The Back Room

You claim that you hate anal sex. So that must mean you're a faggot. Panic, Chaos, Destruction. My work here is done.

Well, if Hugo says so, it must be true. All we need is a CSS posting confirming fact that he saw it first on a InfoWars YouTube video, then we can all rest in the assurance that it is Obama's fault. :laugh:

Agreed, dangling the notion of Christ at the end of the proverbial stick for some seems a to be good marketing strategy for their beliefs.

Three +Five cheers vote for you "Progress isn't made by early risers. It's made by lazy men trying to find easier ways to do something." Robert Heinlein

Christian Graus wrote: It's interesting to me that you made this all about you Having just been sodomised in the lounge for AGW, and knowing the sentiment of some people here in the past my paranois is justified. :) Christian Graus wrote: But, yes, And you agree anyway! Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

Wow - scientists are human beings ? This is the shocking news of the day ? 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.

Dick. ;) And I agree with Ian on this. We may not see eye to eye, but I can respect you for keeping an open mind and being rational. And I am from Chicago originally. I know this place suck for a night life.

:) Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in? Author of Guardians of Xen (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novel)

ragnaroknrol wrote: This seems more the case. However, whatever seems to be the case: Two scientists who could not arrive at Professor Jones's published results with the data set he provided and using his published methodology, requested a copy of the data set he used in his paper, and the source of the programs used to provide the published results. Professor Jones said that the data set he had provided was that used in the paper, and refused to provide the source code. It does not matter that the scientists in question may have been sceptics, all the better, they are more likely to discover any flaws in reasoning. It does not matter that they were not climatologists, they did not need to be for the analyses they were performing. In my opinion, it seems as if version control and documentation of data and programs was virtually non-existent, and it seems that shame might also have been a motive for Professor Jones's refusal. [Edit 2010/02/13: It appears that shame was indeed a motive[^] for the Professor Jones's refusal: Phil Jones, the professor behind the "Climategate" affair, has admitted some of his decades-old weather data was not well enough organised. He said this contributed to his refusal to share raw data with critics - a decision he says he regretted. Bob Emmett @ Ynys Thanatos modified on Saturday, February 13, 2010 11:54 AM

CSS announced he is 'right wing Christian' a few days ago, and has refused to explore that with me. Then I saw a news item on the Phelps family and I realised that they act almost exactly the same as CSS, so I thought I'd ask. And, as someone else pointed out, CSS has run for cover after having his latest stream of drivel shot down in flames. 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.

Yes, that's how I interpret the Phelps family. 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.

MS was the big one. Big 3 also have had this situation. As for corner stores, banks, restaurants and hotels, yes they do have these issues. How many people complain about "our small town feel being ruined" by a Wal-Mart? That chain moves in, drops prices until competition is only had by Target or KMart (which is close to dead) and then raises prices to get a profit again. Corner stores and drug stores have had this situation where they can't compete because they just plain don't have the resources to offer the prices Wal-Mart does. It's them using their size to effectively kill the small competitors, they may not force people to do as they ask in this case, but they do use practices that are darn vicious and effective only because of their size and resources. Taking a loss for a year just to wipe out all competition and then increase your earnings to make 3 times as much as you would with competition is pretty efficient. Neighborhood banks are something I don't know enough to be able to speak on. I do know 2 of them have dropped this year in my town. The major chains stayed up. (and I hate the bail out as much as you do, trust me) Restaurants are pretty cut throat, but there you are right. Very little danger of being strangled by a chain. Of course the statistics on how many survive 5 years with normal competition are pretty grim. Hotels, yea, they are also pretty much chain only. There are only a few players in this and the local places tend to be much worse off. Speculating on my part as to why isn't going to really work. My point, though, is that while you can say it is fine not to regulate, that just won't work in every field. There will always be some company taking any advantage they have to utterly screw their competition with the goal of being dominant. Once dominant, they can price their product however they like and people will not have a real choice. Any possible upstart to their status quo is then immediately crushed and so they remain in charge. Now if you hate the current political atmosphere, why would you want to allow the exact same thing to happen economically? Life is not black and white. No model for society will work for that and so you take the situation, take whatever model will best allow for people to succeed and use that. Capitalism, tempered by the people to not allow it to screw us, with some government stewardship as needed is what you get as a result. Mucking about with the structure of this hoping some radical change will somehow g

probably the worst part about the "Republican Revolution" is their need to make fun of intellectuals. They put idiots on a platform and act like this is a good thing. Intellectuals fix crap done by the morons that think a Bible has every answer they need and everything can be solved with a gun and a "PRAISE THE LORD!" Making fun of the people designing computers, creating businesses, and generally running the show doesn't help. But it certainly makes a specific block want to vote for these guys.

CSS loves income tax because he doesn't have enough income to register. A parasite pure and simple. You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists.

Debra Medina, a real debater: Her pure raw brain power eviscerates the globalist's deceptive talking points. Could you not find a link to her debating? That was a question and answer session, and like any half way good politician she had rehearsed her answers well. Where was the 'raw brain power'? Her answers were predictable, and hackneyed. The same stuff is trotted out year after year. Which was the globalist? What was deceptive about talking points? How is giving rehearsed answers to bland questions evisceration? Bob Emmett @ Ynys Thanatos

Actually I with with and have sex with a woman who is not my mother. Unlike yourself. ------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave

CaptainSeeSharp wrote: The symptoms of a climate cultist: has a strong disdain toward human life, fighting to destroy national sovereignty, and lusts to commit genocide. So, those who ask the richer countries to transfer wealth to poorer countries in order to mitigate the effects of AGW and preserve human life are O.K.? Bob Emmett @ Ynys Thanatos

josda1000 wrote: Lack of regulation, in my opinion, does create freedom, but it doesn't create wealth. OK, so we agree then. josda1000 wrote: Now I live in Lowell, and I'd say it's like once a week. Between the both of us, it seems that you've had it worse off, though. Bloody hell. I don't recall the last time anyone got shot around here. This kind of proves my point.... josda1000 wrote: So I can see where you're coming from, but I still believe it's so rare that you really shouldn't be so scared of people. I'm not scared of people. Here or in the US, Americans are some of the most open and friendly people I've met. I don't doubt that, mass shootings in the US aside, most murders in both countries happen amongst criminals, or in the heat of passion, and therefore are not likely to affect me. That doesn't mean that a society should not be sensible able the cost of a 'freedom' that counts it's price in the blood of it's members. josda1000 wrote: I seriously doubt that, with the way you've been talking in this debate Well, there's a difference between fear, and using some common sense to discuss the possible reasons that the US has such an order of magnitude of wrongful deaths compared to where I live. But, I am coming to the US again in March. As always, I am excited and not at all afraid. ACTUALLY, the guy I work with in Texas, is more scared than me. I've stayed in a cheap hotel in LA and been told by him that it's not safe to go outside, but I still walked around the neighbourhood, met some people, bought some food, etc. He's also expressed great fear that I'd go to a rock festival by myself, and I've gone many times, met a lot of cool people and had a blast. I do believe that Americans being kept in a natural state of fear by your media, has as much to do with your overall homocide problems, as the availability of guns does. josda1000 wrote: I'd love to see that, videotape it for me, while you're at it. LOL - this whole line of discussion came out of fanciful talk of your perception that we were on the edge of a police state. It's not like I was planning on doing ANYTHING any time soon, or that I'd relish the thought. The point was entirely that if my freedom was taken away from me, I'd s

Sorry, private wiki between me and 2 friends. [Forum Guidelines]

josda1000 wrote: A gun is a tool, that's all it's ever been. Of course. A tool for killing. That's all it is. And so long as we care about the actions of people who kill other people, we'd want to limit their access to such tools. josda1000 wrote: See also: Crime, homicide, greed. Except, it did not say that. Which is exactly why you're trying to focus on the tiniest part of terrorism and crime, in order to suggest a small correlation, makes them the same. You are WAY off base here. josda1000 wrote: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/greed\[^\] Greed: 2. Excessive desire, as for wealth or power. Passion: 4. Any strongly felt emotion, such as love, hate, envy, etc. Remember, these are not opinions. These are facts. And I honestly don't see what point you think you are making. Some crime, like terrorism, is done out of passion. One difference is that terrorism is systematic, and other crimes of passion, by definition, are not. That's just one, I could go on forever, because this line of thought from you is both pointless, and bizarre. Sorry. josda1000 wrote: "When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty." -- Thomas Jefferson You can take quotes that we can apply to our world context all day long. Apart from the idea of the government fearing the people being a joke, as covered previously, this does not prove that Jefferson envisaged islamic terrorists. josda1000 wrote: Let's say that it wasn't a false flag, I'll play on your field. You must be joking. I am sorry, if you're suggesting that 9/11 was a government run operation, then I think this conversation is over. I've frankly spoken to those nutjobs as much as I care to. josda1000 wrote: The reason why you WON'T kick the ass of a police officer is because they have the gun. You're disarmed. No, it has to do with respect. josda1000 wrote: AND if someone is just watching you from above, there's no telling what that guy with the camera would want to do. Give an inch, and they'll take a mile. Well, what are you suggesting he'd do with it ? <