search results matching tag: blower

» channel: motorsports

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (66)     Sift Talk (3)     Blogs (11)     Comments (126)   

Debate - That the World is Better Off with Wikileaks

MaxWilder says...

>> ^mgittle:

>> ^MaxWilder:
What is the difference between "whistle blowers" and WikiLeaks???
Each one makes claims and provides what evidence they have available, as a last resort because normal channels aren't working.
It blows my mind that these people are talking like they are different things. Wikileaks just gives whistle blowers a platform to be heard.

They are different things. There is a legal difference. If you leak classified documents in the US, that is a punishable offense because you probably signed some contract saying you wouldn't leak things in order to be able to get a classified clearance of some kind. If you report to others information that has been leaked by a whistleblower, that falls under freedom of the press and is not punishable by law.
That's why the US gov't is trying to hard to find evidence that Julian Assange coerced Bradley Manning into leaking classified information...to connect Assange to a crime. You say "Wikileaks just gives whistleblowers a platform"...yeah, so do all sorts of news organizations. Trade any news source with "Wikileaks"...try your sentence out with "New York Times", for example.
Don't ask a rhetorical question when you don't already know the answer.


Sorry, I didn't make my baffled outburst clear. The assholes claiming that WikiLeaks is a bad thing both support whistle blowers as a necessary measure when all normal channels to right a wrong have been attempted.

Is it not patently obvious to anybody that WikiLeaks is the worlds biggest supporter of whistle blowers? Is it not further patently obvious that shutting down WikiLeaks would make it harder for whistle blowers to get the attention they need? Therefor how could any sane person support one and not the other? (Rhetorical question. Answer: they can't. They are hypocrites and liars.)

Edit: I hasten to add that I have no problem with an open investigation to confirm that Assange was not colluding with those who are breaking the law in gathering the information. That is something that could happen to any news organization, and is fairly reasonable when the release is as significant as those diplomatic cables. But the public harassment is absurd.

Debate - That the World is Better Off with Wikileaks

mgittle says...

>> ^MaxWilder:

What is the difference between "whistle blowers" and WikiLeaks???
Each one makes claims and provides what evidence they have available, as a last resort because normal channels aren't working.
It blows my mind that these people are talking like they are different things. Wikileaks just gives whistle blowers a platform to be heard.


They are different things. There is a legal difference. If you leak classified documents in the US, that is a punishable offense because you probably signed some contract saying you wouldn't leak things in order to be able to get a classified clearance of some kind. If you report to others information that has been leaked by a whistleblower, that falls under freedom of the press and is not punishable by law.

That's why the US gov't is trying to hard to find evidence that Julian Assange coerced Bradley Manning into leaking classified information...to connect Assange to a crime. You say "Wikileaks just gives whistleblowers a platform"...yeah, so do all sorts of news organizations. Trade any news source with "Wikileaks"...try your sentence out with "New York Times", for example.

Don't ask a rhetorical question when you don't already know the answer.

Debate - That the World is Better Off with Wikileaks

MaxWilder says...

What is the difference between "whistle blowers" and WikiLeaks???

Each one makes claims and provides what evidence they have available, as a last resort because normal channels aren't working.

It blows my mind that these people are talking like they are different things. Wikileaks just gives whistle blowers a platform to be heard.

Mythbuster's Kari Byron's New Show - Head Rush

Ron Paul on the CIA, wikileaks, and Liberty

dystopianfuturetoday says...

Ron Paul is 89% right in this instance.

Torture bad. Assassination bad. Secret prisons bad. Military courts bad. Immunity to whistle blowers good. Corporate/Preventative war bad. Collateral damage bad. Occupation/puppet governments bad.

China's exploitation based, pollution heavy economy is great for CEOs, executive boards and other profiteers whom are insulated from negative externalities; not so much for the rest of us. It is instructive that RP sees this as a positive model of capitalism. It is not.

RP is no Chomsky, but he has a decent handle on the symptoms. What he doesn't seem able to do is to connect the dots to see the bigger picture.

Follow the money. Who benefits from these wars? Big Oil, Halliburton and Military industries are the primary beneficiaries. If you want to get the government out of the war business, get the profiteers out of government. Curb the lobbyists, reform campaign finance laws and reverse the corrupt 5 to 4 supreme court ruling that gives corporations unlimited anonymous influence over our system. I understand that this is easier said than done.

Give the system back to the people and let us decide our own foreign policy.

>> ^blankfist:

Awesome speech. He's right on 100% of what he's saying. 100%.

Ron Paul on the CIA, wikileaks, and Liberty

Psychologic says...

I agree with most of what he says (no immunity for government officials, stop bombing people).

On the whistle-blower immunity thing, I agree provided that the person is exposing something illegal. However, I don't support immunity for someone releasing internal government communications (ie- wiki-leaks) if the communications do not indicate any illegal activity.

As far as China, I don't know enough about Paul's views to agree or disagree, but what I've seen from him on the subject seems overly simplistic.

Lawdeedaw (Member Profile)

Duckman33 says...

Dude, you seem to be the only one that doesn't understand what I'm saying. So I'm not going to tailor my posts to cater to your whims, sorry. If you can't understand what I'm trying to say, then simply ignore my posts and move on. It's really that simple.

In reply to this comment by Lawdeedaw:
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^Lawdeedaw:
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^Lawdeedaw:
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^reiwan:
I'd hate to bust anyones bubble, but if anyone here on the sift was getting bubbles blown in their face from some girl, you would be livid. He may have been very curt with her about what she was doing, but he handled it better than a lot of non-uniformed people would have.
Then she is taken aback and complains about not getting any respect after what she did? fuck her.

No, I wouldn't be "livid" if someone was blowing bubbles in my face. Kids do it all the time. I ask them nicely to stop. Please don't speak for me, as I can speak for myself.

Wow... Apples to science here.
First, that woman is old enough for all of us to legally play her field. She is not a child. To put this in perspective, all of the above would have to be met... A-You would have to have an adult blow bubbles in your face. B-It would have to be at your job. C-It would also have to be in front of a crowd that does not work with you, D- You would have to lose authority from both your co-workers and the public watching...
Way different scenario.
Kids do it? Kids also piss the bed. Kids also pick their noses and do not wash their hands. Kids do a lot of things adults should not. What if a kid went up to your father's casket and blew bubbles on his corpse? Again, way different...
Now, in a funtastic world, let's reverse the roles. Have the cops blowing bubbles into the crowds with industrilized bubble blowers (So every one get's it.) I say this because if she is allowed to blow bubbles, someone will step it up... and take it to the next level. Someone mentioned flowers next? Sure, with poison ivy on them. Pranks rarely get gentlier if allowed to continue.
But, in all, this cop is a hat... Just because he said about bubbles being a detergent... Lame-o was his name-o.

My point, as before with you has obviously gone over your head. Here I'll say it again so you hopefully can understand it clearly. Please don't speak for me, as I can speak for myself.

I never spoke for you; so what is your point? I have an idea--as I did not speak for you, don't speak for me by saying I spoke for you. Pot, kettle.

Dude, what in THE fuck are you talking about? Do you even READ what I'm saying in my posts before you fucking reply, or are you just an illiterate ass hole? Seriously.
In the conversation, I was asking reiwan (who I was replying to by the way) not to speak for me. THAT was the point of my reply. YOU had nothing to do with it. But somehow you decided it was all about you anyway. <IMG class=smiley src="http://static1.videosift.com/cdm/emoticon/oops.gif"> I wasn't trying to compare the situation in the video to a kid blowing bubbles in my face. I was saying "shit happens, get over it". It's really that simple. I used to play music for a living. I've had far worse done to me in front of "crowds that don't work with me" by adults than someone blowing bubbles in my face. So I'll make a simple request to you as well now. Please don't lecture me on what I would and wouldn't do in any given situation.



I know/knew the point of your first reply--however, since you unfairly and directly compared what happened with you to being mad at something like this happening, then I simply pointed out the two versions as completely incompatible.

You then stated, this time to me, to stop speaking for you--which I did not. Perhaps you were once again telling Re to stop but that makes little sense...

Now you're all huffy and sad because your feelings are hurt. This reminds me of the last time we discussed and you flipped because I inferred something from your writing. However, you assumed something about my writing so we were pretty even...

I just give up on you Duck; either write what you actually mean or do not write at all. Don't just use words you think are appropriate. I am an over-analytical sort and so I get confused when people use words just to hear themselves speak... I will always mistake your point if you have no clue how to put it down in posts.

Woman Viciously Assaults Police Officer

Lawdeedaw says...

>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^Lawdeedaw:
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^Lawdeedaw:
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^reiwan:
I'd hate to bust anyones bubble, but if anyone here on the sift was getting bubbles blown in their face from some girl, you would be livid. He may have been very curt with her about what she was doing, but he handled it better than a lot of non-uniformed people would have.
Then she is taken aback and complains about not getting any respect after what she did? fuck her.

No, I wouldn't be "livid" if someone was blowing bubbles in my face. Kids do it all the time. I ask them nicely to stop. Please don't speak for me, as I can speak for myself.

Wow... Apples to science here.
First, that woman is old enough for all of us to legally play her field. She is not a child. To put this in perspective, all of the above would have to be met... A-You would have to have an adult blow bubbles in your face. B-It would have to be at your job. C-It would also have to be in front of a crowd that does not work with you, D- You would have to lose authority from both your co-workers and the public watching...
Way different scenario.
Kids do it? Kids also piss the bed. Kids also pick their noses and do not wash their hands. Kids do a lot of things adults should not. What if a kid went up to your father's casket and blew bubbles on his corpse? Again, way different...
Now, in a funtastic world, let's reverse the roles. Have the cops blowing bubbles into the crowds with industrilized bubble blowers (So every one get's it.) I say this because if she is allowed to blow bubbles, someone will step it up... and take it to the next level. Someone mentioned flowers next? Sure, with poison ivy on them. Pranks rarely get gentlier if allowed to continue.
But, in all, this cop is a hat... Just because he said about bubbles being a detergent... Lame-o was his name-o.

My point, as before with you has obviously gone over your head. Here I'll say it again so you hopefully can understand it clearly. Please don't speak for me, as I can speak for myself.

I never spoke for you; so what is your point? I have an idea--as I did not speak for you, don't speak for me by saying I spoke for you. Pot, kettle.

Dude, what in THE fuck are you talking about? Do you even READ what I'm saying in my posts before you fucking reply, or are you just an illiterate ass hole? Seriously.
In the conversation, I was asking reiwan (who I was replying to by the way) not to speak for me. THAT was the point of my reply. YOU had nothing to do with it. But somehow you decided it was all about you anyway. <IMG class=smiley src="http://static1.videosift.com/cdm/emoticon/oops.gif"> I wasn't trying to compare the situation in the video to a kid blowing bubbles in my face. I was saying "shit happens, get over it". It's really that simple. I used to play music for a living. I've had far worse done to me in front of "crowds that don't work with me" by adults than someone blowing bubbles in my face. So I'll make a simple request to you as well now. Please don't lecture me on what I would and wouldn't do in any given situation.



I know/knew the point of your first reply--however, since you unfairly and directly compared what happened with you to being mad at something like this happening, then I simply pointed out the two versions as completely incompatible.

You then stated, this time to me, to stop speaking for you--which I did not. Perhaps you were once again telling Re to stop but that makes little sense...

Now you're all huffy and sad because your feelings are hurt. This reminds me of the last time we discussed and you flipped because I inferred something from your writing. However, you assumed something about my writing so we were pretty even...

I just give up on you Duck; either write what you actually mean or do not write at all. Don't just use words you think are appropriate. I am an over-analytical sort and so I get confused when people use words just to hear themselves speak... I will always mistake your point if you have no clue how to put it down in posts.

Woman Viciously Assaults Police Officer

Duckman33 says...

>> ^Lawdeedaw:

>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^Lawdeedaw:
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^reiwan:
I'd hate to bust anyones bubble, but if anyone here on the sift was getting bubbles blown in their face from some girl, you would be livid. He may have been very curt with her about what she was doing, but he handled it better than a lot of non-uniformed people would have.
Then she is taken aback and complains about not getting any respect after what she did? fuck her.

No, I wouldn't be "livid" if someone was blowing bubbles in my face. Kids do it all the time. I ask them nicely to stop. Please don't speak for me, as I can speak for myself.

Wow... Apples to science here.
First, that woman is old enough for all of us to legally play her field. She is not a child. To put this in perspective, all of the above would have to be met... A-You would have to have an adult blow bubbles in your face. B-It would have to be at your job. C-It would also have to be in front of a crowd that does not work with you, D- You would have to lose authority from both your co-workers and the public watching...
Way different scenario.
Kids do it? Kids also piss the bed. Kids also pick their noses and do not wash their hands. Kids do a lot of things adults should not. What if a kid went up to your father's casket and blew bubbles on his corpse? Again, way different...
Now, in a funtastic world, let's reverse the roles. Have the cops blowing bubbles into the crowds with industrilized bubble blowers (So every one get's it.) I say this because if she is allowed to blow bubbles, someone will step it up... and take it to the next level. Someone mentioned flowers next? Sure, with poison ivy on them. Pranks rarely get gentlier if allowed to continue.
But, in all, this cop is a hat... Just because he said about bubbles being a detergent... Lame-o was his name-o.

My point, as before with you has obviously gone over your head. Here I'll say it again so you hopefully can understand it clearly. Please don't speak for me, as I can speak for myself.

I never spoke for you; so what is your point? I have an idea--as I did not speak for you, don't speak for me by saying I spoke for you. Pot, kettle.


Dude, what in THE fuck are you talking about? Do you even READ what I'm saying in my posts before you fucking reply, or are you just an illiterate ass hole? Seriously.

In the conversation, I was asking reiwan (who I was replying to by the way) not to speak for me. THAT was the point of my reply. YOU had nothing to do with it. But somehow you decided it was all about you anyway. I wasn't trying to compare the situation in the video to a kid blowing bubbles in my face. I was saying "shit happens, get over it". It's really that simple. I used to play music for a living. I've had far worse done to me in front of "crowds that don't work with me" by adults than someone blowing bubbles in my face. So I'll make a simple request to you as well now. Please don't lecture me on what I would and wouldn't do in any given situation.

Woman Viciously Assaults Police Officer

Lawdeedaw says...

>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^Lawdeedaw:
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^reiwan:
I'd hate to bust anyones bubble, but if anyone here on the sift was getting bubbles blown in their face from some girl, you would be livid. He may have been very curt with her about what she was doing, but he handled it better than a lot of non-uniformed people would have.
Then she is taken aback and complains about not getting any respect after what she did? fuck her.

No, I wouldn't be "livid" if someone was blowing bubbles in my face. Kids do it all the time. I ask them nicely to stop. Please don't speak for me, as I can speak for myself.

Wow... Apples to science here.
First, that woman is old enough for all of us to legally play her field. She is not a child. To put this in perspective, all of the above would have to be met... A-You would have to have an adult blow bubbles in your face. B-It would have to be at your job. C-It would also have to be in front of a crowd that does not work with you, D- You would have to lose authority from both your co-workers and the public watching...
Way different scenario.
Kids do it? Kids also piss the bed. Kids also pick their noses and do not wash their hands. Kids do a lot of things adults should not. What if a kid went up to your father's casket and blew bubbles on his corpse? Again, way different...
Now, in a funtastic world, let's reverse the roles. Have the cops blowing bubbles into the crowds with industrilized bubble blowers (So every one get's it.) I say this because if she is allowed to blow bubbles, someone will step it up... and take it to the next level. Someone mentioned flowers next? Sure, with poison ivy on them. Pranks rarely get gentlier if allowed to continue.
But, in all, this cop is a hat... Just because he said about bubbles being a detergent... Lame-o was his name-o.

My point, as before with you has obviously gone over your head. Here I'll say it again so you hopefully can understand it clearly. Please don't speak for me, as I can speak for myself.


I never spoke for you; so what is your point? I have an idea--as I did not speak for you, don't speak for me by saying I spoke for you. Pot, kettle.

Woman Viciously Assaults Police Officer

Duckman33 says...

>> ^Lawdeedaw:

>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^reiwan:
I'd hate to bust anyones bubble, but if anyone here on the sift was getting bubbles blown in their face from some girl, you would be livid. He may have been very curt with her about what she was doing, but he handled it better than a lot of non-uniformed people would have.
Then she is taken aback and complains about not getting any respect after what she did? fuck her.

No, I wouldn't be "livid" if someone was blowing bubbles in my face. Kids do it all the time. I ask them nicely to stop. Please don't speak for me, as I can speak for myself.

Wow... Apples to science here.
First, that woman is old enough for all of us to legally play her field. She is not a child. To put this in perspective, all of the above would have to be met... A-You would have to have an adult blow bubbles in your face. B-It would have to be at your job. C-It would also have to be in front of a crowd that does not work with you, D- You would have to lose authority from both your co-workers and the public watching...
Way different scenario.
Kids do it? Kids also piss the bed. Kids also pick their noses and do not wash their hands. Kids do a lot of things adults should not. What if a kid went up to your father's casket and blew bubbles on his corpse? Again, way different...
Now, in a funtastic world, let's reverse the roles. Have the cops blowing bubbles into the crowds with industrilized bubble blowers (So every one get's it.) I say this because if she is allowed to blow bubbles, someone will step it up... and take it to the next level. Someone mentioned flowers next? Sure, with poison ivy on them. Pranks rarely get gentlier if allowed to continue.
But, in all, this cop is a hat... Just because he said about bubbles being a detergent... Lame-o was his name-o.


My point, as before with you has obviously gone over your head. Here I'll say it again so you hopefully can understand it clearly. Please don't speak for me, as I can speak for myself.

Woman Viciously Assaults Police Officer

Lawdeedaw says...

>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^reiwan:
I'd hate to bust anyones bubble, but if anyone here on the sift was getting bubbles blown in their face from some girl, you would be livid. He may have been very curt with her about what she was doing, but he handled it better than a lot of non-uniformed people would have.
Then she is taken aback and complains about not getting any respect after what she did? fuck her.

No, I wouldn't be "livid" if someone was blowing bubbles in my face. Kids do it all the time. I ask them nicely to stop. Please don't speak for me, as I can speak for myself.


Wow... Apples to science here.

First, that woman is old enough for all of us to legally play her field. She is not a child. To put this in perspective, all of the above would have to be met... A-You would have to have an adult blow bubbles in your face. B-It would have to be at your job. C-It would also have to be in front of a crowd that does not work with you, D- You would have to lose authority from both your co-workers and the public watching...

Way different scenario.

Kids do it? Kids also piss the bed. Kids also pick their noses and do not wash their hands. Kids do a lot of things adults should not. What if a kid went up to your father's casket and blew bubbles on his corpse? Again, way different...

Now, in a funtastic world, let's reverse the roles. Have the cops blowing bubbles into the crowds with industrilized bubble blowers (So every one get's it.) I say this because if she is allowed to blow bubbles, someone will step it up... and take it to the next level. Someone mentioned flowers next? Sure, with poison ivy on them. Pranks rarely get gentlier if allowed to continue.

But, in all, this cop is a hat... Just because he said about bubbles being a detergent... Lame-o was his name-o.

Jokes I like (Blog Entry by dag)

Sagemind says...

The jokes my family hates to hear me repeat...

Q: What's the best way to catch a fish?
A: Have someone throw it to you.

Q: Why did the monkey fall out of the tree?
A: It Was Dead.

Q: Why did the second monkey fall out of the tree?
A: It was stapled to the first one.

Q: What's Red and White and hangs from trees?
A: A baby that got run over by a snow blower

Me: Ask me if I'm a tree...
Them: Are you a Tree?
Me: No.

Me: Ask me if I'm a bush...
Them: Are you a bush?
Me: Yes.
Me: Now ask me if I'm a tree...
Them: Are you a tree?
Me: No, I just told you I was a bush...

.. I just bought some instant water, but I don't know what to ad to it...

Making a cat from glass - Incredible

Baseball's Nostradamus

HenningKO says...

Well, let's see if we can do the math... like a Drake's equation of baseball:

[typical at-bats per-game: 3] x [chance of hitting in any one at-bat: Tuiasasopo's AVG is ca 0.2] x [chance a Tui hit will be a homerun: ca 0.08 (1/12, this is the most arguable stat, he's still green, and before this HR, the chance would've been 0!)] x [chance the count will be 3-1 when you go for it: I dunno, but there are only 7 possible counts and THIS is a hitter's count: if you're gonna go for it this would be a favorable count to do it: ca. 0.2] x [chance it'll go left field: pretty good if you're a right-handed hitter: but to be conservative, 0.5] x [chance it'll go to the second deck: dunno, but it didn't fulfill this particular part of the prophecy, so let's call it a wash: 1] = 0.0048, half a percent.

Blowers had about a 1/200 chance of getting his prediction right! Not bad.
But how many games did she say he's called?

stats from: http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/t/tuiasma01.shtml



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon