ScottSA

And if trains were horizontal escalators or ran in endless procession, they could handle about the same number of people as a highway, but they don't and they can't. You mean it wouldn't be possible to have 400 trains carrying 1000 passengers each and stopping every 1/2 mile? Don't be silly. What about when 10 people got off each train? Then there would only be 990 people on each train, falling completely outside the parameters of your utopic vision.

For those of us in the Center, I don't think anyone takes your comments seriously. But you're not in the center.

Yes, and that is irrelevant. Whether I go or my sons or daughters go has nothing to do with the issue. I love the way you folks take single examples and try to extrapolate from them into great universal truisms. I mean stuff like this: "Vietnam is a prime example of what happens when other countries interfere and try to change things. We have only united the whole population against us." Really? What is the invasion of Germany and Japan examples of? Last I heard they changed a lot, and they're not united against us. Then there's Vietnam and cambodia...the Khmer Rouge weren't very happy about it I guess, but they're all on trial now, so I don't know how much uniting they're up for this week. Why gosh...then there's the entire age of colonialism in which, revisionist historians notwithstanding, the general populace by and large supported the imposed political structure (in the British colonies anyway). I was in India 20 years after the Raj left, and there were still a great many people who wished it would return. If they hadn't, I don't imagine they would have adopted the political trappings of the colonizers when they left. Your assertion that England was universally hated was just pulled out of a revisionist hat. So really, it turns out that Vietnam is just a prime example of Vietnam. As for Harper listening to people, this is pure rhetoric. You just don't like it because he's not listening to you. Thank God for small miracles.

I'd be guessing "zero" of any of the types named. There has never been any nation organised according to the principles of capitalism, socialism or communism. Elements of all three are found in all western nations - including also ancient feudalism and subsistence farming. You're a bit of a purist, eh? I've heard it said that capitalism (obviously not the 'pure' capitalism you have in mind) is the default mode of trade, and that appears to be true. Socialism and communism have to be fabricated and enforced.

And if trains were horizontal escalators or ran in endless procession, they could handle about the same number of people as a highway, but they don't and they can't.

No, if it's a war of attrition with a 20:1 bodycount, we win. Our mistake is not going in on full auto, and until we bleed a whole lot more, we're not going to do that. But to approach every tactical or bureaucratic mistake as if it is proof positive of a "quagmire" makes no sense whatsoever.

Speaking of gaping holes, find any religions which have a god, that can actually stand up to a logical argument? That's like asking science to stand up to a theological argument. If either side shifts the argument into their own territory, evidence gets real hard to come by.

It doesn't matter who started the thread. You replied to me... now you dodge. Is it so hard for you to say, "I misread your post and jumped to a conclusion in error?" If you had said nothing you would have looked better than you do now by trying to spin. I'm not dodging you, I'm trying to explain to you that I was talking to Kuzzad. Go back and look at the post. Why would I dodge someone who leaps on my back and loudly bellows in my ear that he agrees with me?

Oh yeah: if I was in Israel, I'd be shaking in my boots. "Onoes! A bunch of untrained, poorly-armed and dirt-poor militants want to exterminate our people! If only we had, like, the largest, best equipped military in the region to protect us!" You don't know much about them, do you? They are trained by Iran in some of the most grueling training on the planet, they have the latest armaments that Syria and iran can supply them, and they were recently embarrassing the Lebanese government by passing out bundles of cash to the denizens of Beirutese rubble not very long ago at all. So, they are highly trained, well armed, and richer than Midas, which pretty roundly makes you wrong.

Point of order. Brothers and cousins aren't ancestors..... Thank you. As you were....... At least there are no Jamaican sheep in the woodpile.

Well Melanie...thanks for supplying a more current restatement of the same point you're apparently claiming is based on outdated info: "The majority of people living with HIV in the USA are men who have sex with men, and sex between men remains the dominant mode of transmission, accounting for 63% of newly-diagnosed HIV infections in 2003, according to the latest available data (US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2004a)." Thanks to our tax dollars and the billions in research we ultimately pay for, they get to live longer and suck even more out of our pockets for an entirely preventable disease: The estimated number of people living with HIV in the United States of America (USA) at the end of 2003 exceeded one million for the first time, up from the corresponding figure of 850 000–950 000 for 2002 (US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2004a). There were an estimated 1.04 million–1.2 million HIV cases in the USA at the end of 2003. The increase reflects the fact that people with HIV are living longer due to antiretroviral treatment, as well as the failure to adapt and sustain the prevention successes achieved during the epidemic’s first 10–15 years. Approximately 32 000 new HIV cases were recorded in 2003 in the 33 states with confidential, name-based reporting, a number that has stayed relatively stable since the late 1990s. (Those 33 reporting states do not include California and New York, which have the highest number of persons living with HIV.) In effect, this study is more damning than the study KR supplied. Thanks. Clearly there are significant health risks associated with bum buggery.

So what do you want to do? Eradicate all Islamic countries, since this is what would have to be done to permanently eliminate world terrorist actions, death threats relating to the Rushdie controversy which is similar to the Danish cartoon caper and the migration of Muslims into Western and European countries. http://plancksconstant.org/blog1/2006/02/w...e_publishe.html Partly. We can't control what happens in Islamic countries...if they want to burn their own cars, that's fine with me. But when they start burning our cars in the west, it should be put down immediately, sans the self-flagellating hand-wringing. Cartoons of a 6th century warlord are not a valid reason to burn cars any more than crosses submerged in urine and called art are a justification to burn cars. The pope quoting a Bysantine emperor speaking about the brutality of a religion is not a justification to burn cars or kill nuns. Especially in view of the fact that the Emperor in question spoke a few short years before Bysantium was sacked in one of the most brutal sackings in history, by those self same future car burners and nun slayers who got offended at being told they're brutal. Making a movie about the rather obvious fact that Islam subjugates women is not a justification to shoot to death a movie maker. None of it justifies car burning, and when car burning occurs, it ought to be dealt with exactly the same way it would be dealt with if white "thugs" were doing it and not Islamic "youths." And we can shut the doors tight to Islamic immigration. In fact it's foolhardy not to. If other countries decide to export their terror here, or allow third parties to do so, then they are stepping into our turf, and we should respond with the might we still have, and not more wergeld.

Can we at least attempt to keep this on some sort of a mature level? I posted two quotes, one showing that he supported the decrees against Salman Rushdie, the other where he stops short of condemning the actions of 9/11 and instead talks about the problems that the attacks will cause for his own community. If you had stopped the knee jerk you would have noticed that both support your assertion that he holds radical views that could be seen as justification for putting him on the "watch list." And I commend you for it. But I wasn't talking to you. If you go back and read the origins of that post, you'll find that I was talking to Kuzzad, who doesn't share your opinion and who was trying to whitewash Cat Stevens. No need to apologize.

Are you suggesting that Israel is only modern industrialized and educated nation in the world that cannot live in a pluralistic society? Why not? Andrew Because pluralistic societies work better when one side isn't trying to kill the other side because they think the other side are monkeys and pigs. But this is exactly why pluralistic societies developed, as a response to tribalism. By either side in this conflict insisting on preserving some religious or ethnic character for their state they are dooming themselves to constant violence. Andrew With due respect, this is utter nonsense. I can't think of a single case in which pluralism emerged from tribalism without going through several steps first. Even our own homie tribalists in North America haven't quite made it out of the woods, so to speak, on that score yet. Can you give me an example of political pluralism developing on its own "as a response to tribalism?" But leaving that aside for a moment, aren't you actually answering your own question?

You mean, this "British Raj" (wikipedia)? Doesn't mention much about democracy, functioning or otherwise. One can argue another time, whether Germany has become a functioning democracy while under occupation. I concede that Japan could be the one exception to the rule, but such are far and wide in between. In any case, in both Germany and Japan cases, the occupying powers were interested to see the occupied nation recover with a strong national identity. Which seem to be opposite to the cause of Israel in the occupied Palestine. So the statement stands: the main problem of Palestine is the illegal occupation. No, the statement is farcical. You're trying to make a general truism out of a tenuous single example, and even THAT falls flat on its face. Lets start with the Raj. Do you know what took over after the British left? Exactly the same democratic regime that runs the place now. Did you imagine that is sprung up of its own accord when the British left, or that it perhaps had a little help from the British? I have no idea what Wiki has to say about the British Raj and its legacy, but I suggest you look up Lord Mountbatten and read up on his involvement with Nehru and Jinnah and just how democracy came to be in India. Naturally, the Muslims couldn't keep democracy working, but India managed just fine. Oh, and don't believe the mythology that Gandhi somehow formed it all himself. He was a moral figurehead with no power and a limited amount of moral suasion. You're trying to squirm out of your blanket statement that occupied countries can't form democracies, and in fact in many cases exactly the opposite is true. In spite of the mess Africans have made of post-colonial Africa, they were left with functioning democracies...at least the former British colonies were, and it's a fair bet that they wouldn't have developed them out of tribalism had the British not been there. As politically incorrect as the "White Man's Burden" has become in hindsight, it is solely responsible for much of Asia emerging from tyranny and all of Africa emerging from political tribalism, all of which required an "occupation." As for Palestine, it doesn't have a strong national identity because it has never been a nation. Such national identity as it may have developed under Arafat was entirely bound up in loudly advertized victimhood and didn't survive the first internal challenge to it in the form of Islam. The main problem with Palestine is the Palestinians, not Israel. I'm sure Israel would like nothing better than to wash its hands of these morons, except that every time it tries, the morons start blowing up Israelis, so it can't. Give then money and they buy weapons. Give them autonomy and they take hostages. Give them democracy and they elect 6th century thugs. Give them an inch and they take a mile. Leave them alone and they fling themselves at each other's throats. Israel is trying to survive as a modern democracy while living next door to 'Return to New York.'

Hahahaha...I love it! And you're exactly right of course. Leafless' comment is representative of the school of stultifying political correctness that would have the west avoid anything and everything that might conceivably "offend" anyone. The reason Muslims get all in a tizzy and burn cars over this kind of thing is because it works. The west immediately dons a hair shirt and starts apologizing even though it hasn't done a damned thing. Rushdie is not a particularly good writer, but he damned well deserves a knighthood for the ruin of his life by these 6th century goons and their howling fantoids.

Your link leads back to a very biased website, with an ultra Christian agenda. Anything this website posts has to be viewed as subjective, rather than objective. There aren't links to the studies cited, and the two studies listed are 9 and 10 years old. I don't think you've proven your point at all. The age of a study ought not matter to the point at hand, do you think, considering that for the last few years AIDS has again been on the rise in the NA homosexual "community?" Most sites are biased one way or another, and certainly the optics of your posts suggest that you are retreating while firing ad hominem over your shoulder. He made a point and cited evidence to back it up. I've seen those studies numerous times over the years, and I know very well they exist, and so do you. It's intuitively true anyway. Just for the information of Melanie et. al. academic assassination is an indication of weakness. Someone may not like the use to which their information is put, but that doesn't render their information incorrect.

Boy my day was dour until this popped up. You are writing comedy now? Cuz thats funny. Do tell. Or is this simply a case in point of blind support for all things Islamic?

You must hail from a former communist country where the government does everything? See, here in the west, we still cling to vestiges of the idea that people probably ought to do at least some things for themselves. Instead of trying for years to get some courses, why don't you just get some courses? There are no shortage of accredited courses lying about hither and yon, and I'm sure you can get student aid if you're worth educating, so just do it...it's more productive than sitting around on pogey complaining and waiting for the government to trundle along and hoist your rump out of the chair and pave your way with endless lucre forever and ever amen. If, as you say, you can't get a job, and you can't get some courses, then why in God's name do you even WANT to be here? No wonder people are telling you to go back home.

Really? Japan and West Germany don't ring a bell? Then of course there's the British Raj, which took a collection of decaying empires, satrapies and kingdoms, and built a functioning democracy out of them before leaving. No doubt the allies should have left Germany and Japan as glowing remnants of sound and fury rather than "installing" a democracy or any of those other nasty rightwing things. No doubt the british should have left India to revert to the squalor, mass brutalities and regional anarchies it was prone to before they showed up, instead of "installing" a democracy there, but I can't help thinking that what they left instead can't be all bad. What do you think?

Are you suggesting that Israel is only modern industrialized and educated nation in the world that cannot live in a pluralistic society? Why not? Andrew Because pluralistic societies work better when one side isn't trying to kill the other side because they think the other side are monkeys and pigs.

You seem to have a lot of difficulty adhering to the forum rules. Hopefully that means you won't be around for much longer. Well sweal, you've already been banned, so you shouldn't be here at all.

"The latest horror to hit the U.S. looks to have been caused by people of Middle Eastern origin, bearing Muslim names. Again, shame. This fuels more hatred for a religion and a people who have nothing to do with these events. " Cat Stevens http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/c...vens203130.html A British charity has been accused by the American government of financing Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda and the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas. The Islamic Relief Agency (ISRA), which is based in Birmingham and provides aid for orphanages and water wells in countries such as Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, has been designated by the United States treasury as being part of a network of "terrorist" charities that have allegedly "provided hundreds of thousands of dollars to Osama bin Laden". The Telegraph has also discovered that Yusuf Islam, the singer formerly known as Cat Stevens who was refused entry to America last September because his name was on a security watch list, has previously donated thousands of pounds to the Birmingham charity. The reason for his exclusion has never been publicly revealed, but last night American officials indicated that the entertainer's funding of the ISRA was one of the reasons for him being banned. Mr Islam has always denied financing terrorism. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...2/13/ncat13.xml TORONTO - Yusuf Islam, the British singer formerly known as Cat Stevens, was the guest of honour at a Toronto fundraising dinner hosted by an organization that has since been identified by the Canadian government as a "front" for the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas. In a videotape of the 1998 event obtained by the National Post, Mr. Islam describes Israel as a "so-called new society" created by a "so-called religion" and urges the audience to donate to the Jerusalem Fund for Human Services to "lessen the suffering of our brothers and sisters in Palestine and the Holy Land."http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/003377.php and this: Yes, in 1988, the singer of “Peace Train” authored an “informational pamphlet,” called “Eyewitness,” containing these peaceful words: “The Jews seem neither to respect God nor his creation. Their own holy books contain the curse of God brought upon them by their prophets on account of their disobedience to Him and mischief in the earth. We have seen the disrespect for religion displayed by those who consider themselves to be 'God's chosen people.'...There will be no justice until all the land is given back to its rightful owners... Only Islam can bring peace back to the Holy Land.” http://www.debbieschlussel.com/columns/column092204.shtml I'm sure there are more. Lies, no doubt. All lies. Cat is as innocent as the folks who paraded through the Nurembourg trials, all piously proclaiming their innocence.

Not much. Send them in dressed as cleaners late at night ... no problem over a few weeks. A few weeks? Riverwind provided information earlier on showing that demolition of buildings that are dwarfed by the WTC takes months to execute properly. If a normal situation requires months, then "a few guys" working nights and under the requirements of complete secrecy (ie, not just planting the explosives, but also concealing the explosives and the wiring) would have had to have started during the Ford administration. (link) Who ever said it was laid to rest? I thought this would have been hushed up after my agents "disappeared" PolyNewbie into a FEMA deathcamp (constructed by KBR. You can find the link at Alex Jones' new website, RacistPsychopath.com) -k {I refuse to believe that you've hopped on the Truthwagon, Figleaf; you're far too smart for that. I'm convinced that your participation in this is a noble effort in playing "Devil's Advocate" so as to force people to examine their beliefs.} Figleaf aka sweal is not as smart as he thinks he is, but not as illogical as he sometimes appears. We used to think it was the impulsiveness of youth, but that was in 1997 and it hasn't changed a bit since, although his fits of reed gnashing rage seem to have been brought under control since then. He's in this battle because he's a leftwing ideologue, and since normal people tend to gravitate toward the right, and toward common sense in the case of 911, he feels the need to at least snipe from the woods on this issue. Press him, and he won't have an opinion to stand behind, but that doesn't stop him from mounting wee ankle-biting routines.

Americans have the worst morality of any western nation?? I'd like to see what information you're basing that statement on. Republican party talking points. Ann Coulter. Rush Limbaugh. Dinesh D'Souza. They are the sources from which it is understood that the USA is a cesspool of immorality. Well, it is understood by you, but until such time as it is understood by smart people, the "understanding" doesn't mean anything.