Yes, many hits are generated through sheer volume of blind fire. The other good reason to shoot in the general vicinity of the enemy, even if you can't see them, is that they're not going to stick their heads out and see if they can line up a good shot on you if there are bullets whizzing all around them. It also tends to pin them down, so hopefully you can bring in other units to flank them, while they are afraid to move.

The interesting historical note to this is, being Americans, the military overreacted to this WW2 problem of not shooting often enough, and trained soldiers to just pull the trigger. In Vietnam US soldiers expended one million rounds of ammo per confirmed hit. I've seen lots of footage of men in trenches blasting through magazines on full auto with their rifles pointing well over the heads of the enemy position.

That poor cop. Caught between a young kid that won't give him a word in edgewise and a old fuck that uses Scientology tactics of intimidation. Kudos to Officer Stan for responsibly handling the situation, although I would have liked him to have pressed the PR guy on showing him documentation that they needed a one million dollar insurance bond in order to film. At least the kids had done their homework and had documentation stating that they could indeed film at a TSA checkpoint.

>> ^wagthedog1:

Game Theory explanation of Voter Paradox - only in a tie does your vote matter. So why vote?


Voter Paradox essentially explains that you get one vote.. and not one million votes.. so, i think its only a paradox if u dum

At no time did I say "Lana Lang" here was justified or right in doing what she did. As some of the less-testy lefties here admit, she certainly did not act like someone who was caught deliberately trying to do wrong.

What I am saying is, compared to the vote-rigging schemes by taxocrat elected officials and the illegal "granting" of amnesty by His Majesty, liberals have no solid ground to attack voter suppression, which consists of asking for the SAME FUCKING ID used to buy alcohol.

Oh that's right, we're not allowed to criticize The One's SHIT performance in office, because he's (half) Black.

Liberals will always have a ready-made excuse why obamanomics failed, or why no one is investing in this poisoned business climate, or why millions have been added to food stamps and disability, or why tyrants around the world scoff at His Earness' spinelessness. But it's your right to worship at the feet of this fool.

Regarding partisanship, am I inclined to be a little less harsh towards conservative foolishness than liberal foolishness? Of course. Only now, liberal foolishness means the wholesale ruination of the system.

Seriously, American libs, why are you still here? Canada and Europe ALREADY HAVE free health care and all the PC bullshit already set in stone! If I believed as you do, I'd have moved a long time ago.



>> ^cosmovitelli:

>> ^quantumushroom:
I'll see your one confused girl attacked by a liberal harpie with these clowns and His Earness' amnesty for one million illegals in June.

Behold the hypocrisy of the partisan.. funny how reality flips upside down depending on the color of the offenders T shirt..
Harpies and cuties aside any reasonably impartial fan of democracy would say this shit CANNOT PASS

>> ^quantumushroom:

I'll see your one confused girl attacked by a liberal harpie with these clowns and His Earness' amnesty for one million illegals in June.


Behold the hypocrisy of the partisan.. funny how reality flips upside down depending on the color of the offenders T shirt..
Harpies and cuties aside any reasonably impartial fan of democracy would say this shit CANNOT PASS

I'll see your one confused girl attacked by a liberal harpie with these clowns and His Earness' amnesty for one million illegals in June.

>> ^Morganth:

I'm guessing Morocco. Can anyone verify this?
youtube comment says:

This happened in Jeddah , Saudi Arabia it's happened nine mothe ago . Also king Abdullah give the two brave guys one million for each of them.

this thread is derp threat level one million... i think the planet would be better off if all of us who posted commit harikari

"That's what you get coppers, see??!!...All your pretty cars gone, and over what, HUH!?....You couldn't let me smoke the marijuana in peace could you see, NO!!"....NO, you had to go and fuck with the weed, see??

Yeah, see? NOWWWW, all your pretty little copper wagons are leaking, flat......CANS OF SHIT, see??! You like that coppers?! YOU LIKE THAT!!??"

(GAVEL CRASHES REPEATEDLY AS MAN CONTINUES TO RANT...)

JUDGE: BAIL IS SET AT ONE MILLION DOLLARS! BAILIFF!? OFFICERS, REMOVE THIS MAN!

Ha, I'm bilingual French/English, and I've been switching between billion and "milliard" (in French) without ever thinking about it. Cool knowledge!

Some number trivia: Japanese counting of large numbers is based on 4 zeros instead of 3. For example, one million is "hyaku man" or "one hundred ten thousands".

If I owned stocks in a company that over paid it's CEO by a gross margin like this, I'd be pissed!
Why should I invest in a company that would piss my profit away on the CEO?

Cenk is right, The decision maker is worth more pay. He makes the life or death decisions that affect the company and the jobs of the employees. But don't let it get out of control.

-One-million per year ($83,333/month or $69,444/week) is lots.
-Two-million($166,666/month or $41,666/week), maybe.
-Five-million per year ($416,666/month, $104,166/week), it starts to get out of hand.

-At 55-million per year ($4,583,333/month, 1,145,833/week), it is pure absurdity. That's just robbing and bankrupting.

If a company is making that kind of profit off the backs of it's employees, then it should be setting up better benefits for their employees, profit sharing programs, and re-investing back into the company by creating new products and services (R&D). Those new developments would create new industry, jobs and in turn profit - not to mention returns to the shareholders.

You're welcome, but I think you took a wrong turn somewhere when you followed that link, because Hitchens lost that debate pretty badly. Don't get me wrong, because I think Hitchens did win most of his debates, if only on his rhetorical abilities, but on that one he floundered..which is particularly clear when watching from 1:19:00 or so when he was subject to direct questioning by Craig.

In any case, the fallacious claims are all on your side, considering the rest of your post is nothing but a strawman argument. Congratulations, you defeated me in your imagination..did you get a boost of self-esteem? I also wonder how a self-described militant antitheist could escape the label of zealotry?

Let's say that I told you that I buried one million dollars somewhere in your neighborhood, and I gave you the GPS coordinates for its location. I also told you that if you didn't dig up the money within 48 hours, it would go back into my bank account. The GPS coordinates are very convenient to your location and are on public property. All you would have to do is go and check it out for yourself.

But, instead of going over to the location to dig, you start doing some research. You interview a lot of people in the neighborhood and you find out that no one actually saw me bury the money. You also find out that many other people have claimed to have buried treasure in the past, and many of those claims have turned out to be false. Further, on the basis of speculation as to what I was doing that day, you dig around many other locations where I was said to have been. After this, you finally come to the GPS location and look for forensic evidence, such as foot prints, that I was there. You test the malleability of the dirt at the location to see if it feels like it had been dug in recently. In that 48 hour time period, you do absolutely everything except putting your shovel into the ground and directly investigating the claim. At the end of the time period, you tell me that on the basis of your investigation, you have rejected my claim as false. I take you over to the location, dig up a suitcase and show you the money. It would have been yours if you had just taken a leap of faith and spent 5 minutes of your time investigating it.

Do you think the way you investigated this made any sense? If not, then why you do you think that the way you investigate the question of Jesus Christ makes any sense? You want to investigate it on your own terms, in your own way, stubbornly refusing to even consider the only actual way you would find evidence for the claim; the way that He told us to find Him. In all the time you have ever invested in this, you have refused to do the one thing that could yield up the truth. Does that make sense?

Jesus specifically said you wouldn't find any evidence for God any other way. He said He is the only way, and if you want to know God, you have to go through Him. Why are you so against actually testing His claim to see if it is true? Do you think the Lord of all Creation is incapable of proving His existence to you? Is it because you would feel silly? Isn't it worth feeling silly for a few minutes to potentially gain an eternal reward? Isn't it worth stepping outside your comfort zone for a few minutes to potentially avoid an eternal consequence? The only thing which is stopping you is pride.

I wasn't spoon fed anything; I was agnostic for most of my life. I had no predisposition towards Christianity, and actually many against it. I was opposed to religion in general, and the claims of Christianity in particular. I did just what you're doing; I dismissed it, thinking I knew enough about it to rule it out, when it was all just based on my superficial understanding. My proof constituted a few verses taken out of context, my rejection of any judgment for my sins, and the hypocripsy I had seen in Christians in general. Yet, it wasn't evidence at all, it was simply what I preferred to be true.

Yet, God was merciful to me. He drew me near to His Son, and when I finally gave my life to Him, Jesus revealed Himself to me. He will do the same for you, if you came to Him in humility and asked Him into your life. If you just asked Him what the real truth is, instead of arrogantly believing that you have it all figured out, He would show it to you. He makes it plain to everyone that He exists, it's just that people write these things off or deny them to themselves because they don't want to submit to God. They don't want to believe it is true.

Only God can reveal Himself to someone; I can only point to Him. No amount of argument is going to give you faith. You have to choose to want to know Him, to want to know what the actual truth is. It's something that happens in your heart, when you desire to know the love of God, and you simply do not have any idea how much He loves you. It is what you are here on Earth for, to know that love of His; to be in relationship with your Creator.

I pray that you learn that and understand that. You have to realize that you don't actually know either way. Step outside your comfort zone and listen to your conscience, because it witnesses against you that you have sinned against a holy God. There is forgiveness for you, but it is your choice to receive it or not.

>> ^SpaceGirlSpiff:
I honestly don't know why I bother... oh well, here goes.
First off, thank you for the Hitchens video, I don't think I had see that one yet. Now I've seen it though, I see that Hitchens once again quite successfully defends against the vapid, circle jerk arguments which assert proof without evidence. In fact a Hitchensism comes to mind that I quite enjoy, which states that, "That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." Good stuff. Simple. Easy to put to use.
Take for example Shiny's ridiculous assertion about Hitchens being in his make-believe after life.
Shiny: Oh no, the after life is real and you're going to burn in hell fire. I know it's real because the bible says it's so and the bible is the truth.
Inquiry: How do you know it's the truth?
Shiny: Because the bible says it's the truth.
Inquiry: What evidence do you have that it's the truth?
Shiny: The bible says it's the truth.
No evidence. Fallacious claim dismissed.
You may choose different words to express yourself, but this is the very essence of your circle jerk argument and like all other apologists and zealots, it proves nothing except your willingness to accept something without evidence.
You contribute nothing.
You advance nothing.
Your words are empty.
You merely wretch up that which was fed to you...
...and I have no appetite for your absurdly limited menu.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

This achievement has earned you your "Silver Tongue" Level 2 Badge!

>> ^oOPonyOo:

@Fletch Woah, relax buddy. Now I know how it feels to be Ellen. Lol.

Multiply "how it feels" by your whole life, and you may.

"...leveraging her sexual politics to promote a historically traditional brand. Each mention of the name she gets 100k, or something like that."

Oh, god...

She defends herself against bigots and, yes, bullies, so she's somehow participating in "sexual politics"? JCP hired HER, and she certainly doesn't control the ignorant ramblings and activities of One Million Moms.

"Historically traditional brand"? WTF does that even mean? Do you mean "before there were gays"? Or do you think JCPenney sheets and pans and clothes and waffle irons were originally meant to represent some sort of imagined conservative lifestyle? Or maybe you just mean "old", which doesn't mean shit.

“We stand squarely behind Ellen as our spokesperson and that’s a great thing, because she shares the same values that we do in our company. “Our company was founded 110 years ago on The Golden Rule, which is about treating people fair and square, just like you would like to be treated yourself. And we think Ellen represents the values of our company and the values that we share.” - Ron Johnson, JCPenney CEO

Who knows if she shops there? Does she have to? Maybe someone shops there for her. She used to work there in the 70s, but that probably isn't enough for you. What if she just moves into one of the bedroom displays? They could put up plexiglass so none of the 40,000 One Million Moms could spit on her. Do you think Troy Aikman and Hulk Hogan actually rent shit from Rent-A-Center? Or that Jared Fogle doesn't have a BigMac once in a while? Or that Ricardo Montalbán actually enjoyed the soft Corinthian leather of his very own Cordoba?

I'm sure there are many, much more important things you can spend your time being ignorant about.