2002 was a good year for Microsoft – certainly more so than 2001. And the optimism continues, with a distinctly Microsoft-friendly administration in power in the US that has as good as declared itself uninterested in pursuing the company through the courts for any corporate misdeeds it may or may not have committed in the past.
Microsoft Finds it’s Business as Usual
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
The default status of Windows Server 2003 will be to have all its security measures turned on rather than off – and no doubt there will be millions who would say that the sooner Microsoft implements a similar policy for its desktop software the better.
I guess this guy has never tried the newest version of Outlook – the ability to receive most/all attachments turned off by default. Same in Outlook Express 6, I believe.
MS operating systems will become more secure, just as they have become more stable. Right now, the security thing is a HUGE leg for the Linux crowd to stand on when promoting their OS. But when that goes away, they’re going to have less to nitpick at. The whole free (as in beer) software thing is slowly changing as well, with some Linux distros charging $100+ for the package, and I am predicting this will happen even more as time goes on.
Of course, Palledin (sp) and DRM are two big sticking points. The interesting thing to see will be if MS can make these things transparent as they have the WPA. Hell, most Joe Users I have spoken to didn’t even know WinXP had WPA built-in, and most don’t care when they find out about it either – they are quite used to Corporate America by now. At this point, I don’t even think balls-to-the-wall ‘policeware’ will be enough to start a revolution.
> with a distinctly Microsoft-friendly administration in power
I think it really has more to do with the number of jobs tied to MS in an already tight economy. I think it’s a pretty narrow view to think that the current administration is just pro-MS or pro-corporate-america or what have you.
Yes, Monopolies are absolutely bad for a healthy economy over the long haul. But, even though I’m by no means a pro-MS person, I have to beleive that leaving MS alone *for the time being* is not as bad as it sounds, and it’s certainly not as cut-and-dried as some Linux/Mac/Sun/IBM/other-MS-competitor zealots would like you to believe.
“Hell, most Joe Users I have spoken to didn’t even know WinXP had WPA built-in, and most don’t care when they find out about it either – they are quite used to Corporate America by now.”
Of course. They will let them commit any crime they want, just so long as they will be get online and get on AOL, and upgrade to the next version of Windows because they don’t know/care if anything else exists.
But really, is it MS’ job to be the police? No its not. No more it is they’re job to decide what laws are created.
different product name(s)
Every time Microsoft heads into a new product release cycle we see the same type of articles start to appear. Some MS representative gets interviewed and gets all mushy gushy about the “new” “improved” MS whatever.
“We’re so excited about this “insert name here”, we just can’t wait to get it out to our customers! It will slice and dice and julianne and even cook breakfast for you. It SO much better than the old version, I just know you can’t wait to throw more money toward us and help me stay employed!” (gush gush)
This is where linux on the desktop will keep gaining ground on MS. Focusing on the consumer is just a misdirection. The city of Houston just went with Simdesk, an Office replacement that works through a web browser. Government and schools are cheap and have thousands of desktops. They don’t won’t to pay $900 a user for an OS and word processing.
The lack of antitrust prosecution, I think, is in large part because while MS is ripping off consumers (like any unregulated monopoly will do), they are “our thief”, i.e., american. Bringing billions back to the U.S. Overseas they are getting a little sick of this.
It’s too early to say for sure what will happen, but I think the cost conscious consumers (govt, and some corporations) will continue to shift to Linux.
WPA – doesn’t piss anyone off who has a single computer. Have more than one (i.e. small business) and it’s an issue.
Look, right now linux is JUST BECOMING a viable option for govts and corporations that have limited desktop needs (basic office apps, browser, email). Ultimately MS is going to have to start adding some value to their existing products (innovation). I think they are trying to do this. Problem, is they’ve never operated this way.
Yes, Monopolies are absolutely bad for a healthy economy over the long haul. But, even though I’m by no means a pro-MS person, I have to beleive that leaving MS alone *for the time being* is not as bad as it sounds, and it’s certainly not as cut-and-dried as some Linux/Mac/Sun/IBM/other-MS-competitor zealots would like you to believe.
Yes, I agree with you. I think the appropriate way to deal with MS is to force them to open up all of their APIs, file formats, and such (because of their past crimes).
Now that OEMs are free to ship whatever OS they want without MS bullying, other companies could use these open APIs/file formats to make products/operating systems that are 100% compatible with Windows, thus greatly decreasing the need to stick with MS for compatiblity reasons. This way, the tide would shift slowly and wouldn’t create such a jolt as if you were to cut the legs off MS in one swift blow.
“Of course, Palladium and DRM are two big sticking points. The
interesting thing to see will be if MS can make these things
transparent as they have the WPA. Hell, most Joe Users I have spoken
to didn’t even know WinXP had WPA built-in, and most don’t care when
they find out about it either – they are quite used to Corporate
America by now. At this point, I don’t even think balls-to-the-wall
‘policeware’ will be enough to start a revolution. ”
There is a very interesting paperback called “They Thought They Were
Free” which details how the totalitarian state crept up on the Germans
in the 1930s, a little bit at a time.
Mainly because the “average Joe” thought, “the bosses know best, and
anyway I can’t do anything about it.”
If you were to (in one way or the other) force MS off the desktop, you woudl have to pass a law that would require any operating system maker who ships apps with the OS to use open file formats. Why? Let’s say that Sun builds an OS that went on to become the desktop market leader. They could easily ship Star Office with the OS and once they were in the lead, pull the rug out from everyone and update StarOffice to use a proprietary file format. And you would be very naive if you assume Sun (or other Corporation for that matter) wouldn’t jump at the chance to do this.
Personally, I don’t understand why file formats can be like everything else. Let’s take CD audio and VHS for instance – you come up with an open standard, and let manufacturers build players around them and compete that way. Why does software have to be so different ? From a corporation’s point of view, I think it would be BETTER to use open standards. I mean, if you go head-to-head with another company and you’re both using something propietary, if you end up behind, it’s an all or nothing kind of thing – there’s no room for second place here. People aren’t going to even consider your product if it’s not compatible with the proprietary ‘standard.’
“The whole free (as in beer) software thing is slowly changing
as well, with some Linux distros charging $100+ for the package,”
but you can then copy it to as many computers as you like, with no
further license fee. That can be a big saving if you have hundreds or
thousands of computers, _provided_ the applications you need exist for
Linux.
>>>MS operating systems will become more secure, just as they have become more stable. Right now, the security thing is a HUGE leg for the Linux crowd to stand on when promoting their OS. But when that goes away, they’re going to have less to nitpick at.
>>>
Very true. By the same token, as Windows gets more secure, linux will also have acquired most of the advantages currently enjoyed by MS, like ease of use, for example. We have already wittnessed this in the last couple of years. Barely 3 years ago, it was a huge CNN-type news when Caldera came out with the first graphical install.
>> I think it’s a pretty narrow view to think that the current administration is just pro-MS or pro-corporate-america
<<
On the contrary, I think it is a pretty narrow view to not see that the Bush administration is obviously pro-bigman. In the worst sense of the word.
crimes? what crimes did ms commit?
according to http://www.capitalism.org, ms is a benefactor and innovator.
if ms committed crimes, why isn’t any of its execs charged and threatened with jail sentencing?
<crimes? what crimes did ms commit? >
I remember the trial of OJS. He got away with murder.
So if you have enuf money you got away with any “crime”
“crimes? what crimes did ms commit?”
They were convicted of abusing their Monopoly status which
is a crime.This conviction was upheld on appeal by a business
freindly appeal court. The evidence was so overwhelming they
had no choice. So yes, MS is a lawbreaking criminal.
“according to http://www.capitalism.org, ms is a benefactor and innovator.”
Oh. …
Well, sorry, then. I guess _that_ settles it.
but you can then copy it to as many computers as you like, with no further license fee. That can be a big saving if you have hundreds or thousands of computers, _provided_ the applications you need exist for Linux.
True, I never said it had gotten to the point of the commercial offers, but I do think it will get there. Do you think that if Adobe were to port Photoshop to Linux, you’d be able to copy it to as many computers as you wanted?
Very true. By the same token, as Windows gets more secure, linux will also have acquired most of the advantages currently enjoyed by MS, like ease of use, for example. We have already wittnessed this in the last couple of years. Barely 3 years ago, it was a huge CNN-type news when Caldera came out with the first graphical install.
You’re probably right but on the same token, as it gains the advantages of an MS OS, it will also inherit the same problems. Take stablity for instance – rock solid at one point Linux was, but not so much when you add Gnome/KDE to the mix. Though it’s still pretty stable, not as much as it used to be. Not only that, but as the interfaces get more sophisticated, they also get more bloated. Also, though I haven’t seen much in security flaws (slapper not withstanding), I feel those are merely around the corner as well, especially if it starts to go more commercial.
AT&T once made the same policy with their tetephone technologie as microsoft is going to do… security by complete control and everything adapted to one standard…
Then a guy developed a small adapter, which you could stick on the microphone of your phone. This adapter did nothing but filtering background noise, but this technologie was prohibited by courts because it was not part of the AT&T standards and could thus be an element which could disturb security and funcionality…
Same does Microsoft today.. Standards over standards, more security, certifications for this and for that (the summit for these days is palladium and TCPA)…What people often don’t catch is the fact that these technologies are only necessary for Microsoft, for their ability to keep control, and NOT for the user…
A network with less monoculturized participants would be thousands of times more secure than this overall control of microsoft… Use Linux are whatever, but don’t use this technology, as long as it is possible… There are already plans to force users to use Palladium computers by law… as it happened with AT&T in former times
>>>>Same does Microsoft today.. Standards over standards, more security, certifications for this and for that (the summit for these days is palladium and TCPA)…What people often don’t catch is the fact that these technologies are only necessary for Microsoft, for their ability to keep control, and NOT for the user…
What the hell are you talking about. The number one supporter for TCPA is —- IBM. TCPA will the RedHat’s (and the rest of the linux distributors) best business plan. Only paying customers get RedHat’s TCPA certified key. Freeloaders still get the linux source code but no TCPA key.
You make a huge point here, Darius. I absolutely cannot fathom why MSFT was not at least forced to publish their .doc/.xls/.ppt file formats to help level the playing field for office software. This is such a simple, elegant way to make them pay for at least some of their convicted lawbreaking and I don’t understand why even a relatively minor concession like this was not pursued in the “settlement deal”. Seems like the DOJ just wasn’t smart enough to ask for it – I had never even heard of it being discussed by them.
they charge you for service – just like the cable tv setop box – without cable/signal it is useless.
This is an interesting point of view. That would turn the ability to access “Protected” formats and services into a value added service.
This could work as long as you can still boot unsigned OSes on commodity hardware. I can see running a signed “Working” Linux install signed by RedHat, etc. and having a “Development” installation where I can excersize my OSS freedoms sans extra corperate “value”, that is IF the corps create somthing that is of value
“Government and schools are cheap and have thousands of desktops. They don’t won’t to pay $900 a user for an OS and word processing.”
First off they wouldn’t. Schools get steep discounts on liscenses, hell even students get discounts. I can buy office for less than half of what it costs retail. Even if they didn’t xp is $200 and basic office is around $450. Thats $250 less then your estimate. Add on top of that the fact that it would still make windows based computers cheaper then anything apple or anyone else has to offer. Lastly word by itself is less than $100, bringing the total, with just word and xp, up to around $300. A third of your listed “cost”.
“The lack of antitrust prosecution, I think, is in large part because while MS is ripping off consumers (like any unregulated monopoly will do), they are “our thief”, i.e., american. Bringing billions back to the U.S. Overseas they are getting a little sick of this.”
How so? Single liscenses of xp do cost more than linux distros, but they also have much higher costs. Higher cost of production equals higher cost in the market place. Tough concept huh? And OEM liscenses are even cheaper then linux liscenses. Granted most linux liscenses have no limit to the number of machines an end user can load it unto but who knows what if any changes they may make if oems start making linux computers. If they keep the same unlimited licensing they will go out of business. The reason being even if 1 million linux red hat boxes ship they get paid for 1 copy. And no they won’t thrive off of the tech support fees like they do in the corporate world, end users are cheap. They’ll search for solutions rather than pay for them.
“It’s too early to say for sure what will happen, but I think the cost conscious consumers (govt, and some corporations) will continue to shift to Linux.”
What shift? There are a few instances of a move to linux, but its no great shift. I’d venture a guess that less than 1% of 1% of governments (state and local) use linux. I’d also guess that less than 1% of corporations use linux as their desktop. If 1,000 people in the US become beatniks does that mean there is a shift toward beatnikism?
“Look, right now linux is JUST BECOMING a viable option for govts and corporations that have limited desktop needs (basic office apps, browser, email). Ultimately MS is going to have to start adding some value to their existing products (innovation). I think they are trying to do this. Problem, is they’ve never operated this way.”
Linux is just becoming a better clone of windows and mac, thats all. As for value, thats an opinion. btw I like how you imply linux is an innovator when it is currently just a copier of windows and mac. Graphic installs? Windows had it since 95, years before linux. Decent hardware detection? Again years ahead of linux. Hardware support? Well if you argue who’s the follower in this category you might be delusional so I’ll back away slowly. And lastly ease of use. Let me put it this way. Redhat, the most recognized name in linux, still makes you create shortcuts to mount windows partitions. Great way to ease people away from windows, keep newbies from their files. I wonder how many tech support calls a government would get if they chose redhat and no one could access their old files? I’m guessing more than 1.
Or they could at least force them to include the option to read and write free and open file formats in their software like Office, Excel, etc… while having them retain the abilty to use their own closed file formats as well. This way you won’t hurt MS in such a drastic way but you would allow them to face real competition.
Imagine being able to write, read and export a OpenOffice/SunOffice, Hancom, or WordPerfect file in MS Office using a free open file format that all office suites have access too !
“You make a huge point here, Darius. I absolutely cannot fathom why MSFT was not at least forced to publish their .doc/.xls/.ppt file formats to help level the playing field for office software.”
Its because they are protected by copyright laws. Now before anyone decries the dmca realize it would’ve been the same under the original copyright laws. Under original British and American copyright laws they were valid for 14 years with 1 renewable term. Those formats would still be under the original 14 year term (I think, I don’t know actual development dates). Meaning that we’d have at least another 14 years of closed formats before they could be forced to open them. In the meanwhile of course they would shift us all over to new formats. 28 years is quite a bit of time in this day and age, but its also fair imo. Of course newer laws extend that period to much longer (some stuff is protected until 70 years after the death of the author).
True, I never said it had gotten to the point of the commercial offers, but I do think it will get there. Do you think that if Adobe were to port Photoshop to Linux, you’d be able to copy it to as many computers as you wanted?
I don’t understand your point. Photoshop is not, and has never been, open source. Most likely, it will never become open source. If it was ported to Linux, you’d still be buying it via license the same way you do today when you run it on Mac OS or Windows. This is completely unrelated to what operating system you run it on or what license that OS operates by.
Actually, the opening of APIs and file formats was in the brief that beunited.org submitted to the court (if I’m not mistaken – you can go read the brief at bu’s site). This was brought up by lots of people. The only people that didn’t consider it are the important ones that make the decisions so that pretty much makes it all moot in the end anyway.
I don’t understand your point. Photoshop is not, and has never been, open source. Most likely, it will never become open source. If it was ported to Linux, you’d still be buying it via license the same way you do today when you run it on Mac OS or Windows. This is completely unrelated to what operating system you run it on or what license that OS operates by.
I wasn’t talking about open source, I was referring to the license restrictions on commercial software. If you bought Photoshop for Linux, would you be able to copy it to any computer you wanted to and use it? Does Adobe’s EULA allow for that? So, you’re right – license restrictions are in place regardless of the OS you use. That is why using Linux will be less of a free (as in beer) thing as time goes along and more commercial software is ported to it.
I suspected that the MSFT file formats would indeed be protected by copyright, but that would not necessarily prevent the DOJ from putting it on the table as a bargaining chip against MSFT, would it? I would think that in that kind of dealmaking situation any and all options would be open on general principle, regardless of how firm the literal legal protections might be. I am disappointed that the DOJ did not go for this because I think MSFT would have complied to it without much of a fight, really, and it would have been a great boon to the industry to have this.
MSFT pretty much got a free ride on this one.
The US Government disgusts me – and I’m not even an Arab!
>>>The US Government disgusts me
Why? The 9 states that didn’t settled got their case essentially tossed out anyway. So, what are you going to say — that the courts disgust you. If a government that respects the court of law disgusts you, then go and live in some 3rd world dictatorship country.
Climb down from that high horse of yours — because the EU already is climbing down from theirs. Look at their approval “with minor changes” of Microsoft’s Passport.
I never said Linux was more innovative than windows. I said MS is not innovative (generally speaking — that’s not always true)
None of the other operating systems are really secure, since they don’t have as many users as Windows. They didn’t prove anything so far, since they are really not challenged. In addition, they don’t have many programs, they don’t have as many features as Windows.
More uninformed people spewing anti-capitalism garbage, which is taken for facts.
1. Capitalism says NATURAL monopolies are good, not all monopolies. MS is NOT a natural monopoly.
2. The government is not supposed to directly intervene into the free market(farm and corporate subsidies, price fixing, passing new regulations which are basically barriers to entry)
3. The courts do not make rulings based on ‘notes’ the Bush administration hands them. You are living in some kind of conspiritorial world if you believe the government is THAT organized. Sounds good in the column, but its not real life.
Tell you what, get the feds to drop all the things I mentioned in #2 then we can compare apples to apples (capitalism vs regulated economies).
By the way, for extra points :What type of government thrives in a completely regulated free market?
(Hint: Germany circa 1935)
Darius: Of course, Palledin (sp) and DRM are two big sticking points.
DRM have been introduced in Windows XP. Nothing happen. My MP3 collection didn’t mysteriously dissapear. Things that MS bashers said would happen didn’t happen. And then now they are having a field trip over Palladium even though little of the spec is released.
Yes, Monopolies are absolutely bad for a healthy economy over the long haul.
A government sponsored monopoly is absolutely bad for a healthy economy, but a unchallege (literary) market-approved monopoly is not all that bad. Most, if not all, failed companies attacking Windows and Office are mostly run by *geeks* not businessmen.
appleforever: This is where linux on the desktop will keep gaining ground on MS. Focusing on the consumer is just a misdirection. The city of Houston just went with Simdesk, an Office replacement that works through a web browser.
Focusing on the consumer is the only direction they can go from here. They already control most of the corporate market, so the consumer market naturally becomes the next spot.
As for Simdesk and Houston, Houstan, from what I understand in the press releases, needed something like that. It is technically impossible for Office to take the role of SimDesk, and even more so not worth it for Microsoft to do so.
appleforever: They don’t won’t to pay $900 a user for an OS and word processing.
Corporate users, particulary those with site licensing, pay way way way way way way way less.
appleforever: The lack of antitrust prosecution, I think, is in large part because while MS is ripping off consumers (like any unregulated monopoly will do)
Guess what happens if Microsoft decides to take a 10% profit margin and cut their product cost all around? If you couldn’t guess, antitrust laws is the clue. Imagine the outrage that would happen when Sun, Corel, various Linux distributions among others when their main (and sometimes only) competitive advantage is stolen from them?
appleforever: Bringing billions back to the U.S. Overseas they are getting a little sick of this.
With the exception of China, most countries couldn’t care about this. What they care is that how much tax payers money is being used when less can be used, and how much security can you get for sensitive information. Although largely unfounded, there is always this paranoia that USA could be spying on them via Microsoft’s products.
appleforever: Ultimately MS is going to have to start adding some value to their existing products (innovation)
Now, you got your English wrong. Innovation means thinking up a novell unheard of idea. That’s totally different from value. *Sometimes* it is interchangable, but most people don’t care how much innovation goes into it as long they get the most amount of value from it.
Using that defination of innovation, your favourite OS… err, I mean religion is merely value rather than innovation. There isn’t much new ideas in it. if there is, they aren’t all that novell.
appleforever: Problem, is they’ve never operated this way.
Yes, and I’m so very sure that Office won in the market simply because Microsoft hired the mafias to burn down their competitors.
Darius: Yes, I agree with you. I think the appropriate way to deal with MS is to force them to open up all of their APIs, file formats, and such (because of their past crimes).
Would that open up the markets? Microsoft would probably loose some market share because of that, but ultimately, no. For example, you mentioned APIs. If Microsoft were forced to fully document Win32, would this mean Linux would be able to run Windows applications? Nope, it doesn’t. It took Microsoft around a decade to write proper support for it under NT, and that’s with the source code, so not, I don’t think so.
Don Cox: There is a very interesting paperback called “They Thought They Were
Free” which details how the totalitarian state crept up on the Germans
in the 1930s, a little bit at a time.
I read some chapters about that. It is mostly an opinion based on facts rather than the fact itself. Nazism creaped on them through their poverty. The only rich people then in Germany are Jews mainly because of their international connection (and Gypsies are well considered as criminals… poor them).
Let’s take CD audio and VHS for instance – you come up with an open standard, and let manufacturers build players around them and compete that way. Why does software have to be so different ?
Because CD players *need* a standard. Because there are recording studios and player manufacturers. Their feature is how they play the CD/VHS (hardware) and the contents of the CD/VHS.
Software on the other hand is very different. Take Office for example. Word contains a lot of features not found on other competitors’ formats. Same with WordPerfect. Now if they were to have a standard office document format, what features can it support? Sure you can add extensions, but that removes the entire point of having a standard doc format, right?
Don Cox: but you can then copy it to as many computers as you like, with no
further license fee.
Not really. Xandros for example, don’t allow it (CodeWeaver’s software). Same with SuSE’s new office thingy.
hgm: I remember the trial of OJS. He got away with murder.
So if you have enuf money you got away with any “crime”
Actually no. Capitalism.org doesn’t advocate antitrust laws, in fact condemn it. So in their view, MS is 100% legal.
pnghd: So yes, MS is a lawbreaking criminal.
Oh same with Amina Lawal of Nigeria. She must be stoned as soon as her baby created in the act of zina has weaned!
Yes, MS broke the law, but if you read that site, the site don’t agree with the law. Besides, the appeals court isn’t all that business friendly, mind you.
boris: Same does Microsoft today..
Very different actually. One is Congress-mandated, the other isn’t. Besides, have you even read TCPA’s FAQ, no less study it? It is a multi-vendor thingy, just like SSL, only with encryption so high it needs hardware support (or else you are stuck with a very slow computer).
boris: There are already plans to force users to use Palladium computers by law…
Apparently, Microsoft is part of a lobbying organization against any Congress mandate in DRM.
Anonymous: Or they could at least force them to include the option to read and write free and open file formats in their software like Office, Excel, etc…
MSDN have specs for you to write you third party import, export and print filters. In other words, Sun can build filters for Office.
Anonymous: The US Government disgusts me – and I’m not even an Arab!
Arabs pretty much hate Jews and their American supporters. You hate America for corporate practices. I can’t seem to make a comparison.
appleforever: I never said Linux was more innovative than windows. I said MS is not innovative (generally speaking — that’s not always true)
Neither is Apple, the company you support. They bring value. They charge for it. Is the ideas Apple and Microsoft bring to the table new? Hardly.
1. Capitalism says NATURAL monopolies are good, not all monopolies. MS is NOT a natural monopoly.
Actually, accroading to Ayn Rand, a non-natural monopoly is one that recieves sponsorship from the government. Which isn’t true in MS’s case. In other words, MS is a natural monopoly.
Adam Smith, the guy who invented capitalism in the first place, barely mentions monopolies or their remedies, so I can’t quote him.
2. The government is not supposed to directly intervene into the free market(farm and corporate subsidies, price fixing, passing new regulations which are basically barriers to entry)
This is exactly what the government is doing now. Microsoft won in the free market. Sadly, there are some sore losers. This is intervention. Spliting companies up is intervention. Forcing them to do things to remove competitive egdes they spend years of hard work building is intervention.
3. The courts do not make rulings based on ‘notes’ the Bush administration hands them.
Actually, they don’t. However, under antitrust laws, Jackson was way off tangent that even under the Clinton/Gore administration, his ruling would be thrown out.
By the way, for extra points :What type of government thrives in a completely regulated free market?
Indonesia, under General Suharto. Prior to that, the economy was in ruins. After him, the economy was in ruins.
“Guess what happens if Microsoft decides to take a 10% profit margin and cut their product cost all around? If you couldn’t guess, antitrust laws is the clue. Imagine the outrage that would happen when Sun, Corel, various Linux distributions among others when their main (and sometimes only) competitive advantage is stolen from them? ”
Or rather, MS would start burning through about $10 billion in cash a year. When you’re a monopoly you don’t have an incentive to cut prices. I mean, how important is that last 5% of the market anyway?
“MSDN have specs for you to write you third party import, export and print filters. In other words, Sun can build filters for Office. ”
Those are programs that would be accessed from within Office would they not? That really doesn’t help someone read a .doc file stored in a shared drive does it?
“None of the other operating systems are really secure, since they don’t have as many users as Windows. They didn’t prove anything so far, since they are really not challenged. In addition, they don’t have many programs, they don’t have as many features as Windows.”
Nonsense. While Windows has the largest desktop market share, other OSes have users numbering from several thousand to over a million. And, they have not onlyas many features, but better security.
There are enough Linux or Unix-hating programmers that would love to write a worm or virus that would do as much damage as Code-Red or Nimda – and they have the entire OS and application source code to look at. Yet, how many have we seen?
1. Capitalism says NATURAL monopolies are good, not all monopolies. MS is NOT a natural monopoly.
Actually, accroading to Ayn Rand, a non-natural monopoly is one that recieves sponsorship from the government. Which isn’t true in MS’s case. In other words, MS is a natural monopoly.
This is partly true, since they priced competitors out (OS/2 had to pay them money for every copy od OS/2 hence it could never be competitive. All based on IP laws, which are set up and regulated by….government.
DMCA? Crack .DOC formats and the lawyers will come running.
Actually a lot of their influence is laid at the feet of the hardware resellers who wouldn’t stand up to them.
The US Government disgusts me – and I’m not even an Arab!
I’ll second that
Why? The 9 states that didn’t settled got their case essentially tossed out anyway. So, what are you going to say — that the courts disgust you. If a government that respects the court of law disgusts you, then go and live in some 3rd world dictatorship country.
well lessee now,
-US government only thinks about economy, they are selfish crap who prefer to give something back to the oil company providing funds, rather than doing something for the environmnt (if i remember correctly an nature area was used to get oil)
– if i remember right Bush/US where the ONLY ONES not to sign Kyoto
– for some bizarre reason (probably oil again) bush is now going to war in the middle east, i guess hell attack anyting and anyone who doesn’t agree with him (or his dad for that matter)
US is the MS of all governments
greetz from .be
“Actually, accroading to Ayn Rand, a non-natural monopoly is one that recieves sponsorship from the government. Which isn’t true in MS’s case. In other words, MS is a natural monopoly.”
Ayn Rand has no credibility among serious philosophy.
Her Objective Materialism is regarded as a something of a joke , albeit a mean spirited one.
so you are an eager beaver junior capitalist . Good on ya.
Get some better sources. You will give Capitalism a bad name. Ayn Rand ? (shakes head)
==========================================================
Don Cox: There is a very interesting paperback called “They Thought They Were
Free” which details how the totalitarian state crept up on the Germans in the 1930s, a little bit at a time.
Rajan responds and undemines ( inmy mind) every good post he ever made on OSN:
“I read some chapters about that. It is mostly an opinion based on facts rather than the fact itself.
Nazism creaped on them through their poverty. The only rich people then in Germany are Jews mainly because of their international connection (and Gypsies are well considered as criminals… poor them).”
Rajan, you are treading perilously close to parroting the same old tired bigoted drivel about the Jews having all the money. Your response is simplistic and uniformed .
What were you weaned on this stuff or did you come up with it all by yourself?
This wasn’t true in Germany, America, or England.Then or now. Use your brain. I know you have one. Do you really think that majority of businesses in Germany at that time were owned by Jews? The real Money is always oldline mainstream members of the Majority.
Was Farber the company that helped make the gas owned by Jews? Was Hugo Boss , the company that came up with the sylish Nazi Uniforms owned by Jews?
Ok, I guess if you are in a generous mood you will allow
that the Jews weren’t the only ones that had money in Germany.
I hope I have misunderstand you, because otherwise you
are basing your thinking on Ignorance which can only lead to more of the same.
True Growth involves questioning one’s assumptions.
In a sense , the old self must die and a new one rise from
the ashes.
Ponder the way of the Phoenix ,Rajan.
It is the road you must travel, if you are to rejoin Humanity.
see header. It was Pnghd that fired off the J’Acccuse.
US government only thinks about economy, they are selfish crap who prefer to give something back to the oil company providing funds, rather than doing something for the environmnt (if i remember correctly an nature area was used to get oil)
Thank goodness most of us aren’t moron environmentalists. Environmentalism is a power grab and nothing more. Environmentalists are people who want power, or people like Robert Redford who already own their cabin and SUV and don’t want anybody moving in next door.
if i remember right Bush/US where the ONLY ONES not to sign Kyoto
Again, thank all things good for that one. The US chooses not to sign a treaty designed for nothing more than to allow other countries to gain power and influence over what American’s can and can’t do, and they are bad? I think not.
I have a treaty where people from .be can only drive goats to work and must pay a tribute of 50% of all their belongings and earnings to me. Want to sign it?
for some bizarre reason (probably oil again) bush is now going to war in the middle east, i guess hell attack anyting and anyone who doesn’t agree with him (or his dad for that matter)
Umm, we like got bombed and stuff. Over a thousand of our people were murdered. It wasn’t THAT long ago, surely you remember.
Business as usual http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2129418,00.html
> US government only thinks about economy, they are
> selfish crap who prefer to give something back to the
> oil company providing funds, rather than doing something
> for the environmnt (if i remember correctly an nature
> area was used to get oil)
> Thank goodness most of us aren’t moron
> environmentalists. Environmentalism is a power grab and
> nothing more. Environmentalists are people who want
> power, or people like Robert Redford who already own
> their cabin and SUV and don’t want anybody moving in
> next door.
it’s not about environmentalism, it’s about me not being able to go to the beach this summer becouse of some bitchass oil disaster, it’s about me wondering what i will be able to show my kids or grandchildren when they get born, i only hope i can show my grandchildren the beach
and stuff like that,
i am not an environmentalist per se, an altruist would be a better description, i pity selfish idiots because in the end they achieved nothing, and have no friends to tell it to.
if i remember right Bush/US where the ONLY ONES not to sign Kyoto
> Again, thank all things good for that one. The US
> chooses not to sign a treaty designed for nothing more
> than to allow other countries to gain power and
> influence over what American’s can and can’t do, and
> they are bad? I think not.
Did they even consider other nations opinions? no
why are they the ONLY ONE not signing
it’s just an example to show that US gvmt does whatever it pleases without considering other ppl.
with arrogant politics like that no wonder shit get’s blown up, be it by fundamentalists, or an american psycho sniper
> I have a treaty where people from .be can only drive
> goats to work and must pay a tribute of 50% of all their
> belongings and earnings to me. Want to sign it?
that’s not even worthy of a reply
> for some bizarre reason (probably oil again) bush is now
> going to war in the middle east, i guess hell attack
> anyting and anyone who doesn’t agree with him (or his
> dad for that matter)
Umm, we like got bombed and stuff. Over a thousand of our people were murdered. It wasn’t THAT long ago, surely you remember.
hmm, lessee, how many iraqis or africans where slaughterd by US navy?
anyway, if you put a nation under an unbearable embargo, it’s kinda natural some freak steps up and get’s to the less educated
remember what hitler could do in a time of despair?
> out
i’m losing my calm
> influence over what American’s can and can’t do, and
you seem to be pretty sure what americans are, but what are they actually?
some nation who forgot their roots (kinda killed them even) or put them into reservates.
They call them native americans en consider them some kind of touristic attraction.
Then those are the ppl talking about ‘the americans’ and ‘our nation’ while both are artificial concepts, created after 1498
food for thoughts
dabooty: US government only thinks about economy, they are selfish crap who prefer to give something back to the oil company providing funds, rather than doing something for the environmnt (if i remember correctly an nature area was used to get oil)
If you were so nature loving, you wouldn’t be using that computer over there, after all it caused polution. Besides, remember the time Bush proposed mining in a protected area in Alaska to remove dependance on the middle east, the root of Islamic terrorism? Remember how his initiative didn’t work?
dabooty: – if i remember right Bush/US where the ONLY ONES not to sign Kyoto
They weren’t the only ones. Australia, for example, didn’t sign. This is because if US implements Kyoto, their economy would crash so hard it would make the Great Depression look like a walk in the park. And if US’s economy crashes, it would also take down other economies with it.
dabooty: for some bizarre reason (probably oil again) bush is now going to war in the middle east
The bizarre reason is Saddam Hussein. Don’t remember him? Here’s some reminders. He killed 300,000 Iranians troops, 375,000 of his own countrymen just to control Iran’s oil? (Blocking the Islamic Revolution is a lame excuse, the Revolution was looking towards central Asia as their next target, NOT Iraq). Plus, 5000 “living matyrs”, Iranians infected with Iraq’a chemical weapons, 1000 of them chronic, now live in misery.
While in the Kuwait invasion, Hussein let 25,000-75,000 of his country men die because of his miscalculations with the Iran-Iraq war (Iraq cut their oil production to increase oil prices, but Kuwait increases their oil production, thus ruining all efforts by Hussein). Not only that, he caused the biggest inferno the world have ever seen by burning Kuwait’s oil fields.
dabooty: i guess hell attack anyting and anyone who doesn’t agree with him (or his dad for that matter)
That would put a lot of the world, including one of their allies, Saudi Arabia, in their list of “What to attack next”.
Anonymous: Ayn Rand has no credibility among serious philosophy.
Why would you say so? Albeit some of her theories are rather utopian today (but not when she wrote it), she is a very good philosopher who happens to be a very bad writer.
Anonymous: Get some better sources.
Okay, how about Adam Smith himself? He said NO government intervention – not no government intervention only when times are right. Isn’t antitrust laws government intervention?
I suggest you get some better sources.
Anonymous: Rajan, you are treading perilously close to parroting the same old tired bigoted drivel about the Jews having all the money.
I did not said that nor implied that. Germans, the majority, was forced into poverty mainly by France after WW2. I’m in no means a anti-semit, I face a lot of harrastion here in Malaysia because I’m pro-Jew and pro-Zionist.
Anonymous: Was Farber the company that helped make the gas owned by Jews? Was Hugo Boss , the company that came up with the sylish Nazi Uniforms owned by Jews?
I didn’t said the entire business sector was owned by Jews. I said it was the average Jew was richer than the average German. It was very easy to get jealous of them.
Anonymous: Ok, I guess if you are in a generous mood you will allow
that the Jews weren’t the only ones that had money in Germany.
Wow, thanks for putting even more words ion my mouth!
Anonymous: I hope I have misunderstand you, because otherwise you
are basing your thinking on Ignorance which can only lead to more of the same.
The only one is ignorant is you. It is like saying people misunderstood communism and preaches good things about it, while most of it wrong, and goes around and says Karl Marx is a stupid philosopher.
Or preach good things about socialism, but when quoting Robert Owen, you would turn around and call him a idiotic philosopher.
You did nothing to address why point. For example, when I said Jews were richer than Germans (meaning most Jews are richer than most Germans, there are poor Jews and rich Germans then too), you go around and imply that I’m a bigot.
Anonymous: It is the road you must travel, if you are to rejoin Humanity.
I’m quite sure I had travel that road. Why not you do the same, you anonymous troll. I mean after all, you are so cowardly using no nick to represent you (much less than a name, unlike me) and no email address.
If there is any post to mod down, it is yours.
first of all: i didn’t really want to get into a lengthy conversation about this on this site, but it has come this far
it’s a long post, but i promise it’ll be the last
> dabooty: US government only thinks about economy, they
> are selfish crap who prefer to give something back to the
> oil company providing funds, rather than doing something
> for the environmnt (if i remember correctly an nature
> area was used to get oil)
> If you were so nature loving, you wouldn’t be using that
> computer over there, after all it caused polution.
> Besides, remember the time Bush proposed mining in a
> protected area in Alaska to remove dependance on the
> middle east, the root of Islamic terrorism? Remember how
> his initiative didn’t work?
as far as i’m concerned the root of terrorism is the american arrogance that has been going on for decades now. Why is the us the center of attack and not any other country. Why is it always the american embassy?
i am not an ecologist as i told before, it’s that macavelian attidude i object to. u know when u put up a target (economy) and will pay wathever price to get there
prices like:
rich get richer, poor get poorer
ecological disasters
ppl fighting over a drop of oil, or an acre of land (though they did before, it only gets worse)
> dabooty: – if i remember right Bush/US where the ONLY
> ONES not to sign Kyoto
> They weren’t the only ones. Australia, for example,
> didn’t sign.
if i remember right > implied i wasn’t sure
> This is because if US implements Kyoto, their economy
> would crash so hard it would make the Great Depression
> look like a walk in the park. And if US’s economy
> crashes, it would also take down other economies with it.
i am not saying i don’t understand that point, but bush proved very arrogant during that conference and the reason why it would hurt america a lot, is because they pollute a lot.
they shouldn’t have gone way overboard in the first place
> dabooty: for some bizarre reason (probably oil again)
> bush is now going to war in the middle east
> The bizarre reason is Saddam Hussein. Don’t remember him?
> Here’s some reminders. He killed 300,000 Iranians
> troops, 375,000 of his own countrymen just to control
> Iran’s oil?
yes maybe so, but it seems bush is the only one really in favor of an attack, prime minister major of engeland is an early ally, but for some reason it only seemed to have bothered bush so far.
he’s making a complete fool out of himself abroad by playing the saviour of mankind by declaring a (phantom) war on terrorism, and on iraq then later on. while they keep supporting the worst violations of humanism in palestine.
he’s fighting personal wars with your taxes and you don’t even see it
i know the war against terrorism might not qualify as a personal war, but most sensible people would agree that whatever he tried now didn’t help and made the anti-us feeling in those countries even worse, so now they have to shit their pants for chemical weapons and the likes. A little understanding for the frustrations of those ppl would’ve helped a lot
What’s even funnier is that the groups that are now feared were trained by your soldiers a few years back, and the nuclear bomb which you should all fear has been made for your government with your taxes (and sold to iraqi’s by germans as i seem to have heard on tv yesterday)
I don’t think the iraqi’s should have nuclear weapons, noone should (US neither)
But we have a saying that probably translates:”you harvest what you seed” or something, and that’s exactly what’s happening. US lead the nuclear warfare a while back, and still owns more than any other country (not sure again, but still enough to remain a valid point)
> (Blocking the Islamic Revolution is a lame excuse, the
> Revolution was looking towards central Asia as their next
> target, NOT Iraq). Plus, 5000 “living matyrs”, Iranians
> infected with Iraq’a chemical weapons, 1000 of them
> chronic, now live in misery.
Not all of the frustration in those country’s is to blame on the islamic revolution not happening. Have you ever been there? the frustration is with the people being sick but not being able to buy medicine because of an embargo. The frustration is because even in suck conditions they still get MTV and Coca Cola crammed up their asses. The frustration is really american arrogance.
> While in the Kuwait invasion, Hussein let 25,000-75,000
> of his country men die because of his miscalculations
> with the Iran-Iraq war (Iraq cut their oil production to
> increase oil prices, but Kuwait increases their oil
> production, thus ruining all efforts by Hussein). Not
> only that, he caused the biggest inferno the world have
> ever seen by burning Kuwait’s oil fields.
I am not clearing saddam from his crimes, i just find it hilarious that GW Bush pretends to be the angel that’s gonna save the world. He doesn’t even appear human.
Why weren’t there attacks like this during bill clintons reign or other predecessors (excluding the first bush), because none of them were so arrogant as the 2 bush legislatures.
> dabooty: i guess hell attack anyting and anyone who
> doesn’t agree with him (or his dad for that matter)
> That would put a lot of the world, including one of their
> allies, Saudi Arabia, in their list of “What to attack
> next”.
it begins to look like he actually has a list like that, first osama, then saddam, then …
(and no i don’t seriously believe he has a list, but he is one of the more agressive leaders at the moment)
and that concludes my part in this discussion, though i included my email this time to be able to receive more flaming, and maybe get some interesting understanding for the american point of view, but so far i rest my case
quote: The bizarre reason is Saddam Hussein. Don’t remember him? Here’s some reminders. He killed 300,000 Iranians troops, 375,000 of his own countrymen just to control Iran’s oil? (Blocking the Islamic Revolution is a lame excuse, the Revolution was looking towards central Asia as their next target, NOT Iraq). Plus, 5000 “living matyrs”, Iranians infected with Iraq’a chemical weapons, 1000 of them chronic, now live in misery.
____________________________
1° Ohwell *cough*amnesty-international*cough* There are countries with the likes of the taliban regime, why doesn’t bushboy attack those? I could give an endless row of examples, but I can’t be arsed atm: http://www.amnesty.org
2° North Korea is rebuilding its nuclear arsenal; Bush’s reaction: “We must attack Iraq” No weapons found there so far (28/01), only a lack of cooperation. He’ll come up with documents of America’s secret service. America’s…. secret service, quite reliable.
3° US don’t want american soldiers in the Den Hague tribunal, now how fascist is that?
4° The US decides whether you’re a prisoner of war (and thus enjoying the rights) or not… just like that. When you’re not a PoW they can do whatever they want with you, disregarding the civil rights. If you don’t believe me: Prisoners at Guantanamo Bay are NOT PoW’s, but terrorists.
__
I don’t say the attack of 1109 was a nice wake up call for the president, but I see the facts in their whole context.
Cheerz from .be as well
Rajan , you claim are you are no aniti-semite and I take you at your word. Brevity is great but certain topics need more than a line or two, otherwise there is the risk
of misunderstanding.
However when you inadvertently repeat one of the lies used by Bigots, do not be surprized if you are mistaken for one.
Anonymous: Rajan, you are treading perilously close to parroting the same old tired bigoted drivel about the Jews having all the money.
Rajan
“I did not said that nor implied that.”
Actually, you did. Perhaps you did not mean to.
“The ***only*** (emphasis mine) rich people then in Germany are Jews …”
Many thought this but it was a _false_ perception. To repeat this without noting that risks perpetuating it
and the hate it has been used to justify.Therein lies my bone of contention with you.
Sure, less affluent Germans were envious of middle and upper class german Jews. However even in the harsh aftermath of Versailles,there were still _far more_ Germans in those two groups than Jews.
And not all Jews were Rotschilds. Hard economic conditions effected everyone,Jewish or otherwise.
In response to my post you said, ” when I said Jews were richer than Germans (meaning most Jews are richer than most Germans”
But that is something very different from ” the only
rich peole then in Germany are Jews” Also it does not
change the fact that there were far more wealthy Germans
than wealthy Jews in Germany.
If they wanted to hate the rich , they could have hated
rich Germans. But it was easier to resent the Jews.
Why ?
Answer that and you go a long way to explaining the age old phenomenon of Anti-Semitism.
Part of it is simply that they weren’t considered Germans but Jews. Institutionalized anti-semitism of Europe was encouraged and exploited by the Nazis.
One way, was by encouraging the lie that that the only
rich people in Germany are Jews.
Please be more careful and you won’t inadvertently stumble
into one of thet same positions held by those you are the opposite of.
peace be with you.
as far as i’m concerned the root of terrorism is the american arrogance that has been going on for decades now. Why is the us the center of attack and not any other country.
Not really. It was only Sept 11 where Americans found out they are vunerable to terrorism. Prior to that terrorist attacks happens all over the world, in Africa, Asia, etc., and it mainly goes unnoticed in the international press.
Why is it always the american embassy?
It is not only the American embassy that normally find most of the attacks, in South East Asia, Australian embassies find a lot of those attacks, and in Africa, Israel embassies find most of the attacks.
However, the attacks is not due to American arrogance. The Soviet Union was very very arrogant, ten times of what it is today, and except for American-sponsored Mujahiddin in Afganistan, there weren’t much attacks on it.
See my point on Saudi Arabia below.
rich get richer, poor get poorer
If America didn’t thrive on its industry products, much of America be poor, and it would be Europe that would be filthy rich. In America, most of the people who are poor are there because of their own fault, mainly. In India for example, some of the top businessmen came from very low caste and low income families.
So, what you say is pretty wrong. The clever/wise gets richer, the ignorant/stupid gets poorer. I’m not however saying there are cases of people who are in poverty because of circumstances they cannot fight..
they shouldn’t have gone way overboard in the first place
At the time America was building its industries, they didn’t know about the seriousness of the enviromental effects. After all, they were in the early 1900s. However, America is slowly reducing their polution every year, but what Kyoto demands is a date where US must stop such activities (IIRC, 2005).
yes maybe so, but it seems bush is the only one really in favor of an attack, prime minister major of engeland is an early ally, but for some reason it only seemed to have bothered bush so far.
Other allies include UK and Australia. Currently, the main opposition comes from countries that have vested investment in sanctioned Iraq, like Jordan, Turkey, France and Germany.
Saudi Arabia on the other hand opposes the war because they know they would be sideline once a America-friendly regime is in place on Iraq. Saudi Arabia, with its Wahhabism ideology and interpretation of Islam that promotes mainly intolerance, is the main root of Islamic terrorism. Right now, America can’t live without Saudi Arabia, even though everything America fights for – mainly tolerance, democracy, seperation of church and state, freedom of speech, is opposed by the Saudi royal family.
while they keep supporting the worst violations of humanism in palestine.
There was about 10,000 killed in East Timor in 20-30 years, while only 5,000 in Palestine since 1967. But did Catholic East Timorese held suicide attacks on Indonesian civilians? No, they never gave such justification for Indonesia to commit human rights violations in East Timor.
And guess who’s independant?
The so-called Palestian cause was funded and started by Arabs. Yasser Arafat himself was from Eqypt. And in case you didn’t know, the Nazi regime during WW2 promised Arab nations its independance in return for ideological support. So since the late 30s, Arab presses have been anti-Semetic.
Palestians themselves don’t see, early on itself, Jews’ right to live in Palestine. They said Palestine is their home, but wasn’t it for Jews before the Romans kicked them off for resisting their occupation? Till today, even though the PLO says differently, they still don’t see Israel’s right to exist.
And the Arab discrimination in Israel now is caused mainly by Yasser Arafat’s attacks on Israel civilians. Would Arabs live peacefully under secular, democratic Israel then other Saudi-inspired fundamental regime or Syria-inspired Baath regime? I highly doubt it.
It is the Palestians that push themselves into this predictament.
I don’t think the iraqi’s should have nuclear weapons, noone should (US neither)
USA, the last I check, still have nuclear weapons, but have been reducing the number every year. This is mainly because they aren’t in use, and they detoriate, while it is hard to justify building new nuclear weapons with tax payers money when there is no need.
Not all of the frustration in those country’s is to blame on the islamic revolution not happening.
I never blamed the Islamic Revolution in Iran for Iraqi’s predictament. I blame Hussein himself. While he is living in lush palaces, his people can’t get medicine and food. Through the oil-for-food program, there should be enough money for Iraq to get enough food and basic medication for Iraqis (unless there are really more Iraqis then they tell us).
No one ask Hussein to attack Iran, causing a huge economic problem in Iraq. No one aske hussein to attack Kuwait, causing the sanctions. No one ask Hussein to kick out weapons inspectors, causing the prolonging of sanctions against Iraq.
The frustration is because even in suck conditions they still get MTV and Coca Cola crammed up their asses
I don’t understand this statement. I think you mean American radios. These radios are mainly there to tell the Arab world what’s really happening in the world, and is even free from American censors. Most Arab countries don’t have a free media.
Why weren’t there attacks like this during bill clintons reign or other predecessors (excluding the first bush), because none of them were so arrogant as the 2 bush legislatures.
Opinion polls in South East Asia show that the Bush administration is far less arrogant than the Clinton one. Remember the Anwar Ibrahim crisis? The majority support actions against him, yet Gore came over to Malaysia druming up support for demonstrations.
Saddam is the biggest problem in the world today, that’s why they are paying attention to it and not Iran, N. Korea, etc. Remember when USA blamed Osama for Sept 11, most of the world says “It’s not true” or “No proof”. Now? Only idiots being served Arabian press believe that.
and maybe get some interesting understanding for the american point of view, but so far i rest my case
Well, you aren’t getting an American point of view. Heck, I never been outside of Malaysia and Singapore.
Ohwell *cough*amnesty-international*cough* There are countries with the likes of the taliban regime, why doesn’t bushboy attack those?
Didn’t Taliban was overthrown mainly because of American help? Hmmm….
Besides, America has no reason to waste tax payers money removing a regime that doesn’t harm its interests. US has many interest in the Mid East, little in Taliban. The last I checked, Taliban don’t have, nor have been accused of having weapons of mass destruction.
North Korea is rebuilding its nuclear arsenal
N. Korea only said to American diplomants that it was restarting its nuclear program. This does not include attacking S. Korea, US’s main reason for intervening. Why? There is no possible way N. Korea can attack South. And even if they manage to, their half of the penisular wouldn’t be inhabitable anymore.
3° US don’t want american soldiers in the Den Hague tribunal, now how fascist is that?
The reason being that there are many countries accusing America of human rights violations, and even though there are ample proof against it, letting these countries file charges would only serve to cripple the American army.
The government would also face huge opposition from Christians (born-again) and perhaps some Muslims that believe that convention is the beginning of the one government system that would be used by anti-Christ. Even though there is no proof of this, Bush have to keep on of his large groups of voters his and not his rivals.
Prisoners at Guantanamo Bay are NOT PoW’s, but terrorists.
These prisoners are trialed under American criminal law, a set of rather human-rights abiding laws. They aren’t subjecting them to torture, as many European and American insepectors tell. They let them have their 5 prayers a day, although they didn’t inform them about Eid-ul-Fitr, causing them to fast a few days extra then nessecary.
They are pretty much American prisioners awaiting trial. Now, accroading to the Geneva convetion, PoW status would only be given to countries at war, not terrorist cells (Taliban itself was pretty much a terrorist cell). That’s why nobody can successfully build against this action. (America is one of the members of that Geneva convention).
Just wonder, are all people from Belgium anti-US?
I agree with you, sorry for causing the confusion. I never meant to say “only”. for the rest of the post, I 100% agree with you. The anti-Semitic feeling came from the Jewish uprising against Roman occupation about 2,000 years ago. It continued because Jews, in general, were far more successful than non-Jews (Jews’ culture were far more business-orientated than the culture of the Dark Ages’ Europeans).
Plus, the fact that most Jews prefer to live in their own communities and choose not to inter-marry (this isn’t strange, every race does that back then) didn’t help the situation.
Just wonder, are all people from Belgium anti-US?
not really, but there’s a reasonable amount of anti-bush / US, though it would be better to call it discomfort, feelings rising (faster than linux on the desktop is) amongst native europeans as well as immigrants. Prime Minister Major is considered guilty by association.
The fact that belgium is maybe a bit more vigilant might have something to do with the US storing nuclear weapons in belgium (some sort of payback for the help during WW’s) and the US stationing troopers here for their war@bagdad.
“Didn’t Taliban was overthrown mainly because of American help? Hmmm….
* It’s with the help of America they got the power there as well (remember the russian invasions). It was just a struggle for oil between the russians and the americans. The americans won that game of political chess back then, but they got it right back in their face on sept 11th.
_____
“Besides, America has no reason to waste tax payers money removing a regime that doesn’t harm its interests. US has many interest in the Mid East, little in Taliban. The last I checked, Taliban don’t have, nor have been accused of having weapons of mass destruction.”
* Maybe they should tell that openly instead of sending total rubbish into the world. “Charity” huh…
_____
“N. Korea only said to American diplomants that it was restarting its nuclear program. This does not include attacking S. Korea, US’s main reason for intervening. Why? There is no possible way N. Korea can attack South. And even if they manage to, their half of the penisular wouldn’t be inhabitable anymore. “
* Well why are they producing nuclear devices then? For no good, believe me. Setting up a nuclear program is never good in these days. This ain’t the fucking cold war anymore.
______
* 3° US don’t want american soldiers in the Den Hague tribunal, now how fascist is that?
“The reason being that there are many countries accusing America of human rights violations, and even though there are ample proof against it, letting these countries file charges would only serve to cripple the American army.”
* Proof against it: case closed. Proof is proof, no higher court needed.
“The government would also face huge opposition from Christians (born-again) and perhaps some Muslims that believe that convention is the beginning of the one government system that would be used by anti-Christ. Even though there is no proof of this, Bush have to keep on of his large groups of voters his and not his rivals.”
* Born again christians, you mean the radical kind? That’s a minority isn’t it, and PERHAPS “SOME” muslims – sounds like a minority group as well. Although you have a point here, the tribunal is neutral and educated enough to make a judgement in honour, believe me. American criminals of war (case proven) should be “brung to justice”
as well!
_____
“These prisoners are trialed under American criminal law, a set of rather human-rights abiding laws. They aren’t subjecting them to torture, as many European and American insepectors tell. They let them have their 5 prayers a day, although they didn’t inform them about Eid-ul-Fitr, causing them to fast a few days extra then nessecary.”
* Maybe, I don’t disagree nor do I agree – I don’t know.
“They are pretty much American prisioners awaiting trial. Now, accroading to the Geneva convetion, PoW status would only be given to countries at war, not terrorist cells (Taliban itself was pretty much a terrorist cell). That’s why nobody can successfully build against this action. (America is one of the members of that Geneva convention).”
* “We are at WAR” says who (ànd repeated that line several times?)? Indeedie. And what happened back there in Afghanistan wàs war. Now, don’t get me wrong – those taliban boys should be punished for their behaviour. Just the principle of labelling someone as a POW at will is not a honest way of working. Doesn’t have to be outside the US you know. They changed the law so they can (conform the anti-terrorist sanctions) hold someone as long as they want, even when he/she isn’t guilty after all.
“Just wonder, are all people from Belgium anti-US?”
No, just the both of us are ;p
I have the impression big fluxes are about to take place in the near future. America getting ready for battle in the middle east, n.korea arming itself with nuclear weapons, europe opposing the american plans (especially B, F & D), Russia watching and acting with caution (they still have the cheycheynian case), imam’s all over the world – even in london (finsbury park) – calling the mosque visitors and islam people to arms, … There are a lot of things that are beyond our comprehension that are discussed, decided and eventually planned above our heads; hidden away from the press. We can have endless duscussions about it, but in the end may not be of any importance anymore.
Cheerz
It’s with the help of America they got the power there as well (remember the russian invasions). It was just a struggle for oil between the russians and the americans. The americans won that game of political chess back then, but they got it right back in their face on sept 11th.
It was the Cold War. Much of the world’s mistakes, including allowing Saddam to rise to power, were made then. But however, USA funding the mujahiddin forces in Afganistan to fight Soviet invasion did that for pride and prestige rather than oil. If oil is the made issue, they would have conquered many other countries, right? And why did they entered the Vietnam War? Do they have large amounts of oil?
Proof against it: case closed. Proof is proof, no higher court needed.
You don’t understand how the court works, don’t you? Both sides are given time to proof their cases, so it would always be a long trial. America already have laws against soldiers that commit human rights violations in foreign countries
Born again christians, you mean the radical kind? That’s a minority isn’t it
20% of America? A big one to please, my friend.
Imagine 20% of the country moving to support your rival.
and PERHAPS “SOME” muslims – sounds like a minority group as well.
18% of America.
“We are at WAR” says who (ànd repeated that line several times?)? Indeedie.
Yes, the same line was used against the war on drugs. Do drug trafficers get PoW status? The same line was used against corporate accounting practices. Do Enron and Worldcom executives get PoW status?
n.korea arming itself with nuclear weapons
As soon as the Hussein case is over, you would immediately see US getting all over the N. Korea case, along with human shields from US and UK going to N.Korea, hehe 🙂
http://www.misterpoll.com/4245524358.html
’nuff said
The poll is a far cry from any scientific poll. Real scientific polls conducted by real analyst (opinion polls) show that Americans prefer war against Iraq then none at all. But the questions are so screwed against the Bush that it would be a miracle that Bush’s administration would come out victorious.
Plus, like any online poll, there would be ballot stuffing, dynamic IP problems, etc. If you seriously take this poll as real proof against war of Iraq, you are far worse than a idiot.