that site has personal data on it... I dunno maybe ticket sales to an event or a submission system for a permit or something.
Would it be better for the site to be down, or up and not maintained?
Um, no.
Appropriations and spending bills have to be passed all the time, surplus, deficit, or anything in between. They are bread and butter bills to reallocate funds from the treasury to the departments.
The Debt ceiling problem is in two weeks.
The reason why this has happened to because the republicans in the house haven't been able to convince the senate to repeal the AHA any of the 40 odd times they've tried... So they're now taking hostages.
>>>>>Can you tell me what THIS BILL does to alter that? The only people who benefit from this are insurance companies.
This bill has nothing to do with healthcare at all. It is an appropriations/supply bill to find the government.
Perhaps you mean the affordable care act, which is not a bill.
Seriously, if you don't know the difference you need to stop copy/pasting crap from tea party HQ and instead go spend some time learning how congress works.
The issue was debated... And passed by both houses! There's a reason why its called the affordable care act and not the affordable care bill. Acts have been passed, the debate is complete, it is law.
As for the shutdown, that again was debated, and the senate voted against passing the bill, thrice.
We need to change the insolvency order of precedence such that employees are either number 1, or number 2 to companies who supply goods/services where the intention is those goods/services are used to allow the business to continue long term trading.
That way the regular guy gets screwed less often.
Gee if I was going to put a 3G radio into a chip, I'd tell the world about it, let both you and the NSA pay for it, and this hide the backdoor in plain sight - you might even help the NSA some by repositioning for better signal.
I might even get safety laws passed to mandate their use and make aeroplane mode illegal...
csumpi, you've failed at showing the citation required. The claim is iPhone sales are down. The alleged proof of this remains missing... even with your attempt to be funny. The share price says nothing about sales.
This story isnt even a case of "Dog bites man" Its "Dog doesnt bite man, so the dog must be dead".
>>When I once resorted to a similar tactic in order to try to persuade a government agency (that theoretically had a policy of paying small business invoices within 30 days) to pay bills more than 4 months overdue, I got an immediate call from their lawyers threatening legal action for defamation.
Tell em to bring it on. Shortest court case in history.
lawyer: So what did they say?
Witness: They said we hadn't paid our bill
lawyer: had you?
Witness: No
Judge: And my time is being wasted..... Why?
Sky "Support".. Ha!
Had intermittent sync. Despite persistent emails to them and persistedn reponses saying "We're looking into it" no movement, and didn't even offer even an basic explanation as to where the problem was just "We're looking into it, please don't leave".
Moved to BT as they were the only company who'd take away that nasty sky connection without £150-ish in engineer fees (LLU connections are great... Until you want to move to someone else to provide a connection and get hit with that exit fee....
Never had to contact BT support thankfully, and am fearing having to do so.
>First, holding Miranda wasn't a farce.
>Are you saying that the anti-terrorist laws shouldn't exist in the first place?
What an absurd oversimplification/
Here's where the "farce" comes into it.
The anti terrorism law used in this case exists for the sole purpose of allowing police to determine if someone is a terrorist.
Its not for "he might have something we want", or "he might rob a shop", or even "he killed a man", its simply to determine if someone was a terrorist.
There is no suggestion - none at all - that Miranda was a terrorist, just an argument that he had something that terrorists might like. Well geez, anyone here carry money? Terrorists might like that too, Book em dan-o.
---
>"Sorry, but we've seen enough damage which caused the laws to be enacted in the first place."
You're more likely to die in a plane crash than a terrorist attack, shall we ban air travel too? Exactly how many freedoms are you willing to sacrifice to feel safe from the boogeyman of the week?
----
>3) This was most likely a planned side show. (Hint: From Berlin... why did Miranda go through London to Brazil?)
Maybe because there wasnt a convenient direct non stop flight from Germany to Brazil? Transiting in one of the busisiest international airports in the world isn't exactly uncommon.