| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Comments:
<0> those are creditcards bank numbers
<0> he said he can get money from credit cards that begin with those numbers
<1> some pretty small numbers
<1> ah
<1> that makes more sense
<0> in our country that's "the new thing" ppl do
<0> they steal money from creditcards
<2> sounds like fun
<2> how do I sign up?
<3> Oddly enough, that's the in thing in our country, too
<3> http://www.newstepsolutions.com/debt-statistics.htm
<3> Americans carry, on average, $5,800 in credit card debt from month to month. If one were to make only the minimum payment on that debt every month, it would take 30 years to pay off - and include an additional $15,000 in interest.
<3> A 1992 Federal Reserve study showed that 43% of U.S. families spent more than they earned.
<3> According to the National ***ociation of Realtors the average homeowner stays in their home for 7.1 years (1993 statistic). With an 8% mortgage, they will sell their home still owing over 90% on their mortgage. If they were to continue this trend they would NEVER pay off a mortgage in their lifetime!
<1> well, i guess it beats prostitution. jb should have thought of that sooner
<0> JBlitzen: and what are they doing after those 7 years? they give the house back?
<3> Well, the ones like khan get a new job somewhere else and move
<0> or they pay the entire amount?
<1> boo, patch 1.21 is limiting deployed claymores to 2
<1> i LOVE claymore whoring!
<3> And since they never really bit into the capital on their house, they only get a little back in the sale
<0> I see
<1> and the other 57% of americans own their trailers, as does jb
<3> I suspect that that website skews the statistics toward the absurd, but there's definitely a grain of truth in it
<3> I just have a little apartment, homo
<1> sure sure
<3> Well, it's cheaper than a trailer, so it's not like I'm bragging
<0> well... I guess it's just better to have something that you don't own than not having it at all
<0> I'm talking about the houses
<3> Well, I don't have much need for a house at the moment
<1> jb was homeless for 10 years, so he can vouch for that
<3> Obviously at some point people do
<3> Particularly when they start to have kids
<1> he sold his body to old men for booze
<3> But since khan's a hermaphrodite, that's not a big concern for him
<1> unf
<3> We think he just felt guilty about not paying enough taxes
<0> I'm 21 :D my birthday ended 16 minutes ago :D
<0> uglyes birthday ever
<4> congrats, heh
<0> tx :)
<3> Happy birthday, sk8 :D
<0> thanks :)
<5> oh. my. god
<5> BBC -= 10000000000000 respect
<5> with the amazing newsnight heading
<6> huh?
<5> "Bittorrent, a new way of downloading films from the internet may make life easier for terrorists and peodophiles"
<5> I wonder how much the film industry paid for that headline
<6> or the pedophiles
<0> lol
<3> BBC never had any respect
<5> They're normally excellent, which makes this even odder
<5> And looking at their website, it seems like their copywriter for the headline introduction is just an idiot
<5> The article is about how ISPS are limiting bittorrent use, which leads people to use encryption to get around it. And apparently, encryption is teh tool of TEH TERRORISTSTS AND CHILD MOLE ESTERS!
<3> They're never excellent
<5> Well, I admit they never reach the journalistic heights of Faux News, but they're pretty damn good
<5> oh, sorry, that's Fox News
<3> Without even looking at it, I'll bet you a +v that any URL you give me from them, I could dissect and point out two flaws in
<3> Anything on the front page
<5> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/4748996.stm
<5> is the current banner headline for their UK site
<5> Given that it's just a factual report, sans opinion (as news should be), you might have a hard time
<3> Yeah, that one's pretty tough
<3> I notice they don't actually report the description and computer image of the suspect
<5> in fact, all the homepage items are like that
<3> Only that one's been released
<5> See, they actually normally do *news*. Not what at lost of news systems do, which is "News + random political opinion"
<3> Well, this isn't a political thing
<3> It's a cat up a tree article
<5> well, try http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/default.stm
<5> their UK political homepage
<5> again, all just factual reporting
<5> aside from the clearly labeled columists
<1> make life easier for terrorists and pedophiles...how exactly?
<1> heh
<5> god knows. This current concept that "If you've got nothing to hide, you should show us everything you do" is very odd, and rather disturbing
<3> Well
<3> Note that I'm an American
<3> And, reading that article
<3> I have no idea why the mayor said what he said
<3> I count that as a flaw
<5> the actual factual reporting, sans "spin" is why I only generally read BBC news. Of course, they could be "spinning by omission"
<5> so I temper with other sources as well
<3> ^
<5> but they're normally pretty damn accurate on all points
<3> It's not about accuracy
<5> Well, it's a UK political homepage, so we're ***umed to know. You could visit their international homepage
<3> For all we know, the mayor may have said what he said in response to the journalist's constant harping about Britain not locking up arabs at random
<5> Sure it is. What else do you want from a news organisation?
<3> Well, explain it to me
<3> Why'd he say that?
<5> An accurate, consistent, unbias representation of the facts
<3> Sure, unbiased, what's his side of the story?
<5> Because some tabloid reporter retarded was chasing him down the streets harasing him
<3> I don't see anything like that in this story
<5> if you look down the right, it has all the previous stories published on this, going back one year
<5> listing "why", his comments etc
<5> this is just a report on the adjudication panel
<3> It should be unbiased
<3> But it isn't
<3> I will make you a bet
<3> Based on what I read here
<5> In what why is it not? It just lists what happened
<3> The BBC didn't endorse that mayor
<7> i got to go
<7> nite' folks.
<5> The BBC can't endorse any political parties
<1> no, but jesus did
<5> They're legally obligated not to. They even have to give air time to the insane right wing loonies
<1> is BBC state owned?
<5> No, just state funded
<1> ah
<5> But it goes both ways; the government is legally mandated not to interfere in the BBC in any way
<3> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/uk_politics/2000/london_mayor/736460.stm
<3> Haha
<3> Ken Livingstone's election as London mayor stands as a remarkable comeback in a political career many of the left-winger's friends and enemies alike believed had run into the sand.
<3> Before he set his sights on becoming mayor, the former Greater London Council leader had come to be seen as a star that failed to shine in Parliament.
<3> Livingstone's reign as GLC leader from 1981 to 1986 coincided with the worst of Labour's wilderness years.
<3> Some of his policies made him a tabloid hate figure; the Sun newspaper once described him as "the most odious man in Britain."
<5> Yes, what's wrong with those? They're all pretty factual to me, hell, the last one is a quote
<3> Our government is legally mandated not to interfere with any journalism in any way
<3> It's one sided, that's what's wrong with it.
<3> Okay, think of it this way
<5> How's it one sided? Read the other articles
<5> they've got paragraphs in the one where his lack of apology is listed full of quotes supporting him
<3> But no facts
<5> huh? it's full of fact
<5> they have an entire political biography of the guy, just listing what he did
<3> http://www.strategypage.com/dls/articles/200512203720.asp
<3> Asriel ^
<5> yes, I know all of that. Standard stuff
<5> in what way is does any of this apply?
<3> #1, Sinn Fein from above, and Labour in the wilderness years
<3> #2 is that entire article
<3> #4 with the Jewish reporter
<3> #5, odious
<5> How is Sinn Fein relevent? He was the first of the major political figures to regonize the party; they all do now
<3> #6 is a VERY common tactic
<5> The wilderness years is a standard term for that political period for the labour party
<3> #11, dismissive of his reasons
<3> #12 is all over it
<5> #4, the report himself introduced the jewish issues, the complaint was from the jewish council, hence it's entirely relevent
<3> The statements in support of the mayor are vague and meaningless
<3> #13, clearly all over their coverage of it
<3> #14, too
<5> huh?
<5> In what way?
<5> I'm not seeing any of this, I must confess
<5> How is #13 relevent in any way, shape or form?
Return to
#c++
or
Go to some related
logs:
#windows
#linuxhelp
#AllNiteCafe
#teens
#linux
Toad and Toadette
il-qahba
StandardOutput.ReadToEnd() textreader
erfewr
pass std::string between dlls
|
|