kombucha2

Correct to some extent (the same can be said of Al Jazeera) but they do have a quite bit more integrity and can be trusted with many more topics with much more ease than RT. To be fair I vet news from those sources as well. But painting both CNN and BBC with the same broad stroke as RT is being disingenuous. RT is on a whole other level of fud. Don't trust the BBC/CNN/Al Jazeera on domestic affairs from within their own countries but RT can't be trusted with anything.

These[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] are a perfect example of why people don't trust RT. It's not that they always post such a blatant lies or falsehoods but the brand as a whole is tainted. It's operated as more of disinformation campaign/operation masquerading as alternative news. And this is just RT, plenty of other Russian outlets are worse.[6] If I find something interesting on RT I usually corroborate it elsewhere and then use that source. ZH (ZeroHedge) is another example of this. They come up in my Play Newsstand feed(which I cannot change...thanks Google) as news but I would never think of RT or ZH as trustworthy, I give them a gossip-rag level of trust. Though I would say there are trust issues with a lot of MSM outlets, RT really takes the cake and they aren't nearly as crazy as they used to be, they've learned to be far more nuanced.

[1] https://www.rt.com/news/356697-man-climbs-ecuadorian-embassy...

[2] https://www.rt.com/news/158212-academi-blackwater-ukraine-mi...

[3] https://web.archive.org/web/20140704230031/http://rt.com/new...

[4] https://www.buzzfeed.com/katherinemiller/insane-moments-from...

[5] http://www.interpretermag.com/rt-sends-in-the-clowns/

[6] https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-examples-of-contemporary...

>Soros' plan to federalize US police

Oh wow, what a bad a idea, maybe just more oversight is the answer, certainly federalization can't be the best answer?

Very cool.

thats pretty great

I just hate tips....

can anyone suggest good infosec reads or periodicals?

It's the armies he's building around the world for various countries that has me concerned. I still think his style of business ought to be heavily regulated and accountable and currently it is not...that is a huge issue.

Brooks saddles are a nice touch :)

To me it felt like a complete betrayal of what most people, who were for it, wanted. Most people I know regard it as a failure or at best a mess. I know I certainly had a very different system in mind. I will say that it seems to have benefited some however.

That still doesn't change the fact that redlining is a historical fact and was institutionalized in many ways.

For everyone with a stake? I still see clear winners and losers in that scenario.

Both examples are pretty disingenuous.

Wow...just WOW, I never had any idea that was a part of Stonewall.. jesus.

Just found it...crazy..I was unaware of developments in the TrueCrypt story let alone how long the US gov kept it in secret.

What article on TrueCrypt?

Yes

reminds me a lot of what people said about the Turner Diaries and the Oklahoma City bombings. Though I guess the connection is a lot stronger in the former.

My anecdotal experience is that 1 is simply not true.

Making Mexico pay for it for one and the other crazy ideas he wraps up in it. That, indeed, does make his plan incoherent.

this is stupid

I love how aren't reading my comment. I also didn't know buserror's sarcasm tag immediately transferred to your comment. I genuinely thought your comment was in earnest. The Four Seasons thing did happen, parts of your comment are factually wrong. The fact that you fail to see what I'm commenting on is probably as funny as my original mistake. Sarcasm tag or not I was still commenting on the lack of facts in your post. So agree to disagree??

well I was responding to you specifically. I fail to see how the quote is unrelated as it was from the most up-to-date sources regarding the situation. I apologize for assuming that your response was in earnest. Indeed, I did not see the sarcasm tag despite reading buserror's comment first and then your's. I still don't think your comment is factually correct and if it was in jest, I simply didn't see it as sarcastic despite it being in response to a sarcastic comment.

Also, it took me a few seconds to past that comment as I had it on the ready. So really no loss for me, except for responding to your comment, that has indeed cost me much more time than my first comment did. ;)

Your link appears to tell a different and unclear story:

Bin Laden explained the origin of the term in a videotaped interview with Al Jazeera journalist Tayseer Alouni in October 2001:

The name 'al-Qaeda' was established a long time ago by mere chance. The late Abu Ebeida El-Banashiri established the training camps for our mujahedeen against Russia's terrorism. We used to call the training camp al-Qaeda. The name stayed.[83]

It has been argued that two documents seized from the Sarajevo office of the Benevolence International Foundation prove that the name was not simply adopted by the mujahid movement and that a group called al-Qaeda was established in August 1988. Both of these documents contain minutes of meetings held to establish a new military group, and contain the term "al-Qaeda".[84]

Former British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook wrote that the word al-Qaeda should be translated as "the database", and originally referred to the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen militants who were recruited and trained with CIA help to defeat the Russians.[85] In April 2002, the group assumed the name Qa'idat al-Jihad, which means "the base of Jihad". According to Diaa Rashwan, this was "apparently as a result of the merger of the overseas branch of Egypt's al-Jihad (Egyptian Islamist Jihad, or EIJ) group, led by Ayman al-Zawahiri, with the groups Bin Laden brought under his control after his return to Afghanistan in the mid-1990s."[86]

How do you feel this contrasts with the Student Aid/Loan/FAFSA regime? I made the exact same argument as op the other day about higher education and I really thinks it fits much better in that context than it does when used with housing finance.

CSM all the way.

"On October 2, 2013, near the end of the three-year investigation, Navy officials boarded and relieved Capt. Daniel P. Dusek of his command of the amphibious assault ship USS Bonhomme Richard.[8] Fifteen months later on January 15, 2015, federal prosecutors obtained a guilty plea from Dusek on charges of bribery for supplying classified ship movements in the Asia-Pacific region to Glenn Marine in return for prostitutes and luxury hotel stays worth over $10,000.[6] Dusek arranged for the carrier USS Abraham Lincoln and the amphibious assault ship USS Peleliu to stop at ports where Francis' firm could service the ships. Dusek was released on $200,000 bail pending his sentencing hearing set for April 3, 2015. The previous week, on January 2, 2015, Cmdr. Jose Luis Sanchez pleaded guilty to supplying secret ship movement schedules in return for prostitutes, luxury travel and $100,000 in cash over a four year period."

Worked fine on my end.

Well I did say "potential punitive measures" which I thought would make it obvious I meant legal punitive measures. Last time I checked holding a gun to a drug addict's head to achieve a change in that addict is not only illegal but highly unethical.

Pressure, as I took it, meant legal methods of affecting change. And even so, widespread violence against addict's and their families certainly didn't eradicate the problem for China. Today there are around 4-5 million drug users in China and yet that country has laws allowing for the death penalty for trafficking and very stringent use laws.

And certainly putting a gun to someone's head is definitely not a long term solution to addiction but rather a very cruel way of incentivizing treatment.