News Stories

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Kamui4356

Wait, what? Iran can barely build a domestic ICBM, let alone an anti-satellite missile. Source that they have such capability?

Not that China's demonstrated anti-satellite capability is anything to write home about either.

Well they have their own BMs which can be easily modified to go beyond the atmosphere, so I don't see why can't they have ASAT capabilities.

[Roger Rambo]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

Well they have their own BMs which can be easily modified to go beyond the atmosphere, so I don't see why can't they have ASAT capabilities.

Just because you got a ballistic missle that can leave the atmosphere doesn't mean it's rated for satellite duties. Most BM's are really only designed to do one thing once they exit the atmosphere, fall down on their target.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Roger Rambo

Just because you got a ballistic missle that can leave the atmosphere doesn't mean it's rated for satellite duties. Most BM's are really only designed to do one thing once they exit the atmosphere, fall down on their target.

Eh you are wrong.....BMs don't fall down from the skies like Qassam rockets. They have their own propulsion coupled with a guidance system for critical strikes.

One small flaw for most ASAT systems is that upper atmosphere communications technology is expensive, meaning that they wouldn't have alot of power in their homing missiles. But that doesn't mean they cannot pilfer technology from US through covert intelligence though.

[mg1942]

this south carolina girl is on a very important mission...

http://vp.mgnetwork.net/traveler.swf...c92a4a0d&z=CBD

[Kamui4356]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

Well they have their own BMs which can be easily modified to go beyond the atmosphere, so I don't see why can't they have ASAT capabilities.

Based on foreign designs. Not to mention it's not so easy to modify them. You basically need more powerful rockets, which means a complete redesign of the missile. Plus there's the small matter of hitting a satellite. It's a lot easier to hit a city with a missile than a small object orbiting the earth.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

SEC staffers watched smut as Wall Street burned

If you look at the timelines... the behavior was towards the end of the evisiceration of the SEC (and every other government agency) during the Bush administrations. It was hard to care anymore, even if you meant well. Not defending... but this behavior is one I see common in corporations when the pirates have bought the company, broken and sold assets, and its spiraling. So hell.. play FPS games and find porn. Escapism in the face of pointlessness.

[Irenicus]

^The discrepancy between the timeline of the actual "neglect" and the timing of the "news" surfacing is to me the real news of the story.

I see Goldman Sachs' counterattack behind that. Republican soundbite-rs are just willing allies and covers as the giant firm defends itself from SEC's resurgence and assault. As they say, if you attack the biggest firm on Wall Street like that, "it's a war."

Mind you, the SEC is not lacking in allies. Obama has adopted financial reform as his new agenda for America, and the President and his party has already learned a tragic lesson on "American bipartisanship" and seems much, much more aggressive than in their healthcare reform battles. Already Mitch McConnell had to abandon his pathetic "financial reform = bailout" nonsense and is trying other angles of attack.

I will enjoy the bloodletting to come. As well as the way in which Tea Party-ers will be spin'd by the Overlords to maintain their "populist outrage" in support of an ultra-capitalistic, anti-populist stance.

[Xellos-_^]

Sitting in the tiny jail cell that has been her home for months, Judge Maria Lourdes Afiuni said she knew a ruling she handed down in December might incense Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez. But she was astonished when intelligence agents arrested her and the entire courtroom staff 15 minutes after she freed a prisoner the government wanted in jail.
"I never thought -- never -- that the violations would get to this point," said Afiuni, 46, who is being held here in a cell block filled with women charged with drug trafficking and murder, some of whom she sentenced

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews

anyone ask Sean Penn and Danny Glover about their good buddy Chavez lately?

[Nosauz]

Originally Posted by mg1942

this south carolina girl is on a very important mission...

http://vp.mgnetwork.net/traveler.swf...c92a4a0d&z=CBD

Human Rights for all, 2d or 3d, human rights for all, real or imaginary!

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

anyone ask Sean Penn and Danny Glover about their good buddy Chavez lately?

Do anyone really espect a guy like Chavez to act differently?

One thing for sure, if Obama was realy a socialist ( like Chavez) as the Tea Partist claim, he would make their live much harder.

[Roger Rambo]

Originally Posted by Irenicus

I see Goldman Sachs' counterattack behind that. Republican soundbite-rs are just willing allies and covers as the giant firm defends itself from SEC's resurgence and assault. As they say, if you attack the biggest firm on Wall Street like that, "it's a war."

I'm not sure it's fair to characterize every criticism of the SEC to politically oriented attacks.

[Joojoobees]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

anyone ask Sean Penn and Danny Glover about their good buddy Chavez lately?

Well, who is to say that Chavez' march to restrict human rights couldn't have been prevented if he was handled differently? Instead of offering him a constructive path to normal relations with democracies, he was threatened with assassination (by Pat Robertson), and literally kidnapped by the Venezuelan equivalent of Fox News. Needless to say, the US government (especially under GWB) made no attempts to strengthen Venezuelan civil society, because that civil society had elected a leftist. What happens when you corner a rat?

Originally Posted by Roger Rambo

I'm not sure it's fair to characterize every criticism of the SEC to politically oriented attacks.

And the SEC apparently intentionally ignored many cases that were brought to them; Bernie Madoff was only the biggest. But they also relaxed a variety of restrictions (such as the "uptick rule") that increased the size of the financial market meltdown.

The thing I would be concerned about, however, is using these stories to say, "see, you can't effectively regulate the financial industry." As some on the right are doing. As far as I'm concerned, regulators who don't do their jobs should be punished harshly. This holds double for the heads of regulatory agencies who encourage lax attitudes by their employees. As such the culpability of Christopher Cox (SEC chair from 2005-2009) should be examined.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by Joojoobees

Well, who is to say that Chavez' march to restrict human rights couldn't have been prevented if he was handled differently? Instead of offering him a constructive path to normal relations with democracies, he was threatened with assassination (by Pat Robertson), and literally kidnapped by the Venezuelan equivalent of Fox News. Needless to say, the US government (especially under GWB) made no attempts to strengthen Venezuelan civil society, because that civil society had elected a leftist. What happens when you corner a rat?


And the SEC apparently intentionally ignored many cases that were brought to them; Bernie Madoff was only the biggest. But they also relaxed a variety of restrictions (such as the "uptick rule") that increased the size of the financial market meltdown.

The thing I would be concerned about, however, is using these stories to say, "see, you can't effectively regulate the financial industry." As some on the right are doing. As far as I'm concerned, regulators who don't do their jobs should be punished harshly. This holds double for the heads of regulatory agencies who encourage lax attitudes by their employees. As such the culpability of Christopher Cox (SEC chair from 2005-2009) should be examined.

Problem is... it was the Bush Administration's SEC that was "on watch during the Madoff fun and all other relaxations, failure to investigate, etc. I can point to just about every government regulatory agency under Bush as having had qualified personnel driven away or zipped up, front men for industry appointed to lead/eviscerate said agency, funnel funds from government into privatized industry with no oversight and no accountaiblity. It is not even an opinion - it is the documented history and the perpetrators were fairly up front about their agenda.

The GOP politicians are treading thinly with any attacks on the SEC because it leads squarely back to their party and their former president's administration.

[Anh_Minh]

Yeah, but is it anything that can't be solved by shouting loud enough?

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Joojoobees

Well, who is to say that Chavez' march to restrict human rights couldn't have been prevented if he was handled differently? Instead of offering him a constructive path to normal relations with democracies, he was threatened with assassination (by Pat Robertson), and literally kidnapped by the Venezuelan equivalent of Fox News. Needless to say, the US government (especially under GWB) made no attempts to strengthen Venezuelan civil society, because that civil society had elected a leftist. What happens when you corner a rat?

you can really blame a lot on bush, iraq, sec, the weather. but even i find it a bit unfair to blame Chavez on bush. At the End it is Chavez own choice to become a dictator, no one else.

[Irenicus]

Originally Posted by Roger Rambo

I'm not sure it's fair to characterize every criticism of the SEC to politically oriented attacks.

The thing is, the SEC under Bush was a toothless organization that matched exactly the criticisms thrown at it. The SEC under Obama -- oh sure it's technically independent, but Obama chose the new chairman and political climates have shifted with his Presidency -- is a very different creature clearly trying to reassert its usefulness. It is after all going after the biggest baddest firm on Wall Street.

Ergo, attack on the current SEC by digging Bush-era dirt + timing the "news" to match the current battle over public opinion = politically motivated to discredit SEC. Indisputable truth? No, I'm not a right wing mass media figure. Cynically likely? I'd bet my subprime mortgage on the yes.

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

you can really blame a lot on bush, iraq, sec, the weather. but even i find it a bit unfair to blame Chavez on bush. At the End it is Chavez own choice to become a dictator, no one else.

I agree. He had the "world" -- with the exception of the same Cold War extremists that supported the likes of Pinochet -- on his side when that coup failed, a chance to reassert Latin American independence, become an internationally respected left-wing leader, strengthen Venezuela's future, etc., etc. The man proceeded to waste that clout playing the latest Caudillo. Pathetic.

And left-wingers are once again thrown off by how different their humanitarian ideologies and the leaders which they naively pin these hopes on prove to be. Stalin did far more damage to Western socialist movements than McCarthy or De Gaulle (not that the two are equivalents), Mao did the same in a more indirect extent for 60's radical leftism, and Chavez made a lot of people in Latin America rather angry, I'd think.

[Joojoobees]

Originally Posted by Vexx

Problem is... it was the Bush Administration's SEC that was "on watch during the Madoff fun and all other relaxations, failure to investigate, etc. I can point to just about every government regulatory agency under Bush as having had qualified personnel driven away or zipped up, front men for industry appointed to lead/eviscerate said agency, funnel funds from government into privatized industry with no oversight and no accountaiblity. It is not even an opinion - it is the documented history and the perpetrators were fairly up front about their agenda.

I agree, and that's why I wish we would hold people accountable. This attitude of "regulation just gets in people's way, we gotta let the free market innovate," is an excuse for all kinds of behavior that isn't in the public's interest. The thing that bugs me is now that it happened, no one holds the people in charge accountable. And I do mean "in charge". The administration directors who dismantled their agencies should have some serious consequences for the damage they did. Sadly the SEC probably isn't even the worst case. Alberto Gonzalez should be doing hard time for sabotaging the Justice Administration.

BTW, I'm not trying to blame Chavez on Bush. I'm just saying being kidnapped and receiving assassination threats from the US, in the context of a long history of aggression (economic and military) against leftist Latin American leaders, is not going to encourage moderation and liberalization. The US needs to come up with another strategy for working with governments in our hemisphere, if we really want to encourage the development of respect for human rights and respect for civil society.

[Xellos-_^]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle7108423.ece

A science teacher shouted "die, die, die," as he beat one of his pupils around the head with a dumbbell, a court heard today.
Peter Harvey, 50, attacked the 14-year-old with the 3kg weight after he confronted the child for misbehaving in class, Nottingham Crown Court was told.
Stuart Rafferty QC, prosecuting, told the jury that Mr Harvey had previously taken several months off work after warning that he might harm somebody at school, but was "well, happy and in a positive frame of mind" on the morning of the attack.

we keep hearing about students snapping but i was wondering when we hear about a teacher snapping.

BTW, I'm not trying to blame Chavez on Bush. I'm just saying being kidnapped and receiving assassination threats from the US, in the context of a long history of aggression (economic and military) against leftist Latin American leaders, is not going to encourage moderation and liberalization. The US needs to come up with another strategy for working with governments in our hemisphere, if we really want to encourage the development of respect for human rights and respect for civil society.

it is not the US responsibility to promote Human rights and democracy in SA. It is South American countries own decision to decide on what they want.

[Vexx]

it is not the US responsibility to promote Human rights and democracy in SA. It is South American countries own decision to decide on what they want.

Unfortunately, South America is still recovering from a few decades of the US undermining any trends that would disturb easily getting what the US wanted in the region. The "anti-communism" of the Cold War led to supporting many dictators at the expense of actual democratic movements (much less any mildly socialist ones). The US has a knack of putting their cards on the single "strong man" rather than building support from the grassroots in a country. Its either lazy or stupid... usually both.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Vexx

Unfortunately, South America is still recovering from a few decades of the US undermining any trends that would disturb easily getting what the US wanted in the region. The "anti-communism" of the Cold War led to supporting many dictators at the expense of actual democratic movements (much less any mildly socialist ones). The US has a knack of putting their cards on the single "strong man" rather than building support from the grassroots in a country. Its either lazy or stupid... usually both.

i don't disagree with you vexx, but eventually the whole it is the US fault is going to wear out. Other South American countries like Argentina and Chile had US back strongman in charge in 70s and most of the 80s but has pretty much put that in the past and has move on to a imperfect but still much more democratic society the countries like Venezuela, Bolivia and Peru.