blike

Here's some SS of the router config

Yea. I'll post it in about 10 minutes (had to disconnect everything to get back on the internet).

Yes. One computer is connected USB (wireless), and the other is NIC. Same problem on both machines.

I'll start with what I've done, then maybe you guys can make suggestions on where I should go: I've eliminated the possibility of: faulty cables faulty cable modem and internet connection faulty router ports bad wireless reception faulty computers (same problem on both computers) faulty USB ports, ethernet cards I'm using a motorola cable modem (I'll have to look up the exact model), and a D-Link 524 (revision c) wireless router. My ISP is brighthouse roadrunner cable. The router appears to be working fine. I can ping it and connect to it by typing in the IP address. One of my computers is hooked up to the router via an ethernet cable. The other computer is on a wireless connection. Both computers are assigned an IP address by the router. The router can release and renew the IP address from the ISP (brighthouse roadrunner). I believe it's a router-modem issue. Some setting isn't right and thus the router and modem have a hard time communicating. Yea, don't know which settings would be useful though. I'll post some screenshots of configurations here in an hour or so.

I really got interested in the case when one of my professors, Jay Wolfson, became Terri Schiavo's guardian ad litem. He knew everything about the case inside and out and gave numerous talks on the issue. He tried to stay neutral on the subject, as that was his role, Nonetheless, in case anyone didn't see the news today, federal courts upheld the decision. http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050322/D8902I400.html TAMPA, Fla. (AP) - A federal judge on Tuesday refused to order the reinsertion of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube, denying an emergency request from the brain-damaged woman's parents that had been debated in Congress and backed by the White House. U.S. District Judge James Whittemore said the 41-year-old woman's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, had not established a "substantial likelihood of success" at trial on the merits of their arguments. Whittemore wrote that Schiavo's "life and liberty interests" had been protected by Florida courts. Despite "these difficult and time-strained circumstances," he wrote, "this court is constrained to apply the law to the issues before it."... Howard Simon, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida, praised the ruling: "What this judge did is protect the freedom of people to make their own end-of-life decisions without the intrusion of politicians."

The majority support her tube being removed. She won't wake up. It's been 15 years now. He knows that if he divorces her, her wishes won't be honored. If she responds like her parents claim, why don't they ask Terri. Set up some sort of response system whereby one blink is yes, two blinks is no. She doesn't respond, and the family knows it. If everyone made decisions based on the beliefs of parents we'd be in a mess. "PINELLAS PARK - Angered by the latest political developments in Washington, Michael Schiavo said Saturday that it isn't just the Florida governor who should visit his wife to learn about the case. Jeb Bush's brother, President Bush, should visit Terri Schiavo, too, he said. "Come down, President Bush," Schiavo said in a telephone interview. "Come talk to me. Meet my wife. Talk to my wife and see if you get an answer. Ask her to lift her arm to shake your hand. She won't do it." She won't, Schiavo said, because she can't. He made a similar offer to the governor last week, saying lawmakers interferring in his wife's life know nothing about the case. So far, Gov. Bush hasn't responded to the offer." No moral difference really. You're right. Nonetheless, that doesn't make it wrong. Personally, I would prefer to use a morphine drip. But the people who are fighting to keep this poor woman alive are the same people who are against any "humane" way of "going out." Newtonian, my comment about the video was wrong. I heard someone mention accusations of it on the news, but it seems that nothing ever became of it.

You're not making much sense. You say you want personal autonomy, but then you say that it doesn't matter what she wants, what's best for her is what's most important. In other words, if a bunch of lawyers and senators decide that it's not best for her to die, then their opinion stands? Show me. You're telling me you don't want your lifelong partner to have that right? I think his actions prove that he wants what Terri wanted. That is all they prove. Medical opinion changed as her brain decayed. She went from 'possibly rehabilitable' to 'unrehabilitable'. Michael actually became a respiratory therapist to care for her. At that trial, Michael testified he and his wife talked about life support when Terri's grandmother was ill. "She said, 'If I ever have to be a burden to anybody, I don't want to live like that,'" he said. He also testified the two watched a television documentary about people on life support. "She made the comment to me that she would never want to be like that," he said at the trial. Michael said he told Terri he felt the same way and has since written into his will instructions not to be kept on life support. Michael's older brother, Scott Schiavo, and Michael's sister-in-law, Joan Schiavo, who is married to a different brother, also testified Terri made similar comments to them. Scott said he talked with Terri at a luncheon after a funeral for Scott's grandmother, who had spent weeks unconscious on a ventilator. "Terri made mention at that conversation," Scott said, "that 'If I ever go like that, just let me go. Don't leave me there. I don't want to be kept alive on a machine.' Pretty much everybody at that table that was in the discussion had made the same comment." No, it means the courts choose. No doctor has had any say in whether she lives or dies (other than testimony). What's his motive then? MONEY? Is that why he turned down 1 million and then 10 million dollars to 'walk away'? http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-03-10-schiavo_x.htm So the family is now the medical professional? Please. Families see "signs of life" in PVS patients all the time. Sometimes patients do thinks that they used to do when they were alive, and it gives false hope to the family. This is simply a family that can't let go.

My brother just bought a wireless router and we're trying to get it hooked up and working. However, whenever we use the router, the internet speed drops to like 1kb/s. Webpages start loading, but they never finish, which means that the speed is dropping to near 0 kb/s. Any ideas on where to start troubleshooting this? I have roadrunner cable. I checked the cables and they seem to be fine. It seems to be a problem between the router and the cable modem.

Fixed again.

A spouse, whether moved on or not, still has the legal right. That is not seriously wrong, and I doubt anyone would agree that it is. Just because he has moved on does not mean that he does not love her or does not know what she would have wanted. I don't know that I would label it conspiracy. I don't think they are deranged or demonic. They are her family, afterall. Nonetheless, they do not have any legal say in the matter. I don't doubt that they think they are doing what's best for Terri. No she's not. The only evidence is a videotape? Why can't they reproduce it? All things aside, it doesn't matter what's best for her. What matters is that Terri clearly indicated what her wishes were if she were relying on life support (her feeding tube is considered life-support by florida law), and her choice has been verified and respected by several courts. Not exclusively, which is why Michael was allowed to use some of it on attorney's fees. No it's not. Michael gave the court authority. What do you mean dire consequences? This is a victory for autonomy. This is what Terri would have wanted. This is a victory for personal rights. Doctors don't chose, family members do. In this case, her spouse is only one who has the authority to make the decision, and he gave the authority to the courts (which is permissible by law). If a spouse is alive, families have no rights. When you get married your spouse assumes all the rights and responsibilities. "The Legislature recognizes that for some the administration of life-prolonging medical procedures may result in only a precarious and burdensome existence. In order to ensure that the rights and intentions of a person may be respected even after he or she is no longer able to participate actively in decisions concerning himself or herself, and to encourage communication among such patient, his or her family, and his or her physician, the Legislature declares that the laws of this state recognize the right of a competent adult to make an advance directive instructing his or her physician to provide, withhold, or withdraw life-prolonging procedures, or to designate another to make the treatment decision for him or her in the event that such person should become incapacitated and unable to personally direct his or her medical care." Bottom line: This is a victory for personal rights in this country. The judicial branch got involved because this right was challenged and Michael turned the right over to the court because of disputes between him and the family. "Rather than make the decision himself, Michael followed a procedure permitted by Florida courts by which a surrogate such as Michael can petition a court, asking the court to act as the ward's surrogate and determine what the ward would decide to do. Michael did this, and based on statements Terri made to him and others, he took the position that Terri would not wish to continue life-prolonging measures. The Schindlers took the position that Terri would continue life-prolonging measures. Under this procedure, the trial court becomes the surrogate decision-maker, and that is what happened in this case. The trial court in this case held a trial on the dispute. Both sides were given opportunities to present their views and the evidence supporting those views. Afterwards, the trial court determined that, even applying the "clear and convincing evidence" standard -- the highest burden of proof used in civil cases -- the evidence showed that Terri would not wish to continue life-prolonging measures." Now, onto the PVS issue: You can say that she's responsive all you want, but the fact is that the results seen in the video could not be reproduced. The court thus determined that these were simply reflexive movements, not conscious movements. CT scans indicate that most of her brain is severely damaged. She

The courts have determined that was her wish in this case. Technically she won't starve to death. She'll die of an electrolyte imbalance before her body runs out food. However, she won't feel any of it, considering most of her brain is fluid now. It is sad that we don't have any other legal means of taking care of this though. Surely a morphine drip is more humane than starving.

The footage you saw was from august 2001. What you were not shown is the countless hours the Schiavo's parents spent filming hoping for a response. They propped her up with strings and such. They went over the same routine for hours on end until she randomly had the responses they were looking for. The rest was then cut away and the tape edited into the format you saw it in. No she doesn't. The US courts appointed several doctors and scientists to reproduce the responses Terri's parents filmed. They even brought the parents back in and everything. She does not respond to stimuli. She does not open her eyes on request, and she does not smile on request. The tape is very deceiving. That's why Michael Shiavo refused to allow more tapes to be made, because they were a sham in order to sway public opinion. Maybe I should just write this off as just another case where those crazy Europeans have rushed to a decision without knowing the whole story. Don't you guys consider us a right-wing conservative cesspool compared to yourselves? If this is taking place in conservative land, I assure you it would take place in the UK. The problem here is that the facts are so skewed by the parents that it's hard to understand why the US courts are allowing this to take place. Her medical care is provided to her courtesy the tax payers of the state of florida. That's why her award was allowed to be used to for Michael's legal fees. Furthermore, after the issue had passed through several courts, Michael's position was constantly upheld. Indeed. What's sad is that the same lawmakers who are raising a big stink about her "starving to death" are the same lawmakers who refuse to put into law any sort of humane death policy. Stinking republicans piss me off.

He's moved on, I don't think there is anything wrong with that. None of this would have happened if she had been allowed to die earlier on. The husband agreed to let the courts decide and they sided with him. Isn't the best right we can give her right now the right to die peacefully? It's been decided in several courts that she did not wish to be kept alive in such a situation.

Her feeding tube is out now. It's about time the courts stood up for themselves. Congress and the federal government need to keep their hands out of private affairs. Unfortunately, it's bound to be put back in after congress finds a way to force the issue.

Anybody else following this travesty? It really is getting a bit ridiculous. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,150797,00.html Schiavo suffered severe brain damage in 1990 when her heart stopped because of a chemical imbalance, and court-appointed doctors say she is in a persistent vegetative state. Her husband, Michael Schiavo, says she told him she would not want to be kept alive artificially. Her parents dispute that, and say she could get better. The court found that it was Terri Schiavo's wish not to kept alive in her current state and issued an order to remove the feeding tube Friday. Michael Schiavo's attorney, George Felos, wouldn't comment on when and how the removal will take place or whether Michael Schiavo would visit his wife before it happened. Doctors have said it could take a week or two for Terri Schiavo to die once the tube that delivers water and nutrients is removed.

Indeed. We have a problem with unhelpful answers. I'll see what I can put into writing. I've been meaning to for awhile now :/

Just because she was shot at doesn't mean she was shot at because of her beliefs. It's highly unlikely the soldiers knew who was in the car. But you must admit that her position will undoubtedly influence her recollection of the event (whether consciously or unconsciously). I'm going to pose a question. This is probably stepping in a bee-hive, but I want your opinions. Area 51 is offlimits to most everybody in the country. They have signs that warn that any unauthorized persons on the premises will be shot with intent to kill, no questions asked. Let's assume John Doe is taking a walk through the desert. He doesn't see the sign, wanders onto the premises, and is shot dead. Who is at fault? The guard that shot him? The guy who was ignorant of the sign? For all the guard knew, the wandering man was an enemy spy. For all the man knew, he was taking a walk through the desert. Both of their ignorances resulted in the man's death. Why should we place the blame squarely on the shoulders of the guard? At least we're consistent. But seriously, I'm conservative, and I don't think any of my beliefs are evil.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/03/16/obesity.eu.ap/index.html BRUSSELS, Belgium (AP) -- At least seven European countries now challenge the United States in size -- at least around the waistline. In a group of nations from Greece to Germany, the proportion of overweight or obese men is higher than in the United States, experts said Tuesday in a major analysis of expanding girth on the European continent. "The time when obesity was thought to be a problem on the other side of the Atlantic has gone by," said Mars Di Bartolomeo, Luxembourg's Minister of Health. -- I don't want to hear any more fat american jokes!

The question is why. Not sure what righteous americans destroying WMD has anything to do with the topic at hand. Heh.

Gee, how about I post some "facts" from rightwingnews, to balance things out.

Sounds like somebody's lab homework. You should be able to at least guess some of the differences if you have an understanding of the differences between mitosis and meiosis.

Yes, till late this evening or tomorrow sometime.

Recent pictures of her car have been released, and it wasn't "destroyed" as she claimed. "Earlier, she suggested US troops might have deliberately tried to kill her." If they had been deliberately trying to kill her, I assure there would have been more than a few bullet holes in the car. Her story is also inconsistent. (1a) "Sgrena told colleagues the vehicle was not travelling fast and had already passed several checkpoints on its way to the airport." (1b) "We hadn't previously encountered any checkpoint and we didn't understand where the shots came from.'' (2a) "But in an interview with Italy's La 7 Television, the 56-year-old journalist said "there was no bright light, no signal." (2b) "It wasn't a checkpoint, but a patrol that started shooting after pointing some lights in our direction" And now this is coming out: "ROME -- Italian agents likely withheld information from U.S. counterparts about a cash-for-freedom deal with gunmen holding an Italian hostage for fear that Americans might block the trade, Italian news reports said yesterday. The decision by operatives of Italy's SISMI military intelligence service to keep the CIA in the dark about the deal for the release of reporter Giuliana Sgrena, might have "short-circuited" communications with U.S. forces controlling the road from Baghdad to the city's airport, the newspaper La Stampa said."

Typically: Name Street Address City, State, ZIP, USA