GP's question is a good analogy. Police can only solve crimes that have been committed. Antivirus only fixes problems that have already been identified.

No spells, I don't think. What we refer to as "magic" here in the US is simply sleight-of-hand. I've never visited a "magic shop", but I would expect to find top hats with secret compartments, costumes, literal smoke and mirrors, special decks of cards, loaded dice, the boxes and saws used to "saw people in half". There would probably be books detailing how to make these tricks work. Such books would emphasize the importance of distracting the audience' attention away from the trickery, toward something else, such as a beautiful, scantily clad young lady.

For spells, you would probably visit a book shop that specializes in occult writings.

Apparently, you don't understand the term "political asylum".

No, the question is still, "WTF is a civil suit being investigated and prosecuted by the FEDERAL FUCKING GOVERNMENT!?!?!"

Major company? If you say so.

Meanwhile, visit their site and let them know what you think about them.

I told them they are a bunch of goober smooching douches, and left the link to this discussion.

You are correct, that the evidence is rather flimsy. Hence, my decision that we need conclusive evidence. All we have is an accumulation of circumstantial evidence so far, and that provided by "our side" is no better than that provided by "their side".

But, in all of this, I keep coming back to the fact that a president was deposed, and another president installed - that president largely relying on some "irregular" forces who keep order in the realm. And, everywhere you look, are western investors who have financial interest in the region.

I remain quite suspicious of Kiev - although I'm not yet willing to state anything like "Kiev did it in an attempt to gain world support for a genocidal campaign in the east of the country." Not willing to commit myself to such a statement yet, but I'm leaning that way.

I'll match American propaganda with some Russian propaganda. Please, actually READ IT? Huh? Willya please?

http://21stcenturywire.com/201...

I can't say WHO shot that airliner out of the sky, because there is no CONCLUSIVE evidence yet. But, there's a helluva lot of circumstantial evidence that points at Kiev.

Do you have any idea why Kiev had fighter jets shadowing that airliner? Neither do I, but that's a question that needs to be answered. And, why did Kiev order the airliner to alter it's filed flight plan, flying a couple hundred miles north of the normal flight path?

There are a lot of questions that need to be answered, and I'm pretty sure that some of those answers will be "Well, we've invested so much money into the Ukraine, we can't abandon the plan!"

Unfortunately not. What is going to happen is, a bunch of marketing clowns are going to latch onto that term, and publicize it far and wide before the year is out.

On this subject, you and I are in complete agreement. If I want an "experience", I'll put some music on, or a video, or a game. Almost nothing else on my computer should be an "experience" at all. Just serve up the information, and let me get to it, thank you very much. Didn't the world almost unanimously reject Clippy? Someone should have learned from Microsoft's mistake.

In fact, all of my posts that I have ever made on any Google service has been pseudonymous. I had an exchange of messages with Google over my names. They really, really, REALLY wanted to know my real name, and for me to use it on Google. I hemmed, and hawed, made some excuses, told a couple lies, and they weren't buying. My final message on the subject flat out stated that I've lived a long life, and in that time, I have made a lot of friends, and some enemies. Stated that I had NO INTENTION of putting my real identity online for those enemies to find. SOME OF THEM might just show up at my door, loaded for bear.

They stopped bothering me, and they never deleted my account - so, I guess that one or more decision makers decided I had given a pretty good excuse.

Never mind that the excuse is 80% or more bullshit. Of course I've made some enemies. But I don't really think that any of them would come shoot me. Or - - - - would they?

http://www.surfline.com/surf-s...

Two somewhat informative videos here - it's the best I got in a quick google.

The US was beginning to move in that direction several years back. My memory is a bit foggy - it seems like California was leading the way, and maybe a couple of New England states. Time frame would have been the latter half of the '90's. Then, 9/11/01 happened, and cops were given carte blanche. At some point, fleeing and evading the police was made a felony, so that a cop could just shoot to kill anyone who attempted to flee.

IMHO, giving chase is often justified - but no one can justify chasing a bad guy into and through a school zone, or a hospital zone at insane speeds.

The cop decided to take the risk of exceeding any given speed, not you. YOU are only guilty of the speed at which you were driving. The cop is entirely responsible for his own actions.

Question - have you never witnessed police speeding for mundane reasons? No siren, no lights flashing, they're just driving along. I've seen them fly through villages with speed limits of 35, doing double the speed limit.

Cops routinely break the law in most of the US, all on their own initiative.

You ain't very bright. I stated that they gave chase, not that you were running. I used 80 or 90 mph as an example, precisely because those speeds are only a little bit over the legal speed limits in many places. So, you meet a cop on the interstate, doing around 80 - in many places that is just ten mile over the speed limit. The cop drives across the median, does his U-turn, and gives chase. HE EXCEEDS 100 MPH, so he tells the judge that the "chase" exceeded 100 mph, in an effort to make the arrest sound much more serious than a similar arrest in a 35 mph zone.

As for "running away from the cops" - well, maybe I have done that. You don't do it in the family car though. And, "speeds over 100 mph" are meaningless terms on/in any vehicle capable of outrunning a police car. The term "speeds in excess of 175" might make sense then, except very, very, VERY few police cars are capable of that.

Youtube has a number of videos attributed to "Ghost Rider". You might find them interesting. Note that not all of those videos are of the "real" Ghost Rider, but some of the false attributions are as good as the real ones.

*sigh* I just wasted moderator points - just posting to negate the effects . . . .

Since I'm here, I'll point out that cops do the same thing on the ground. They chase you, maybe you're doing 80 or 90, but the cop exceeds 100 mph catching up to you. The police report states that the chase exceeded 100 mph, and the judge looks at that, and throws several books at you.

It would be great if cops were trustworthy.