Figleaf

I thought I heard a few years ago that Pope JPII had cancelled hell. Or rather, that he had revised doctrine to say that that 'hell' is not a specific place where souls are sent to receive torment. Instead, rather than a place, hell is a condition experienced by souls that are permanently separated from God. I'm pretty sure I didn't dream that or make it up, but I can't find reference to it despite a quick search. Here's what the vatican website says: http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/arch...123a12.htm#1036 And here's another view... http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Rel...ing_in_hell.htm

I hope this gets a proper investigation eventually. It's really a disgusting scandal. One of the lowest points in Canadian governmental history -- a minister of the police not stepping down while he's potentially implicated in a criminal code political corruption offense is just unheard of. It's almost as shocking as the police dismissing the possibility of charges with evidence as clear and uncontroverted as we have in this case. Have the RCMP tendered any sort of explanation or rationale for thier choice to ignore the evidence?

Muldoon? Can't be Trudeau, he did all kinds of good things and very little bad.

I'd put him and Roosvelt on a league with Hitler, Tojo, Mussolini, Bernardo and Pickton. You'd put Hitler on a par with Roosevelt?!? You'd put Bernardo's handful of victims on a par with Hitlers millions?!? What are you thinking, man?!?

As far as 'Royal' goes, it being earned doesn't make it any better. Worse, actually, the premise of 'earning' something worthless is vaguely nauseating. As far as individual service names goes, I'm assuming they combining was done for some reason that someone thought was good at the time. I don't know what the pros and cons are.

Well, this is more about Stockwell Day, but in any event, it seems peculiar to characterize normal citizen interest in the ethics of government as "obsession".

Even though Stockwell Day presided over the RCMP while they whitewashed the Hartgate affair and so they have now (surprise surprise) decided not to investigate, the theoretical, parliamentary practice point may be relevant some time in the near future when this degenerate-Conservative government is chased from power. Accordingly, here is an example of how honourable parliamentarians behave when the possibility of a conflict of interest arises: http://www.canada.com/saskatoonstarphoenix...6bd946c&k=68530 That's right, honourable parliamentarians don't stay on to control the outcome or the spin on an investigation into their own potential wrongdoing. And an honourable government wouldn't let them. If a minister and government don't do what is honourable, what is it that they are doing?

We'll see if it works if they end up defeated. 'When'

Got any evidence?

Perhaps he's in shock, not that Tories would actually turn to these parliamentary tactics, but rather someone would compile them in a handbook. Maybe he was the author...

Journalism needs to be cleaned up. It's rotten through and through. Even leaving out media whose acknowledged purpose is polemical (e.g. Toronto Sun, FauxNews, Michael Moore), what remains is virtually worthless. Aside from the issues of ownership concentration, the practice of journalism is a shambles. Consider: 1. There is barely a remnant of the concept of independent fact checking anymore, copy editting has died in favor of the very sketchy substitute of spell-check, and editors don't edit anymore (gods know what they actually do). 2. Journalism students are not taught to be reporters anymore ... they are taught to be 'storytellers'. And editorial departments, staffed with jumped-up senior 'storytellers', now all believe that too. It doesn't take a genius to percieve what this does to the rigor of the product.

Canada has had a long history of bureaucratic/command/troops squables over service names, and before that, regimental nomenclature. So, is this about people actually being really keen to bring 'royal' into it, or is it really a move to distinguish the sea/air/land services with their traditional navy/airforce/army monickers?

"You are a disrespectful insulting ass!" * * http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....opic=8917&st=24

Wolfowitz, apart from being instrumental in an illegal war and the needless death of at least 3000 Americans, was obviously completely nuts when it came to corporate ethics. He basically admits to paying for nookie with company money, but asks (no demands) that the Board absolve him or he won't resign. Does that logic make any sense to anyone? Mr. Bizarro.

"Royal"?!?! :VOMIT: Why drag that archaic, irrelevant nonsense back into anything? Who would even waste their time with this sort of crap?

So you say the tories published a 200 page manual in less than a week? I very much doubt it. So, the tories weren't even present to do their jobs, and you blame he Liberals. Ridiculous.

I'd say soldiers are on that list too.

Is God poison? Hmmmm. I wonder what the Midianites would say ...? [boodle oodle oo! boodle oodle oo! boodle oodle oo!] Numbers 25, 31 --

But ... 'Capitalism' is the system that produces the very externalities that the missing markets arn't fixing. And 'capitalism' is the system that is not forming those markets.

JT's comments didn't advocate socialism at all. Stop fabricating nonsense. It was statist and redistributive, but not really particularly socialisit. Actually, a recession caused most of that trouble, not the NEP. In any event, the NEP was not socialist and has very little to do with JT. What speach did you hear him give in your imagination? Seriously dude, try to retain some credibility.

Who are, by and large, flighty, shallow, self-absorbed, and lacking any real knowledge on almost all subjects related to governance. :Puke: :barf:

No.

Unlike virtually all other so-called Christian groups, the WBC believes in the literal truth of the Bible and has the courage to face and address the fearsome and horrible nature of Jehovah that the Bible actually reveals.

Why don't you ask Figleaf instead of wagering in the dark? Sort of like this... Betsy: "Hey Figleaf ... What about if a student said disparaging things about another student?" Figleaf: "Hmmm ... If it was in school or in relation to a school activity, then it could be something the school authorities should act on. But if it is not in or around school, then school authorities would have no business intervening, and affected persons should seek elsewhere for their remedy."

Feel the love.