Thorn

The Palestinian issue is not going to be helped by recognizing the area as a state. Nor, to be honest, do I feel it deserves such recognition given the nature of its screwed up government and institutions, and its lack of historical precedent. It hasn't the industrial or resource base to sustain itself as a state, unaided. It doesn't have the water. It doesn't have the organizational structure. And the space involved is too damned small. I understand the emotions involved. I've seen enough to know that if I was an Israeli I would _hate_ Palestinians, and Arabs in general. I would loath them. And if I was raised in the occupied territories I would _hate_ Israelis, and Jews in general. My hate would not be unreasoning. There have been plenty of outrages between these two groups to justify them hating each other. Unfortunately, the hate causes the outrages and the outrages cause the hate, and it's a never ending cycle. I do not see any logical way out of this even if Palestine became a state. It would be a sort of Arabic version of Bangladesh, but with the religious violence and organizational problems Pakistan is having, and there would probably be civil war between the Hamas and PLO people. It would be a local cats-paw for other nations, because of its lack of coherent government, and because of the desperate need for foreign and military aid. The only sensible solution I see is for the existing territories to be split up between Jordan and Egypt.

In western societies, its a strange, unorganized amalgam of cultural leaders from the fashion and film industries. How they arrive at their decisions is not something I ever really understood.

This is my general complaint. One can assume that after 14,000 odd posts you had some comfort that what you posted would not get you any sort of reprimand or punishment, in all likelihood because you'd seen such language and used such language, many times without any evidence the moderators didn't like it. If you'd thought you would be suspended for it, you wouldn't have posted it. So after 14,000 posts you still didn't understand the moderating policies. After 21,000 post, M. Dancer posted something which he thought was appropriate for this web site. Why did he think it appropriate? How could have have so little understanding of the moderation policies after 21,000 posts?

Would it be inappropriate to observe that the next time the RCMP selects officers to be pall bearers they should consider selecting those who are approximately the same height? Also, how has Nycole Turmel reached her sixties without learning how to dress respectfully for a solemn occasion?

What makes you think they've been banned? Has there been an announcement I missed? I would certainly have more respect for the moderation if that were the case.

Its my belief the emoticons ought to be removed from this site. Ninety percent of the time when I see them they're used to mock and jeer at people. As I've previously posted, you can usually tell just how disrespectful a posting will be by how many emoticons it contains. And you can tell who are the more abusive posters by how often they employ them.

Are you going to follow me all around the site crying because I hurt your feelings?

We do what is culturally expected of us to do. Thus at one point virtually all men had beards. Body hair rules have changed over time, especially for women. Fashion and pornography has had a lot to do with it. As skirts got higher and higher, as bathing suits and lingerie got smaller, women had to shave a lot more, until there was very little left. Then the porn industry basically decreed there would be no hair, and so most of the women I know have gone that route. Now over the past I don't know how many years, the rules have started changing for men, too. Just about any male actor now who is going to be doing a topless scene gets his chest shaved. Remember the days of Magnum PI? When they remake that show, and they will, the new Tom Magnum will have no chest hair. Male models now routinely remove all their visible hair. And, again, I think this is probably due to the influence of the porn industry, a goodly number of men are starting to remove all their pubic hair as well. Have a look at this google search with just the words 'male model'male model And this one for shirtless male actors Fashion is being changed and young men are simply following those changes in the same way as young women did. Who decrees what is in fashion?

Dunce meat, eh? I always wondered what dunces eat... Well, by all means. Go ahead. Eat me.

There is a thread on Jack Layton. This one is about the letter, which was quite political, and so is being discussed in a political fashion. Get over it.

They weren't stated as values so much as factors in whether a person will do as well, economically, as another person. And if the answer is no, then it can't really be said to be unfair that they don't. I don't think we disagree so much about the desirable results as to the 'fairest' means of getting there.

Anecdotal assumptions are not a basis for an ideological statement either. But I'm not making one. There is no real reason I can think of to be in poverty in Canada, barring physical/mental/emotional problems, and certainly no reason to stay that way, unless you simply lack the drive and motivation to do something about it.

I don't think, even if I deliberately sought to make up a caricature of Americans that would be the epitome of the 'ugly american' I could come up with a better example than you present here daily.

If you believe that it's neccesary to know every single American in order to determine the rough geographical knowledge then you have no clue as to what Americans know either. I'm still waiting for the evidence you were going to post to contradict what I posted. I want to hear all about the vast world knowledge the average American possess. You haven't asked any question that hasn't been dealt with, though I leave open the possibility that you don't actually understand what a question is, of course. I'm sure everyone here will encourage you in anything you do which can enhance your level of knowledge about Canada or anything else.

No Vacation Nation

I have no idea what you're talking about. Do you? I don't care if you were insulted. There are some people of various levels of sanity who will always take offense at things, but that's entirely their business. The post itself, however, was not an insult. It was a statement of fact.

I eagerly await your multiple cites to contradict them. I will ask every day for the next couple of months. I don't expect you to post anything, however. I don't base my opinions on a couple of cites. They were simply referrals to someone who suggested my opinion was some sort of anti-American insults. My opinion is based on a lifetime of dealing with Americans. You didn't ask one.

And you do a run-through of all the members regularly to see which ones are banned? How would you even notice it says banned next to his post unless you're reading an old post and happen to notice that? Three and four year old posts? Is that it? That doesn't seem to indicate there are any regular interventions in things to warn what's being done wrong. Doesn't seem to have affected a number of well-known posters here who pretty consistently insult, flame and troll people.

The guy had 21,000 posts, and yes, got away with a lot. We all get away with a lot which is against the rules. So what gets you suspended or banned? Is it that you do something, get a slap on the wrist, and after a while they decide you've done it one too many times and ban you? How many times do you get to say a word or whatever before you get banned or suspended? What are the words? Again, as you say, people get away with a lot, constantly, every day. That, to me, doesn't say the admins are 'on top of things'. There are people on this site who have been 'getting away with a lot' for years, apparently. How much is too much? This is what I mean. You can't just go by what's written in the rules since obviously not everything is being enforced.

As has already been pointed out that's very easy to remedy. You don't get to argue with your newspaper about sentences at court, though people can discuss it, and I don't find that a 'descent into hell'. There's no requirement that anyone answer or justify what they've done, merely make the notice so that people can read it and see that doing this action results in that punishment, etc. Poor moderation policy, which results in everyone hurling insults on a constant basis -- which is pretty much what exists here. There are a few regulars who do this the most, but then they provoke others to respond in kind and the tone of the board plunges so that it becomes general.

How is it possible for you to know that when you don't know who was banned or why? I mean, honestly! And again, how can you possibly know they ever got even one single warning before being suspended or banned? The moderators have made no such claim.

I'm sorry. What's the relevance? The statistics are fairly clear on what Americans and Canadians as a whole get compared to other people.

And to repeat, I wouldn't use a cliche'd expression like that. Also, whether my opinion is or is not accurate is irrelevant. The post to which you refer was not a generalized insult towards Americans and it wasn't at all insulting towards you.

Young Americans Ignorannt of the World Around Them Americans next to Last in knowledge of world

Well, granted, but I'm not sure just how this relates to what I was discussing.