newbie

It was you who made no point and proved nothing, you blamed everything on the States. You gave one sentence assumptions and I gave one sentence responses, that is my point. You contributed nothing. You are the troll who always spues hateful remarks on anything that you type.

There was no point; I only posted back garbage that you first posted, that is all. You started this whole charade not me. My issue I stated clear in my last post.

atm, come on. Everything you said in post 32 points towards the states, you didn't bring in any other country. If you want people to believe you are not biased then maybe you should broaden your assumptions. I agree 100% but like I said how you presented your ideas in post 32 was wrong. FYI, the encyclopedia doesn't agree with you. I am certainly not jadote, you don't have to post to me this is a public forum after all. I disagreed with your post so I replied, but if it makes you feel better you are correct, I should have rephrased my post but I was lazy. There is no need to look up the word 'counterpoise', what you posted was balanced by mine.

LOL, I actually had tears in my eyes reading that. That was good. But like I said before, I am aware of basic economics. What you state is true; bigger fish tend to eat up the little ones, but what I do not agree with and where you have a flaw in your argument is in post 32. You blame everything on America, are your trying to say America is to blame for all the worlds problems? You are correct I did get that from the encyclopedia, last time I check that wasn't plagiarism. The point I was showing is in the beginning "underdeveloped economies are not a result of rich nations". There is a lot more credibility from the encyclopedia then you certainly have. When you make a statement and someone doesn’t agree with and gives a reason (post 41) then you should be able to back up your reasoning. But instead as always you ignore it and start up your little person attacks. Here is another phrase I’m sure you are aware of “garbage in, garbage out” I gave you what you gave me. (Post 32, 41) That was your counterpoise.

You are the one trolling, I am not picking an argument with you either. You consistently change face everytime I reply. Why don't you explain your reasoning or at least show how you come to your assumptions. For the 2nd time please re-read post 41. Your are not making a point only your opinions, if you don't have facts then don't gripe to me about it. You are the one who always resorts too negative remarks, ever hear if you don't have something nice to say, don't say anything at all? I'm sure you have, you don't state an unbiased opinion it's always negative. So until you counter what was said in post 41 there is nothing else to say.

I am familar with economics, underdeveloped economies are not a result of rich nations, poor nations desperately need aid from the rich nations in the form of capital and of technological and organizational expertise. They also need easy access to the markets of the industrialized nations for their manufactures and raw materials. The political capacity of rich nations to respond to these needs depends greatly on their own success in coping with inflation, unemployment, and lagging growth rates. In democratic communities, it is exceedingly difficult to generate public support for assistance to foreign countries when average wage earners are themselves under serious financial pressure. It is no easier politically to permit cheap foreign merchandise and materials to freely enter American and European markets when they are viewed as the cause of unemployment among domestic workers. for you to say: ... holds no weight, you have no argument. You might want to blame this on America but clearly no-one else but you believes it to be true. The bold part above sums you up well. As for I "linking to a website and claiming it as evidence" is not something I do often. To get this back on track here, I gave you your "counterpoise" please re-read post 41.

I do not think this is a school at all, I do not want you to help me understand anything, but it would be nice for you too just once, back up your statements. You acknowledged a book 'Globalization and Its Discontents' as a source, which is a good thing--thank you. I will check it out when I can. What you stated in post 32 you do not have any proof. I have never heard nor read anything like that at all, and I thought at least going to the web would give you the benefit of the doubt, but in the end I came up with nothing. So I was hoping if what you say is true you could possibly show some shred of evidence too your claims, but if you continue to do nothing but change the subject then frankly this is yet another one of your many opinions. Btw, you object to someone searching websites for info? Is that looked down upon to you?

Don't try and turn this around on me, you’re the troll. All you have done is post questions with no answers and then say "Your arguments are childish", WHAT arguments? I put up no arguments, only answers to your questions and asked if you did not agree with them please clarify YOUR OWN QUESTIONS. You made no points--only questions, you cite reasoning. Human rights and Fair trade are not the same, no where in your post did you highlight human rights. Joseph Stiglitz is a good guy, but I have yet to see him claim the things you do. I searched amnesty international's website for "fair trade disputes, cash crops, broken fair trade agreements, sweat shops, political slavery et al that put millions of people across the world in abject poverty/starvation to support the American dream" and could not find anything like you stated. The library function seems to be not working so I will check again at a later time. -edit- Woohoo! here we go -edit-

That's about all I can expect from you atm, so yes that will do for now. -edit- Sayonara³, I did not lose -edit-

Please name them all since you know all this for a fact right? The citizens of America, who else could? Go ahead, explain for me please. I would love to see proof of this! I don't think its something to be deserved, it’s more of something that was worked hard for--unless you care to explain otherwise? See, this is it. This is the gold of your post. You don't have anything to say, only that you hate America. You never have anything positive to say about anything. This might be tough for you but please, tell us something good about America, be sincere and don't worry it's not hard.

I cannot believe this has gotten as far as it has. There is only one thing to say here, Hitler was wrong. There is no inferior/superior race or person. We can't even measure or define Intelligence, so I think having a debate on that is rather limited. Just to give my two cents, contrary to what some say—if one where too look at academic studies one would surely see most studies show no difference between the average IQ of Asian Americans and that of the general population.

danmoore80, Evolution has been observed. One only needs to look at speciation. Evolution does not say one kind of creature can turn naturally into a completely different kind “Insects don't evolve into more complex non-insects for instance, because they don't have the genes to do it” . This is why speciation occurs with only pre-existing genetic information. To have a cat evolve into a dog would require new genetic information. That has never been proven or observed. As Radical Edward stated, I will explain a couple of his examples. The species of mosquito known as Culex pipiens , cut off from their diet they became an underground variety known as molest. The York Groundsel is another good example. Basically it is just a hybrid of the Common Groundsel and the Oxford Ragwort as Radical Edward stated; but it is only a reproductive isolation and not evolution in the sort of cats evolving into dogs. Too answer your question is no evolution does not allow one species to evolve into a completely different more complex species. __________________________________________________ Creation comes before distribution—or there will be nothing to distribute.

LuTze, I did not quote him but in my orignial post I did refer to what I was speaking about; let me show you. See you stand corrected, I told you what I was talking about but you chose to not read or ignore it. As for MS fixing exploits quickly I will only give a quick example which you yourself said; MSBlast. Also here is a good link for Linux since its so much better than XP right? Linux Anyways its a good read and shows that both OS's are good. Its just whichever one makes you feel better.

LuTze, I was talking about atm's link so why the reply to me? (post 45) I will say it again, please read before you post. What seems to be a misunderstanding here is the reference to backdoors and the EULA. I see nothing of that sort in the EULA. I was under the impression that the arugment here was Microsoft the company having access to your personal information online by means of WinXP. These exploits that have been posted have been patched. And the odds of them affecting a lone PC is the same odds as you being on a boat and getting hit by a plane. All OS's have exploits, you should be happy that MS actually fixes them quickly; more than I can say for linux.

LuTze, I don't want to sound rude here, but what are you talking about? Did you read the page atm posted? That page CLEARLY STATES: "The vulnerability would not enable the attacker to gain any administrative control over the server or to alter any data on it." Please read before you post.

LuTze, I have used a mac before and I stand by what I said. It seems the "backdoors" then are nothing more than vulnerabilities that all OS's have. Just MS is hated by many and it gets in the headline the most. Also the Quality of Service (QoS) is actually not a bad thing; the only thing that should have been done different is it should not come enabled on a recommended install. QoS is good for corp. networks that have a heavy load and should not be used on a home PC. Even Cisco uses the technology. Besides that the rumor of the 10-20% of your bandwidth being locked is false even when it’s enabled. The exploit you posted atm does not harm your system. I misunderstood what you were trying to get at with the backdoor. I thought you were referring to MS getting into your system without the owner's knowledge with the auto update feature enabled.

No need to read IT pages I write them. I did a search on yahoo to try to find any backdoors in XP and still come up empty. Did you mean Backdoor Trojan's?

Windows XP Pro is one of the best OS's out. All versions of Linux\Unix are decent but not as stable as they like to claim. Mac to me is a joke and only worthwhile if you work in advertising. Someone said that Linux was great for it having modules--in that if something goes down your OS is not killed. Well I have to say XP does the same thing except its not called modules its called services, and the same thing applies too it. If something crashes in XP you do not crash the whole OS. Sayonara³ I have yet to see any backdooring in XP. Also about your friend's copy automatically updating itself without his knowledge; please explain to him/her that on your first install XP gives you the option of setting the auto update on or off. It’s not done by itself, unless of course he bought an OEM computer which is in itself a very bad and evil thing. In any case he/she only has to turn auto update off and does not have to firewall anything. Better yet you could also disable the auto update service all together.

Just wanted too clear some things up regarding the chemical weapons in Iraq. I will try to make this short and quick. First we backed Iran in the 1970's when Iraq was governed by the Arab nationalist regime of Major General Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr, who sought to unite and strengthen the Arab world and reject Western influence. But then around 1979, Khomeini declared and established an Islamic republic in Iran and took American hostages in November 1979. In 1980 Iraq-Iran war started and at this point Saddam was currently the ruler of Iraq. Iraq relied heavily on the USSR for military supplies, and around this time the US helped Iraq with WMD. Am I saying what was done was the right thing? No, I am not. But there are reasons why we do things and I just wanted to shed some light on the subject. What happened in the Iraq-Iran war was horrible. But the US did not start the war. That war lasted 8 years and yes Saddam did use chemical weapons but Iran sent massive numbers of older men, children, and sometimes women as human “waves” against Iraq’s better-equipped forces. Although thousands upon thousands of these poorly armed forces were slaughtered with each assault, the Iranian government continued to send them to the front. There is allot more but I tried to make this short, basically I just want to say this is history and we did learn from it.

Sayonara, you watching this? Even though I know nothing will be said or done about him. Atleast I think the poor guy is funny. If that were me though, things would be quite different. Have fun rebeldog, you are :zzz:

FYI, the Persian Gulf War, conflict beginning in August 1990, was when Iraqi forces invaded and occupied Kuwait. Hmmm, your oil conspiracy doesn’t hold why do you cling to it? Also I see you are uninformed of how Bush got elected. As your comment about be being in “Jed country’ and “love for right wing American values, I will only say you are wrong and I will not stoop to your level with ignorant assumptions. http://www.channel4.com/news/2003/11/week_3/18_guinea.html Wasn’t hard to find that one, I believe this is where you get ‘your facts’. I’m sorry but that’s wrong, and its upsetting to think you would claim a news station is credible. I even went to the Library just to check on this. Europa World Yearbook shows no such percentage of Oil exports to the US. I even checked the CIA World Fact book online with the same results. My original statement still stands. Because I am a better person than you and since as Sayonara says I have a “problematic history on this forum” I won’t blast you for your attacks. I will simply laugh and state that unlike you I can actually make an assumption about you and be correct; you can’t spell.

It’s called the Persian Gulf War Oil conspiracy’s, it’s ok to disapprove of the war but it’s not ok when you make up things to justify your reasoning. Since you did not do it; here is a link to the supposed very bad and evil group http://www.newamericancentury.org/ Democracy and liberation are very good words that have a very real and worthwhile meaning. Holds true for the reason behind the war and are not hypocritical. Equatorial Guinea supplies 13% of its entire exports to the US, 53% to Spain and 26% to China. I am unable to find "oil exports" anywhere so I must ask where you get your information. I am sure its no where near 15-25% since US Oil - consumption is 19.65 million bbl/day (2001 est.) and Equatorial Guinea Oil - Production is 181,400 bbl/day (2001 est.). If that dictator plays ball with anyone it would be Spain or China. Equatorial Guinea certainly does have a disgraceful human rights record, but do you see your country or any other for that matter doing anything about it? No..., it’s sad but true.

If the UN is undecided then it defaults to the countries in question to resolve the matter. Why is that so hard to understand? I disagree again. If you really wanted to convey a sad believe and not direct that comment to me then you should of rephrased it, as it stands it was directed to me. This is getting us nowhere so I think its time to say goodbye to this discussion. Can we agree on that?

I will make this short, all this talk about being illegal is just a conspiracy that you want to hold on too because of reasons you dislike the country. I read some of the thread you posted and stopped when I read faf's post. Iraq did have WMD and the whole point of the resolutions was to prove that they destroyed them. That was one of the reasons Bush gave to go to war and was justified when Iraq did not comply. There have been instances where we have found possible links to Osama, but as of now we are unable to verify the claims. Regarding your thoughts on my last post: One only needs to read the resolution to understand that Iraq did not comply. Also the Security Council was undecided on the issue like I said before. If I do have a "problematic history on this forum" it’s because I must. When you reply to a post you are replying to that person, not the entire thread. My first statement was directed to you; I have no problem admitting that, but you make one to me and I challenge it; then you call out that I am making assumptions, which I have not. Your comment was directed too me, if not why would you type it in your reply if it wasn’t? I am not trying to cause trouble here, just that there is no PROOF of this illegal action. There is no reading behind the lines because everything is out in the open, no secrets, no conspiracies and no illegal actions.

That is not what I said, but your welcome to use that as your own argument which I have taken as so. I believe something can be done against a permanent member of the council but I am in the process of researching that. What I did find so far is a piece that to me shows the US did nothing illegal and it comes right from the UN website. http://www.un.org/News/ossg/sg/stories/sg-4dec2003.htm I did not find an illegal US action on that website so far. The UN was undecided on the issue it seems. Grant it, that was funny but to me you lost some creditability for that one.