FastNed

Black Dog, you are so naive it is pathetic! Israel offered peace and it was thrown back in their face by Arafat. Unless and until the Palestinian people rid themselves of the delusion (and the leadership) which is that they can drive the Israeli's out of the Middle East, there will be no peace. The Jews are quite through with standing quietly in line awaiting their turn in the Gas Chambers. Does "Never Again!" sound familiar? The Palestinians have not complied with their obligations under the Oslo Accords and Israel should denounce them, and then revert to the Status Quo Ante .

Hello, newglory. There is much to think about in what you have said but I do not concur. I believe that patriotic feelings exist within the majority of Americans but it just isn't something we normally express absent cause. We reserve such displays for the Fourth of July, Memorial Day and such; it's like being 'manly' or a 'gentleman', normally if you have to talk about it, it makes people wonder. On 9.12, I attempted to describe the feelings and scene in America to a friend abroad - a fellow attorney from Vermont working with USAID in the Ukraine - and I had spoken with my Brother in Texas and friends in Florida and Hawaii to gather their thoughts and observations. What I described and expressed was the quiet contemplative mood, in part sadness and part questioning who had dared to do such a thing to Americans but what was most astonishing was the spontaneous display of the Flag. Everywhere there were American Flags! This display of patriotism came from within the American people, uncalled for by any politician or media commentator and was a spontaneous expression of the belief in "our" America. The America which remains the home of the brave and the land of the free - and it is difficult to say or write those words because it is a naked expression of our feelings which we usually refrain from exposing. It isn't 'manly' to display such emotion! What was absent was terror or panic but instead the feelings were of quiet determination that there would be a blood price extracted for what had been done and that we would pay the Ferryman's Fee for each and every one of our dead. The "Street" the media elite and politicians ignore is the "American Street" and they make a fatal error when they do so. As I have mentioned before, minorities should not be your focus, they are simply cast as the eternal victims by the Tranzi's who believe they have been 'selected' to rule us. Read some of the nattering from Nova for more on this. Black Dog, you know, I hope one day you are quite successful and make a great deal of money. You will then discover that it is not the root of all evil. Being in the top one or three percent is an opportunity available to any American and those of us who get there are too damned busy to be either interested or bothered to run the Country - marxist theology notwithstanding! As to terrorism and terrorists, there is only one suitable response. Terrorists and those who provide aid, comfort, shelter and support are to be put down like rabid dogs when and where found. Open season, no bag limit. Leave no live enemy behind.

Hello, Scotchneat - You are correct, I am against all Hate Speech Laws. They lack the certainty required to notify citizens what constitutes prohibited acts and thus inhibit free speech. Incitement to riot is, no doubt, covered under existing legislation at the Provincial/State level and special "Hate Speech" legislation is no more than pandering to special interest groups for political advantage. I have seen people destroyed by vague laws used by ambitious prosecutors for publicity reasons to advance their careers. SirRiff, with your scientific background and degrees, if you add a Law Degree, you can pretty well write your own ticket. Patent and Copyright are rewarding legal specialties and you might find a number of employers willing to pay your way thru Law School. But this is going further and further astray from the genetic question. Did you miss my last question to you., SirRiff?

With my regrets to the people of present day Denmark, everyone should know what happens when you pay "Danegeld"! Clinton subscribed to the Tranzi views of the EU Elite so why are you surprised he paid off terrorists? How else would you describe their policies towards the Palestinians and Arab Fanatics?

Hugo, you are correct that "Hate Speech" Laws could subject you to prosecution for comments made on this Forum. As a flat statement, "Hate Speech" Legislation is a Prosecutors dream! There is little certainty in exactly what is covered and prohibited so any exercise of a 'controversial' or 'emotionally charged' position could lead to prosecution - if a Prosecutor wished to pursue you or has their own agenda. Google 'saskatoon' for prosecution of Biblical quotes against homosexuality - this is a very dangerous area as is all hate speech legislation. It not only chills debate but it attacks the fundamental concord between us all, that we can live together in a civilized manner and discuss our differences until we reach a middle ground. I really could care less what someone does in their bed, the only bed I control is my own and that is as it should be. But I deny that anyone has a right to silence discussion on homosexual issues because of an allegation that this is 'hate speech', that's BS, pure and simple. There are Six Thousand years of religious texts that define homosexuality as a forbidden activity - along with adultery and murder. We are free to discuss those two but not homosexuality? The concept of homosexuality must be subject to free and open discussion - such as it has been here on this Forum - and people must be free to state the good and the bad of both viewpoints. Without threat of criminal prosecution!

cknykid - after looking over your posts, I'm not going to give my usual welcome to the Forum. You have mental health issues. For Fifty years, the Arab world has attempted to crush Israel; every war they have begun, they have had their ass kicked and lost more territory. Perhaps that's why the no longer start wars with Israel - Israel would end up larger than Europe. Now the "Palestinian" people - Jordanians, by the way - have been used as pawns by the Arab Leaders for these same fifty years. They are such losers they have become the Jews of the Arab World - no other Arab country will give them house room or admit them. They never miss a chance to "Miss a chance!" Israel has no chance to stop terrorism so long as it abides by the Oslo Accords. It must denounce them, drive the Palestinians out of the area, back into Lebanon and then let Syria deal with them. If, as and when Israel adopts America's policy on terrorists - there is NO refuge - then and only then will terrorism end; when the cost is too high to those who sponsor it, it will cease. Yes, I agree that America is one of those who has handcuffed Israel but the must have the courage to tell the American politicians to stuff it, even if it means going it on their own!

Hi Mod, without comment on the value of your quote from the Guardian - no doubt an objective source, just ask PM Blair - you are missing a major factor in American Politics. For eight years under Pres. Clinton, at the CIA, State Dept., Army, Pentagon, etc., democrats were promoted and encouraged. Clinton's anti-military, Tranzi politics flourished. The likes of Wilson IV were promoted ahead of their abilities. In effect, what we have in place today is a Fifth Column alive and well in American government advancing their tranzi agenda whenever possible. This 'elite' knows that their view of the world is 'correct', of course it must be! It is a serious ongoing American problem; President Bush, perhaps wisely, has not purged either State or the CIA. The Palme affair thou, may force a reevaluation of this 'live and let live' policy at the CIA.

I agree on the ID Card - they will never get one through in America. If the 'politicos' were not so in love with "buzz-words" like 'biometric', the passport business would never be on anyone's screen. It is only an update in tech to modernize Passports and make them harder to falsify.

The U.S. International Trade Commission ruled Friday that "Hard Spring Wheat" is being "dumped" by Canada into US Trade but that "Durham Wheat" is not. Odd result when the allegations of 'improper' governmental subsidies are identical, in each case. Evidently, a differentiation was made between the types of wheat based upon the finding that the US does not produce sufficient "Durham" wheat for internal usage. This constant bickering between us over agricultural products is disheartening and only adds to the agitation over NAFTA. The 'Agricultural Lobby' is quite strong in each country and neither of us lacks politicians quite willing to pander to them. Does anyone have any thoughts on how to reduce this friction?

Nova, please lower your voice and stop the flaming. It is counter-productive as well as bad manners.

Nova, in your latest rant against Craig, you said: "Then you're one of the few people who believe with terrible education, a joke for popular culture, dumbed down newspapers, and little knowledge of the world gives someone a better realistic assessment of what must be done then one who has studied under the best professors in the world, who has more resources avaliable then the average US agency, who are some of the brightest people in the world, who have been hand picked to lead the world." (emphasis added) You have actually 'outed" yourself as a Tranzi! Why am I not surprised.

Hello, RWB&B, welcome to the Forum. I do wonder, thou, if you make the same Tarzan like announcement of your presence everywhere, doesn't your chest get a little sore from all that ritual beating? You state: "Any minority group can have their way with government, as long as they create enough ripples in the media pool. .... " When the minorities of America have wiped away the last of the mjority resistance, they will continue pilagaing our freedoms till there are none left." I believe you are somewhat on target but have misidentified who is doing the shooting. Welcome to the world of "transnational progressivism"; the concept and tool of a postnational intelligentsia determined to reshape America to their world-view of "evolving norms of international law." It's an impressive phrase but in essence, it simply means they believe that the Constitutional protections retained by our citizens and expressed in our "Bill of Rights" have no place in their world view. They know better and, after all, it's for our own good. They are the "Intelligentsia" and they know what's best for us plebes! The Tranzi's hate America, hate it with a passion which consumes them. They have hated us from our Founding Days and as the Freedoms of America have spread through-out the World, they have grown to fear us even more than they hate us. That all power remains in the people, that the consent of the governed is a necessity for government, that we will not bow or kneel to any so-called aristocrat or Intelligentsia is anathema to them. How dare we deny their superiority and fitness to rule! America's success in assimilation of minorities must end - clan, tribal and ethnic feuds and warfare must continue so as to provide fertile ground for the deconstruction of America. There can no longer be the concept of individual rights but rather all rights must be viewed as 'group rights' and these groups must remain unassimilated into America. Rights are then to be assigned to these racial/ethnic groups based upon a scale measure by minority-ness and which trumps any and all individual rights. And thus is born the politics of "Victims", the politics of "Race" and the politics of "Hate". Proportional representation and majority rule can not be allowed as the rights of "Victims" and "Races" must be granted greater value than the rights of any number of individuals. For an advanced view of "Deconstructed America", see the Balkans. The saddest fate of all is reserved to the very minority members touted by these Tranzi's, for their fate is to ever remain as victims and never be assimilated and become "Americans" - but not to worry, real Americans will cease to exist in a Tranzied America.

Synon, perhaps you should check your facts (instead of the Media) before you put words in someone's mouth. How about exactly what President Bush stated at the UN in September, 2002. "The history, the logic and the facts lead to one conclusion: Saddam Hussein regime is a grave and gathering danger. To suggest otherwise is to hope against the evidence. To assume this regime's good faith is to bet the lives of millions and the peace of the world in a reckless gamble, and this is a risk we must not take." "The first time we may be completely certain he has nuclear weapons is when, God forbid, he uses one. We owe it to all our citizens to do everything in our power to prevent that day from coming." The process is called "Threat Assessment" and it is a necessary exercise if you wish to survive. When the danger from inaction in the face of a threat exceeds the danger from action, it is time to act. If you, Synon. announce that you are my enemy and wish me dead, I am not about to loose much sleep over it. If you then display your support for terrorists who have attacked in my neighborhood, you raise your threat level to one which I will not live with, and I will take you out which is exactly what we did to Saddam. Leave no live enemy behind!

OK, SirRiff, I've read your response and I'm still attempting to reach an understanding of the potential for the existence of, and the ramifications of a "Gay" gene. I do not know the technical language of genetics so excuse my terminology and correct it where necessary. I am differentiating between 'primary' and secondary' genes in looking at this because if a gay gene was a 'primary' recessive, probability theory would give us a 25% population and the figure I see most commonly for a gay male population is 3%. (Side thought - can you work back from 3% and say anything meaningful about such a genetic distribution?). If I understand what you have said, somewhere in a gene, 'sexual attraction', 'aggressiveness', 'nest-building', 'testosterone production' or something like this, there is a recessive factor (element?) which when aligned so that the recessive factors merge (mate) (compliment each other) the result is a desire for same sex pairing. As same sex pairing is non-reproductive, this is obviously a genetic dead end and I do not state that as a value judgment as to the individuals who carry these genes but as a evaluation of its genetic value to the survival of the species. I realize that six thousand years is a mere second in terms of genetics and evolution of a species but the 3% - the size of it - bothers me. Ignoring any value judgment other than the survival of the species, and accepting that a 'non-reproduction' gene is a species dead end, does this number track with overall genetic theory? I ask because none of the genetic disorders (for lack of a better term) appear to have this large a population, perhaps excepting the 'malaria' gene in Black people which you mentioned.

Hi Hugo, you mention: "However, the fact remains that homosexuals overwhelmingly suffer from rejection and self-esteem issues, often quite severe. Psychiatrists term this to be psychological trauma." I do not disagree with this observation, I've noted the same myself but I do wonder if this is a "chicken or egg" situation? Is this because (as some evidence would indicate) there was early childhood victimization? I have read investigative reports over the years and a common theme was the young victims were told, repeatedly, that they were "made" for this sort of activity. As adults, we know this is BS intended to control the victims and convince them to participate but it appeared to have a highly significant effect on the youths involved. It is often not noted but these acts are a 'rape' and it is well accepted that the act is as much about 'power' or 'control' as it is about sex. Reports on adult female rape contain very similar statements and in a number of cases, there were statements that because the rapist had forced a physical response (a climax) the victim had hesitated about reporting the rape. There is the same sort of theme running through female abuse cases, the victim was convinced "she" deserved the abuse. That some of what a molester/rapist does brings pleasure has to mess up the mind of a victim. What effect does this have on someone when society (or a significant portion of it) holds the act to be unnatural? This is the other end of it, that if you take/receive pleasure from what 'society' holds to be an unnatural act, would you not have self-esteem issues? This is tangential to the genetic issue but your statement brought these questions to my mind.

Craig, I believe the intent is to make counterfeiting much more difficult. A 'Smart Chip' is more difficult to falsify, there is room within for some cute tricks with 'check-sum' equations and the ability to be machine read adds the potential for procedural changes which could expedite clearance for those who carry such documents. It is like asking why bother to change the currency when you know there will still be people able to counterfeit it - well yeah, but..... I do think America has made an error by not adopting the methodology of the EU and going for a fingerprint(s) as well as the picture but then again, no one asked for my opinion. I guess they lost my phone number. (Joke!)

I concur, Hugo and neither of us wishes to set out a primer on how to do it but it remains quite possible to create a false identity. But it is nowhere as easy today as it was twenty years ago and as more and more death certificates are computerized, it becomes less so. We can never end this, only slow it down. Compare it to the problem of underage drinkers and ID. For every step taken to create more secure identification, some smart kid gets creative in the school media lab and comes up with a solution. We are unwilling to go to a "Cradle to Grave" ID program and so long as we refuse to do so, the number of false identification documents will be high. Even a National ID Program can not prevent this as it will always be possible to 'disappear' people and assume their identity or simply become a 'duplicate' them a State or Coast away. ID theft is extremely easy. Witness the "Ten Most Wanted" and the difficulties in finding them with photos, fingerprints, etc. - so long as well have an open and mobile society, no ID program will ever be greatly effective.

Hello Vandervecken, welcome to the Forum. Your post is the expression of an opinion and while you are certainly entitled to hold it, it adds nothing to this discussion and indicates you have not read this thread prior to your post. Candidly, we have beat that opinion to death over and over in this and other threads. The "Topic" is the Gay Gene and is a discussion of the existence of a genetic basis for homosexuality. As distinct from a religious belief. The recent mention of "height" brings a question to my mind; I believe historical evidence exists that while height may be a genetic potential, as our knowledge of nutrition has increased and childhood diets have been modified and improved (in the West) the height of our population has increased. Could there be a corollary to this in the "Gay Gene"? That is, presuming one exists? SirRiff, you're the geneticist - could this be a possibility? I do not want to use the term 'evolution' as that has a great deal of ideological baggage but as we have become more 'civilized' (we no longer need to hunt Mastodons for dinner) is it possible that the population of "Gay" people has increased? Without judgment of any sort, I'm thinking that a gay gene is like a hemophilia gene, something which would have ceased to replicate - a dead end gene?

First and foremost, I am expressing no opinion about the need, validity or logic of a National Identity Card, that is not the subject of this thread! Please take a dollar bill out of your pocket or purse and take a good look at it. Every day you rely upon the 'validity' of that document - for it is a document issued by our government - and you expect others to accept that document from you for what it is. We in America have seen our currency change over these last few years and become more complex which is intended to make counterfeiting of these bills more difficult. Soon, a multi-colored 'twenty' will be introduced as the beginning of a new multi-colored currency and the greenback will be a matter of history. It is simply too easy to falsify existing American currency; technology has defeated complex engraving where currency is involved. As it is with our currencies, so it is also with our Passports. It is too easy to duplicate existing passports and unless they are improved, they will have no validity. Now let's be real, none of these changes will end the sale of Third World Passports or end the trade in altered 'lost' passports but the more secure and difficult a passport is to alter, the fewer will be the outlets. Passports standards are negotiated these days through the International Civil Aviation Organization and the new standard is set by: ICAO 9303 “A Passport with Machine Readable Capability” . In brief, it calls for a machine readable document with biometric indicators. This does not mean you will need a 'chip implant' or a 'plug-in' port or any other invasive use of technology. Where the individual is concerned, at least in America and Canada (as differing from proposed action in the EU), there will be no additional requirements from the present although there may be fewer places where you can obtain the necessary pictures for your passport - I have not researched this, its simply speculation on my part. Procedures for obtaining a passport should be no different or more difficult than they are today. The bottom line is that this changes how the passport is constructed; there are restricted addenda concerning papers, inks, etc. to be used but the essence of the 'biometric indicators' concerns the use of a 'smart chip' (as in some credit cards) to create a digital photograph. Unlike the proposed EU Document or even the present US/Mexico 'Laser" Visa, there is no required fingerprint(s) on this new document. I suspect the widespread American paranoia about fingerprints and data bases are the reason America did not concur with the EU on the requirement of a laser inscribed fingerprint(s) in the document - but again this is speculation on my part. Possession of such a passport may result in a "Green Lane" where a Canadian holder would swipe his passport and walk thru Customs. I had thought that I would need to quote Statutes concerning criteria for admission but I do not believe that would add much to this discussion. This change has little to do with admission criteria but rather is aimed at document validity. Someone suggest that earlier in this discussion and I believe they are correct. Yes, a document more difficult to counterfeit makes it harder for anyone, terrorists included, to assume a false identity to cross our borders and that is the overall intent of these new specifications, they are not specific to the terrorist problem. Greg, I remain of the opinion that Canadian Refugee procedures are of the 'catch and release' variety but that would be a different thread should someone wish to open that discussion.

Daniel, I am forced to disagree with you. You state: "any other President would still provide a balanced agenda so as to look after domestic affairs too." The last President to be in this situation was FDR after Pearl Harbor. You need to go back fifty years to make such a comparison. In addition, Congress has been under Democratic control for the most part during the Bush administration. Again, compare President Bush's performance domestically against others in the same situation. I'd give him a B- or C+, myself. I really have problems with the remainder of what you said: And as an employee he is spending $1billion a week with no progress or end in sight, who has torn international relationships within the first nine months of his term, and most importantly, his ventures have been promoted based on false pretenses. 1): "no progress or end in sight" - your crystal ball is better than mine if you can provide a date by which we will defeat these Islamo-facists. 2): "who has torn international relationships within the first nine months of his term" - your position on this indicates you believe in the politics of Chamberlain rather than Churchill. 3): "his ventures have been promoted based on false pretenses" - please read exactly what President Bush said at the UN in Sept. 2002 and justify your position, I do not think you can. Here is a cite to read it.

Hello,RB, you pose a complex question. Could Clinton be licensed to practice Law in another Jurisdiction? In theory, Yes. But in reality, it would be a very difficult process. He is not now, an "Attorney in good standing" in any jurisdiction so even the most liberal States on this question of Licensing would not allow him to apply under relaxed standards. Let me use Vermont as an example - were he in good standing, he could "Clerk" for a period of months under an established (and licensed) Attorney and then apply for admission to the Bar of the State of Vermont. Such admission requires public notice, a hearing should someone file an objection and a determination by Bar Officials that he is of such character (i.e., good) as to warrant admission. You see the obvious problem - the "character" issue. I did not read the Arkansas Bar decision in which he was "Disbarred" so I can not speak to the period of his disbarment - it could be for life or, there may be other cases in Arkansas which hold that after a period of years, an Attorney may reapply for admission. Nothing is impossible (especially for an Attorney) but the practicalities of Bar Membership, its special status, make readmission after disbarment a highly difficult process and justly so. To touch on something raised in other conversations on this matter, while an Attorney is expected to fold, spindle and mutilate the Law on behalf of a client that selfsame Attorney is mandated to comply with the Law in his personal life. There are exceptions of a very narrow nature but those are in the area of what I would call human frailties, i.e., drunk driving, becoming sexually involved with a client and so forth. Violations in those areas bring private censure, referral to alcohol counseling programs and so forth, not disbarment. Repeated violations in such areas does bring suspension and absent remedial action, eventual disbarment. Theft of client funds and perjury are examples of essential character flaws, of major violation of the ethics of the Law and few if any excuses are accepted - ever! A highly respected friend of mine was disbarred some years ago for failure to properly supervise his practice when it was discovered that his senior legal secretary had been 'borrowing' clients funds for years! He made good from his own pocket when it was all discovered and there was never a question that he had received any of these 'borrowed' funds. Tough result but he was the custodian of these funds by virtue of his status as an attorney - he delegated "his" personal responsibility and was responsible for the result. Great privileges create great responsibility.

Unfortunately, the present government of Canada has ignored invitations from the US for several years to join in the Anti-Missile Defense of North America. The train has left the Station, Canada has left its seat unoccupied and American plans for Missile Defense are underway and the defense area ends at the Canadian/American Border. Unlike NORAD which clearly included Canada and had a Canadian as Number Two in Command, Canada is not a participant, is not in the Chain of Command and will receive no more coverage from American Anti-Missile defenses than Mexico.

Hello Locke, welcome to the Forum. May I suggest that you are just acknowledging reality. The "UN" is a voluntary association of Nations - some good, some bad - that have gathered together seeking some common purpose or good. This is rarely achieved. There has been a myth promulgated that somehow the "UN" is a 'source' of International Law while nothing could be further from the truth. A majority of the membership can hardly be called 'Democratic" as they are dictatorships - see Libya. Saddam's Iraq. Assad's Syria, and I could go on and on. Would you wish to live under the rule of these people, or the Chinese, or how about Burma/Myamar? At the core of the American revolution is the belief that all power rests in the people; that government has only those powers granted to it by the people and that the consent of the governed is the only grant of legitimacy to any government. How then can anyone who holds such beliefs consider the "UN" as a source of Law? I differ from Nova in the belief that the UN is the "best" humanitarian organization in the World. Witness its performance in Kossovo and Africa. Witness the political motivation of its flight from Iraq. It is a bumbling bureaucracy which often operates in the self-interest of its bureaucratic masters and, despite itself, sometimes does a great deal of good work.

Clinton was never brought before a Court on criminal charges, thus he was never "acquitted". He was censured by a Judge for false and misleading testimony, under oath , in a Civil Deposition. The Judge referred the matter to the Bar Association of Arkansas and he agreed to be "Disbarred" quietly rather than face the full range of penalties available to the Bar Association. For an Attorney to loose his license, to be disbarred is a disgrace which never can be overcome, at least not among the legal profession. We spend years in Law School after College, three or more in most cases, to obtain a degree which allows us to take a rather extensive examination to be licensed to practice Law and hold ourselves out to be an "Attorney and Counselor at Law". It is a special and privileged status and bears substantial responsibility. He was not disbarred because of his sexual practices, or because he liked a good "BJ" or even because he was a sexual predator. He was disbarred because he committed a criminal act, he lied under oath and had he contested this before the Bar of Arkansas, there is little doubt that a criminal prosecution would have been recommended. It had nothing to do with politics at the end, but everything to do with the special responsibility of an Attorney to comply with the Law in his personal actions.

Clark as a "Contender" is a media invention and is an "empty uniform" to join the mostly "empty suits" currently running on the Democratic Ticket. Until he was promoted as a Presidential Contender, the West Point Protective Association circled the wagons around him and protected the "Perfumed Prince". He was forced into retirement but given the "mandatory" one grade promotion upon retirement (it's a military perc!) and no questions were asked (or allowed) about character issues. That no longer is the case. Gen. Clark (Ret.) will soon face Hobson's Choice - either withdraw from the race or face exposure of a variety of character issues which the Media can not continue to ignore. Military nicknames tell a great deal about people often to their detriment. That his nickname is "The Perfumed Prince" speaks a great deal about him and, no, it has nothing to do with his sexual orientation! America has no place for "A Man who would be King!" and "White Horse" not withstanding, Gen. Clark (Ret.), is not of Presidential caliber.