Figleaf

Whatever. Your opinion means less to me than the crud on the soles of my sneakers. Well then, you'll have no problem with this... lease refer me to a place that I failed to back up my arguments. How about when you denied that a blockade was an act of war....or is it an act of war for everyone except israel? I can't remember......you reported me around there...didn't you? Feel free to dig up the requisite URL to that exchange and post it again for everyone to review. I'm satisfied that I fully supported my position then, and that your behaviour fully revealed your true nature as well.

Is Stockwell STILL trying to brazen this out? C'mon, the guy who got paid off practically admitted it. Leading the investigators looking into allegations about oneself is a corrupt practice and the tories should admit that Day can't stay.

Blah blah blah. Go ahead and lash out if a deficiency in your impulse control impells it. But I'd suggest to you that you wouldn't have these problems if you were able to read, understand, and abide by the forum rules. Go on, give it a try.

Whatever. Your opinion means less to me than the crud on the soles of my sneakers. Well then, you'll have no problem with this... lease refer me to a place that I failed to back up my arguments.

Oh believe me, I know a tad about intl law, and you are very wrong. Actually, I don't believe that in the least. You seem to persistently mistake your (rather hackneyed rightwing) opinions with knowledge. By Charter, I suppose you mean the UN Charter. Please provide: 1-support for your contention that it is the 'highest'; 2-an explanation of why you suggest (even if it is the 'highest') that it is exhaustive. Your interpretation of the law is faulty. UNSC authorization was required to legitimize GWB's attack on Iraq, and it was never obtained. Better you start closer to home. Utter nonsense.

Pure fantasy. Canada's navy could beat the Iranian navy, probably. Man for man, rifle for rifle, I'd put reg force Canadians up against ANY other country's reg forces and count on Canada to win. But Iran has a much larger army. I the air, right now Canada and Iran's equipment are mostly of the same vintage. Iran has some newer equipment and Canada has yet to take delivery of its new aircraft. Tough call in the air. Are we doing some hodge podge invasion or is this a flat out war where they can come and invade Canada as well? I heard somewhere on the forum that we can't even field a wing of fighter aircraft. If we were to beat Iran in a fictional war it would be through superior generalling and fighting on an area of our choosing, or if we wanted to go the long route, a nice war of attrition involving besieging the entire country (no one gets in, no one gets out). I was assuming we were talking about Canada attacking Iran, but somehow magically deploying our whole military there.

No WMDs, no justification for war, no UN authorization ... Oh, I'm going to report you for lying. Lying? ? Why yes. Please show me a UNSC resolution claiming the war was "illegal" or even in poor taste. The UNSC doesn't have to declare something illegal for it to be illegal. You should inform yourself better on this subject before purporting to say someone is lying. Both courtesy and your reputation would benefit. True. Actually, there are several technicalities around the law of defamation that would exclude this situation. However, the best defence is always that it be true. I invite anyone who believes I have defamed them to take me to court on this. The invasion of Iraq was illegal. Not to my knowledge. Please do correct me and the rest of all humankind with some credible evidence on this point.

Please refer me to a place that I failed to back up my arguments. I see no reason to allow a poster to fall into a pattern of abusing other posters. If that's the sort of thing you're looking for, you're probably in the wrong place. You might have some firsthand understanding of that, right? Please show me a place where you backed up an argument with anything more than a big tearful emote. Please refer me to a place that I failed to back up my arguments. If you can.

Reported.

No WMDs, no justification for war, no UN authorization ... Oh, I'm going to report you for lying. Lying? ?

Gosh, now there is forum criminality. Is there forum grand juries, and trials also? Maybe there are forum jails. Probably not. Just banishment, which is something akin to lethal injection. I'm not talking about 'criminality'. I'm talking about something apparently foreign to rightwing apologists -- integrity.

You have a real yen for censorship, don't you August? The video is truly freakish. Do you have an explanation for it, or is capital I Ignoring it going to be your response?

Please refer me to a place that I failed to back up my arguments. I see no reason to allow a poster to fall into a pattern of abusing other posters. If that's the sort of thing you're looking for, you're probably in the wrong place. You might have some firsthand understanding of that, right?

No WMDs, no justification for war, no UN authorization ...

Toooo bizarre!

Are you the boy lawyer or the girl lawyer?

Nope. Too many nutbars out there ready to take the argument to your front door rather that keep it on the forum where it belongs. Also, I think a forum is better without posters knowing who has a bigshot job or not, or lots of cash or not, or is a police officer or not, etc. Let the merits of our opinions speak for themselves, not what we do for a living or whatnot.

Maybe you should have said: A real man is a person who HAS A PENIS AND puts his family and friends before his own needs. A real man HAS A PENIS AND protects his family and the people he cares about at the risk of even his own life. A real man evaluates a situation and makes a judgment based on his best judgment. A real man HAS A PENIS AND can handle IT AND any situation that comes up in life and even if he cant he takes it on anyways. A real man HAS A PENIS AND takes responsibility for his own actions. A real man HAS A PENIS AND recognizes the need to protect his land from Domestic and Foreign attackers. A real man HAS A PENIS AND takes control of a situation through action and does not hide behind only words. To me, those are the signs and qualities that i feel a man should have, ESPECIALLY THE PENIS.

The allegation Scott made was that it is code for the word "Jews". But that's nonsense. Millions of non-Jews, especially in North America, are pro-Israel. ...and that makes them, a community? What makes a community? Should he call them a faction? Or a movement? What? Is there some special collective noun that you would find more appropriate for these millions?

Pure fantasy. Canada's navy could beat the Iranian navy, probably. Man for man, rifle for rifle, I'd put reg force Canadians up against ANY other country's reg forces and count on Canada to win. But Iran has a much larger army. I the air, right now Canada and Iran's equipment are mostly of the same vintage. Iran has some newer equipment and Canada has yet to take delivery of its new aircraft. Tough call in the air.

The allegation Scott made was that it is code for the word "Jews". But that's nonsense. Millions of non-Jews, especially in North America, are pro-Israel.

Reported. I'll keep that in mind and report any slips by you in the future. Just don't push your luck. I already let you get away with calling me pipsqueak on another thread. You need to improve your habits or you won't last long around here.

Next time you feel the urge to editorialize, you should avoid presenting your version as if you were quoting someone else. That way you won't be perpetrating a dishonesty.

Nicely done.

Not according to the Criminal Code.