theloniusfleabag

Dear Mr. Bedson, I agree with you, and I knew this was coming... because it is true. Once orders get questioned, the authority of rank falls apart. The guy should be tried for desertion, and hope that he can prove his point in a legitimate way. Not fact here, Canada has not lost 'thousands'. Not fallacy, really but fact. Both the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq were illegal.

Dear August1991, Actually, no, legislation is. I am sure you have noticed I am no Libertarian, but also not totalitarian. Should a 7 year old with 'good money' be allowed to buy smokes, beer and porn? Without legislation, the store would have to wager that the sales gained would outstrip the sales lost (from indignation). Oddly, someone like you should be supporting that store in the name of the freedom you espouse. Too much freedom and you'll find that people generally aren't moral, aren't fair, and base anarchy is only kept in check by 'discriminatory laws'. Achieving balance is difficult, while total anarchy can be argued as 'completely fair', yet I don't believe it strives in the right direction.

Dear Mr. Bedson, I suppose I should have actually read some of the rest of the thread before I shot my mouth off. (It's been up for a while, I forgot what the purpose was until now). Yes, desertion is illegal and this soldier should be aware of the consequences of his actions.However, there should be exceptions, though they may not apply here. In 1941, German General Jodl tried to avoid Hitler's tyrannical orders that were to accompany Germany's advance into Russia. He said that the Army would concern itself with military matters only, and leave the Hitler's planned atrocities to the SD and SS, the Einsatzgruppen, and Reichskommisariat. Hitler was admant that the Army would carry out his orders, which included the liquidation of some 75% of the Russian populace, as they went (instead of using terror on the population after the invasions, as had been done previously). For a soldier who signed up to fight battles, this must have been something that not all could agree with. If someone joins a military to defend their country, or even 'freedom and liberty', that is one thing. But what should he do if the country decides to use their military for an aggressive war of choice (which were, in the eyes of many, for the spoils and not for the reason given to the media)?

Dear Mr. Bedson, I do believe that the lawyers (including those in the UK) said it was, at best, 'iffy'. Certainly not outright 'legal'. It actually relies on convoluted logic and leaps of faith to produce a 'maybe'.PS. Welcome back, Krusty.

Dear August1991, Interesting story. Good for them. A tiny ray of secularist light that hopefully doesn't get snuffed. It boggles the mind that people can rail against 'Muslim opression of their own people', yet will defend this country (Saudi Arabia) to the death...and for some reason, would like us to believe that the motive isn't oil. Last night, I was thinking about starting a thread on Saudi Arabia and Kuwait as they are two of the most 'hard-line' and oppressive religious states in the world. Should they be invaded to free their youth from tyranny?

Dear August1991, To be fair, I believe Black Dog does try to criticize them all. Perhaps it is true that he has a special dislike of Levant, but I don't see it as hypocritical in Black Dog's case. I have to agree here, but the current solution seems to be the notion that the Muslims need to be convinced that God isn't that gosh-darned important. That won't happen soon.As a pragmatist, I see some bad times ahead.

Dear betsy, I must concur with Black Dog and August1991, there are too many threads on this one topic already. Creating multiple threads of the same topic is against forum rules (as it could be interpreted as 'flooding' or 'trolling'), I do believe, unless it was by accident (which I have done in the past, while trying to edit a new topic) or if you are attempting to argue some other, relevant point not covered in the original thread. In this case, I could possibly see how there might be two, religious and legal, but certainly not the volume we have had thus far.

Dear betsy, I believe someone has posted a link to them on another thread. However, You will not see what Muslims see. This is the point that a lot of people are missing. Depictions of Muhammed are considered 'idolatry', just as the Jews and Muslims see Christians as 'idol-worshippers' for venerating 'Christ on the Cross'. Reminds me of a bit from Monty Python's Life of Brian, where a man was about to be stoned to death for uttering the name 'Jehovah'. Kooky, but to this day, if you read the writings of devout Jews (such as the "Ask the Rabbi' section of Israelnationalnews.com), they still cannot write the name 'God', it will always appear as 'G-d'.

Dear Mr. Hardner, My time is too valuable to protest 'just to prove a point'. There are many things that should be acceptable, and some that should not. Often clubs and bars (and restaurants) are 'closed to the public' for special events, usually for company functions. By the same token, one could argue (foolishly) that they were being discriminated against, and refused service or entry, because they did not belong to that specific company. However, August1991, Should it be up to the consumer to decide if a 'whites only' club should exist?As to the notion of the 'Pride Parade', I don't really care. I actually see it as a 'Sexual Preference Parade', so I have advocated (and labeled a mixed 'burned' music CD in my collection) "The All-Canadian Tit-Fuckers Parade".

Dear geoffrey, To give at least the veneer of legitimacy, Saddam should have been tried at The Hague, in front of an international tribunal. Besides, We often support human rights abusers if it is in our interests to do so. Like Saddam. Or Suharto. Or 'Papa Doc' Duvalier. Or Pinochet. Or Taylor of Liberia. Or Hamas (created by Israel). Or fanatical anti-western Muslim extremists in Afghanistan. http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/06/...l?from=storyrhs http://www.burmalibrary.org/reg.burma/arch...1/msg00535.html

Dear Mr. Hardner, Such is the nature of profit-driven, mammon-worshipping secularism. What else is there to do? It too, is claimed as 'holy', and defended with equal fervor, but the problem is, it does lack a point. Except that it turns a profit.

Dear tml12 I call B.S. Further, the reverse of this statement is set to grow stronger. I would have voted conservative this time around but the MP in my riding is contemptible. However, I agree that some 'conservative values' need to be strengthened, and US relations have to be handled with way more tact.

Dear Argus,, I don't believe an American court would have had this trial.

Dear August1991, I looked through several dictionaries, and the only place I found something similar to 'dirigiste' was in my French-English dictionary. It had the word 'dirigisme', (government economic planning and control). I would say that most countries gov'ts dabble in this to one degree or another, more than practice 'Laissez-faire' to such degrees. (Why do the french have such great terms like this, and not english, and why do the germans make up 32 letter words to mean the same thing?) Not exactly true. Hutterites have been extremely successful with their brand of 'collective farming', to the point where they are (or were) the fastest growing land ownership concern in recent times. (This applies to prairie farmland only, though)Cuba is an example of a tainted experiment, where the economic value of their production and ability to trade has been virtually nullified. I think your label of 'Left' is too broad, (and you yourself qualified the difference between 'the old left' and 'modern left', yet still lump them together in the next post. Many people who witness this 'underdog phenomenon' called those people 'bleeding hearts', while you seem to think that all of those who support even economic socialism (and even 'fair play) must also and unequivocably support those that fight against a more powerful force. I don't believe this to be true.

Dear Melanie, Back in the days of VCRs, I had all the Fawlty Towers (and Yes, Minister) episodes taped. As to Monty Python, I had The Holy Grail memorized, and copies of The Life of Brian, and Yellowbeard (which had most of the Python crew). I also have a book called "Monty Python's Flying Circus: Just The Words", which has all of the dialogue from all of the episodes.Mel Brooks' History of The World (part one) was Brooks at his best, Blazing Saddles was a close second.

Dear August1991, The Cult of Personality. It is also the 'consumerist society and it's idol worship. Celebrities are feted by the consumers of their product and they are actively and daily coerced to do so by every available and (almost always) legal means. I admit the same of television and 'popular culture'. I have watched about a weeks' worth of television in the last 10+ years, and of that mostly select DVDs that I own. (The entire 'Yes, Minister' series, Some old Abbot and Costello Shows, Red Skelton, Jesus Christ, Superstar and The Rocky Horror Picture Show. Aslo, Ichi the Killer, Meet the Feebles, South Park, Bigger, Longer and Uncut, and Team America. Oh, and an incredible cinematography bit called 'Powaqqatsi'.)

Dear FTA Lawyer, It sounds like you advocate the legalization of 'victimless crimes', which is a can of worms unto itself. The Jersey Mob makes gruesome examples out of 'welchers'. This is why they are saying the punters weren't breaking the law, only those that profited from said illegal gambling are being named and prosecuted. Well, the NHL has been relatively untainted by scandal like the rest of the major sports, and with the wife of the most recognizable hockey name in the world being involved (amongst his vast number of trophies and records held, he won the 'Lady Byng' Trophy aka. Most Gentlemanly Player Trophy, 5 times) stories like this tend to have at least artificial legs.

Dear Mr. Hardner, Well said. Indeed, virtually every society is 'economically and socio-morally blended', to various degrees. I was going to argue to August1991 that the Left has not 'lost the economic argument', since no 'pure' experiment has taken place. Further, many societies, including Canada's vehemently support things that are left economically', including health care, regulated energy prices, and state-owned or arbitrated easement. I do believe that you and August1991 are both right, that extremes and absolutes are now moot, but that leaves us with another conundrum...if 'too many cooks spoil the broth', whom should be head chef?

Dear FTA Lawyer, Surely you jest. There is no such thing anymore as 'anything for the sake of itself' (such as journalism, etc.) that is motivated by profit. Only selling papers matters. Too much or too little, sales and only sales dictate. I'll agree here (except with the word 'supported', perhaps 'tolerated' is better).

Dear durok, As geoffrey states, 'yes', it is true. That is why both the Muslims and the Jews deride Christians as 'idol-worshippers'.

Dear Black Dog, I am inclined to agree. Saddam was found hiding in a hole with a suitcase full of cash, and not with a cummerbund full of dynamite.geoffrey, Evidently, Israel has threatened to do this in the past, according to the book "The Samson Option" by Seymour Hersch. Actually, it is a pretty good threat. "Don't attack me or I'll kill us all."

Dear August1991, How is censorship to be eliminated? Evidently, The Rolling Stones were censored at the Superbowl. They were told beforehand, "Sing your lyrics, but we are going to turn down the microphone at certain times, to hide the naughty bits". I read that the Stones were a bit miffed, but played their songs anyway. Should they have walked off stage? I also read that the Danish publisher of the 'offensive cartoons' was going to run the Holocaust cartoons as well. http://start.shaw.ca/start/enCA/News/World...rc=w020843A.xml As well they should. They should also challenge Iran to emulate 'western reaction'.

Dear August1991, No, the 'left' has not lost the economic arguments, they will continue for a long time to come. Canada, as well as many other socialist countries, continue to have far more equtiable and generally high standards of living compared to most other countries. ( I can go to a local farmer's market, and/or to some Hutterites, and get a month's worth of potatoes or onions for less than 1% of my paycheque) We also do that. Often, admittedly, not pragmatically enought...but this applies to both sides.There was another point you had made towards Liam, but I either cannot see it or my recollection is bad...did you edit it at all?

Dear August1991, A rather pathetic post, I am surprised at you. Let's take David Geffen, for example (as Joni Mitchell did in her song "Free Man in Paris"), who is rich, white and gay. You seem to be suggesting that 'the left' only supports Geffen's right to marry another man because it is a fashionably 'underdog' thing to do, but would think twice of Geffen's situation because the rest of him fits a 'conservative' mold. I support same-sex marriage regardless of who is involved (so long as it is consenting, sane adults). As I have said in another thread, Muslims should have the right to boycott goods, or stage demonstrations, or even print Holocaust cartoons, but should not have the right to resort to violence. Violence should only be legitimized if they so choose to declare war over the issue.

Dear August1991, Huxley's 'Brave New World' gets closer ever day. Sadly, the 'unfathomable ways' will only be technological. We'll still do things for the same old reasons. Profit and war.