ibx

No, they are. Just that the UK is very much against the EU and has been, pretty much from the beginning. France can definitely be considered a major player. Maybe I overreacted but OP made it sound like there was a major right shift, surprisingly it didn't happen.

Bullshit. The only "major players" who voted far right are France and the UK. If the UK is major player is debatable since they do not even have the Euro and have a lot other special rules... Even the countries where the EU had a supposedly negative effect voted left or far left. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27575869

Wow, you sure do throw a hell of lot of acronyms in your post. Net neutrality is actually not that hard. I will try to weed through your forest of acronyms and we will what is and what isn't a problem. Bandwidth = the sum of the amount of data that can transferred over a certain time. Net neutrality is about not limiting bandwidth for anybody for financial reasons. BGP peering, this is only a problem if there are no regulations making peering between carriers fair/free. network advertisements and filtering = what do these have to do with on another? In a free network no filtering at all should take place. What do mean with advertisements? security, monitoring and alarming support = basic services that a carrier must provide as a part of it's business and is payed for by the customer, also known as operational costs. It's the cost of running business, why is this a problem? speeds = Whatever that means in this context. We already had bandwidth. metro-ethernet services, national ethernet services = Do you mean Metropolitan Area Network, and Wide Area Networks and why is this an issue when discussing net neutrality. QoS prioritization (required for VoIP and IPTV services) = VoiP and IPTV are not directly internet products and should not be part of the net neutrality discussion since they are services that are billed separately from internet only access. Net Neutrality is only tricky if you try to cloud the issue in a bunch of bullshit buzzwords. I have one more technical question about your post. >MAC address limits of the old gear really jacks up performance too. Do you mean the size of the ARP table?

As soon as somebody says something which you do not like, you scream oppression. surprise, surprise.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPM5znJruKg&feature=youtu.be Oath Keepers abandon bundy ranch, remaining rebels hold kangaroo court.

Just curious, who do mean by "they". The mother that wants money for her children or the elite left wing politician or industrialist?

The liberal education system wants to tag the white race: Wis. education officials want students to wear ‘white privilege’ wristbands http://eagnews.org/wisconsin-education-officials-want-students-to-wear-white-privilege-wristbands/ I'm somehow reminded of yellow stars...

US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study http://www.princeton.edu/~mgilens/Gilens%20homepage%20materials/Gilens%20and%20Page/Gilens%20and%20Page%202014-Testing%20Theories%203-7-14.pdf

I think Nietzsche had is right. I don't think Hercules or Superman are going to convince anybody otherwise... This is nothing but a Christian circle jerk using established tropes to make money from under educated believers.

http://chicagopolicyreview.org/2014/01/22/the-deadly-vaccine-loophole-religious-exemptions-and-the-rise-of-pertussis-in-new-york/

I like this, though it may not be 100% accurate it brings the point across nicely. http://cdn.acidcow.com/pics/20140124/acid_picdump_116.jpg

http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-antivaccination-movement-20140120,0,5576371.story#axzz2rCbOZbp8

Here is what happens when children stop getting vaccinated: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2014/feb/20/syrias-polio-epidemic-suppressed-truth/ So instead of infecting Children with Autism the ruthless dictator decided withhold vaccines to weaken them... Why wouldn't he just infect them all with Autism using injections people take voluntarily? Don't be a fucking idiot and get the vaccines for your children. Chances are Syrian refugees will enter all of our countries and send their children to kindergarten with yours.

He was just standing his ground.

Very nice reply and the healthiest attitude towards the whole thing IMHO.

I'm sorry my reply was rather snappish. I apologize for the tone. English is one of my native languages since I grew up speaking English and German. I even went to an English school for the first 6 years. As I tried to explain earlier, the law part of Davjohns post did not make in sense within the context of gay meaning what it used to mean. What Davjohns wrote was rather strange...

Yeah. I thought you'd enjoy driving teens to suicide...

I know that, I just thought if he meant that and really thinks nobody in Yemen or Russia can be happy that is even more ignorant than thinking being gay is a choice... The whole law part wouldn't make sense either...

Do you think being gay is a choice?

That's the same stupid line of reasoning gun banners use. If guns where harder to get would the 5 year old not have shot his sister. The role reversal is hilarious. Either you are for personal responsibility or you aren't.

Isn't that exactly the argument gun banners use when a two year old shoots his sister...

I think the moniker "Average Global Warming Denial" will go down in history as another ideology, propagated by industry lobbyists and parroted by uneducated Americans. There isn't actually much debate in the rest of the world.

We fully agree on this. One point we may have forgotten is that facts are suspended to further an agenda, regardless of the personal beliefs of the person involved. In that case any stated opinion is not reflective of intelligence at all. This is a problem if the opinion is stated as fact, underlined by the perceived intelligence of the person stating the opinion giving it(the opinion) unwarranted merit.

Since when is the skin color/race of somebody an opinion? If you say that Jews in the middle east during the roman occupation where white, you are obviously purposely ignorant or unintelligent. This is simply not a matter of opinion but of historical context. If I say Mao Ze Dong was a black guy from Brooklyn then that is also an opinion, just because I may be viewed as intelligent, this does not make my opinion any more valid. That is the appeal to authority logical fallacy. Do you now understand what is wrong about this?

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/24/opinion/sunday/right-vs-left-in-the-midwest.html Who's going to tell me why this is bullshit?