BruceVC

Nope No this article is utter nonsense, its not just 9 years old at the time no one knew about Prism You can tell the author doesnt know about the real capabilities of Prism because he says the USA "Secretly monitoring the email messages and phone calls " .....no mention of forums and social media Plus the author is from Norway...what does he know about the NSA

I am paying more than that by a good deal. But it isn't about the 'rich' not paying their fair share, it's about the fact you cannot grow any wealth below a certain income level, while those at the top are able to grow their wealth extremely fast. Clearly the solution is more low wage illegal immigration. WOD lets say Trump is elected president What are the things you absolutely expect him to do?

Hate to dispute any point about Gun Control in the USA but if we honest I dont think a terrorist attack by an ISIS affiliate is about the availability of guns? Because this type of person has made his mind up to attack the USA, so the getting of a gun will just be a formality But the other various shootings were about easy gun control, like Sandy Hook? 'Affiliate' that just means some moron who wanted his 15 minuites of fame. Who knows why anyone does anything. Whether his dog spoke to him and told him to kill, or God. Same difference. I hear you, it does seem pointless But ISIS does have a mandate to attack certain Western countries...yet all these attacks do is galvanize support within the USA to destroy ISIS entirely Why provoke the USA .....I'm sorry but this just confirms how shortsighted and stupid these groups are

Well I said nothing about a crusade, I called for teaching tolerance. People freaked out about my rather short statement, but I think I'll go all in anyways. Everyone is quick to jump on the ISIS bandwagon on this, but this guy didn't target Americans in general or make a political statement, he went after a gay nightclub. This is an attack on the LGBT community by a religious nutjob. Just because he is Muslim, instead of Christian, doesn't mean you just ignore the role religion played in this attack. Honestly I'm probably not doing a good job explaining myself, but I think this article does a better job expressing what I'm trying to get across: http://www.christiantoday.com/article/orlando.shooting.why.christians.must.not.stay.quiet/88192.htm I think you making an important point but I just want to be sure I understand it That article is correctly raising attention to violent attacks on the LGBT community? I have huge respect for any religious group that is prepared to support the LGBT community...its not that common to see

Good greif, i hope that you're joking. @ gfted1 okay you win, best comment of the week @ meshugger Can I tell you Gfted1 suggestion is not silly but can be implemented successfully, we just need to consider a few things together..anyone can comment? Once again the Americans are fortunate to have the worlds most effective and comprehensive system to analyze data..Prism It can be tweaked but the real questions should be things like Would this type of lone wolf use the Internet to communicate his plans Would he actually communicate with anyone Prism can do extraordinary things but the data or device has to be on a TCP/IP connection

Shes a big fan of Jameson's Charhouse so the family and extended family are gathering there tonight. Having a 16yo is a study in being ignored. Yes, shes allowed to date and I absolutely meet the boyfriends. State. Gfted1 is it your wife who has the big family that you see over Xmas? Listening to your stories its nice to see a happy family doing normal things that are appreciated I wanted to get married and have kids but these things dont always work out, also I would want to be in love to have a family ..and I'm finding love haaaaaaaaard to find in the flesh pits of JHB

Nice one What are you doing to celebrate, whats it like having a 16 year old? Do you allow her to date and do you meet her boyfriends...sorry for the questions I am just interested

Gromnir before you go I want to ask you something I may be wrong but it has taken you a long time to comment about Trump, I was expecting you to start attacking his policies much earlier. IMO your view on these matters carries a lot of credibility Arent you concerned by his demagoguery? And what about his general vitriol towards Latino's? Can he actually deport 11 million people and build the Trump wall?

Hate to dispute any point about Gun Control in the USA but if we honest I dont think a terrorist attack by an ISIS affiliate is about the availability of guns? Because this type of person has made his mind up to attack the USA, so the getting of a gun will just be a formality But the other various shootings were about easy gun control, like Sandy Hook?

Sexism is a two-way street, Bruce. The notion that men can't feel embarrassment at having their sex tapes leaked is no less stupid and harmful than the overall societal view that ties women's worth to their perceived purity. Yes my friend, of course I know sexism is two way. Thats a physiological fact but the whole Hogan issue for me is about the moral and social decision Hogan made when he had sex with his wifes friend .....I am not surprised he felt embarrassed But I am not really convincing anyone about my point, let me try this another way. Bill Cosby is a sexual predator, how would you feel if he was also filmed and he decided to sue a company like Gawker ? So in other words does the character and actual deeds of a person matter when they get offended and decide to take legal punitive steps? For me it does because I would ask "you who raped over 50 women now are offended by a leaked video "

Guys I am really enjoying this series but most of you seem unreasonably negative? I dont over analyze each episode..maybe thats why, besides for me the real story will be in the next book

Let me explain why you are wrong. The fact that you personally dislike Hogan's actions is immaterial. No matter what you may personally feel about Hogan or his morality, he is entitled to have his privacy respected in the same manner you expect Lawrence's privacy to be respected. The concept is simple Bruce, it's called equal protection under the law and it applies to everyone or it applies to no one. As a champion of equality I would have expected you of all people to understand and embrace that concept. That you don't is surprising. So you're dead wrong on this. As for the folks employed at Gawker.com, no one (except possibly the editor) has lost a job yet. If they do lose their jobs, you can blame Denton and his wanton disregard of privacy. Yes, you are technically correct as usual. I understand the concept of "equal protection under the law " But that has never been my issue, my point is you cannot possibly compare the personal embarrassment that Jennifer must have felt compared to Hogan. So lets not debate the law and rather look at this from a social perspective? I am still surprised you guys refuse to see a difference ?Its as clear as day to me? Oh I don't doubt you understand it. I just don't think you believe in it. If you did, this discussion would have ended some time ago. Social perspective? Sorry but no. Let's stick with the law because the social perspective varies based on who you are talking to. I get that you don't like Hogan or think he is amoral and that's fine, It's immaterial. And frankly I think you're being awful presumptuous trying to imagine what Hogan or Lawrence's feelings are. In any case, it just doesn't matter a bit. Gawker violated his privacy. Now they are paying the price. It's that simple. Well you say I'm being presumptuous but I say my opinion is based on a typical human response to the situation So for example lets say we take 8 people on this forum and they go away together to stay in a log cabin in ....Norway. If you said to me " Bruce how many of these 8 people will be keen to swim at 4 am in the freezing lake next to the cabin " even without asking them I will say " none, who wants to swim in a freezing lake " ? Its logic ...dont think I'm a genius Yes I dont like Hogan, you right. He comes across as morally bankrupt ...I dont see Jennifer like that so that may make me bias but I still think Hogan is an attention seeker who after having sex with his wifes friend and the video being leaked now is " offended " But to be honest I am sure why I seem to be defending Gawker because they also lack morals and have embarrassed people purely for readership points...so maybe I should retract my original view because if this is about morals then Gawker is also lacking?

Well I enjoyed DA2, it was fun but Bioware took noticeable shortcuts ...but that game had the love of my life ...Isabela

Let me explain why you are wrong. The fact that you personally dislike Hogan's actions is immaterial. No matter what you may personally feel about Hogan or his morality, he is entitled to have his privacy respected in the same manner you expect Lawrence's privacy to be respected. The concept is simple Bruce, it's called equal protection under the law and it applies to everyone or it applies to no one. As a champion of equality I would have expected you of all people to understand and embrace that concept. That you don't is surprising. So you're dead wrong on this. As for the folks employed at Gawker.com, no one (except possibly the editor) has lost a job yet. If they do lose their jobs, you can blame Denton and his wanton disregard of privacy. Yes, you are technically correct as usual. I understand the concept of "equal protection under the law " But that has never been my issue, my point is you cannot possibly compare the personal embarrassment that Jennifer must have felt compared to Hogan. So lets not debate the law and rather look at this from a social perspective? I am still surprised you guys refuse to see a difference ?Its as clear as day to me?

Good insights Indira But why do you think this attack is not ISIS related? It is ISIS related in the sense that becomes the tribute for the attack. Would he still have attacked the gay club if ISIS didn't exist? I doubt it as the reality of ISIS and its campaigns have definitely emboldened certain people to act in there name...so for example if this wasnt a real attack to support ISIS he wouldn't have announced it? The USA has had many attacks like this that weren't extremist related but I do consider this logically one ? That is a clever question! I must admit that Daesh propaganda on the world wide web certainly may act some kind of trigger for a loose cannon on the brink of exploding. In that sense, it may be considered as Daesh-realted. Still, even without anything like Daesh, he may have done the vile deed anyway. This question of yours also applies to the Breivik case at Utøya in Norway. If it wasn't for all those extreme right forums, would he have done it then, and even more interestingly, would he have done it on that scale and with those twisted political "stamps of approval"? EDIT: Speaking of triggers; As for the role of violent video games in this kind of crimes, I'd say it's pretty much no role whatsoever. (I do recall the absurd PnP RPG debate and devils and demons in the 1980s. *Shiver*) Still, as with any kind of story/media, scenarios and acts taking place in any kind of media may inspire culprits. But, so what? I mean, then those cave drawing way back in the Stone Age, where some elder probably told a violent story or two, pointing towards, say, an atlatl, are just violence-inducing and harmful as GTA. The linkage is quite bizarre. Our brains are hard-wired to copy others. We are copy cats, all of us. Every poet is a thief. You are a thief! Yes that Brevik example is a good one and I think applicable, you take his actions and what he expects from his jail cell with computer privileges . He almost thinks he is a celebrity and I am of the opinion the various right wing rhetoric influenced his choices. I am not blaming the Internet at all but sometimes access to all this information can be abused

I think quiet the opposite. The more ways to channel your emotions safely the better. ? I was just joking because we know there is no link between video games and people who commit violence

This is a very interesting point but it shouldn't concern us too much because this type of attack cannot really be prevented as its a lone wolf attack. So the reality is in a world where groups like ISIS exist you will always have a small segment of the Muslim population who will for inexplicable reasons align ideologically with ISIS and be prepared to attack the country that gave them a home

There it is again. And then they complain that gamers are so defensive. Games are still not out of the woods and censorship is still on the table. And regardless of whether this was a religious extremism attack Islam needs to get the same treatment as everyone else does on the question on human rights. People are ready to show up with pitchforks to a christian bakery but tremble before islamism. Fighter can you say with absolute certainty that violent FPS games are not at least a contributing factor ? In fact my advice is you should stop playing any violent game as you dont want to commit violent acts....or do you think you know the difference between gaming and reality?

Good insights Indira But why do you think this attack is not ISIS related? It is ISIS related in the sense that becomes the tribute for the attack. Would he still have attacked the gay club if ISIS didn't exist? I doubt it as the reality of ISIS and its campaigns have definitely emboldened certain people to act in there name...so for example if this wasnt a real attack to support ISIS he wouldn't have announced it? The USA has had many attacks like this that weren't extremist related but I do consider this logically one ?

Not sure we are on the same page, I acknowledge the video was embarrassing for Jennifer...thats why she wanted to take it down Oh no need to worry about me passing unreasonable judgement, a video of you having sex with your partner being posted online would be basically embarrassing for anyone? I would think this would be obvious?

Yes, thats an accurate observation. One of the main criticisms I had for the USA was this incongruous social reality where you had the greatest, influential and significant country of the Western world which in turn means it has the most influence in the world and you have this respected Constitution and value human rights yet homophobia was still fairly rife in some states. Yes it was more the views of Conservative Christians but it did create a a strange inconsistency, the world expects a country like the USA to have addressed tolerance around gay rights Thats why I said to GD the way the supreme court basically made gay marriage mandatory was necessary because if you left it up to the states then there would still be states who would refuse to allow gay people to marry...so sometimes in society you need to legislate social changes because human beings dont always do the right thing

So if Jennifer Lawrence was married and having sex with someone outside that marriage - even if all parties involved, even her spouse, had consented to it -, she'd deserve having the Internet plastered with videos of that? I assumed you would say I was contradicting myself but I am not as I always look at the context and the nuances with this type of event And yes there is a difference between Hogan and his lifestyle choices and someone like Jennifer Lawrence No, there isn't. The only real difference is that one has a "hoohah" and one has a "wee wee". Both had photos of them being hacked and put on display on the internet. And when Jennifer asked to have hers taken down Gawker did, because she was a she. When Hulk Hogan asked to have his removed, they doubled down and threw up the middle fingers to him. And before you say "But people are losing their jobs!" Realize, this entire thing has caused Hulk himself to be declared "Un-person" by the largest wrestling promotion in the world (his former employer WWE). The only other time that I can remember this happening with a wrestler was the murder suicide of Chris Benoit. (WWE keeps most of hits big talent of the old days on "Legend Contracts" that pay a living salary for sporadic appearances) Guys it always surprises me when people reject my suggestion that Hogan and Jennifer aren't the same....alum I am particularly surprised you disagree as you are normally aligned to these types of nuances Let me explain why they different. And to understand this point you have to forget any previous view you have that is similar to " of course they the same, its about Gawker publishing information of a tabloid nature " ...no they not as what matters is the person and there character...these points will obviously have different responses based on the person For example lets say Charlie Sheen was filmed during one of his sexual escapades....would the emphasis to " not embarrass him and get the video taken down " be the same as a video of Jennifer Lawrence having sex with her boyfriend?

That would be nice. Much more likely it will lead to the polar opposite. Those with radical views will use this to further erode our already dwindling freedoms, meanwhile the terrorists will continue to hate and kill us just the same. Come on, lets not think this will lead to another " now the government will erode our freedoms " rant The USA has very effective information gathering and the endeavors of the likes of the NSA and FBI have helped prevent numerous attacks but IMO this will be considered a " lone wolf " which are very difficult to prevent. So I dont see any new " monitoring of citizens " laws being passed? I don'r know how much more monitoring Big Brother COULD do. But I'm figuring the Gun Control nuts will come back with new promises of gun bans and gun confiscations. Because clearly the way to punish this is to take the private property away from everyone who did no wrong today. GD I have a different view now on Gun Control, so let it not be said I dont reflect on my opinion on matters and change my opinion as it serves a greater common good I no longer think that Gun Control laws should be enforced, despite all the evidence that supports a reduction in violent crimes. I have come to the conclusion that the topic has become too divisive in the modern age of USA politics and is more political now than a valid societal change? So its now used to criticize all people who own guns and this is seen as a form of attack by many Americans on there culture and history. And even if I say " no this is not an attack on your personal liberty " this is not how you see it and your view does matter I just feel there are enough progressive social changes in the USA that you have accepted its best to leave the Gun Control laws alone And it was your criticism towards my view last time that helped shape my new opinion. You basically said " You dont like the way people are being condescending and telling you what guns they can keep or be allowed to own '' ...you are right in some ways. When Hilary says things like " we must reign these wayward gun owners " it can be seen in a patronizing manner, I understand that view But efforts to enforce Gun Control are not suppose to be about surreptitious control of the population or suggestions that the average American cant take care of guns...no its suppose to be about reducing deaths through gun control. But the point is the intention is misunderstood and that causes unnecessary consternation And finally I want someone like you to be happy overall with most of the social changes happening in the USA...its because you represent a very important demographic in the USA and your support is needed..do you know why you are so important? I am surprised to hear you have shifted your views on something. Even if only by degree. I told you participating in a forum where you will hear a diverse array of onions opinions was a healthy thing. (That typo was so funny I had to leave it in!) There is one huge difference between your philosophy of life, society, economics, and politics and mine, And this is not a criticism, merely an observation. You place great value on motivations. You first thought on any policy or subject is something to the tune of "is this good?" "Does this mean well"? I do not even consider motivation. It is not even a blip on my radar. I focus 100% on outcomes. What will something actually do? But this thread is about a specific thing and I don't want to be the one to derail it so reply if you wish, I won't retort. GD sometimes it may appear I only focus on certain SJ issues or support certain politicians like Hilary and I am biased towards minorities and I may seem to ignore certain facts but I am aware of some of the issues you guys raise, I just dont think they have the ramifications you raise...so for me its about priorities But sometimes I think some of these social changes that espouse the Obama legacy get misunderstood..and the outcome is a fractured US as there seems to be a campaign, that you believe. to undermine certain core American values and a selective targeting of white people...or rather white males Now this is where you come in to the point, you symbolically represent a very important demographic in the USA. And sometimes I think you forget how important you are...you are a white, male who has worked hard, served your country and paid your taxes. You have contributed in your own way to the USA being the economic success it is. Of course you matter, you always have and its important you recognize it....even though it probably doesnt feel like anyone cares about your contribution if you vanished it would create a negative outcome So finally and this is the most important point, everything Obama has done and Clinton want to do is about addressing real and perceived social and economic imbalances that certain sectors of US society grapple with. Nothing is an intentional attack on white males....its just certain social developments are based on this like BLM and then some supporters of these movements will bring race into it and generalize about topics and issues which in turn marginalizes some white folk who feel they are being blamed for events they have no influence in I have been dealing with this in the new SA for 20 years, I am very positive and believe in the economic transformation of SA but I only started believing this in the last 5 years. It took a paradigm shift in my way of thinking about the past and Apartheid before I started being seeing things in a more honest and accurate light..and trust me its easy to only see negative in a country like SA, if you going through what White people have gone through do these points apply to you You achieved your success at work through hard work and diligence and didnt do it at the expense of minorities You find certain groups in society claim they are at an economic and societal disadvantage to achieve success..even though you had similar challengers You find certain reasons for a social challenge being blamed on things like " white capital " or " white privileged " There is a narrative that highlights the fact that white people need to distribute there wealth to address the past injustice where white people only became wealthy at the expense of minorities I dont agree with any of these completely but if these apply to you then I can help you rationalize them?

Mmmm....I would say right to bear arms is more important ?

To be fair, the way American culture fetishizes guns is absolutely worth criticizing, and if I had a magic wand that could somehow either make that stupid, childish fantasy of "guns = freedom and rugged individualism" or the guns themselves disappear, I'd definitely choose the former. Yes, I agree with you that from an outsiders perspective it does seem irrational...but we mustn't underestimate how divisive trying to enforce Gun Control is being seen or how it will be received. Trust me on this one...rather let the folks keep there guns