SERVING THE QUANTITATIVE FINANCE COMMUNITY

 
User avatar
Cuchulainn
Posts: 62637
Joined: July 16th, 2004, 7:38 am
Location: Amsterdam
Contact:

bronto will have a fit....

September 9th, 2010, 7:36 am

QuoteOriginally posted by: daveangelQuoteOriginally posted by: trackstarQuoteOriginally posted by: daveangelQuoteOriginally posted by: rmaxGuys - just shag and get on with it.I suspect that even in post coital bliss the pillow talk may quickly veer off ...We should leave a pack of Dunhills on the nightstand for them.In Holland, 'shag' is a nounSome people try to kick the habit like Gavin Friday
Last edited by Cuchulainn on September 8th, 2010, 10:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Step over the gap, not into it. Watch the space between platform and train.
http://www.datasimfinancial.com
http://www.datasim.nl
 
User avatar
ppauper
Posts: 70239
Joined: November 15th, 2001, 1:29 pm

bronto will have a fit....

September 9th, 2010, 7:58 am

QuoteOriginally posted by: trackstarOr maybe just down and dirty - real man cigarettes - Camel no filters I'd Walk a Mile for a Camelhandy for the arabs. They can shag a camel then smoke a camel
 
User avatar
ppauper
Posts: 70239
Joined: November 15th, 2001, 1:29 pm

bronto will have a fit....

September 9th, 2010, 8:34 am

good news for fermion
 
User avatar
exneratunrisk
Posts: 3559
Joined: April 20th, 2004, 12:25 pm

bronto will have a fit....

September 9th, 2010, 11:57 am

"HR is a universal principle", he spoke out, "therefore I can utilize them for my programming", he might hide from .... ?Do I have the privilege to watch a HR program contest here (again) from the first row?
 
User avatar
Errrb
Posts: 1398
Joined: December 17th, 2002, 4:18 pm

bronto will have a fit....

September 9th, 2010, 2:15 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: ppaupergood news for fermionI bet Fermion was used as a prototype for the character from "Family Guy", dirty old pederast Herbert.
Last edited by Errrb on September 8th, 2010, 10:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
brontosaurus
Posts: 2035
Joined: May 10th, 2004, 8:33 pm

bronto will have a fit....

September 11th, 2010, 6:06 pm

QuoteQuoteOriginally posted by: FermionWhy on earth would I have a fit about George Soros giving money to Human Rights Watch? Because you have claimed HRW is discredited by the nature of their donors. (At least you do when it suits you to make that spurious argument.) Can we now assume you are retracting that?QuoteIs he guilty of human rights abuses like the Saudi Royal family?I don't know. But Israel is.Fermion, George Soros is unlikely to have killed homosexuals, sliced off the hands of young thieves and denied women basic rights. But the Saudis are more likely to have behaved that way - their human rights should make you blush, unless you have other priorities, like bashing Israel. Its honestly amazing to see someone like you,so far left they are actually on the extreme right. That's you Fermion, wake up.Now it is clear you think that it is reasonable for Human Rights Watch to take donations from the dictatorial Saudi regime, and moreover to raise those funds by promising to directly use the money from those donations to fight that regime's enemies. You could of course claim ignorance -- I think that would be your best bet to be honest -- and didn't know what most of the world already does about HRW and their Saudi friends, but I just think you have other priorities. I now expect you to try and show that somehow, what most people see as unreasonable behavior, is actually reasonable.Language abuse -- in today's example: you are struggling with what the word "reasonable" -- are the norm with you. When I said you had your head up your ass, I meant it more than just as an insult. I think you faithfully believe that your opinions are scientifically true, even when they are as ridiculous as they are here. Quote"I don't know what you mean by 'glory', " Alice said. Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. "Of course you don't -- till I tell you. I meant 'there's a nice knock-down argument for you!' " "But 'glory' doesn't mean 'a nice knock-down argument'," Alice objected. "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less. "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things." "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master -- that's all." Alice was too much puzzled to say anything, so after a minute Humpty Dumpty began again. "They've a temper, some of them -- particularly verbs, they're the proudest -- adjectives you can do anything with, but not verbs -- however, I can manage the whole lot! Impenetrability! That's what I say!"
Last edited by brontosaurus on September 10th, 2010, 10:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
Fermion
Topic Author
Posts: 4486
Joined: November 14th, 2002, 8:50 pm

bronto will have a fit....

September 12th, 2010, 1:39 am

QuoteOriginally posted by: brontosaurusQuoteQuoteOriginally posted by: FermionWhy on earth would I have a fit about George Soros giving money to Human Rights Watch? Because you have claimed HRW is discredited by the nature of their donors. (At least you do when it suits you to make that spurious argument.) Can we now assume you are retracting that?QuoteIs he guilty of human rights abuses like the Saudi Royal family?I don't know. But Israel is.Fermion, George Soros is unlikely to have killed homosexuals, sliced off the hands of young thieves and denied women basic rights. But the Saudis are more likely to have behaved that way - their human rights should make you blush, unless you have other priorities, like bashing Israel. Its honestly amazing to see someone like you,so far left they are actually on the extreme right. That's you Fermion, wake up.Now it is clear you think that it is reasonable for Human Rights Watch to take donations from the dictatorial Saudi regime, and moreover to raise those funds by promising to directly use the money from those donations to fight that regime's enemies. You could of course claim ignorance -- I think that would be your best bet to be honest -- and didn't know what most of the world already does about HRW and their Saudi friends, but I just think you have other priorities. I now expect you to try and show that somehow, what most people see as unreasonable behavior, is actually reasonable.As usual you have built an argument on a false premise in order to distract from what I actually wrote. Nowhere have I claimed that the Saudi regime is not a human rights abuser. Nowhere have I been selective in criticizing human rights abuses. I leave that nonsense to you who seeks to discredit HRW by association in order to deny their cataloguing of Israel's abuses. Don't you ever feel ashamed of the crap you write?
 
User avatar
brontosaurus
Posts: 2035
Joined: May 10th, 2004, 8:33 pm

bronto will have a fit....

September 12th, 2010, 9:47 am

Fermion, I guess demial is another option for you. But its Rosh Hashana for Jews, so I should try and give you the benefit of the doubt. So let's get this clear: Was Human Rights Watch in the wrong or not from taking money from the Saudis? Also, do you think that its OK for Human Rights Watch to raise funds by promising to use the funds donated by a specific group for fighting that group's enemy? Just so there is no confusion, I would be grateful if you could clear that up.From my perspective, Human Rights Watch's Middle East Division fails miserably when it comes to Watching Human Rights, because they dedicate too much resources on Israel. I don't mind that they criticize Israel, much as you probably don't mind that they criticize America, in fact, I welcome such criticism, when it is fair and proportionate. Because I care about my country, as I assume you do about yours. But I do mind the fact that their is a clear focus on Israel, and relatively little focus on other Middle East countries, who are far worse. (That they focus on Israel disproportionally is not really in dispute).
 
User avatar
Fermion
Topic Author
Posts: 4486
Joined: November 14th, 2002, 8:50 pm

bronto will have a fit....

September 12th, 2010, 9:35 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: brontosaurusFermion, I guess demial is another option for you. But its Rosh Hashana for Jews, so I should try and give you the benefit of the doubt. So let's get this clear: Was Human Rights Watch in the wrong or not from taking money from the Saudis?I have no opinion on that -- nor will I have my opinion driven by the spin you want to put on it. QuoteAlso, do you think that its OK for Human Rights Watch to raise funds by promising to use the funds donated by a specific group for fighting that group's enemy? I think it highly likely that you are misrepresenting the situation. But regardless of that I am extremely glad that HRW gets the funds it needs.QuoteJust so there is no confusion, I would be grateful if you could clear that up.From my perspective, Human Rights Watch's Middle East Division fails miserably when it comes to Watching Human Rights, because they dedicate too much resources on Israel. I don't mind that they criticize Israel, much as you probably don't mind that they criticize America, in fact, I welcome such criticism, when it is fair and proportionate. Because I care about my country, as I assume you do about yours. But I do mind the fact that their is a clear focus on Israel, and relatively little focus on other Middle East countries, who are far worse. (That they focus on Israel disproportionally is not really in dispute)."Not in dispute" eh? In your eyes, maybe. Just check out the HRW home page. The current Middle East section links two stories about Bahrein, one about Jordan and one about Israel. The Israel story is one that has even received comment in the pro-Israel press -- and rightly so. The other stories are completely new to me. Without HRW I wouldn't know about them.Right now I am very glad they do the work they do and very glad that Soros has seen fit to support that work.
 
User avatar
brontosaurus
Posts: 2035
Joined: May 10th, 2004, 8:33 pm

bronto will have a fit....

September 13th, 2010, 5:54 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: FermionQuoteOriginally posted by: brontosaurusFermion, I guess demial is another option for you. But its Rosh Hashana for Jews, so I should try and give you the benefit of the doubt. So let's get this clear: Was Human Rights Watch in the wrong or not from taking money from the Saudis?I have no opinion on that -- nor will I have my opinion driven by the spin you want to put on it. QuoteAlso, do you think that its OK for Human Rights Watch to raise funds by promising to use the funds donated by a specific group for fighting that group's enemy? I think it highly likely that you are misrepresenting the situation. But regardless of that I am extremely glad that HRW gets the funds it needs.QuoteJust so there is no confusion, I would be grateful if you could clear that up.From my perspective, Human Rights Watch's Middle East Division fails miserably when it comes to Watching Human Rights, because they dedicate too much resources on Israel. I don't mind that they criticize Israel, much as you probably don't mind that they criticize America, in fact, I welcome such criticism, when it is fair and proportionate. Because I care about my country, as I assume you do about yours. But I do mind the fact that their is a clear focus on Israel, and relatively little focus on other Middle East countries, who are far worse. (That they focus on Israel disproportionally is not really in dispute)."Not in dispute" eh? In your eyes, maybe. Just check out the HRW home page. The current Middle East section links two stories about Bahrein, one about Jordan and one about Israel. The Israel story is one that has even received comment in the pro-Israel press -- and rightly so. The other stories are completely new to me. Without HRW I wouldn't know about them.Right now I am very glad they do the work they do and very glad that Soros has seen fit to support that work.Fermi, its not in dispute at all, just because now after they have been caught with their pants down they throw some other strories on their web page doesn't change the history. Its documented, if you really care, I can show you the reports about their reports. But as not having an opinion on whether its ok to take donations from the Saudis, you are turning a blind eye to obvious wrong-doing. Nothing else to say.
 
User avatar
Fermion
Topic Author
Posts: 4486
Joined: November 14th, 2002, 8:50 pm

bronto will have a fit....

September 13th, 2010, 8:07 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: brontosaurusQuoteOriginally posted by: FermionQuoteOriginally posted by: brontosaurusFermion, I guess demial is another option for you. But its Rosh Hashana for Jews, so I should try and give you the benefit of the doubt. So let's get this clear: Was Human Rights Watch in the wrong or not from taking money from the Saudis?I have no opinion on that -- nor will I have my opinion driven by the spin you want to put on it. QuoteAlso, do you think that its OK for Human Rights Watch to raise funds by promising to use the funds donated by a specific group for fighting that group's enemy? I think it highly likely that you are misrepresenting the situation. But regardless of that I am extremely glad that HRW gets the funds it needs.QuoteJust so there is no confusion, I would be grateful if you could clear that up.From my perspective, Human Rights Watch's Middle East Division fails miserably when it comes to Watching Human Rights, because they dedicate too much resources on Israel. I don't mind that they criticize Israel, much as you probably don't mind that they criticize America, in fact, I welcome such criticism, when it is fair and proportionate. Because I care about my country, as I assume you do about yours. But I do mind the fact that their is a clear focus on Israel, and relatively little focus on other Middle East countries, who are far worse. (That they focus on Israel disproportionally is not really in dispute)."Not in dispute" eh? In your eyes, maybe. Just check out the HRW home page. The current Middle East section links two stories about Bahrein, one about Jordan and one about Israel. The Israel story is one that has even received comment in the pro-Israel press -- and rightly so. The other stories are completely new to me. Without HRW I wouldn't know about them.Right now I am very glad they do the work they do and very glad that Soros has seen fit to support that work.Fermi, its not in dispute at all, just because now after they have been caught with their pants down they throw some other strories on their web page doesn't change the history. Its documented, if you really care, I can show you the reports about their reports. But as not having an opinion on whether its ok to take donations from the Saudis, you are turning a blind eye to obvious wrong-doing. Nothing else to say.Feel free to cite some evidence. I don't think I've ever seen any from you here on any subject. It would be a vast improvement on your bullshit propaganda.
 
User avatar
daveangel
Posts: 17031
Joined: October 20th, 2003, 4:05 pm

bronto will have a fit....

September 13th, 2010, 8:14 pm

Quote Feel free to cite some evidence. I don't think I've ever seen any from you here on any subject. no doubt he has a regular supply of photos from jihadwatch, danielpipes etc
knowledge comes, wisdom lingers
 
User avatar
brontosaurus
Posts: 2035
Joined: May 10th, 2004, 8:33 pm

bronto will have a fit....

September 14th, 2010, 12:17 pm

I don't know about your neutral opinion on the Saudi issue Fermion, if the latest research on smoking and health was found out to have been sponsored by Philip Morris, and also turned out to favor their needs, a reasonable person would think twice. Even if the organization doing the research had a promising sounding name, like "heart health". Human Rights Watch's reputation rests on their being able to provide neutral analysis. Here are two pieces that provide evidence their neutrality in this region is a joke.NGO Monitor Report on comparing condemnations of Israel vs other Middle East countries by Human Rights WatchFundraising Corruption at Human Rights WatchQuoteThis is a serious allegation, and one I found difficult to believe, because Human Rights Watch has always been moderately careful about the optics of its fundraising efforts. The group's credibility, of course, rests on its neutrality; playing traditional enemies off each other as a way to collect money from one (or both) sides in a conflict seems beyond the pale. (Let's put aside for now the queasy-making image of a human rights organization venturing into one of the world's most anti-democratic societies to criticize one of the Middle East's most democratic states.)Another problem here, of course, is that Sarah Leah Whitson, if the allegation against her is to be believed, trafficked in a toxic stereotype about Jews in a country that bans most Jews from even crossing its borders, and whose religious leadership often propogates the crudest expressions of anti-Semitism. The term pro-Israel lobby, of course, means something very different on the Arabian peninsula than it does here. Here, even to critics of AIPAC, it means a well-funded, well-oiled political machine designed to protect Israel's interests in Congress. In much of the Arab world, "pro-Israel pressure group" suggests a global conspiracy by Jews to dominate the world politically, culturally and economically.I'm not one of the people who believes that Human Rights Watch is reflexively anti-Israel, and I think the group has done admirable work exposing Israel's human rights violations (and admirable work, of course, exposing human rights violations across the Middle East). But this allegation, if proven true, would cast serious doubt on whether Human Rights Watch's Middle East division could ever fairly judge Israel again.I asked Ken Roth, the executive director of Human Rights Watch, if Bernstein's allegation was true. He forwarded me the following letter, from Sarah Leah Whitson, that was sent to the Wall Street Journal: (the rest of the conversation is on his blog at the link provided)
 
User avatar
Fermion
Topic Author
Posts: 4486
Joined: November 14th, 2002, 8:50 pm

bronto will have a fit....

September 14th, 2010, 2:32 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: brontosaurusI don't know about your neutral opinion on the Saudi issue Fermion, if the latest research on smoking and health was found out to have been sponsored by Philip Morris, and also turned out to favor their needs, a reasonable person would think twice. Even if the organization doing the research had a promising sounding name, like "heart health". Human Rights Watch's reputation rests on their being able to provide neutral analysis. Here are two pieces that provide evidence their neutrality in this region is a joke.NGO Monitor Report on comparing condemnations of Israel vs other Middle East countries by Human Rights WatchA piece of pseudo-science. Selective methods on selective data by an organization with an agenda. The abstract alone betrays their intentions clearly.Promoted by an oprganization that laughingly claims to be "Promoting Critical Debate and Accountability of Human Rights NGOs in the Arab Israeli Conflict" when even a cursory glance at their web-site shows that they exist only to smear critics of Israel.QuoteFundraising Corruption at Human Rights WatchQuoteThis is a serious allegation, and one I found difficult to believe, because Human Rights Watch has always been moderately careful about the optics of its fundraising efforts. The group's credibility, of course, rests on its neutrality; playing traditional enemies off each other as a way to collect money from one (or both) sides in a conflict seems beyond the pale. (Let's put aside for now the queasy-making image of a human rights organization venturing into one of the world's most anti-democratic societies to criticize one of the Middle East's most democratic states.)Another problem here, of course, is that Sarah Leah Whitson, if the allegation against her is to be believed, trafficked in a toxic stereotype about Jews in a country that bans most Jews from even crossing its borders, and whose religious leadership often propogates the crudest expressions of anti-Semitism. The term pro-Israel lobby, of course, means something very different on the Arabian peninsula than it does here. Here, even to critics of AIPAC, it means a well-funded, well-oiled political machine designed to protect Israel's interests in Congress. In much of the Arab world, "pro-Israel pressure group" suggests a global conspiracy by Jews to dominate the world politically, culturally and economically.I'm not one of the people who believes that Human Rights Watch is reflexively anti-Israel, and I think the group has done admirable work exposing Israel's human rights violations (and admirable work, of course, exposing human rights violations across the Middle East). But this allegation, if proven true, would cast serious doubt on whether Human Rights Watch's Middle East division could ever fairly judge Israel again.I asked Ken Roth, the executive director of Human Rights Watch, if Bernstein's allegation was true. He forwarded me the following letter, from Sarah Leah Whitson, that was sent to the Wall Street Journal: (the rest of the conversation is on his blog at the link provided)A smear based on the hypothesis that HRW's continual battle with Israeli attempts to discredit it and distract world attention from HRW reports somehow discredits it! Laughable. I also note that you fail to include Whitson's rebuttal.Try again! Next time see if you can find evidence instead of propaganda.
 
User avatar
brontosaurus
Posts: 2035
Joined: May 10th, 2004, 8:33 pm

bronto will have a fit....

September 14th, 2010, 3:49 pm

QuoteA piece of pseudo-science. Selective methods on selective data by an organization with an agenda. The abstract alone betrays their intentions clearly.The difference between NGO Monitor and HRW is that NGO Monitor have a clear and stated agenda, and are open about their claim to be defending Israel's interests. Human Rights Watch, on the the hand, are self-declared neutral judges found out to be taking bribes from criminals. If this were a court of law, the evidence of NGO Monitor would not be dismissed simply because they are representing the defendant. You need to back up your claim that NGO Monitor's report showing bias on HRW's part is selective use of evidence by NGO Monitor. Not liking them is not a good enough reason. QuoteA smear based on the hypothesis that HRW's continual battle with Israeli attempts to discredit itIts obvious, as a conclusion, not a hypothesis, that HRW Middle East Division has become politically activist and is no longer neutral. Even Robert Bernstein says so, do you know who he is?QuoteAS the founder of Human Rights Watch, its active chairman for 20 years and now founding chairman emeritus, I must do something that I never anticipated: I must publicly join the group?s critics. Human Rights Watch had as its original mission to pry open closed societies, advocate basic freedoms and support dissenters. But recently it has been issuing reports on the Israeli-Arab conflict that are helping those who wish to turn Israel into a pariah state.Rights Watchdog, Lost in the Mideast, by Robert L Bernstein Perhaps you should try again.
Last edited by brontosaurus on September 13th, 2010, 10:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ABOUT WILMOTT

PW by JB

Wilmott.com has been "Serving the Quantitative Finance Community" since 2001. Continued...


Twitter LinkedIn Instagram

JOBS BOARD

JOBS BOARD

Looking for a quant job, risk, algo trading,...? Browse jobs here...


GZIP: On