You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #179: I'll try to reply one by one. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
EOTE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-26-08 09:15 PM
Response to Reply #177
179. I'll try to reply one by one.
First of all, thanks for changing the tone of this sub thread. I didn't mean to let it escalate to the point where it's gotten, and I apologize. Sometimes it's easy to forget we're on a progressive chat board and we all want pretty much the same ends, even if it's by different means.

With regards to the Bush Doctrine, I don't know if I believe that the Afghanistan war really falls in the first element you listed. First off, as listed in the OP, the taliban initially offered to hand over anyone thought to be involved with the attacks so long as the U.S. government offered proof they were involved. After that, the taliban offered to hand Bin Laden over to Pakistan even without proof. They said then that if the U.S. offered any proof, they'd then extradite Bin Laden to the U.S. Time for Change does a really good job of covering this in his OP (full disclosure, I'm TfC's son). As for the majority of Americans agreeing with the Afghanistan invasion, that really doesn't mean much at all to me. Supposedly, the majority of Americans supported GWB and at one time, the majority of Americans supported slavery. I don't believe that the majority of Americans are evil, not even close. But I think it's possible for the majority of Americans to support very, very bad actions simply because the bulk of them are misinformed.

With regards to you calling me stupider than Sarah Palin, forget about it, I kind of chuckled when I read that and assumed you were pretty heated, so I disregarded it. As for my intentions, I'm simply trying to assert my case as strongly as possible. In doing that, I know I've said some disrespectful things, and for that I apologize.

As for the cognitive dissonance you see regarding me not believing that Bin Laden was involved with 9/11 and yet still wanting to see him dead, I think that can be explained rather easily. There are many dispicable acts that I have very little doubt that OBL did do. He's wanted for terrorist acts by the FBI, including the embassy bombings in Dar es Salaam and Nairobi. Also, he's been indicted by the Spanish government for his involvement with the 2004 Madrid train bombings.

Now, back to the video conversion issue. You bring up the pixel issue again, but it's really a non-issue. The fact that the discrete colors that comprise horizontal resolution in an NTSC aren't called pixels really doesn't mean anything. You could send a CRT a signal consisting of alternating black and white. Then you could increase the h-scan of that signal to the point where the lines were the smallest, yet each color was discrete. At this point, you could count the black and white vertical lines and this would be the maximum horizontal resolution the CRT is capable of displaying. On any one of these lines of resolution, one of those discrete 'dots' may not technically be a pixel, but it's about as analogous (no pun intended) as you can get. I'm not entirely sure why the term isn't used, but I'm guessing it's because of slop involved when a signal is displayed entirely in the analog domain. Because you're not dealing with a fixed pixel display, the 'dot' size can vary by miniscule amounts, just as one color may appear as a very slightly different color the next time it's used (hence the old video tech acronym for NTSC, Never Twice the Same Color). I understand that AQ would be working with very limited means, but I still don't buy this particular explanation for the fat Bin Laden. First of all, I still can't imagine why such a shoddy device for converting PAL to NTSC would exist. I used to work with ICs a lot when I was younger and I'd get Heath Kit catalogs all the time. One of the kits was a PAL to NTSC/NTSC to Pal converter and it was based upon a very cheap and easy to find 16 pin IC. I don't recall exactly how much the kit cost, but like most things from Heath Kit, it was really cheap (definitely under $40). The reason I have a hard time believing that a converter like that would exist is because I can't imagine that it would be anymore difficult (or expensive) to make a converter that maintained proper aspect ratio. Nowadays even relatively sluggish ICs wouldn't have a hard time keeping up even real time. I now know you're rather qualified in this field and didn't mean to diminish your experience. I wasn't on a crusade against you, I was just frustrated for having to talk about so many different issues simultaneously.

As for why Bin Laden wouldn't have claimed it was fake, I'm not entirely certain. There are so many inconsistencies pertaining to the events surrounding 9/11, it's hard to find a single thread that ties everything together and makes sense. I certainly don't buy the official government explanation, and probably never will. However, I look at various conspiracy theories and there doesn't seem to be a thread to tie them together as well. One possible reason could be that Bin Laden is now dead. Another reason I can think of is that he benefits by taking responsibility. It's very easy to make the argument that the Afghanistan and Iraq wars have been extremely good for recruiting violent extremists. That's what I can think of off the top of my head, but once again, it's nearly impossible to find a timeline of the events leading up to and taking place after 9/11 that makes complete sense. While I'm certain I don't believe the official government theory, it's very difficult for me to create a complete and cogent timeline of events and actions that really makes sense. If you haven't already, I recommend that you read TfC's OP from start to finish. I think the Bush Doctrine has been extremely harmful for the U.S.'s image in terms of world opinion. I think there needs to be an extremely high burden of proof required if we are to actually invade another country, causing many civilian deaths as well as massive infrastructure damage. TfC also does a good job of showing how the Bush administration's actions after the start of the invasion show that they were far more interested in locking away 'enemy combatants' for their own ends than they were in providing evidence justifying their invasion in the first place. I think this kind of attitude towards international law needs to change immediately and is one of the reasons that I'm so incredibly relieved that Obama (whom I did vote for, though not in the primary) is now our President Elect.

Anyway, I think I covered everything. Once again, I didn't mean to let this escalate to the point that it did. I didn't mean to demean your knowledge or your expertise, it's just a rather emotional issue for me, and for you most likely as well. If you respond, it might be a while until I get back to you as I probably won't be around computers much until Friday. Regardless, thanks for changing the direction of this sub-thread and I hope you have a great Thanksgiving.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC