What's wrong with this technology?

[ukulele]

Onboard cameras news flash....

Sounds OK to me. The pilots get paid enough to sweat. Sounds like a pratical use of technology to me. Why the opposition?

[steevo]

Seems like a good idea to me. Anything to prevent terrorism.

[zybch]

All well and good. What are the people who are monitoring the cameras going to do if there is a hi-jacking?

Most hi-jackers are quite happy for the world to know what they are up to, thats the whole point. If everyone knows their demands and the number of innocent people potentially about to die, then the hi-jacker gets what he wants.

How about the terrorism commited by the US government?
I recently read an article (forgotten the actual content) but the heading was "The Biggest Terrorists Wear Suits".

Sorry to bash the US but for gods sake, open yor eyes people! Your country has been hi-jacked by the biggest crooks to ever grace the face of the earth.

[zybch]

When it comes out, buy a copy of Michael Moore's new book, 'Dude Where's my Country'.
Its released this comming Tuesday I think.

[gibsinep]

My do I love mis-informed foreigner's opinions about America

and Mike Moore is the biggest Liberal that ever walked the face of the earth, if you take his word you mines as well go flush yourself down a toliet becuase your..............

[zybch]

Perhaps the blind patriotism that most Americans (GENERALISATION ALERT!!!) seem to have renders them blind to things that the rest of the world believes are wrong and won't go along with. Just because you have the biggest stick doesn't mean you are right, or that you have to use it (usually for your own interests).

I know Moore does go on a bit, however quite a few of his points are valid.

Here in Australia we have a similar 'troublemaker' called John Pilger. Mosty of his stuff is trash, but there are enough jems hidden in the crud that bear thinking twice about.

I just can't get over GW Bush's arrival on that aircraft carrier back a few months ago. Like he was some military conquering hero. In reality he went AWOL from his Air Force service period and only got where he is today because of his 2nd name.

[gjimene2]

I suggest that they put tanks in with sleeping gas for the passengers. They see a thread, they release the gas, everyone but the pilots fall asleep and the plance safely land.

[zybch]

The way planes are all automated these days, it'd probably be a good idea. Why not remove all pilots alltogether? Then at least they wouldn't be able to complain about cameras.

[Mm9004]

I just can't get over GW Bush's arrival on that aircraft carrier back a few months ago. Like he was some military conquering hero. In reality he went AWOL from his Air Force service period and only got where he is today because of his 2nd name.

What a stupid idea, when was the last time anyone voted for the president because of his name?

As for the aircraft carrier thing: Why is it that people love to attack that guy because he wanted to go meet the real conquering heros where they were? He even said blatently that they they were the real heros.

[zybch]

He could have met them all when they came ashore, at far less expense to the American taxpayer.
By being there be got the public to associate himself with the heroes. It means very little to say that 'They are the heroes' when the TV cameras never move from his face, at least what the rest of the world saw of his little media stunt.

Its just like my weasly little prime minister John Howard 'slumming it' with our armed forces after they returned from their peace keeping role in Timor.
You could tell he didn't actually want to be there by the strained look on the dopey little guy's face, but it WAS a great photo opportunity and made him appear to be something other than an upper-class twit who cares more about his own interests than looking after the country that elected him. Just like it made GWB look like 'one of the boys' fighting for freedom, when in reality he sent the country to war for reasons that weren't entirely honest and have not yet been justified (WMD).

Also, I didn't mean that people voted for GW Bush's surname. Just that by being a Bush with all of his daddy's connections and having the family millions behind him, certanly helped him secure the top job. That and the massive campaign contributions he got from 'big oil' because they all knew that he'd repay the favour by drilling for oil in Alaska or whatever they wanted.

There was a great documentary (German funded/made) that explored the link between the Bushs and the oil companies. I doubt very much that it would ever get shown in the US, especially in the current political climate. I recorded it on VCD and will happily send a copy of it to anyone who wants their eyes opened a bit.
The same sort of thing goes on in just about all countries except possibly Puhket (look it up guys). We just have to live with it I guess because without money and influence (synonomous with each other it seems) we can't do anything about it.


Incidentally, if you look back in US presidential history, the winning candidate in each election alternates between the 'normalness' of their names - eg - Franklin, Harry, Dwight, John, Lyndon, Richard, Gerald, Jimmy, Ronald.
You can't get too much more normal than George. Also the candidate who was taller has usually gotten in.

Check out:

http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a3_308.html

[zybch]

Originally posted by zybch
He could have met them all when they came ashore, at far less expense to the American taxpayer.
By being there be got the public to associate himself with the heroes. It means very little to say that 'They are the heroes' when the TV cameras never move from his face, at least what the rest of the world saw of his little media stunt.

Its just like my weasly little prime minister John Howard 'slumming it' with our armed forces after they returned from their peace keeping role in Timor.
You could tell he didn't actually want to be there by the strained look on the dopey little guy's face, but it WAS a great photo opportunity and made him appear to be not just an upper-class twit who cares more about his own interests than looking after the country whos people elected him. Just like it made GWB look like 'one of the boys' fighting for freedom, when in reality he sent the country to war for reasons that weren't entirely honest and have not yet been justified (WMD).

Also, I didn't mean that people voted for GW Bush's surname. Just that by being a Bush with all of his daddy's connections and having the family millions behind him, certanly helped him secure the top job. That and the massive campaign contributions he got from 'big oil' because they all knew that he'd repay the favour by drilling for oil in Alaska or whatever they wanted.

There was a great documentary (German funded/made) that explored the link between the Bushs and the oil companies. I doubt very much that it would ever get shown in the US, especially in the current political climate. I recorded it on VCD and will happily send a copy of it to anyone who wants their eyes opened a bit.
The same sort of thing goes on in just about all countries except possibly Puhket (look it up guys). We just have to live with it I guess because without money and influence (synonomous with each other it seems) we can't do anything about it.


Incidentally, if you look back in US presidential history, the winning candidate in each election alternates between the 'normalness' of their names - eg - Franklin, Harry, Dwight, John, Lyndon, Richard, Gerald, Jimmy, Ronald.
You can't get too much more normal than George. Also the candidate who was taller has usually gotten in.

Check out:

http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a3_308.html

[Billforce]

I and others would prefer that you keep your political views to yourself, especially when you are criticizing a govt. that you are not a part of or have a personal interest in. I don't see other threads on here whereby we are criticizing inept little P!ssant countries, so keep your diatribes to yourself.

[mireland]

POLITICAL THREAD ALERT!

[zybch]

I forgot, you Americans elect leaders who invade countries whos views you don't like.
My mistake.

I'm not sure I ever said that the US was an "inept little P!ssant country.
I thought it was an adept large powerful country. Perhaps a little misguided in places, but then just about every country has its misguided elements. Mostly they don't run the country though.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/america/poll.html

[Billforce]

Originally posted by zybch
I forgot, you Americans elect leaders who invade countries whos views you don't like.
My mistake.

I'm not sure I ever said that the US was an "inept little P!ssant country.
I thought it was an adept large powerful country. Perhaps a little misguided in places, but then just about every country has its misguided elements. Mostly they don't run the country though.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/america/poll.html

AS STATED! Keep your opinions and diatribes to yourself....
We don't care about your slanted view of the U.S.