theloniusfleabag

Dear GostHacked, It isn't the site, but our 'troll' that is hated.

Dear geoffrey, Try as I might, the only question what might be applied might be "Too little, for too much, too soon'? (that is a lot of 'o's) However, in most every regard, they are not reallly comparable. Let's see Israel take on the UK (and all it's traditional colonies allies), the US and Russia. (Perhaps add in some 50-100 countries, who declared sides against the Axis powers) The Jews have displayed a far more 'honourable code of conduct' before and during WWII that they have displayed since then to the present.

Dear August1991, I see no reason why Bush won't fullfill two terms in office. The media has taken over the 'wielding' of 'public opinion' (and the courts). Clinton was cleared not successfully prosecuted...like Orenthal.

Dear August1991, Did you know his middle name was 'Sphere'? Did you also know he was crazy? Sometimes I wonder if I am crazy...I always look at the 'whole ball of wax', I look to the end, and believe that if you find the 'end', only then does the path to it become clear...and that path will never contain 'means' that the end would not include.

Dear August1991, Excellent post, you often see what others do not. Toro raises a good point, some in 'the rest of Canada', particularly in Alberta, are possibly even more isolationist (and seperatist) than some Quebecois, or the US before (and during) WWII. Not if they don't care. BTW, does media influence them? Or are they immune (you know, 'being different', and all)?I saw Peter McKay jousting with Peter Mansbridge the other day on the telly, ( I tuned in to the news for a short bit, even though I try to shun the medium) and Mansbridge tried to pin down McKay on whether or not Israel was included in Canada's 'stated position' that all parties should cease hostilities, and Mckay tried to 'weasel out of it'...Mansbridge: "When you say 'all parties, do you include Israel as part of 'all parties?" McKay: "Let me be clear, when I said 'all parties, I meant all parties should cease hostilities..." Generally, a 'clarification' is not meant 'to make one's self clear', it is 'to put one's self in the clear'.

Dear August1991, You must have missed a word here, all I can decifer is 'syntax error'. However, what you seem to be implying is; the status quo, (ie: the same mistaken approach that not only will not solve the problem, but has historically exacerbated it) more rigorously applied. A short term solution to a long term problem. I believe it is called 'diplomacy'.

Dear August1991, Mine doesn't, in this case, but I do respect that he has a desire to avoid phrased equivocation. Oversimplification. Further, I don't believe 'world public opinion' is quite so galvanized in it's judgement of the situation. Why do you suppose that some who fight foreign occupation are in one case called 'terrorists' (though they may not have ever killed a civilian, and in other cases, sometimes justifiably 'guerrilla fighters') while no one dare call them 'Minutemen'?

This thread reminds me of a diaper...'8-10 lbs' of crap, it's full, and it's time to throw it out.

Dear Leafless, How about the US? My brother-in-law lives in Victoria BC, and is a lawyer with dual citizenship. He is a great guy, makes a fair bit of money, and I would rather he (and his tax dollars) stayed here. However, due to the nature of his work, he travels a great deal (mostly to the US) and the dual citizenship is a great advantage to him. In this light, there must be some exceptions to the rule of 'one citizenship only'.

Dear Army Guy, You may know the answer to this better than anyone,... I have posted links elsewhere, but I understand that Israel has had the capability to shoot down the katyushas using MTHEL (which was successfully tested against salvos of katyushas in 2002). Are they allowing them to hit Israel to justify their invasion? Is it like the Coventry bombings of WWII, where British citizens were intentionally left in harm's way for the sake of 'the bigger picture'?

Dear Mr. Hardner, I wholeheartedly agree, but sadly, this is the trend of the media, and of society. It is all about 'getting the camera in the victim's face', because that is what sells. The 'unwashed masses' want to see "Survivor: Lebanon" than want to see truth and reality. If those producers could just add some smut, perhaps a bombing victim that was cheating on their spouse, and arrives in Canada or the US opn the same boat as the mistress, well, sales and ratings would be great!

Dear geoffrey, Here is a somewhat related article...http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:HUPNPAa...ca&ct=clnk&cd=5

This question is either asinine or insane. Or incredibly poorly worded. 'Nazi Germany' no longer has a military. Further, not all of Germany's Wehrmacht were 'Nazis'. What is the point of this question?

Dear Toro, Actually, it seems that uniting all muslims under one leader (Caliph), and not a nation, is called a 'caliphate'. http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/ISLAM/CALIPH.HTM http://www.caliphate.co.uk/ http://www.bartelby.net/65/ca/caliphat.html Which, it seems, they have not solidified, and that there is no one widely accepted 'caliph'. (based on the presumption that no one, including Bin Laden, has succeeded in calling for 'jihad' against anyone in particular, nor accepted any responsibility for any failures in the progression of Islamic unity)

It seems August1991 has been somewhat prophetic... from...http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....indpost&p=33955

Thought I'd dredge up this old thread, even though it turned silly. There has recently been some posts and some news stories that are somewhat related...for example... http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....=0entry123589 http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....ndpost&p=123568 I believe the original question was meant to imply: "Can radical Islamists be 'contained' if they have their own country to govern?" Would having such a country existing in the world be a legitimate 'destination' for deportations of those that support radical Islam?

Dear Moron X, Don't keep us in the dark, lad, perhaps you should tell us the name, so I can...er...avoid it. By the way, your 3 posts thus far have been in threads with either 'pedophilia' or 'child spanking' in the title...is there something we should know?

From an Arutz Sheva op/ed piece... http://www.israelnationalnews.com/article.php3?id=6394

Dear August1991, Indeed, well said. In some ways, it reminds me of a 'loveless marriage' that continues 'for the sake of the kids'. I concur.

Dear PocketRocket, Well done, (though I think I have read this elsewhere before...sounds kinda like Markus Twainus)kilkee's predilection for cross-posting this rubbish while refusing debate is simply an example of 'trolling'.

Dear Charles Anthony, Actually, it does have a name, and it is called 'anarchy'. You just seem to be in a minority of those who shun the popular definition in favour of another. There would be no 'crime' because there would be no law. If you think this 'state' has no name, perhaps you could convince people it should have one, 'chaos', for example, and then convince the majority of people that they misunderstand the classic definition of 'anarchy'.I would venture that BHS shares the 'common mistake of the definition of anarchy', and perhaps has coined the new name for that which is missing... http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....indpost&p=67788 An example of 'anarchy' (and not libertarianism) being practically applied... Indeed, here we are...Interestingly, some 'scientists' somehow received a grant to study the 'thousand monkeys on a thousand typewriters' conundrum...they found that the typewriters were used as weapons, toys to be hurled, and finally as a toilet. I don't believe the name 'Yorick' ever appeared.

Dear August1991, Actually, Victor Borge invented 'inflationary language' some time ago. It involves adding 1 to each of the 'hidden numbers' in our language...so 'before' +1= 'befive', create +1 = 'crenine', ans so on and so fifth. So rather than saying "I ate my tenderloin with my fork", one should say "I nined my elevenderloin with my fivek".Seriously, though, generally the 'agenda' is saving said people from said disaster. The rise in the tone is likely part and parcel of the general numbing and desensitization people have experienced over the years. Would another Rwandan genocide be called a 'major humanitarian disaster'? Or would that not cut the mustard anymore?

Dear August1991, Gee, the NYT (and the 'main stream media) has been accused on this forum of being blatantly 'leftist', to the point of treason. A load of poppycock, I say, but where does this rating leave them? Obviously, to the right of anything that might suggest that the Palestinians have been wronged in any way, and therefore imples that they bear sole blame for any conflict or loss of life in the entire region, in the past, in the present, and in perpetuity. I disagree with that.

Dear Mr. Fortin, They are apples and oranges, (so they cannot be compared) and don't really belong together, except by arbitrary choice. They temper each other, really.

I found another interesting read... http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/wor...lah-rockets.htm I wonder why they haven't used it thus far? I wonder why the Cambodian ship being sunk didn't make the headlines? Or did I miss it?Oddly, the only google reference I found (that wasn't a pay site) was... http://www.bahraintribune.com/ArticleDetai...51&CategoryId=2 The other one was from the... http://www.einnews.com/cambodia/newsfeed-cambodia-terrorism