Todays Bitch Session

I live out in the county, where Dsl and Cable is not. So my internet is dail up... It's like waiting for God..

However, the family next door to me has Hughes Satellite Internet service.. and a wifi home network system, and I'm in range... Yes I have been stealing broadband, and it feel so good. Right, Not,. I have check into get this service, after using it for while I have decide not to. the only good thing about satellite internet is to download only. loading web pages, take just as long as dail-up in most cases.

so it even pay 24/m for dial up or 50/m for high-speed.

I would have to wonder if its really worth it..

Save the Internet

http://www.dearaol.com/

http://www.aol.com
What's This About?
In February 2006, AOL announced that it would accept payment for incoming emails. For these certified emails, it would skip its usual anti-spam filters and guarantee delivery for cash. Our coalition believes that the free passage of email between Internet users is a vital part of what makes the Internet work. When ISPs demand a cut of "pay-to-send" email, they're raising tollbooths on the open Net, interfering with the passage of data by demanding protection money at the gates of their customers' computers


From: all@dearaol.com
To: postmaster@aol.com
Date: Tue Feb 28 13:00:00 EST 2006
Subject: An Open Letter To America Online
We wish to express our serious concern with AOL's adoption of Goodmail's CertifiedEmail, which is a threat to the free and open Internet.

This system would create a two-tiered Internet in which affluent mass emailers could pay AOL a fee that amounts to an "email tax" for every email sent, in return for a guarantee that such messages would bypass spam filters and go directly to AOL members' inboxes. Those who did not pay the "email tax" would increasingly be left behind with unreliable service. Your customers expect that your first obligation is to deliver all of their wanted mail, and this plan is a step away from that obligation.

AOL's "email tax" is the first step down a slippery slope that will harm the Internet itself. The Internet is a revolutionary force for free speech, civic organizing, and economic innovation precisely because it is open and accessible to all Internet users equally. On a free and open Internet, small ideas can become big ideas overnight. As Internet advocacy groups, charities, non-profits, businesses, civic organizing groups, and email experts, we ask you to reconsider your pay-to-send proposal and to keep the Internet free.

A pay-to-send system won't help the fight against spam - in fact, this plan assumes that spam will continue and that mass mailers will be willing to pay to have their emails bypass spam filters. And non-paying spammers will not reduce the amount of mail they throw at your filters simply because others pay to evade them.

Perversely, the new two-tiered system AOL proposes would actually reward AOL financially for failing to maintain its email service. The chief advantage of paying to send CertifiedEmail is that it can bypass AOL's spam filters. Non-paying customers are being asked to trust that after paid mail goes into effect, AOL will properly maintain its spam filters so only unwanted mail gets thrown away.

But the economic incentives point the other way: The moment AOL switches to a two-tiered Internet where giant emailers pay for preferential service, AOL will face a simple business choice: spend money to keep regular spam filters up-to-date, or make money by neglecting their spam filters and pushing more senders to pay for guaranteed delivery. Poor delivery of mail turns from being a problem that AOL has every incentive to fix to something that could actually make them money if the company ignores it.

The bottom-line is that charging an "email tax" actually gives AOL a financial incentive to degrade email for non-paying senders. This would disrupt the communications of millions who cannot afford to pay your fees-including the non-profits, civic organizations, charities, small businesses, and community mailing lists that have arisen for every topic under the sun and that make email so vital to your subscribers.

And what if other Internet service providers retaliate and start demanding their own ransoms to accept mail from your millions of users? Your company works hard to simplify the Internet. Don't start a surcharge war that will complicate it with tiered services and dozens of middleman fees for every simple act of communication.

We have always been happy working together with you to fight spam and phishing. We have a common enemy in spammers. We are happy to work together to develop open approaches that attack the problem of spam and phishing. But a pay-to-send "certified" system does not help to fight spam. It only serves to make the Internet less free for everyone. We stand together in asking you to reconsider your decision to use CertifiedEmail.

Respectfully,

Brent Castillo: Don't Use Religion as Justification for Hate

The Wichita Eagle

http://www.topix.net/content/kri/2003987238259187411740769781743578324528

September 13, 2006

We have just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another.

President Bush raised some eyebrows last month when he spoke of fighting 'Islamic fascism.' Some Muslims were upset, including Parvez Ahmed, chairman of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, who said in an open letter to the president that the term 'contributes to a rising level of hostility to Islam and the American-Muslim community.'

In his Sept. 11 address, Bush toned down his description to 'perverted vision of Islam.'

I'm not a Muslim, but to me, either description seems appropriate.

The term 'fascism' was originally used by Italy's dictator, Benito Mussolini, in the 1930s and '40s, and exalted the state and race above the individual. In more recent usage, 'fascism' refers to autocratic or dictatorial control. When you combine the current usage with the fact that terrorists have justified their actions through their faith in Islam, then 'Islamic fascism' seems reasonable.

Islamic leaders such as Ahmed are rightly concerned about hostility, but his complaintswould carry more weight if the worldwide Muslim communityloudly condemned acts of terrorism and the fringe theology that condones them.

A good case study, on a much smaller scale, of how radical religion should be treated can be found here in Kansas. Fred Phelps, the Christian minister from Topeka, spews his hatred of homosexuals and our country wherever he can and to whomever he pleases. But he is roundly condemned by most Christians. Even people who agree with him in principle about the immorality of homosexuality are quick to criticize his methodology and rigid theology.

The Muslim community in Wichita has strongly condemned terrorism and the perversion of Islam. But the worldwide community needs to make a concerted, unified effort to marginalize and shrink the radical elements within its faith. Until then, the complaints about using the fascist label likely won't carry much weight with many non-Muslims.

Religion should be used to make a positive change in people. I chose Christianity because I believe its teachings are true. Millions of others have chosen Islam for the same reason. We may disagree, but we shouldn't use our faith as a justification to hate or hurt others.

Author Jonathan Swift made a wise point when he acknowledged a potential shortcoming of faith:

'We have just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another.'

Let's not use religion as a justification for hate. And let's not stand by as others pervert faith, using hatred for their own gain.

ACLU challenges Ohio's anti-Phelps law as too broad

 

THIS IS JUST TO SICK FOR WORDS, ACLU HELP GAYS TO GET THE VERY BASIC RIGHTS THAT EVERY HAS. THEN OTHER FACE OF THE ACLU HELP THIS ASSHOLE....

by Anthony Glassman

Cleveland--The ACLU of Ohio is challenging a new state law intended to keep a notorious anti-gay preacher from picketing the funerals of soldiers killed in Iraq.

The legislature passed the Rest in Peace Act last spring. The ACLU says the measure is overly broad and filed suit against it on August 24, shortly after it took effect.

The act was a reaction to protests by Fred Phelps’ Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kansas, an unaffiliated congregation with a history of virulently anti-gay rhetoric.

Phelps’ church, which is mostly his extended family, has traveled the country since the early 1990s, protesting funerals of people who died of AIDS and hate crime victims like Matthew Shepard. They wave signs reading “God hates fags” and “Thank God for 9/11.”

In the past year, the group has taken to picketing the funerals of soldiers killed in Iraq, promoting Phelps’ line that God is punishing soldiers because the United States shelters homosexuals and is filled with “fag enablers.”

The church’s protests led to a federal law barring demonstrations at federal cemeteries, and states across the country have passed similar measures.

Ohio’s law bans protests during funerals and an hour before or afterward, creating a 300-foot protest-free zone around the funeral home, cemetery and funeral procession.

“The ban is far too broad,” said ACLU of Ohio legal director Jeffrey Gamso. “The time restraints, free speech ‘bubble’ and the fact that it will move with the funeral procession will effectively prohibit protesting for large amounts of time in many communities around Ohio.”

“If a political group wanted to have a demonstration on Main Street and a funeral procession was driving by, they would not be permitted to continue, even if the protest has nothing to do with the funeral,” he said. “That is clearly too strict and would severely limit free speech.”

Similar laws have been challenged in other states, including Kentucky, though none of those challenges have yet been decided.

ACLU of Ohio Executive Director Chris Link brought up the example of striking workers picketing outside their place of employment. She said that, as the law stands, if a funeral procession drove by, the workers would have to stop.

The Westboro demonstrators have spurred another backlash: the Patriot Guard Riders, a group of 53,000 people nationwide who attend military funerals to show their respect and, if need be, block protesters from view.

Patriot Guard Riders were present at the funeral earlier this year of Mark Todd Shinkle, the president of the Buckeye Region American Veterans for Equal Rights.

“We do it to respect and honor the soldier and support the family,” Bob “Tater” Smith, a Sandusky veteran, told the Toledo Blade of the Patriot Guard Riders’ mission. The group has 1,600 members in Ohio.

Smith believes the Rest in Peace Act is unnecessary and will be more trouble than it’s worth.

“They threaten more than they show up,” he said of Westboro Baptist Church. “If you ignore them, they just go away. Our way costs a lot less for the taxpayers.”

What A Cutie

This is a cute picture, I wonder how long it took to get this shot.

First Post New Blog

Well today was very eventful, i mean really how much can one take before snapping.

 

I sat at my computer surfing the net, search for a great blog theme to use and to get it to work.

While doing this my neices got into a fight over something very stupid. I told them to go to their rooms.

 

Afterwards I got back doing what I was doing before the fight. I found a theme that I like so I download the package then i uploaded all the images, then I update the html codes.

 

I hate the weekend simply because there is nothing good on.