What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Watch a scene from 2012, in theaters November 13 view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - Get ready for the biggest event in history - the end of time. How will you survive? 2012- opening 11/13
60 Comments
- poidh, on 03/29/2009, -2/+26"they could not say conclusively that the Chinese government was involved"
Yeah, but they were/ are. - demicritter, on 03/28/2009, -7/+26The Chicom government are capitalist-esque parasites, loving power and money, who are compelled to control every aspect of life, commerce and communications to this end. This triumvirate of power is their life blood and their motivation for tracking and knowing everything. It's no surprise that they regularly denounce the Dalai Lama. He represents the truth about and antidote to their BS-FILLED basket of lies.
- Pinkertinkle, on 03/29/2009, -4/+14America's spy network is much much vaster.
- v0ider, on 03/29/2009, -2/+10Russia and Switzerland? You're one dumb *****.
- Wrangler76, on 03/29/2009, -3/+11"Intelligence analysts say many governments, including those of China, Russia and the United States, and other parties use sophisticated computer programs to covertly gather information. "
Boohoo. Welcome to real life, where democratic governments spy too! - 4answer2, on 03/29/2009, -0/+8China's spy network: funded by all the useless crap we buy from China.
- TigerStar337, on 03/29/2009, -6/+12Top banks in the world:
Industrial and Commercial Bank, China,
China Construction Bank, China
Bank of China, China
I welcome our new overlords.
What is the American dream?...Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. China does not have a dream. They are awake.
BTW: the Freedom Tower in NYC is owned by a China company. - Modiga, on 03/29/2009, -1/+7Hey! The United States isn't on that list. Let's invade now whilst they're defenceless!
- yetAnotherCroc, on 03/29/2009, -1/+6embassy guards and diplomatic personnel don't count. With that logic every country is stationed in every other country (more or less) Unless the US military has an actual unit on active duty stationed in the country it doesn't count. And I can assure you that no such unit is stationed in Sweden. I'm pretty sure it's illegal for us to allow foreign military to station their active troops here since the neutrality thing is written into our laws.
There might however be representatives of the military that are here in non active capacities (Such as planning joint exercises, negotiating contracts with arms manufacturers etc. We do build a bunch of the stuff you guys use.) - thewanger, on 03/29/2009, -1/+5Quit financing this dispicable country! Your words are meaningless. If it says "made in china" DO NOT BUY IT!!! Tell the manager of Lowes, Wal-Mart etc. that you want products that are not from China. Almost all of their cheap-ass products are full of lead and other poisons. The only vote left to us is with our dollars. Stand up for your children, yourself and your country(what's left of it).
- bearon, on 03/29/2009, -0/+4Er, not quite sure grouping India in there is quite fair mate. The Indian government may be corrupt but the people still stand for freedom and liberalism.
- valkyries, on 03/29/2009, -0/+4sssshhhh
- inactive, on 03/29/2009, -0/+4image < power
- kgerm, on 03/29/2009, -1/+4till you have a few bullet holes in you head!
but you can dodge bullets, rite Neo? - JohnGalt01, on 03/29/2009, -1/+4Hey *****. There are Marine guards and military attache's in every US embassy in the world.
- kelmaster1, on 03/29/2009, -0/+2I bet the US had this years ago, but of course no one knows about it...
- robdiggity, on 03/29/2009, -0/+2Sure thing! No forced labor here! No political prisoners here! No child labor at all!
It's all about responsible business commerce.
Walmart/Target needs to stop buying their plastic *****. And we need to stop buying plastic ***** from Walmart/Target. - Pinkertinkle, on 03/29/2009, -1/+3It's probably because chinese banks skipped out on the whole subprime thing.
- spiffza, on 03/29/2009, -0/+2***** CHINA !
- inactive, on 03/29/2009, -2/+4Ok, so what?
- 4321234, on 03/29/2009, -0/+2***** THE CIA !!!
- X9001, on 03/29/2009, -0/+2ah the internet, where you can make baseless claims with little or no facts
- SamurAchzar, on 03/29/2009, -3/+5That list is mainly made of military non-combative personnel, such as in embassies and probably US representatives in joint projects, etc.
Unless the single Army troop deployed in Iran answers to the name "John Rambo", I doubt his effectiveness in enforcing US foreign policy. - eRenee, on 03/29/2009, -0/+2Only cuz we built all their shoddily-run factory/companies for them.
- arvvvs, on 03/29/2009, -0/+2And more secret...
- bono4u, on 03/29/2009, -0/+2comm on be fair,
echolon spies on all of us, not only the US citizens. - arvvvs, on 03/29/2009, -0/+2Zimbabwe too?
The Gov hates America
And North Korea? - enevitable, on 03/29/2009, -2/+3Exactly what happens when we let trade deficits run for too long. But alas this redistribution of wealth does not alarm everyone, as long as we can keep charging whatever we want and live our enamored life styles.
But if we were to reverse bush-era tax cuts from 36% to 39% to combat these deficits suddenly the world will end.
Maybe the greatest divide we have in our country now is those who see us as a collective whole and want to improve our standing, and those of us who care solely about themselves and only want to improve their standing.
My condolences go out to the selfish few that don't realize that the easiest way to improve their standing is by improving their neighbors. - Unreal030, on 03/29/2009, -1/+2And you can at least be honest and admit that you are completely ignorant on the mechanics of Capitalism. This is the same ***** that they have been brainwashing people with for ages. Capitalists do give a ***** about the little guy. This is the same propaganda I keep hearing repeated through those that are told it and then they quickly rescind it once they actually read a decent history book or understand the concepts better. Socialistic policies are easy to understand. I could explain the system quite well within a days time to a group of students. Capitalism takes at least a week to teach properly. This is the problem.
Capitalism has aided many people in the past.
In South America it greatly assisted with the economic crisis in several countries during the 90's.
Jamestown, one of the first English colonies was revived through a change to a capitalistic mindset, after almost destroying itself via the (admittedly harsh) socialistic policies enacted before that. The problem is not necessarily socialism though. It is that it does not work on a grand scale. It can be quite effective on a smaller scale and this is why there was a failure in that respect.
We gained a substantial leap in productivity and trade over Spain when we adopted a great sense of private property and Joint Stock Companies.
In 1992 India was on the verge of bankruptcy. The national policy of self sufficiency had reduced the
annual growth rate to zero. India had mortgaged its gold deposits and faced ruin in financial markets.
The Finance Minister, Manmohan Singh, made the push to liberalize markets, open competition, reduce
regulatory burdens and secure private property. The end results speak for themselves. In a short
fourteen years India has transformed itself from a poverty‐stricken backwater to a vibrant society
providing goods and services worldwide.
Deng Xiaoping rightly concluded that if Chinese could
create wealth outside China they could create it within China. Deng chose to adopt policies of wealth
instead of policies of poverty and began a slow, methodical process of introducing the institutions of
capitalism into Chinese society. First came trade with other countries, laws regarding investment were
relaxed, rudimentary private property laws were developed, competition was permitted and
entrepreneurs were encouraged to deliver Chinese goods and services to the world. In the short span of
thirty years the standard of living of the average Chinese citizen increased over eightfold and China
became an economic powerhouse. Today the reforms and changes continue apace and capitalism is
finding its natural extensions into personal freedoms and human rights. True China continues to face
difficulties with its transition, just like any other emerging economy, but the lives of the average Chinese
are markedly improved and continue to improve.
Capitalism helps bring opportunity to the individual. Socialism can create welfare cycles where it is more advantageous for you to stay at the bottom and not get out of the recurring slump or otherwise discincetivize people as has been seen in the United States.
Socialistic policies most certainly have their place in society. However so do capitalistic ones. For you to completely knock the ideology is intellectually irresponsible. Just because you cannot see the advantages explicitly as deemed to be the case with more group-centric ideologies does not mean it is not there. An excellent example is Ron Paul's very capitalistic proposal for medical health reform.. Many doctors already practice it and it has benefited both parties with the patients having extremely reduced costs and a more personal connection with their doctor. The benefits are actually substantial in comparison to case studies done on practicing institutions of universal health care in other countries.
Once you have a degree in Economics like I do then you can start teaching me the in's and outs how different market systems work. How about that.
Both Capitalism and Socialism have failed equally. This is not because they both don't work. The problem is that we just have trouble figuring out which system fits what role better. The problems arise when we place capitalistic systems into taking care of roles that could be better handled by socialistic systems and vice versa. A hybrid or holistic coupling of the two systems is definitely better than just one or the other. Unfortunately the United States has transfered to a hybrid that does not work very well. The welfare systems in our country need substantial reform, but so do our regulations, policies, and monetary system (i.e. fed reserve etc) in our capitalistic areas. - sndream, on 03/29/2009, -1/+2You know it's true because the accusation come form resercher of a POLICTICAL activist goup who's lead by a international POLICTICS professor and NOT from the computer security community. It's puzzuling no one released a counter-measure or even say anything about it, it is as if it didn't exist................ Oh wait.
- Windadct, on 03/30/2009, -0/+1It would seem that through disinformation fed to such a discovered system would create such doubt in most of the information collected this way as well as help to discover who is really behind the effort - I have to ask why is this in the newspaper?
- Claverhouse, on 03/29/2009, -4/+5It's odd the New York Times doesn't suggest that the governmental/quazi-governmental entities should switch to linux to provide greater security.
- Unreal030, on 03/29/2009, -0/+1And you can at least be honest and admit that you are completely ignorant on the mechanics of Capitalism. This is the same ***** that they have been brainwashing people with for ages. Capitalists do give a ***** about the little guy. This is the same propaganda I keep hearing repeated through those that are told it and then they quickly rescind it once they actually read a decent history book or understand the concepts better. Socialistic policies are easy to understand. I could explain the system quite well within a days time to a group of students. Capitalism takes at least a week to teach properly. This is the problem.
Capitalism has aided many people in the past.
In South America it greatly assisted with the economic crisis in several countries during the 90's.
Jamestown, one of the first English colonies was revived through a change to a capitalistic mindset, after almost destroying itself via the (admittedly harsh) socialistic policies enacted before that. The problem is not necessarily socialism though. It is that it does not work on a grand scale. It can be quite effective on a smaller scale and this is why there was a failure in that respect.
We gained a substantial leap in productivity and trade over Spain when we adopted a great sense of private property and Joint Stock Companies.
In 1992 India was on the verge of bankruptcy. The national policy of self sufficiency had reduced the
annual growth rate to zero. India had mortgaged its gold deposits and faced ruin in financial markets.
The Finance Minister, Manmohan Singh, made the push to liberalize markets, open competition, reduce
regulatory burdens and secure private property. The end results speak for themselves. In a short
fourteen years India has transformed itself from a poverty‐stricken backwater to a vibrant society
providing goods and services worldwide.
Deng Xiaoping rightly concluded that if Chinese could
create wealth outside China they could create it within China. Deng chose to adopt policies of wealth
instead of policies of poverty and began a slow, methodical process of introducing the institutions of
capitalism into Chinese society. First came trade with other countries, laws regarding investment were
relaxed, rudimentary private property laws were developed, competition was permitted and
entrepreneurs were encouraged to deliver Chinese goods and services to the world. In the short span of
thirty years the standard of living of the average Chinese citizen increased over eightfold and China
became an economic powerhouse. Today the reforms and changes continue apace and capitalism is
finding its natural extensions into personal freedoms and human rights. True China continues to face
difficulties with its transition, just like any other emerging economy, but the lives of the average Chinese
are markedly improved and continue to improve.
Capitalism helps bring opportunity to the individual. Socialism can create welfare cycles where it is more advantageous for you to stay at the bottom and not get out of the recurring slump or otherwise discincetivize people as has been seen in the United States.
Socialistic policies most certainly have their place in society. However so do capitalistic ones. For you to completely knock the ideology is intellectually irresponsible. Just because you cannot see the advantages explicitly as deemed to be the case with more group-centric ideologies does not mean it is not there. An excellent example is Ron Paul's very capitalistic proposal for medical health reform.. Many doctors already practice it and it has benefited both parties with the patients having extremely reduced costs and a more personal connection with their doctor. The benefits are actually substantial in comparison to case studies done on practicing institutions of universal health care in other countries.
Once you have a degree in Economics like I do then you can start teaching me the in's and outs how different market systems work. How about that.
Both Capitalism and Socialism have failed equally. This is not because they both don't work. The problem is that we just have trouble figuring out which system fits what role better. The problems arise when we place capitalistic systems into taking care of roles that could be better handled by socialistic systems and vice versa. A hybrid or holistic coupling of the two systems is definitely better than just one or the other. Unfortunately the United States has transfered to a hybrid that does not work very well. The welfare systems in our country need substantial reform, but so do our regulations, policies, and monetary system (i.e. fed reserve etc) in our capitalistic areas. - yetAnotherCroc, on 03/29/2009, -4/+5The US has troops stationed in Sweden? You might want to go over that list again. No US bases here
- inactive, on 04/07/2009, -0/+1Actually, The Dalai Lama is the head of the elitist religious ruling class that kept Tibet under its thumb for centuries using worse techniques than the Chinese government has ever tried.
I wholeheartedly support a free Tibet: one free of China, and likewise, free of the Dalai Lama, too.
Some reading for you: http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4111
"The only people who lost any rights under Chinese rule are Tibet's former ruling class, themselves guilty of cruelty and oppression of a magnitude that not even China can conceive. The vast majority of Tibetans, some 90% of whom were serfs, have enjoyed a relative level of freedom unheard of in their culture. Until 1950 when the Chinese put a stop to it, 90% of Tibetans had no rights at all. They were freely traded and sold. They were subject to the worst type of punishments from their lords, including gouging out of eyes; cutting off hands, feet, tongues, noses, or lips; and a dozen horrible forms of execution. There was no such concept as legal recourse; the landowning monk class was the law. There was no such thing as education, medical care, sanitation, or public utilities. Young boys were frequently and freely taken from families to endure lifelong servitude, including rape, in the monasteries. Amid all the pop-culture cries about Chinese oppression, why is there never any mention of the institutionalized daily oppression levied by the Dalai Lama's class prior to 1959?"
/met the Dalai Lama once in a reception line, he was a very nice gentleman - JohnGalt01, on 03/29/2009, -1/+2Wait.... Let me guess.
It must be Bush and Cheney. They have re-established themselves in a secret volcano lair in the South Pacific. - Unreal030, on 03/29/2009, -0/+1You misunderstand their ideology. They feel by focusing on themselves indirectly they can assist others. They are also of the idea that it is more beneficial to keep the taxes low because the benefit will come through increased activity in the market because there isn't that extra disincentive on action. People who prefer a capitalistic-style ideology are not selfish. They just have a different opinion on how it is best to help other people. Some people believe that only one way is the best way. This is not true. Socialistic policies have their place in society, certain roles. Capitalistic policies have their place in society, certain roles. The problem and the source of debate is that we need to figure out which roles are best handled by which policies.
- Pinkertinkle, on 03/29/2009, -0/+1I'd be disappointed if it weren't.
- Rantus, on 06/11/2009, -2/+2I don't see how anybody could be surprised by this. The Chinese love money and control, but they're not too creative IMHO. They got as powerful as they did because of the US, and if we don't reign them in then they will surpass us in Military power. However, do I think they want to run the world? Maybe, but do I think they have the ability to effectively do so? HELL NO. The Chinese are way too dogmatic and, as my Dad used to say (a Korean combat Vet): Some are so smart they're stupid and the rest are so dumb they're stupid. In other words, their hegemonic, centrally run society lacks the diversity and creativity to lead the world. I definitely buy that argument. And if it wasn't for their armies of cheap near-slave labor they wouldn't be jack ***** right now.
There will never be a silicon valley in China or India simply because not only do they not understand the basic tenants of true freedom they also don't understand the basic tenants of Liberalism, they are the epitome of a false, money-addicted communist facade society.
And if we aren't careful we could end up just like them. Screw them though, all they have is money and its only money anyway. - eRenee, on 03/29/2009, -1/+1'patriotic hackers'? isn't that the 'Heroes of China' hackers group?
- gkiltz, on 03/29/2009, -1/+1Only goes to show how stupid it is to leave a computer turned on when not in use!
That's BEFORE you get to the carbon-footprint issue. Most electricity comes from coal! - Rantus, on 06/11/2009, -1/+1"They feel by focusing on themselves indirectly they can assist others."
Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Kind of like joining the military to pay for college except in reverse right? Hey, how has that particular ideology worked out so far huh? This country began its slide into economic collapse starting with Reagan and the only thing that has slowed it since then was the Democrats.
You can at least be honest about being selfish and self-centered and not really giving a ***** about the little guy who does all your dirty jobs for you. At least Bush was honest about that. - Rantus, on 06/11/2009, -0/+0My fault, you're right. I meant that there couldn't be a Silicon Valley in either country, but India is nothing like China in reality.
- gradient01, on 03/29/2009, -1/+1Yes, of course we spy, and that's a good thing ... if countries had better spying, maybe we wouldn't get into needless wars looking for weapons that didn't actually exist. So, do both of you actually equate our spying with that of communist China and despotic Russia? Yes, of course you do ... forget I asked...
"When confronted with the assertion that the Soviet Union and the United States were moral equivalents, William F. Buckley responded that if one man pushes an old lady into an oncoming bus and another man pushes an old lady out of the way of a bus, we should not denounce them both as men who push old ladies around." - inactive, on 03/29/2009, -1/+1You're full of *****. There are no American troops stationed in Australia.
- thepowell, on 03/29/2009, -0/+0That's my professor! I had Professor Deibert in First Year Political Science at U of T!
- HanSolo69, on 03/29/2009, -3/+2There's a "reply" button, you dumb *****.
- TigerStar337, on 03/29/2009, -2/+1There are USA troops in Sweden. Check here: http://siadapp.dmdc.osd.mil/personnel/MILITARY/his ...
- inactive, on 03/29/2009, -3/+1Okay, so that make it all right then.
China's loud and pious bleating about "noninterference" in other countries' affairs is being exposed for the massive, hypocritical sham it is. Clearly, preaching "noninterference" is a one-way street: it's NOT okay for anybody to criticise China, but it's perfectly fine for China to steal technology from the West and rape African countries for their resources.
Like I said, ***** hypocrites. -
Show 51 - 61 of 61 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is