Current events!

[RU Joe]

I'm not sure how to lead into this, it's pretty unusual:

Yahoo News Canada - Latest News & Headlines

McGruff could be going away for 16 years for growing pot and owning weapons.

[Dudebro]

I'd feel bad for him if he didn't have all the weapons. Who needs not one but two grenade launchers?

[Jason L. Davis]

WOW!! My grandfather is turning in his grave right now! Sheriff Frank Schubert of King and Queen County ( My Grandfather ) Was the founder of the D.A.R.E. Program in Richmond , Va.
I know he's up there shaking his head on this one...Lol!

[Slime Slayer]

Originally Posted by RU Joe

I'm not sure how to lead into this, it's pretty unusual:

Yahoo News Canada - Latest News & Headlines

McGruff could be going away for 16 years for growing pot and owning weapons.

That's kinda sad, I used to love, that guy... on second thought, maybe it's hilarious...?

[Kong]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC3VTgIPoGU]"CHASING ICE" captures largest glacier calving ever filmed - OFFICIAL VIDEO - YouTube[/ame]

Comments

That was flipping cool

[RU Joe]

That business in Ukraine .. I heard it all began when they refused to join the EU.
Had anyone else heard so?

Something you don't see everyday,
alternative newscaster Liz Wahl {working for Russia Today} quit right on the air, saying she 'didn't want to be part of a network that whitewashes Putin's activities.'

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNBjiO-YgHk"]RT News Anchor Quits Live on Air - YouTube[/ame]

^
Which is interesting.
I wonder why there are no US reporters working for those major networks {owned and operated by the same group of corporations} resigning on air over the wickedness of their own government, the poverty, etc?
Not saying that any government is 100% good, but you get the point.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said Vladimir Putin is 'living in a different world', and Zbigniew Brzezinski {co - founder of the Trilateral Commission} says there have to be 'very serious consequences' against Russia, should they do things like using Russian Nationals within Eastern Ukraine to stage riots, giving Putin an excuse to move troops in ...

Former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright stresses the importance of diffusing the situation, saying they need to 'use all the tools available to them' .. I wonder what she meant.

Brzezinski countered what the interviewer said at the onset about the US not sending troops by saying NATO military forces would be sent in to warn Russia of 'massive consequences' ..

Have a look, this is the interview I've been talking about:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4GQjYDCBkU"]Zbigniew Brzezinski ,madeleine Albright on Crisis in Ukraine ! - YouTube[/ame]

What Vladimir Putin had to say during a press conference:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiKF8JN1qmk"]FULL VIDEO: Putin speaks Ukraine, Yanukovich, Maidan, Crimea - YouTube[/ame]

'This exercise {recent test launching of a missile by Russian military} recently was planned a long time ago, and has nothing to do with the situation in the Ukraine'

He goes on to speak on his private telephone conversations with western leaders, saying:

'Without mentioning their names, I would like to comment on them in general:

One thing we noticed is we {Russia} are often accused of being illegitimate in what we do, and when I ask them: well, do you think everything you do is legitimate? they say: yes.

Well, I can tell you: let's remember what the US did in Afghanistan, in Araq, in Libya, they acted there, either without any sanctions of the Security Council, or they distorted the meaning of UN Security Council resolutions, as they did in Libya.
The resolution only spoke about no - fly zones and eventually it's ended with air raids, air strikes, and their special forces participating in ground operations there.

Our partners, especially in the US always make it very clear what their geopolitical and national interests are, and they pursue those interests with much determination and then they use this phrase:

'Whoever is not with us, is against us.'

And they use this phrase to make all the other countries comply with their will.
And if some countries don't comply, they attack them and eventually, they make those countries regret.'

[Mikman]

Those facts are correct, and the USA should answer for that, but it didn't annex any part of those countries, unlike what Russia did, and Russia shouldn't use that hypocrisy so that they justify their actions, because that would be doubly hypocritical. Most nations invaded other nations during their history, and that was wrong, no matter how anyone views that, but that doesn't excuse Russia's actions now. No country should ever be belligerent or imperialistic in any way.

[Dudebro]

Putin does have a point.

[RU Joe]

Originally Posted by Mikman

Those facts are correct, and the USA should answer for that, but it didn't annex any part of those countries, unlike what Russia did, and Russia shouldn't use that hypocrisy so that they justify their actions, because that would be doubly hypocritical. Most nations invaded other nations during their history, and that was wrong, no matter how anyone views that, but that doesn't excuse Russia's actions now. No country should ever be belligerent or imperialistic in any way.

I agree with what you say.
However when we look at this current US administration's claims that they can't fix what previous administrations had done - despite the fact these were the very things they vowed to rectify during their original election campaign - we see the 'blame game' being played and no positive action being taken.

In other words, they're saying that they can't do those things they originally promised they would.
For me this is further proof our politicians are merely regional managers working for the bankers, so there's no sense in looking to them for help; they're doing their job just fine - it just happens to be something different than what they tell us.

None of this is excusing Russia or the things it does, and for the record I think we're all being played with on a psychological level here.
What I mean is, listen to what Putin said in the interview I posted: he mentions his 'western partners'.
Partners?
I was brought up with Ron Reagan telling us Russia was an 'evil empire' .. and now they're partners?

I realize this could be a bad translation of 'counterparts' and since I do not speak Russian I cannot confirm this but his choice of words seems odd to me, given that history I mentioned.

DB please elaborate; which point were you talking about?

[Dudebro]

Well, I can tell you: let's remember what the US did in Afghanistan, in Araq, in Libya, they acted there, either without any sanctions of the Security Council, or they distorted the meaning of UN Security Council resolutions, as they did in Libya.

That part. Not sure about Libya though.

[RU Joe]

Hard to be sure about anything at this point.
I'm sure that I'm not sure, how about that?

[Mikman]

None can really believe what government officials say. This should indicate that we need political reform in our own countries.

[Dudebro]

You still wouldn't be able to trust politicians. Reform is great and all but don't have unrealistic expectations about it.

[RU Joe]

I think the problem is that we've been taught for decades that there are only so many political flavors to choose from, and reform needs to begin with creation of newer, more flexible and interactive forms of government.
For instance, a comedian {I think it was Chris Rock} said that we should be able to vote on individual issues as they arise.
That way we wouldn't be 'locked' into one mode or other inflexibly for years at a time as we are now.

I realize it's not as simple as that and certainly powers that be would block any attempt to do so, but I like the idea.

[Mikman]

Perhaps referenda could help. The main problem is that politicians only work for their own personal careers and party "beliefs," which inherently contradicts the idea of a proper democracy. That's why nobody should run for themselves or for any group, such as a political party. Every candidate should be impartially nominated, equally questioned and debated, fairly elected and more strictly regulated, which we don't have now. It's possible, although, as Dudebro said, we shouldn't expect too much too quickly.

[RU Joe]

What a way the Earth a run nowadays, man
It gettin' harder by the day to know where you stand
When you think you pon de solid dry land,
When you take a step and find you're inna quicksand ..

Mi Revalueshanary Fren
-Linton Kwesi Johnson
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ..........

Regarding the missing Malaysian jet, does anyone but me find this odd?
I understand it's a Malay jet and so may not be equipped with all the electronic devices jets in other countries may have, but ..

IF they say they surveillance satellites can detect missiles being launched from any place on earth, and those missiles are much smaller than a commercial jet plane .. how can a plane of that size get lost?
It's a 747 Boeing, right?

[bearhawk72]

Originally Posted by RU Joe

What a way the Earth a run nowadays, man
It gettin' harder by the day to know where you stand
When you think you pon de solid dry land,
When you take a step and find you're inna quicksand ..

Mi Revalueshanary Fren
-Linton Kwesi Johnson
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ..........

Regarding the missing Malaysian jet, does anyone but me find this odd?
I understand it's a Malay jet and so may not be equipped with all the electronic devices jets in other countries may have, but ..

IF they say they surveillance satellites can detect missiles being launched from any place on earth, and those missiles are much smaller than a commercial jet plane .. how can a plane of that size get lost?
It's a 747 Boeing, right?

From what I gather if it turns off the transponders(which it did) and flies low enough it won't be seen on any radar and then it's virtually invisible to anyone who can't visually see it.

[D.B. Cooper]

It was a 777 and I'm convinced they've been abducted by aliens. No, you aren't the only one who finds this odd. Seems crazy you can lose something that big in this day and age. I hope this doesn't turn into another D.B. Cooper situation and they can someday find some answers.

[Dudebro]

Originally Posted by D.B. Cooper

It was a 777 and I'm convinced they've been abducted by aliens.

Why? Doesn't it also seem unlikely for aliens to take a giant plane from a high traffic area?

[Kong]

I think the only way we can track planes is
1. Radar which requires a certain altitude. Haven't you heard "fly below the radar" in a bunch of movies.
2, Transponder - radio beacon. Which was off for some reason. You would think there would not be an off switch because that would be dumb. So either their was some kind of unplanned malfunction or they did something like cut the wires which again you would think it would be highly protected behind at least an inch of steel. But that is an assumption that there is at least one smart engineer working in commercial airline security. That might not be a safe assumption.
3. Triangulate cell phone calls. If they knew someone on the flight was talking on the phone they should be able to locate that phone. Not positive if that is possible over an ocean or on a plane. And I assume no one was on the phone at the time which is also mysterious. If passengers were alarmed I think someone would have got on a phone.

From the little I have heard they put a lot of faith in the transponder always working but didn't include a lot of fail safes in it's design. They should have had multiple highly secured transponders but I think they had one, minimally secured one.

[bearhawk72]

Originally Posted by Kong

I think the only way we can track planes is
1. Radar which requires a certain altitude. Haven't you heard "fly below the radar" in a bunch of movies.
2, Transponder - radio beacon. Which was off for some reason. You would think there would not be an off switch because that would be dumb. So either their was some kind of unplanned malfunction or they did something like cut the wires which again you would think it would be highly protected behind at least an inch of steel. But that is an assumption that there is at least one smart engineer working in commercial airline security. That might not be a safe assumption.
3. Triangulate cell phone calls. If they knew someone on the flight was talking on the phone they should be able to locate that phone. Not positive if that is possible over an ocean or on a plane. And I assume no one was on the phone at the time which is also mysterious. If passengers were alarmed I think someone would have got on a phone.

From the little I have heard they put a lot of faith in the transponder always working but didn't include a lot of fail safes in it's design. They should have had multiple highly secured transponders but I think they had one, minimally secured one.

Saw on TV, there is simply a command they go to in the computer, and a switch they turn off. Pilots have access to it so they can turn it off while on land so they do not clutter the radar screens with a plane that is of no threat to anyone.

[D.B. Cooper]

Originally Posted by Dudebro

Why? Doesn't it also seem unlikely for aliens to take a giant plane from a high traffic area?

Sorry, that was my attempt at a joke.

[Kong]

Originally Posted by bearhawk72

Saw on TV, there is simply a command they go to in the computer, and a switch they turn off. Pilots have access to it so they can turn it off while on land so they do not clutter the radar screens with a plane that is of no threat to anyone.

There's gotta be a better solution than that. The traffic controller (not the pilot) should have an option to filter - hide beacons that are not important.

[Dudebro]

Originally Posted by D.B. Cooper

Sorry, that was my attempt at a joke.

Oh ok. I took it seriously because the amount of crazy stories about this is out of control.

[Kugyince]

Isn't there a tracking device normally in the "black box"?