Your video, Spitzer/Taibbi: HSBC is too big to jail, untouchable, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Snoop played one of the best female characters I've ever seen on television. And I didn't even like her and her crew that much. I thought they were too big too fast, too untouchable compared to the other drug dealers. It was like suddenly I was in a super villain movie and all the regular villains were like "We don't know how to handle these new guys...they're too tough." So I thought it was kinda bullshit for the final season even though it was well done.

It's crazy to me that even with me not liking the power levels being out of whack in the 5th Season, the Wire is so Fucking good that it doesn't really matter. I can run down the Wire all day but if someone says "Yeah but what about this other show?" Whoa mother fucker, there is not other show that does drama better, sorry end of.

You hear a crack but the ice remains untouched, do the math.

More like sore forever. Tailbone injuries are persistent buggers.

You made me picture the DeNiro scene from The Untouchables, except with Jobs as Capone.>> ^EvilDeathBee:

>> ^Reefie:
>> ^EvilDeathBee:
Jobs was probably more concerned by him saying that his mac had a problem, rather than the cursing

Yeah, truth hurts! I bet he unsubscribed from Adam Curry's podcasts soon after

I bet he came over to Curry's house afterwards with a baseball bat, smashing his stuff yelling "You made me look like an asshole out there!"

Fun Fact: My avatar is the original, untouched picture from the situation room that day.

quoting moore in that article

Our present financial ethos no longer even resembles conventional capitalism, which at least implies a brutal Darwinian free-for-all, however one-sided and unfair. Instead, we have a situation where the banks seem to be an untouchable monarchy beyond the reach of governmental restraint, much like the profligate court of Charles I.

One of the formative experiences of my life was after I finished college in Ohio, leaving my home in the NJ suburbs of NYC to drive, solo, cross country staying off the interstate as much as possible. I took the northern route until I arrived in Portland and then traveled south to L.A., and then returned East along a more Southern route.

In total, the trip took me about three months (August, 2001 through October, 2001). Not only had I changed during that trip -- the country itself, had also changed.

Sure, there are many minimalls and towns that look exactly the same (which, as it happens, was a welcomed respite of "familiarity," at times), but of the thousands of untouched natural acreage, this land is an experience to behold.

good one!

In reply to this comment by enoch:
i withheld any comment i might have on this topic to see what reaction this video might incur and in what form.
i was not disappointed.

over the past 30 years we have seen the rise of the fundamentalist christian (there is a reason for that) conversely we have also seen the rise of fundamentalist islam (over a longer period).
there are many factors why this has happened which i will not get into but suffice to say that they exist.there are causality reasons for this rise and those reasons are not contended.

i am a man of faith but my faith puts me in a precarious cross hairs between the religious fundamentalist and the secular fundamentalist (yeah.i used the term.get over it because they exist).
i am reviled and ridiculed by BOTH sides of that equation.so i am in a unique position to comment on both schools of thought because both schools have harassed me.

those who admonish me usually practice a subtle passive aggressive form of rebuke but always with the intention of calling me stupid,unworthy and wrong.veiled insults disguised as a debate or discussion.

a typical discussion with a militant atheist:
"you are a man of faith enoch? wow..just wow.and i took you for a person of some intelligence"
and then they try to smooth over their overt insult by remarking "well,i guess thats your thing but i cant see how anybody with critical thinking skills could be a person of faith"
this is the epitome of sanctimonious self-righteous belief in ones own perfect understanding of everything based on their own limited understanding but they feel perfectly justified to project their own hubris upon me,even when i have not spoken ONE word on where my faith resides.they based their entire understanding on me simply on there formulated creation of their own imagination.

my conversations with a fundamentalist christian/muslims does not fare much better and oftentimes even worse.because i do not give authority to holy writ.this does not mean i do not find wisdom nor a certain poetry in sacred writings but rather through my studies it has become apparent that these books are not only man-made but borrowed from each other.
so i can appreciate the words within for their beauty and poetry (and brutal violence) but ultimately have to disregard the edicts within for the simple fact they are not only incomplete but rife with human corruption.

so the christian fundamentalist will revile me as an apostate or even worse:heretic and condemn me to hell,to be damned for eternity.while this self-righteous judgment is FAR more direct than a militant atheist may treat me,what i find most despicable and cowardly is how a christian will hide behind the bible and actually attempt a false compassion (pray for my soul) while simultaneously revile me as an unclean agent controlled by satan.

i find BOTH these positions weak and pathetic and here is why:
fundamentalism,in any form,is the stagnation of the mind and deadening of spirit.
it hinders our ability to question and wonder and to push the boundaries of our known perceptions.
the fundamentalist is convinced (by whatever means)that they are correct with a certitude that is immovable,unshakable and to even allow the possibility of a contrary ideology (very specific in relation to this conversation) is tantamount to admitting oneself to be../gasp..wrong.

now let me stop here for a moment and ask my atheist friends how my comment has made you feel?
are you getting angry with me? irritated? annoyed?
and if so.why?
have i specifically called YOU out?
no.i have not and the reason is most atheists i have had discussions with here on the sift are NOT militant.they are just atheists.normal regular people without an agenda nor a desire to purge me of my faith.

sam harris is a militant atheist and no matter how he may wish to paint it, his writings define him as such.
his attacks on the religious are painted with such broad strokes as to encompass anyone who may have a modicum of faith.he may attempt to smooth over his rough edges but the core message is still there.
and he also seem to be under the impression (falsely imo) that if everyone abandoned faith that somehow human society would miraculously be a better and more utopian world.
total.infantile.naivete'.
this is the reason hedges calls him out on his fundamentalism.harris tends to ignore not only human nature but the preceding centuries of history and thats why i find his arguments to be lacking.

now please understand i am vehemently against fundamentalism and religion is the main offender without a doubt.so when i call harris out as being a secular fundamentalist i do so with that truth in mind and i believe harris is totally unaware that he could be perceived that way (as revealed by many of his posts).

hitchens had it right from the get-go.
he didnt use that broad brush harris uses but rather was specific in his criticisms and rightly so.he understood the history and theology and exposed the wretched hypocrisy which dwelt in the underbelly of all fundamentalism.he went after the church.he went after those who would pervert the word in order to dominate and control the poor and un-educated and he was vicious in his admonishments.

the bible,torah,quran are all tangible books.doctrine is written down to be read and studied and they SHOULD be discussed and debated and not treated like some sacred cow that is untouchable.hitchens was the master of using the very doctrine put forth by the church (or imam) to eviscerate any argument in favor of said doctrine to expose the utter hypocrisy.

i have read hitchens and harris is no hitchens.

Tolkein to me is the Stanley Kubrik of fiction books - to fans he's untouchable; to the few of us who aren't into it, he's long-winded and self-indulgent. People are going to throw things at me for saying this, but he could have written a much better story in two books than three

No one is going to throw things at you. Reading is a very individual experience. Not everyone is going to or has to like the same stuff any more than they have to like the same clothes or food. Your tastes in literature are just different. Nothing wrong with that.

I personally felt that every Harry Potter book (after Azkaban) could be cut in half and it would have made a far better reading experience. But to some people that would be blasphemy. I got sick of JK "The Exposition" Rowling pulling the Scooby-Doo revelation of the "Old Man Jenkins du jour" mystery at the end of every book. She took chapters and chapters to do it - sometimes hundreds of pages - and she's so addicted to exposition that she invented entire plot devices just so she could do more of them (Pensieve, I'm lookin' at you). But to some readers that was good stuff. Me - I skimmed right past it. If Tolkien's descriptions of terrain, histories, and such bog you down then just skim 'em.

Sometimes I feel bad that some folks don't get the same soul-rush I get from LOTR's language though. But there it is. You either appreciate that aspect of a text or you don't. To some people JRR's perfect craftsmanship, literary power, and brightness of theme/setting have no value - just as Rowling's redundant expositions mean nothing to me.

When I walked out of my first showing of the Fellowship of the Ring movie, I was pretty jazzed. I felt the movie (while having flaws) still managed to capture the essence of the story which was loyalty, honor, and sacrifice in the face of temptation and darkness. I heard some gal talking to her friend walking out of the movie saying how boring it was, how stupid parts were, and how the whole thing dragged out way longer than it should. Two different people with totally different opinions about the same thing. One person saw value, depth, and goodness. The other was just bored. Same logic applies to the book.

Sometimes I forget how alone I am in not getting into LOTR. I actually used to read a lot of fantasy, but stopped in my mid-teens. I really just find LOTR very self-indulgent. I had the same experience with the films that I had with the books - I got halfway through the second one (of three - someone mentioned six books above?) and just thought "fuck it, this is taking far too long". We all knew he was going to get to the mountain - why write about it forever? And then I thought, well, not only do we know he's going to get to the mountain, we also know he's going to struggle with gollum and then overcome and throw the thing in the mountain. I was probably too young when I first read it (like 11 or so), but I just skipped to the end, only to find that (from distant memory) there are several chapters after he throws the ring in to tie things up. Several chapters! Ugh.

Tolkein to me is the Stanley Kubrik of fiction books - to fans he's untouchable; to the few of us who aren't into it, he's long-winded and self-indulgent.

People are going to throw things at me for saying this, but he could have written a much better story in two books than three.

i withheld any comment i might have on this topic to see what reaction this video might incur and in what form.
i was not disappointed.

over the past 30 years we have seen the rise of the fundamentalist christian (there is a reason for that) conversely we have also seen the rise of fundamentalist islam (over a longer period).
there are many factors why this has happened which i will not get into but suffice to say that they exist.there are causality reasons for this rise and those reasons are not contended.

i am a man of faith but my faith puts me in a precarious cross hairs between the religious fundamentalist and the secular fundamentalist (yeah.i used the term.get over it because they exist).
i am reviled and ridiculed by BOTH sides of that equation.so i am in a unique position to comment on both schools of thought because both schools have harassed me.

those who admonish me usually practice a subtle passive aggressive form of rebuke but always with the intention of calling me stupid,unworthy and wrong.veiled insults disguised as a debate or discussion.

a typical discussion with a militant atheist:
"you are a man of faith enoch? wow..just wow.and i took you for a person of some intelligence"
and then they try to smooth over their overt insult by remarking "well,i guess thats your thing but i cant see how anybody with critical thinking skills could be a person of faith"
this is the epitome of sanctimonious self-righteous belief in ones own perfect understanding of everything based on their own limited understanding but they feel perfectly justified to project their own hubris upon me,even when i have not spoken ONE word on where my faith resides.they based their entire understanding on me simply on there formulated creation of their own imagination.

my conversations with a fundamentalist christian/muslims does not fare much better and oftentimes even worse.because i do not give authority to holy writ.this does not mean i do not find wisdom nor a certain poetry in sacred writings but rather through my studies it has become apparent that these books are not only man-made but borrowed from each other.
so i can appreciate the words within for their beauty and poetry (and brutal violence) but ultimately have to disregard the edicts within for the simple fact they are not only incomplete but rife with human corruption.

so the christian fundamentalist will revile me as an apostate or even worse:heretic and condemn me to hell,to be damned for eternity.while this self-righteous judgment is FAR more direct than a militant atheist may treat me,what i find most despicable and cowardly is how a christian will hide behind the bible and actually attempt a false compassion (pray for my soul) while simultaneously revile me as an unclean agent controlled by satan.

i find BOTH these positions weak and pathetic and here is why:
fundamentalism,in any form,is the stagnation of the mind and deadening of spirit.
it hinders our ability to question and wonder and to push the boundaries of our known perceptions.
the fundamentalist is convinced (by whatever means)that they are correct with a certitude that is immovable,unshakable and to even allow the possibility of a contrary ideology (very specific in relation to this conversation) is tantamount to admitting oneself to be../gasp..wrong.

now let me stop here for a moment and ask my atheist friends how my comment has made you feel?
are you getting angry with me? irritated? annoyed?
and if so.why?
have i specifically called YOU out?
no.i have not and the reason is most atheists i have had discussions with here on the sift are NOT militant.they are just atheists.normal regular people without an agenda nor a desire to purge me of my faith.

sam harris is a militant atheist and no matter how he may wish to paint it, his writings define him as such.
his attacks on the religious are painted with such broad strokes as to encompass anyone who may have a modicum of faith.he may attempt to smooth over his rough edges but the core message is still there.
and he also seem to be under the impression (falsely imo) that if everyone abandoned faith that somehow human society would miraculously be a better and more utopian world.
total.infantile.naivete'.
this is the reason hedges calls him out on his fundamentalism.harris tends to ignore not only human nature but the preceding centuries of history and thats why i find his arguments to be lacking.

now please understand i am vehemently against fundamentalism and religion is the main offender without a doubt.so when i call harris out as being a secular fundamentalist i do so with that truth in mind and i believe harris is totally unaware that he could be perceived that way (as revealed by many of his posts).

hitchens had it right from the get-go.
he didnt use that broad brush harris uses but rather was specific in his criticisms and rightly so.he understood the history and theology and exposed the wretched hypocrisy which dwelt in the underbelly of all fundamentalism.he went after the church.he went after those who would pervert the word in order to dominate and control the poor and un-educated and he was vicious in his admonishments.

the bible,torah,quran are all tangible books.doctrine is written down to be read and studied and they SHOULD be discussed and debated and not treated like some sacred cow that is untouchable.hitchens was the master of using the very doctrine put forth by the church (or imam) to eviscerate any argument in favor of said doctrine to expose the utter hypocrisy.

i have read hitchens and harris is no hitchens.

>> ^dannym3141:

>> ^Yogi:
>> ^dannym3141:
>> ^TheSofaKing:
Here they would arrest and sue the passenger for assaulting the guy with no ticket, and fire the employee for harassing a passenger who has found himself in a tough spot in life, unable to afford the fare.

Tbh, they would here as well, but the thing is that in the northern areas (and other select areas) of great britain (and you need to go further north each year sadly) people are a lot more what i guess you'd call "hard working, salt of the earth type people". People on the train would have just said "nah, he deserved it officer, no problem here" and the police would just go fair enough, lad's been a nobhead and justice has been served.
I mean even the people saying "there's no need for that" to the big guy when he slammed the guy down would still side with the big guy if it came to it, because they know the lad needs teaching a lesson. Hands-off softly softly parenting has given us a (my generation included) whole bunch of thoughtless twats who KNOW their actions have no consequences!
Love this kind of stuff. Honest, good people. Love em.

What in the living fuck are you babbling about tough guy? I'm sick of this "Salt of the earth hard working" Bullshit to describe Assholes who don't now how else to deal with their problems other than HIT THEM. I come from a family of Hicks with simple minds and hard working backgrounds...they don't go around beating the shit outa people they don't like just cause "That'll learn them."
Honest, good people...they're all a bunch of cunts.

The softly softly bullshit is the entire reason we have arrogant sub-30 year olds who are in no doubt of the fact that, at school, at home, in court, they do not need to fear consequences. Teachers hands are tied behind their fucking backs more every year that goes by. The system has been changed so much by people like you that kids have been given the CONFIDENCE to say to a teacher "what the fuck are you gonna do, you can't do anything to me, i'll sue you." Add to that absentee/non confrontational parenting at home and suddenly they think they're untouchable AND THEY'RE FUCKING RIGHT.
This kid needed teaching from a young age that doing something bad has consequences, and unfortunately little kids can't learn that through talking it out. A few short and non-painful lesson at age 4 would have saved this kid from the slam he took on the train. I hate these shitty parenting values, and we'll surely end up mired in shit if people like you have your way. Kid misbehaving - "please stop doing that, it's not faiiiiiiirrrrr" - that'll surely work right?
I'm honest, fair and certainly not a violent person. I do not advocate violence. Unfortunately, this kid was let down by his parents who failed to teach him the right lesson at the right time. And more unfortunately, the only way he's gonna learn is to get his arsed kicked when he's ~20. But hopefully getting his arsed kicked due to being a dick on a train will save an old lady from getting her handbag snatched because a little twat thinks he's untouchable.
"Tough guy?" "Cunt?" Get a fucking grip, there was absolutely no need to talk to me like that. You're worse than that little twat on the train!
BTW: do you find it in ANY way ironic that you came in advocating softly-softly yet swear and call me names, but i who advocate teaching the little turd a lesson have to rise above your insults and name calling? Is that a good way to advocate your method? I hope you learn something from that at least. You bloody well need to.


Bravo, DannyM, Bravo.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^dannym3141:
>> ^TheSofaKing:
Here they would arrest and sue the passenger for assaulting the guy with no ticket, and fire the employee for harassing a passenger who has found himself in a tough spot in life, unable to afford the fare.

Tbh, they would here as well, but the thing is that in the northern areas (and other select areas) of great britain (and you need to go further north each year sadly) people are a lot more what i guess you'd call "hard working, salt of the earth type people". People on the train would have just said "nah, he deserved it officer, no problem here" and the police would just go fair enough, lad's been a nobhead and justice has been served.
I mean even the people saying "there's no need for that" to the big guy when he slammed the guy down would still side with the big guy if it came to it, because they know the lad needs teaching a lesson. Hands-off softly softly parenting has given us a (my generation included) whole bunch of thoughtless twats who KNOW their actions have no consequences!
Love this kind of stuff. Honest, good people. Love em.

What in the living fuck are you babbling about tough guy? I'm sick of this "Salt of the earth hard working" Bullshit to describe Assholes who don't now how else to deal with their problems other than HIT THEM. I come from a family of Hicks with simple minds and hard working backgrounds...they don't go around beating the shit outa people they don't like just cause "That'll learn them."
Honest, good people...they're all a bunch of cunts.


The softly softly bullshit is the entire reason we have arrogant sub-30 year olds who are in no doubt of the fact that, at school, at home, in court, they do not need to fear consequences. Teachers hands are tied behind their fucking backs more every year that goes by. The system has been changed so much by people like you that kids have been given the CONFIDENCE to say to a teacher "what the fuck are you gonna do, you can't do anything to me, i'll sue you." Add to that absentee/non confrontational parenting at home and suddenly they think they're untouchable AND THEY'RE FUCKING RIGHT.

This kid needed teaching from a young age that doing something bad has consequences, and unfortunately little kids can't learn that through talking it out. A few short and non-painful lesson at age 4 would have saved this kid from the slam he took on the train. I hate these shitty parenting values, and we'll surely end up mired in shit if people like you have your way. Kid misbehaving - "please stop doing that, it's not faiiiiiiirrrrr" - that'll surely work right?

I'm honest, fair and certainly not a violent person. I do not advocate violence. Unfortunately, this kid was let down by his parents who failed to teach him the right lesson at the right time. And more unfortunately, the only way he's gonna learn is to get his arsed kicked when he's ~20. But hopefully getting his arsed kicked due to being a dick on a train will save an old lady from getting her handbag snatched because a little twat thinks he's untouchable.

"Tough guy?" "Cunt?" Get a fucking grip, there was absolutely no need to talk to me like that. You're worse than that little twat on the train!

BTW: do you find it in ANY way ironic that you came in advocating softly-softly yet swear and call me names, but i who advocate teaching the little turd a lesson have to rise above your insults and name calling? Is that a good way to advocate your method? I hope you learn something from that at least. You bloody well need to.

When the 1% Fuck little children, the 99% cover it up.

What people haven't been talking about is that there was yet another person who witnessed the guy having sex in the shower with a kid; a janitor saw him having oral sex with victim number 8. He went back and told the entire janitorial staff what he saw. The guy was so hysterical that the entire staff thought he was going to have a heart attack. He reported the incident to his superior, and the guy told him to contact the police he chose to report it. However, there was a lot of pressure to not report the incident, because they were all afraid that they would lose their jobs if they reported the incident. Thus, it never got reported.

It's truly amazing to think of the number of people that knew about it...and how nothing ever happened. This went on for almost 20 years. Jon Stewart and so many other people say how it's inconceivable that 'they wouldn't stop it from happening and/or call the police immediately.' Really, most people aren't like that. You learn in first semester psychology that most people aren't like that. Most people are embarassed that they would be making a huge fuss on something that they don't know a lot about...even if they make a huge fuss about it through unofficial channels.

The biggest pisser is that the *university police* even knew about it, and they likely had a lot of internal pressure to keep it hush because they as well felt that their job security might be at risk if they pursue it. They even knew about a currently unofficial victim number 9 who is currently overseas in the military & can't return to be on trial.

Again, they were all afraid of losing their jobs because this asshole was so high ranking that they were afraid to do anything about it. THE 99% ARE THEMSELVES MAKING A LARGER DISPARITY AGAINST THE 1%. If you treat the 1% as untouchable in their position of power, they will be. If you demand equal treatment, then own up to it...especially right now.

Sounds great until the insects evolve, and those who are able to pass the barrier gain a higher survival rate (They have access to all these untouched meatbags.)