Nice class. Then we'll soon have well-trained toilet cleaners, because if a job center caseworker considers that reasonable, you'd better do as you're told. Sure, you can sue over it, but given what unemployed people receive, they can certainly afford a lawyer or even just legal protection insurance ...
Besides, what are we so upset about? After all, the unemployed are all to blame themselves anyway. They're probably all just too lazy to work. Structural problems and outright collapses of entire industries are certainly just figments of left-wing cranks' imaginations. The fact that, for example, the textile industry in my immediate area has been drifting on the economic doldrums for years is certainly also just imagination, same as the many thousands of unemployed. All lazybones.
Especially these young, lazy shirkers who don't want to work anyway. Never mind the shortage of apprenticeships, that doesn't exist. Herr Clement himself always traveled around the country and found an apprenticeship for everyone. Anyone who didn't get one is surely lazy.
And another step toward dismantling the social system and social coldness. Thank you, Herr Clement. (whoever finds sarcasm in this post can keep it)
At tagesschau im Internet there's the original article.
With court decisions like this, we'll never get a handle on the flood of spam. This just legitimizes it even further. What absurd reasoning that it only constituted a one-time performance announcement and that the spammer claimed he wouldn't send it again. And? If I got a euro for every email that said "this is a one-time-mailing," I wouldn't be rich, but I'd have accumulated a pretty decent sum. And when will it finally be accepted that a performance announcement that might still be tolerable by post is definitely not tolerable by email? Every email consumes resources and incurs costs. Spam is under no circumstances tolerable. At heise online news there's the original article.
Hmm. So an action by Mac users against the war that is directed at Steve Jobs so that he would make a corresponding statement to the president is already quite amusing. But if the whole thing is targeting Mac users as an audience, should something like this really be in the info? > Therefore support for some web-browers (like e.g. 'safari') cannot be guaranteed. Sorry for that! I mean, why not support Safari in particular, which is the Mac browser since Apple released it? What else are we Mac users supposed to use - the browser of evil perhaps?
Particularly amusing is the reason why Safari might not work:> Taking this experience into account, we had to tighten many security measures. Hmm. I'm sorry? Now I really have to ask which browser one can use. But unfortunately that's not revealed.
At Der Schockwellenreiter there is the original article.
Great. This blunder clearly falls on the account of the Constitutional Protection Office, which prefers to spy on and incite rather than build clean procedures. And on the political leadership, which should have foreseen this debacle beforehand - either they failed because they weren't informed (which in my opinion would already be a disaster - a Constitutional Protection Office uncontrolled by Parliament is itself unconstitutional), or they bungled it because they knew about it and naively believed the Constitutional Court would overlook such a glaring mistake.
And what's the result? Instead of clearly positioning itself against ultra-right ideology, the Right will celebrate it as a victory and feel vindicated. Great. Thanks for that.
I found the original article at TAZ.
The title links to a RealMedia file (from the BBC) with Cook's resignation speech before the British House of Commons. Compare that to the speeches of Dubya.
Here's the original article.
Reminds me that I wanted to port this to OpenMCL ...
At lemonodor there is the original article.
This actually sounds like I could give it a try now. It might be a path to upgrade my home firewall box to, as that currently is running an older debian release and must be upgraded. But I need to pull down all those stupid applications I have thrown at that little box, first. Because a firewall with so much applications is everything else but a firewall
Bei freshmeat.net gibts den Originalartikel.
I see it that way too. Participate. Set a link. Yes, they're only pathetic little signs, no, I don't believe George Bush will look at them, no, I don't believe he'll change his mind. Should you shut up about it anyway? Nope.
At Der Schockwellenreiter you can find the original article.
