The Back Room

fat_boy wrote: Its so obvious what you do and why you do it Christian that it surprises me that you think you can get away with it unnoticed. Well, I'm sure you have amusing theories as to what I do and why. fat_boy wrote: Do you hope the attendees of the BackRoom are less sentient? Actually, the back room has refilled since the great exodus, and some decent discussion does ensue. It's certainly not as closed, controlled or regimented as you and Oakman's love in. Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.

Because it was free, and I figured I could post about it :-) Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.

The war on drugs does not decrease drug use. You claim to have a masters degree but you have the mind of a third worlder. No degree will change that. Now go bow to your Che poster. Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: I dunno... I'm just afraid that it's over-valued at that price... :-D L u n a t i c F r i n g e

Distind wrote: Ever try moving population centers with millions of people? Well, I tried, but it didn't work out real well, as no one listened. :laugh: Distind wrote: We have a number of major cities in the US alone that could wind up underwater But that has nothing to do with environmentalism or 'green'ness, it just another selfish way to put humans first. Most environmentalists say do it for the planet, and my point is that change may be what is best for the environment. Anyone who says change is bad is either selfish or does not understand how the global environment has worked, historically, even to a first order approximation. :rolleyes: Again, let me point out that I would like it to stay the way it is, for my own selfish reasons. :) Opacity, the new Transparency.

simple, don't fly, stay in your parent's basement forever, you don't need to go out. Better be safe than sorry, but in the case you need to fly, I will totally support a complete search of your body, don't worry, they'll use lubricant, you never know where some can hide stuff, I bet you know ways to do it :laugh: I want to die like my grandfather- asleep, not like the passengers in his car, screaming!

Stephen Hewitt wrote: in a perfect world you wouldn't need them As you seem to be saying, it is not a perfect world. Stephen Hewitt wrote: I'd suggest that the U.S. has got the balance wrong. And I'd suggest it does not. Since you purpose to take away my right, the burden of proof is on you. Opacity, the new Transparency.

There are many other things that are made from oil, other than just gas. Significantly more than 46% is converted into revenue generating products. :) Chris Meech I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar] In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. [Yogi Berra]

digital man wrote: I've always thought that anyone with an IQ under 110 should not be allowed to vote since they clearly won't understand what they're voting for. Man, that is just totally hosed. :~ If you think they are that stupid, at least be up front about it and strip them of their citizenship. Opacity, the new Transparency.

And yet all 4 of those words come directly from Latin. DIRECTLY came from latin. Saying english came from any of the other languages, but not latin is not accurate. But hey, you are never wrong. If I have accidentally said something witty, smart, or correct, it is purely by mistake and I apologize for it.

Alex hogarth wrote: this is something the libs wanted to change, they wanted a vote for a party and then they would decided who would fill the seat Now that is rather screwy to me. I don't think I trust any group enough to assume they'd pick someone I'd actually want in office.

Him being a Christian, and how much he grouses about stuff, I figured it was a nom de net. Not complaining, just speculating. ;P Opacity, the new Transparency.

Richard A. Abbott wrote: You could indeed put a tariff on some goods made in China, but what if they responded by placing tariffs on some of your important Chinese exports. If you look closely you'll see that China does in fact impose tariffs. This statement is false

Christian Graus wrote: Well, not sure if it's any of your business but If this is how you feel, then you shouldn't air your wares. This statement is false

Christian Graus wrote: However, because she and Donna are good friends, she knew all the welfare they got, and even before other things like a health care card, they were making more money than us once my taxes had kicked in to give them handouts. They just spent it all on crap and we saved hard to get into a family home in time for the birth of our first child. Some people are just like that. And you judge them. People that are contributing to your welfare by paying rent. And not only judge them, but air their wares on a public site. Maybe that isn't really your province. Maybe, you should really enjoy your success instead of being hung up on other's failures because they might limit the increase of the success that you already enjoy. This statement is false

I don't know... it seems a lot like one of my sayings. Everything... EVERYTHING... can be bought for a price. It might be that the price is so high noone is willing to pay it, but everything can be bought. I don't have ADHD, I have ADOS... Attention Deficit oooh SHINY!! If you like cars, check out the Booger Mobile blog | If you feel generous - make a donation to Camp Quality!!

Bob Emmett wrote: True. But covert operations undertaken by the Resistance do require them to dress as civilians. Otherwise they would be engaging the enemy much as the defeated uniformed military had, which would be pointless. This is not even a 'get them killed to free them' philosophy. It is 'get them killed, so I don't killed'. They have made themselves more important than the people they are trying to 'liberate', that is no different than what Saddam did. He just understood he needed to kill them himself, to make sure they stayed 'liberated'. I could say we are now there to support the Shi'ite resistance that started in 91, so our presence is as legitimate as the Syrian who is there to get us out. I believe the 'resistance' fighters should be acting one way to be legitimate, and that the parts of the GC that pertain to keeping civilians alive are important to both sides. You believe that it does not matter what the resistance does, it is legitimate, since it is either working against an invader, or is just settling internal scores that the rest of us should not worry about, e.g. Sunni blowing up a Shi'ite market place. Again we are at an impasse, unless you think I mis-characterize your positions. Bob Emmett wrote: they should have been summarily shot upon capture. They were killing, or intending to kill, US military. The US has decided to keep them alive - fine, they are yours to keep until you are sick of them. Then send them home. Interesting. I don't think anyone should be shot, once captured, but I am fully aboard on the feeling that some should be. I don't think the GC allows summary execution, in any case, and (most of the time, I believe) it is in our best interest to not dd so. Not so much an impasse as a clearer understanding of each others' beliefs. Opacity, the new Transparency.

Quoted[^] :) Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in? Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)

Ooh look, I'm famous!! :-D I don't have ADHD, I have ADOS... Attention Deficit oooh SHINY!! If you like cars, check out the Booger Mobile blog | If you feel generous - make a donation to Camp Quality!!

It's been back for a good number of months... pay attention man!! I don't have ADHD, I have ADOS... Attention Deficit oooh SHINY!! If you like cars, check out the Booger Mobile blog | If you feel generous - make a donation to Camp Quality!!