dusqi
-
Posts
957 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by dusqi
-
-
My flaws? Sometimes I'm tempted to post my flaws on an internet forum despite knowing that employers search the internet to find details about candidates.
Just sayin' :P
-
I don't get the first paragraph. First it says that it started as a regular rape case, and then that she admitted it's a lie?
Yes, so then the prosecution changed it to rape by deception - part of a "plea bargain" - I'm not familiar with criminal procedure. But the essential point is that she obviously felt humiliated and probably stupid, and wanted to get revenge any way she could.
I hope that there's some way to counter-sue her for making up the initial charges (as well as getting this 'rape by deception' thing reversed).
-
You should never look at the blast as at night even for just a 1 megaton device it can blind you up to 53 miles away: http://www.wikihow.com/Survive-a-Nuclear-Attack
-
Here is some further information on the story:
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/07/rape-by-deception-ctd.html#more
A point which is rarely mentioned in the coverage of the "rape by deception" case - either by Israeli or foreign media - is that the case started out as a regular rape case. The woman claimed she was forcibly raped by Kashour. Once on the stand, however, the defense demolished her story and she admitted she lied and that they had consensual sex. She admitted that after learning Kashour lied to her, she felt humiliated and went to the police. It was at that point the prosecution came up with the plea bargain. A normal court would have just acquitted Kashour, but this court decided to convict.Several further points:
1. If the woman had told the true story to the police in the first place, there would have been no trial, not to mention any conviction.
2. Kashour has no earlier convictions. In another "rape by deception"" case, which involved a lesbian masquerading as a man in order to have sex with women, she received only six months of suspended sentence. Kashour got 18 months of incarceration.
3. One of the three judges is Moshe Drori, who was embroiled in a scandal last year, when he refused to convict a very well connected yeshiva boy who admitted - and was filmed - running over a security guard with his vehicle. The security guard was an Ethiopian woman. Drori, a Jewish Orthodox, forced the guard to accept the apology of the yeshiva boy, and then invoked a judgment by 12th century scholar Maimonides (I [cabbage] you not), which says once an apology is accepted by the victim, the case is closed. And he closed the case. He is apparently a Maimonidas affectionado. The case was overturned in the Supreme Court, and this schtick cost Drori his chance at becoming a Supreme Court justice. Let's say that a non-Jew masquerading as a Jew won't stand much of a chance in the court of Judge Drori.
-
I am subscribed to Time magazine. It costs me a stupidly small amount, something like 30p per issue. I can't send a letter for that cheap.
-
Hah, I made a topic here and on zybez a couple months ago looking for your page. Awesome, thanks!
Ah, sorry that I missed it! And thanks to you too for helping our research :)
-
dusqi are you the guy who had that website with an IPIP NEO that you could link to facebook?
Heh, indeed I am, didn't want to advertise my own website (again) though... But since you mentioned it ;) http://www.facebook.com/apps/application.php?id=2490151219 (you can help our research if you participate :) We have lots more tests as well as a Big 5 one)
Also, I feel continually guilty for my app having an estimate of one's Jungian Type. It's only there because people are so familiar with it, I'd love to get rid of it, but customer demand and all that... It is our way of transitioning people over to the new system.
-
Just an FYI, type personality tests/classifications have basically been disregarded and are thought of as, well, not true by personality psychologists. If you want one that is accurate and that current PP's use to great success, you want the IPIP-NEO. It measures each of the big 5 factors individually and uses a sliding scale, it's much better. It is also long though (short version = 150 questions, regular = 300). Myers Briggs is kind of fun, but it isn't really accurate.
IPIP-NEO if anyone wants to take it
http://www.personal.psu.edu/j5j/IPIP/
I recommend the 300 question version
THIS ^^
Then again, I say it every time there's one of these Jungian Type posts and they still keep coming. I do personality research myself. The Myers-Briggs is almost 50 years old, before people had computers to do proper statistical analyses. Instead they based it on Jung's theories of personality, going back to 1921. Contrary to popular understanding, psychology has moved on a long way from the time of Jung and Freud talking about psychosexual development and other rubbish.
-
Wow. Herr is one handsome man.
Can't say I say eye to herr often.
Who was it who told reese off in off topic like 5 years ago? That was my favorite post on these forums.
You know i never got a chance to hit on meesy, merciful was always in my way - that pic of you dusqi was from your trip to america yes?
Nah, that was when Mad visited London, which was a year before I visited her. It is in London zoo. It is probably apt that the first place we met is where they also keep the monkeys :)
-
Tekky! Sin Q! and a normal looking necro!
Hahaha, yeah. I have pictures of everyone. Knew they'd come in handy for blackmail one day :D My time has come!!
-
Heh, yo Rizla. Good to see you, hope life is treating you well! What were you in Africa for?
Darkwebz still lives :)
Edit: Btw (this is probably breaking a million tip.it rules) remember this ;) (Nov 2004)?
-
I had high hopes for Gordon Brown when he came into power. He wasn't slick but he was going to clean up politics, scrap ID cards, care more about social justice, etc.etc. The high hopes were dashed when ID cards continued, 10p tax rate went, expenses scandals - and he instead spent his time trying to perfect that ridiculous smile.
His heart was generally in the right place as chancellor, and I think that this is demonstrated by the fact that he has chosen to stay on as an MP rather than jet around the world giving paid speeches like Blair. However, he was just not an effective Prime Minister.
-
I am not against religious education of all faiths. If anything is likely to break the hold that religion has on children, it is showing them that there are lots of other religions that believe various things just as fervently as their parents believe whatever religion they follow. It is harder to believe that your religion is the one true faith when you see that it has the same kinds of stories and long equivocal history that many other religions have.
I am against the subtle bias for one religion that pervades many schools: singing hymns, thanking God for this and that. The subtle bias that takes (whichever) God for granted.
-
I often use the analogy that cellphones are like one of those tamagotchis.
You have to carry it around everywhere and they constantly beep at you because they want attention (someone texted/called), or because they want food (charging). In that sense they do own you - they beep, you attend, they want feeding, you charge them. If you don't then that's your (social) life over.
-
I'm not against PR because of any spin, I'm against PR as historical and quite well proven in many cases it leads to weak governing and little being achieved. Yes in some countries it works, but they have many central parties. UK Have 3 main partys, 2 of which are polar oppositions meaning coalition is unlikely to work here.
Like I said I like the new suggestion seems to give a better voice than first past the post, but avoids the weaknesses of PR
From the news, my understanding is that AV would change very little in terms of the number of seats in the House of Commons. Apparently the Libs might get another 30 seats, giving them 13% of the seats with 23% of the vote. And, really, if it was going to change anything, the Conservatives wouldn't offer it.
Anyway, voting reform aside, it sounds from the media as if Lib-Lab talks have broken down (as someone here mentioned, Labs don't want PR either) and Lib-Con is the only game left. Hopefully the Libs will be able to take the edge off of the Conservatives' most extreme policies (tax breaks for millionaires...)
-
A bit disappointed with the Liberal Democrats that they didn't get over 100 seats. But, despite the fact they have the least amount of seats, they are quite powerful for the position they are in to decide who becomes the next Prime minister.
In my view, the coalition between Lib Dems with whoever won't work or it will be agreed but then it will fall apart. Which is why a re-election could be an outcome of this.
Within the next 12 months probably. Maybe even as soon as November.
I just hope to God we'll have electoral reform by then...
Fat chance. The referrendum will get shot down in flames by the murdoch controlled media. It'll never happen.
I don't agree with this. The Cons are against it, but that's only 38% or so of the vote. Libs are obviously for it, as are the supporters of the smaller parties. Lab is mixed. But one thing this underestimates is the number of people who would like to vote for smaller parties like UKIP, the Greens, even the BNP - but don't do it because they're unlikely to win in their area. They know that they'll always have a tough job of winning anything and their vote will always be wasted unless PR comes in.
Edit: Then again, it wouldn't be the first time I was disappointed by the general population's susceptibility to Murdoch's media.
-
Libs had to offer Cons the option of "trying to form a government". I suspect this is just Clegg making a public offer so that he looks like he gave them a chance. The same thing applies to Cameron making public statements offering various things to the Libs. He wants the media story to be that the Cons made significant sucessions to the Libs but they refused. In the end it seems to me that the intractable issue is that the Cons will never offer meaningful voting reform because then they'd never be in government again.
Libs will then speak to Lab. They'll want Gordon Brown to step down because otherwise they'll be seen to be propping up an unpopular leader. Gordon won't want to do it, possibly his party will want him to. I don't know whether the Libs will settle for a coalition including Gordon Brown as PM, and I don't know whether Lab would be able to get rid of Gordon if he doesn't agree to go. This also has the disadvantage in that the various regional parties will need to be involved, and that will involve concessions to them that English people won't like.
If that doesn't work then it only leaves the Tories with a minority government. That's a massive problem because they'll never be able to get their cuts through facing all of the other left-wing parties. Why would anyone defect from their party to afflict tax increases and spending cuts?
I agree with Krugman - somehow, everyone lost (apart from the Green party).
-
Today I realised there's nobody worse you can argue with about politics than your sick Grandfather who takes The Sun to be the 'only paper that tells the truth.' I kinda tried to say that I don't trust The Sun but he didn't really want to know
Here's why you shouldn't trust The Sun <Link Removed>
For those who can't click on the link, I have copied the text below:
<[picture of 16 topless women posing together>
SIXTEEN Page 3 Girls in all their glory represent the very image of freedom in this country.
But if Labour or the Lib Dems win the election, this could be the last time they are allowed to pose together.
MPs Harriet Harman and Lynne Featherstone will move swiftly to change the law and ban Page 3 forever.
Our national treasures - who even enjoy the Royal seal of approval from our future King Prince Charles - will be no more.
And at a stroke the very liberties that put the Great into Great Britain will be torn asunder.
The radical ideas of the 17th-century philosopher John Locke helped shape our freedoms enshrined in the Bill of Rights and, later, America's Constitution.
Lib Dem frontbencher Featherstone was cheered by women's rights activists when she declared she would "love to take on Page 3".
But our Poppy said: "The basis of Lockean thought is his theory of the Contract of Government, under which all political power is a trust for the benefit of the people.
"His thinking underpins our ideas of national identity and society. Please don't let those who seek to ban our beauty win. Vote to save Page 3!"
Here are my problems with this unbelievable article:
#1 Neither Labour nor the Lib Dems have a policy on Page 3 girls. It does not grace their manifestos. They would not act swiftly to ban it. This is just a lie.
#2 Are they seriously comparing having topless girls in a newspaper with the Bill of Rights and the Constitution?
#3 They obviously think that all of their readers are retarded if this is going to sway their voting intentions. Why would you read something that patronises you so much?
It's the third issue that really gets me. Murdoch has complete contempt for his own readers. He herds them like cattle to the slaughter.
~~~
If the Lib Dems went into a coalition with Labour, I suspect that they'd want Gordon Brown to step down. He is too unpopular and the Lib Dems wouldn't want to be seen to be propping him up. Heck, even Labour want Gordon Brown to step down, on the basis of their various attempted coups over the last year.
Removed the link, even though they aren't the focus, nude links aren't allowed. - Danq
OK, but just to confirm, this is a real article. You can search Google for the link if you don't believe it (I wouldn't have believed it) - dusqi
-
I usually enjoy staying up ridiculously late watching the polls come in. It's like watching a football match with all the emotions going up and down and the scores coming in. Unfortunately this Friday I have to be up very early.for an all-day event, so I will instead try to get up at 6am to see how it has gone before I have to leave the house.
-
If anyone is considering voting tactically or is vaguely interested in how important their constituency is, this website should give you an idea of how influential your constituency is/can be in the overall outcome of the general election. http://www.voterpower.org.uk
Just as an example here is the page for my constituency: http://www.voterpower.org.uk/kirkcaldy-cowdenbeath
Good website. My constituency is labeled as a "very safe" Labour seat. I don't really know how much individual seats swing, so perhaps I'm being naive, but there is a new Labour candidate as opposed to our long-standing MP, so I wonder how far this affects voting in an individual constituency. Presumably people would be more likely to switch to a new party when they don't have any personal loyalty to the new candidate? (it would still require the Labour vote to drop by 18% though...)
-
I don't like all this anti-Europe talk. Europeans come here to work, they do jobs that UK people wouldn't do otherwise and they work hard and for cheap. That helps the British businesses that employ them. Similarly, if I want to go and live in Spain or Germany or France, I can. I would like a closer political relationship with Europe also, because it's all very well to talk about keeping sovereignty, but that is becoming more and more worthless as America and Asia grow as blocs. We saw what happened with Iraq - that was a sovereign Britain without dignity. Sure, the UK has lots in common with the US, especially when it has a Democrat President, but it seems to me that the long term trend is for America to do an increasing number of things that the UK does not agree with.
-
I find this "slip" interesting because all of the comments I have seen on FB and this board have been positive (admittedly a small and biased sample of young people). Lots of people saying things like "I'd say the same thing" and "people are allowed to get annoyed". Gordon clearly wasn't going to be winning any Tory voters over anyway, so this slur on right-wing people who dislike immigrants might play well to his party's base, and they're the people he needs to consolidate to stop this turning into a disaster for Labour.
I will be interested to see how the polls react to this.
Unfortunately for Gordon it probably means that his political career is over. Even a Lib Dem + Labour coalition is likely to insist that Gordon steps down.
-
Sky has shown itself to be too unprofessional to be involved in these important occasions in future.
The problem is that they have leverage now. With them being involved this time they would cry foul if they were excluded in the future and they would use the newspapers to attack and claim that Labour (or whoever they're against at the time) are afraid of them and the hard questions. It's really a case of 'you're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't."
There are other legitimate reasons to exclude them, apart from their bias and unprofessionalism. Low viewing figures, for example, which leaves out people who don't have digital TV.
The headlines would only be fleeting in the Murdoch newspapers, and we know that they'd write negative headlines about whoever they didn't like anyway.
It seems like the British media is terribly biased against Nick Griffin. I personally believe that he's not that great and that his views, especially concerning "indigenous British" statements are bullcrap (since the English are different from the Celts), but it is terribly unfair to just blatantly degrade him. At least give him a fair chance.
Oh, and the public humiliation only serves to make his following stronger.
Wiki says: "In the 2005 general election, the party received 0.7% of the vote but had no candidates elected to Parliament." The BNP gets far more than 0.7% of the news coverage though. Sure, a lot of it is bad, but one could argue that this reflects public opinion.
Compare this to the Lib Dems, who got 22.1% of the vote, but until these TV debates have had very little coverage at all in the newspapers.
-
dbl post - apologies
I GOT IN TO UNIVERSITY
in Off-Topic
Posted
Congrats all who got in! Life starts at uni :)
You have to start again.