warpedskydiver

I knew you would not post your own beliefs. you only resort to argue against what I have said, instead of stating your own beliefs. I have said what I think over and over. As for me stating news articles, they are a posting, not a response to one. Learn the difference.

When I said followers of the puppet masters, I made no distinction about the party affiliation. That axe swings both ways.

The strange thing is that Jefferson was far smarter than all the rest of them, and held in the highest esteem by none other than George Washington, who by all accounts was a very smart man. Read "American Sphinx" and you will gain some unusual insight into his mind. Jefferson was not only a phenominal thinker, but a man of action as well.

But of course, the followers of the puppet masters are powerless in thinking for themsleves.

Actually the whole mess was started into play by Harrison. Read up un it, it will make you sick and wonder why harrison was not brought up on treason charges.

Another snide comment/PA directed at someone who doesn't agree with your views...why am I not surprised? Because she is hate filled?

Well does that make you happy? Tell us what you think and quit quoting news stories to veil your own beliefs. I know, you won't do it, but you will be evasive and disingenous as usual.

FDR was an awful resident who presided over a 12 year DEPRESSION! He and many others blamed hoover for something that happened within the first six months of his presidency, and FDR signed our country into bankruptcy, allowed an attack on Pearl Harbor, and tens of thousands to die in the PI, help is on the way my ass!

They should have RTU burned into their foreheads so they will not forget where they are going.

Hey my daughter has to bring a copy of her birth certificate on monday or the cops will be called. They had a copy at her grade school (same district) but they don't have it now. Illegals get a free pass.(actual district rules)

By Peter Svensson Updated: 9:36 a.m. ET Oct 19, 2007 NEW YORK - Comcast Corp. actively interferes with attempts by some of its high-speed Internet subscribers to share files online, a move that runs counter to the tradition of treating all types of Net traffic equally. The interference, which The Associated Press confirmed through nationwide tests, is the most drastic example yet of data discrimination by a U.S. Internet service provider. It involves company computers masquerading as those of its users. If widely applied by other ISPs, the technology Comcast is using would be a crippling blow to the BitTorrent, eDonkey and Gnutella file-sharing networks. While these are mainly known as sources of copyright music, software and movies, BitTorrent in particular is emerging as a legitimate tool for quickly disseminating legal content. The principle of equal treatment of traffic, called "Net Neutrality" by proponents, is not enshrined in law but supported by some regulations. Most of the debate around the issue has centered on tentative plans, now postponed, by large Internet carriers to offer preferential treatment of traffic from certain content providers for a fee. Comcast's interference, on the other hand, appears to be an aggressive way of managing its network to keep file-sharing traffic from swallowing too much bandwidth and affecting the Internet speeds of other subscribers. Number two provider Comcast, the nation's largest cable TV operator and No. 2 Internet provider, would not specifically address the practice, but spokesman Charlie Douglas confirmed that it uses sophisticated methods to keep Net connections running smoothly. "Comcast does not block access to any applications, including BitTorrent," he said. Douglas would not specify what the company means by "access" — Comcast subscribers can download BitTorrent files without hindrance. Only uploads of complete files are blocked or delayed by the company, as indicated by AP tests. But with "peer-to-peer" technology, users exchange files with each other, and one person's upload is another's download. That means Comcast's blocking of certain uploads has repercussions in the global network of file sharers. Comcast's technology kicks in, though not consistently, when one BitTorrent user attempts to share a complete file with another user. Each PC gets a message invisible to the user that looks like it comes from the other computer, telling it to stop communicating. But neither message originated from the other computer — it comes from Comcast. If it were a telephone conversation, it would be like the operator breaking into the conversation, telling each talker in the voice of the other: "Sorry, I have to hang up. Good bye." Matthew Elvey, a Comcast subscriber in the San Francisco area who has noticed BitTorrent uploads being stifled, acknowledged that the company has the right to manage its network, but disapproves of the method, saying it appears to be deceptive. "There's the wrong way of going about that and the right way," said Elvey, who is a computer consultant. All types of content Comcast's interference affects all types of content, meaning that, for instance, an independent movie producer who wanted to distribute his work using BitTorrent and his Comcast connection could find that difficult or impossible — as would someone pirating music. Internet service providers have long complained about the vast amounts of traffic generated by a small number of subscribers who are avid users of file-sharing programs. Peer-to-peer applications account for between 50 percent and 90 percent of overall Internet traffic, according to a survey this year by ipoque GmbH, a German vendor of traffic-management equipment. "We have a responsibility to manage our network to ensure all our customers have the best broadband experience possible," Douglas said. "This means we use the latest technologies to manage our network to provide a quality experience for all Comcast subscribers." The practice of managing the flow of Internet data is known as "traffic shaping," and is already widespread among Internet service providers. It usually involves slowing down some forms of traffic, like file-sharing, while giving others priority. Other ISPs have attempted to block some file-sharing application by so-called "port filtering," but that method is easily circumvented and now largely ineffective. Comcast's approach to traffic shaping is different because of the drastic effect it has on one type of traffic — in some cases blocking it rather than slowing it down — and the method used, which is difficult to circumvent and involves the company falsifying network traffic. The "Net Neutrality" debate erupted in 2005, when AT&T Inc. suggested it would like to charge some Web companies more for preferential treatment of their traffic. Consumer advocates and Web heavyweights like Google Inc. and Amazon Inc. cried foul, saying it's a bedrock principle of the Internet that all traffic be treated equally. To get its acquisition of BellSouth Corp. approved by the Federal Communications Commission, AT&T agreed in late 2006 not to implement such plans or prioritize traffic based on its origin for two and a half years. However, it did not make any commitments not to prioritize traffic based on its type, which is what Comcast is doing. The FCC's stance on traffic shaping is not clear. A 2005 policy statement says that "consumers are entitled to run applications and services of their choice," but that principle is "subject to reasonable network management." Spokeswoman Mary Diamond would not elaborate. Opposition Free Press, a Washington-based public interest group that advocates Net Neutrality, opposes the kind of filtering applied by Comcast. "We don't believe that any Internet provider should be able to discriminate, block or impair their consumers ability to send or receive legal content over the Internet," said Free Press spokeswoman Jen Howard. Paul "Tony" Watson, a network security engineer at Google Inc. who has previously studied ways hackers could disrupt Internet traffic in manner similar to the method Comcast is using, said the cable company was probably acting within its legal rights. "It's their network and they can do what they want," said Watson. "My concern is the precedent. In the past, when people got an ISP connection, they were getting a connection to the Internet. The only determination was price and bandwidth. Now they're going to have to make much more complicated decisions such as price, bandwidth, and what services I can get over the Internet." Several companies have sprung up that rely on peer-to-peer technology, including BitTorrent Inc., founded by the creator of the BitTorrent software (which exists in several versions freely distributed by different groups and companies). Ashwin Navin, the company's president and co-founder, confirmed that it has noticed interference from Comcast, in addition to some Canadian Internet service providers. "They're using sophisticated technology to degrade service, which probably costs them a lot of money. It would be better to see them use that money to improve service," Navin said, noting that BitTorrent and other peer-to-peer applications are a major reason consumers sign up for broadband. BitTorrent Inc. announced Oct. 9 that it was teaming up with online video companies to use its technology to distribute legal content. Affecting others Other companies that rely on peer-to-peer technology, and could be affected if Comcast decides to expand the range of applications it filters, include Internet TV service Joost, eBay Inc.'s Skype video-conferencing program and movie download appliance Vudu. There is no sign that Comcast is hampering those services. Comcast subscriber Robb Topolski, a former software quality engineer at Intel Corp., started noticing the interference when trying to upload with file-sharing programs Gnutella and eDonkey early this year. In August, Topolski began to see reports on Internet forum DSLreports.com from other Comcast users with the same problem. He now believes that his home town of Hillsboro, Ore., was a test market for the technology that was later widely applied in other Comcast service areas. Topolski agrees that Comcast has a right to manage its network and slow down traffic that affects other subscribers, but disapproves of their method. "By Comcast not acknowledging that they do this at all, there's no way to report any problems with it," Topolski said. Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Contact JAG on post, that is the answer.

Don’t Hand Over the Internet to the U.N. Posted on November 16th, 2007 By Fred in Internet, Foreign Policy, Commentaries I’m no tech head, but I think I know a thing or three about the Internet and how it works. And as far as I can tell, it works pretty well. More than 1.4 billion people around the world seem to be emailing each other a lot, and those emails get delivered a lot faster and more reliably than “snail mail.” Lots of people are innovating around the Internet – voice calling over the Internet, e-commerce, blogs, education, employment, and healthcare services, music and video streaming and downloads, and such – and lots and lots of people are profiting from those innovations and the websites and companies that operate online. So if things are going so well, why is it that some folks are seriously thinking about taking management of the Internet away from the United States and handing control to the United Nations? Foreign government officials from around the world meeting at a U.N.-sponsored conference in Brazil actually discussed this notion last week. It didn’t get much attention, but as we all know, that’s how bad ideas get traction. Despite what Al Gore may think, the Internet was an invention of the U.S. government and a number of universities and other entities a couple decades ago. As the Internet became what it is today, the government created a nonprofit organization, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, to manage what was then a growing network of networks. Today ICANN does things like manage the assignment of Web sites domain names – the .coms, .orgs, .edus – for example. But countries like China aren’t happy about U.S. control of “the tubes.” They’d rather have the U.N. run it. I wonder how the U.N. would’ve handled the situation in Burma recently when the government cut off all Internet access to all anti-government protesters, or how it would’ve handled the imprisonment in China of dissidents and reporters who emailed news out of the country. My hunch is that we’d see the same level of management of the Internet from the U.N. that we’ve seen when it came to peacekeeping operations in Africa. Or its management of Saddam Hussein’s “Oil for Food” program. Or its monitoring of Iran’s nuclear program. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if when you look up “fool’s errand” in the dictionary, you find: “Role for United Nations’” as the definition. The notion of surrendering management of the Internet – a global, strategic infrastructure for communications and commerce – to the UN is just a plain dumb idea. We shouldn’t be handing over something that works right to an institution that has difficulty doing anything right.

You are quite welcome, if I can help you in any way in the future give me a yell. If you want a bbl spec'd out for that rilfe let me know. Something in a "Boots Obermeyer" rifling? A 20" bbl chambered in .260rem, and she will have a very loooong range rifle that is easy to handle and of course outstanding at much closer ranges. Best of all is no new bolt needed or mags, unless of course the bolt is worn excessively. Just a remove/replace and headspace check and you are in business!

Or you can use a folding stock, after all when it is utilized it adds length. However the BATFE may just bust you anyways and let you fight it in court, and when the BATFE expert testifies, you may lose.

Some will find it humorous, and at other times find it to be a huge insult, it makes a difference how it was said.

And quite dangerous when you insult their entire ancestry. You just took offense because someone opined that they think marijuana smokers deserve to get arrested. So how is it that you do the same damned thing and think it is quite alright? Think about that...

Most people don't shoot a gun that kicks like a mule and sounds like a cannon very accurately.Quote I understand, that .270win you have is very capable of taking every game animal in North America, and most of the world. There was one man who was quite famous for doing exactly that, every game species on the planet with a .270win It takes a magnum cartridge to out perform a .270win, and there arent many that shoot flatter or faster. The .270win is blessed with low recoil and a wide range of bullets to select from. My favorite in that caliber is a 130grain BT, either Nosler or Hornady. BTW you could always re-barrel that .243win when the time comes and change to a .260rem which is an awesome round and should won't even notice any difference except it's performance. .260rem has got to be the most overlooked and underestimated chambering around.

That was a shitty thing to say about persons of Polish decent. I wonder if you do that in person... I know of several poles that would take offense, and one in particular that would let you know right away.

I get banned for saying things similar to what you just said. My how evenly things are enforced. If someone wants to lie about someone, or treat them in a demeaning manner, there are consequences. I would think there should be a distinction made between outright threats, and defending ones self.

Going to? Heck, Kallend teaches that course.

I concur. Darius has become a quick study of what moral and legal obligations he has to his new home. Others take such things for granted, or do whatever they can to insure the demise of the country that gives them such freedom.

.243 is accurate but the bullets are kind of light for large deer. The ideal bullet weight for deer is 120-150 grains. The idea being to have the bullet generate at least 1000ft/lbs of force at range. .243win will kill, but unless a CNS hit occurs you may have to track them some. Bullets in the 100grain class don't generate that much force by comparison. Hey you can use a .22 rimfire, just don't use a heart/lung shot. It is all about fragmenting mass, and tissue damage resulting in shock, otherwise it is a damned arrow with a field point type of wound.

Or it allows people who think those laws are how it should be, to come into this country and continue as they always did. It is a double edged sword. Wahhabism is alive and well, even in the USA.