kuzadd

we are on a steretyping mission, now aren;t we? lots of riots, everywhere,,,,, we've been through this already. lynchings? caucasians made that a real 'picnic' bombings, hmmm???? yadda yadda yadda............... scapegoating is all the rage! well we always need an "enemy" to justify our own abuses?!

heeb appears to be a published magazine. here's the subscription rates http://www.heebmagazine.com/subscribe mission statement http://www.heebmagazine.com/info etc.,

Your reaction was to quickly post a link to a story on western publishing of cartoons, does anyone really care about these cartoons, period?! I mean, honestly, who hasn't seen them? They seem to be of interest to some on the "right" who use them as a "free speech" icon. Hardly. and laughable at that. It seems some wish to use them simply to be as inflammatory as possible. Is that the intent really of "free speech"? To my mind free speech brings about relevant and possibly difficult discussion, with the intent of resolving or bringing to light specific issues. To my mind the right to free speech was really to keep onself in an environment of open and rational discussion, Not to be inflammatory, but to be informative. But that is just my opinion.

I would say, yah. I looked at your response, quick to finger point at arabs and rehash the trumped up cartoon issue. Which is really a non-issue except for the fact that some 'westerners' wish to continue beating a dead horse.

I think you are correct about that, therefore the "seller" is criminalized. and not the possesor.

I don't think they will either. and in all actuality I do not think arabs would either. but from your response I think it is safe to assume, you would be one of those making a big flaming deal of the cartoon if it showed cooking westerners? with the reaction would be overblown outrage. With subsequent release of Arab recipes and arab's being cooked by "christians" cartoons. right!

http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSGOR27660220080212 In the late 1980s and early 1990's Connolly worked for the European Commission analyzing the European monetary system in the run up to the introduction of the euro currency. an interesting and long read, but informative . he ends the article: "If we don't avoid depression, the only thing worth holding is cash," he added. As I always like to say myself "cash is king"!!!

and the only thing that can save us is 'big brother'? Big gov and big business combined, oh goody

thanks guyser, it;s not that I want to see kids get criminal records for youthful folly. It is that I do not see the sense in the store clerk/store paying for that.

well we had the cookie eating stunt, now we have a cartoon depicting Jews cooking non-jews. http://www.heebmagazine.com/articles/view/125 there are some comments wrt the cartoon from readers of the magazine, on this page also full cartoon here: http://heebmagazine.com/files/uploaded_pho...rtoon_2_800.jpg so share some thoughts, what do we all think about this cartoon? Lets have a good discussion! I'll start, I am not offended. I like wicked humour, so whatever. I can see it would be offensive to some. I wonder why a stereotype of this type would be chosen for humour? I wonder what the reaction to this humour would be if , the cartoon depicted Arabs cooking westerners? I imagine the reaction would be overblown outrage. With subsequent release of Arab recipes and arab's being cooked by "christians" cartoons.

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbc...340/1190/NEWS01 my comments: I do not believe the line ""We were later told the baby was coming here for heart surgery," that's as much of a crock of BS as I can imagine. There is no way in hell the mom and nurse would tell anyone LATER, that the 14 day old infant was in need of heatsurgery. If that was my child I would sure as hell figure out a way to make the situation very clear to the people in charge. Secondly the infant died at 5:50 a.m. and yet paramedics were not called till 6:10 a.m. , a twenty minute time difference. Why? Now the baby may have or may not have died had this not happened, but,nonetheless, the baby died while locked in a room at the airport and paramedics were not called for a full 20 minutes after the baby died. what a heartbreaking story. Is this terrorism " screening" run amok?

sure it happened angus, the bible says so! and normally I don't care either about people's religious beliefs, note I said normally. Unfortunatley these hardly seem normal times. Have you followed the US election at all? it seems the candidates are fallling all over themselves to be religious like it actually matters! Then the american military seems to be exalting itself to the position of warriors for god! All this religious fervor in an alleged modern society is freaky to say the least, and, extremely worrisome IMO.

Though I do not recall any reason such as the one you remember, the reason is irrelevant to the point I am making. The fine passes the buck, if the kid knows it's illegal to buy cigarettes and goes to the store and get's away with it. Why is it the store and the store clerk that pay? alot of times the sellers are not adults, they are just kids working in corner stores. It's a law that takes the responsibility off of the person who should be responsible for their own actions and onto a store or store clerk, often a kid and often working for minumum wage. This law infact if applied to a person committing a break and enter, would see the homeowner fined for having something in their possession, worth committing the crime for.

apologies and to clarify the statement I made hear is in reference to the situation : : This is the law that passes the buck from the responsible party/making there own choice (kid buying cigs) to someone else, who could (Fake and borrowed Id's.) have to pay for that.

let;s set aside the yokel in the pick-up truck. I personally think it is reprehensible that parents feed fast food to their kids, also excessive junk food (pre-packaged crap). Shall we pass laws for that? To criminalize parent's? For their lack of nutritional knowledge? I knew a kid, who ate so much junk food from his parents in his lunch, chips, pop, white bread, chocolate bars. no fruit, no milk, by time this kid hit Gr. 9, Gr 9!, his cholesterol level was through the roof. and he was about 60 lbs overweight , maybe more! His parents obviously choose to be reckless with their child's health and well being. choose with intention? Or from lack of nutritional knowledge? dunno which? shall we pass laws and criminalize that behaviour?

Our laws therefore cause an undue hardship to what end , really.? when education and awareness is the way to go Not penalizing everyone else for the person who is choosing to act in a reckless manner. I would suggest leaving a child to the care and well being of their parents, who have the best interests of their own children at heart. The best thing we can do for our kids in society, is to be a decent society as a whole and ensure parent's have the resources to provide the best they can for their kids. educational abilities, employment , suitable housing etc., There are no amount of laws, that can be passed that can save a child from the recklessness of there parents if the parent is choosing to be reckless. It is sad, but unfortunately true. Laws always come into play after an alleged crime is perpetrated. using the yokel as an example. My problem with the excessive passing of laws is that eventually far to many things become criminal and with that, far too many people become criminals.

I think you misunderstand, is it progress that a minimum wage employee , now get's to be repsonsible for the choices of other's?? Or did progress on reduced smoking actually come from increased awareness via education and PERSONAL CHOICE? I would say it was the latter. wrt the yokel, to fine the yokel someone has to actually catch him doing that? Then the fine hopefully willl act as a deterrent. I say hopefully. for the next time. BUT, even the fine is meted out after the fact. After the deed is done. So you can pass a law, but it will NOT physically deter the yokel. The fine may or may not act as a deterrent, for a next offence? In the end it will still come down to the choice /responsibility of the yokel, to ensure his/her own child's safety. Which is the very point I was making to begin with. That a minor's well being is firmly in the hands of the parent, regardless of the laws on a piece of paper.

one more thing! how is a law necessarily going to stop an action.? If we make a law saying " yokel's can't drive down the highway with unrestrained children in the back of his pickup..." what is actually going to physically stop the yokel? from putting the child in the back of the truck? the law written on a piece of paper? Or the choice the yokel makes? The yokel may or may not be aware of the existence of said law? So it still boils down to the choice the yokel makes. In other words kimmy, the law written on a piece of paper may or may not constrain the 'yokel' from making a bad or good choice. Though you appear to think it will, this is most certainly not the case.

I have NO wish to see any kids hurt,I highly doubt anyone does, so let's not personalize this issue, to play the moral superiority card. Unfortunately kimmy, it is and that's the way it is. That's humanity for you, it comes in all shapes and sizes and all good and bad. By far and large the vast majority of parents care a great deal for the kids, I know I did, I put a bike helmet on my kid when she was 4 yrs old, cause it was the law? No! because i didn't want my precious child hurt? YES! one can always cite the extreme rare situation to justify constraining everyone, but is that legitimate? to do that? cite the 1% to control the 99%?????

Well it was done when I was a kid. I would say, yup. It's not up to the minimum wage employee's to police other people's kids. That's up to parent's btw: there was one store when I was a kid, who would not sell to kids without a letter from the parent, neighbourhood store, they knew all the kids, not foolproof, but at least it was the store owners choice.

thanks for the advice. unfortunately maldon road, keeps putting his/her foot in his mouth ,proverbially speaking, by living up to the very indicators of the top ten list. can I help this? I cannot. Perhaps your advice should extend to maldon, who that seems more applicable to ? "try to not make it appear like you're on some sort of a hunt." maldon.

7 - Your face turns purple when you hear of the "atrocities" attributed to Allah, but you don't even flinch when hearing about how God/Jehovah slaughtered all the babies of Egypt in "Exodus" and ordered the elimination of entire ethnic groups in "Joshua" including women, children, and trees! Your fast living up to this list's identifier's. Top Ten Signs You're a Fundamentalist Christian can't stop yourself I guess?

Some changes are positive, but I think of the cigarette sales in particular. Now I don't even smoke, 'cept for a rebellious teen phase. But look at the fine stores incur for selling cigs to minors? A store clerk at one chain of stores that I know of has to incur the cost if the mistake is made of selling a cigarette to a minor. The fine is huge! So some minimum wage earning working person is now responsible for what your kid may try to get away with. Fake and borrowed Id's. What about the kid? What is the kids responsibility for buying cigs? Nothing. Will the parent's ever even find out? But hey the store will pay a fine and the employee will also, for your kids rebellious behaviour and experimentation. That's progress?

I hear you drea. It is hard to look at the numerous shortcomings in ones own religion, and chritianity has many of them. Speaking of my own fall from grace, as one could say. The facts are christians hold wacky violent inducing beliefs. The bible is littered with murder/ rape and more. Christianity has a checkered history to put it mildly! from popes and their orgies to christians and their polygamy. Pedophile priests From the crusade of old to the modern crusade. Yet somehow they hold themselves up as superior? Not quite sure how? I think of the saying " the unexamined life is a life not worth living". Christians is like one big unexamined life/style. But perhaps it is best not too look to deep? Lest one see's the monster is really within oneself. Never mind the whole other arguement of the non-existence of the sky god!

wrt cigarette smoking http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...;pagewanted=all but as early as 1929 1929 that was almost 80 years ago. therefore we now know, wrt cigarettes, what we knew 80 yrs ago. when I foolishly in my teen phase experimented with smoking, and yup stores sold ciggies to kids, my parents said, that's bad for your health, after of course getting some swift kicks to the a**. This was more then 30 yrs ago. It was a phase that didn't last long, typical rebellion crap. of course now, we can diagnose these rebellious types with a new disorder. ODD. read up on that one!