The Back Room

Well, the author did cite and link to an AP article.

Christian Graus wrote: I'm not sure what I believe anymore Obviously I've visited the site on more than one occasion, watched the films (commercial and the film that recorded the actual event) and the one thing I'm certain of is that we've been shielded from some of the actual facts or there's more that hasn't been discovered. Christian Graus wrote: amazing how after all this time, people still are that interested JFK was / is iconic. he may have ultimately been either a giant or a failure but with a life cut short it is all speculation and I think it is that speculation that keeps interest alive. to put it into a more current context, JFK was my generation's Obama. Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.

You're right! http://www.bcdb.com/cartoon/53840-Peanut_Conspiracy.html[^] ___________________________________________ .\\axxx (That's an 'M')

Christian Graus wrote: I run with monogamy Isn't that a lot like celibacy after awhile? :cool: <- irony icon Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

Shog9 wrote: Jane Austen Wasn't that the dominatrix babe on Final Extinction that kicked as* but took no names? Or was that Alice. I get my classic masterpieces all mixed up sometimes.

Stan Shannon wrote: Must have been one very old CPO. He was Senior Chief of BuPers. His records showed that he served in Vietnam six years before he was born. ;) Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

Well, one novel idea is supporting the 14th amendment which provides for both equal protection and equal prosecution under the law. So, profiling as a practice by law enforcement when rounding up anyone who is Hispanic and forcing them to prove their legitimacy even for legal citizens who happen to be Mexican, which, Arizona has been Mexican for hundreds of years, is at best, unconstitutional. If we support the idea that we are a nation of laws, then we can't pick and choose which laws we wish to obey. As soon as law enforcement is allowed to ignore the laws they find inconvenient, then we are no longer a nation of laws. This statement is false

Thanks, good interview.

Oakman wrote: needs to sober up I got blood in my alcohol stream :omg:

Oakman wrote: Indian programmers misnomer

He needs the money. All of his movies are ancient and lame. Web - Blog - RSS - Math - BM

I would never make the mistake of associating a "Supreme Being's" attitude with the model put forth by followers. In my agnostic ways, what gives me hope with regard to any concept of a Supreme Being is the fact that "it/he/she" doesn't meddle in our experiential affairs. We can be guided, we do have working models, but nevertheless it will always be up to us to implement them. Lest we be a group of unwitting puppets for ye' old puppet master to wield. And I just can't accept that concept and retain respect for such a being. If we are to entertain the concept of free-will, and accept it, why would we complain about it and then ask for that to be subverted by "assistance"? Its our responsibility to clean up our own mess, whether psychological, social, or environmental. Think about this, our planet has all that we need to live a luxurious life. Yet we complicate it. Overpopulate it. Pollute it. Etc ad infinitum. We really could live on nothing and still be wealthy. Think of all the different varieties of fruit/nuts/vegetables/spices. We have all we need to live wealthy. Plenty of real estate, until a committee takes it away and gives it to some corporation. Instead we divide it up, create the notion of private property, slice up the land and call pieces of it off limits, dig up the resources and sell em back to ourselves at some artificial profit, and oh if I could just stop there and not mention GMO. Which we wouldn't need if we weren't throwing a monkey wrench into a beautifully working evolutionary model that took millions of years to perfect. No, I say that if there is a Supreme Being, I would be embarrassed to be face to face and call my self an Earthian. I'd say, let us suffer our own devices. Let us stew in our own juices, for surely we've made this bed and should sleep in it. But, I do think we have all the data we need to have a decent life on this planet. Plenty of opportunity for experience and personal growth. Plenty to suffer through. Remember we aren't judged by our success as much as by our failure, so they say. So, I think that the relationship would have to be similar to what you would have with your garden. Sometimes I have found my garden in a state where to let the good plants grow to fruition I had to leave some of the weeds. To pull the weeds would have shocked the garden. So I let them all grow. The weeds tried to starve the others, but I fed them all. And watched the good ones grow strong along side the weeds. But in the end I only harvested the good plants and the we

Mike Gaskey wrote: I'm in the midst of recovering from 2 weeks on Maui and my critical thought processes have yet to return. I spent 6 months on Oahu in recovery - maybe that explains my thought processes. . . :~ Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

You're the worst kind of hypocrite. I feel bad for you. Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.

Richard A. Abbott wrote: Clearly Stan, you seem to know better than them who are Child Care specialists. Would you care to give some guidance of correctness where such Child Care specialists are getting it so consistently wrong. It isn't the specialists who are the problem (mostly) - it is the bureaucrats who will actually be empowered to administer any such system. It will, of necessity, be a one size fits all bureaucratic solution designed not to help children but to justify the existence of the bureaucrats. Just as with health care, I refuse to sacrifice my freedom simply because other people are incapable of using their own wisely. Freedom is a dangerous thing to give to people. Those who cannot handle it should go live somewhere else or at the very least let me live separately from them. Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

They see meh trollin', they hatin', patrollin', and tryin' a catch meh dirty ridin'.

They see meh trollin', they hatin', patrollin', and tryin' a catch meh dirty ridin'.

73Zeppelin wrote: China's premier worried for U.S. investments Wouldn't you be? :doh: Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs Think inside the box! ProActive Secure Systems I'm on-line therefore I am. JimmyRopes

Gary Kirkham wrote: Probably, but maybe he gave the forum a reprieve seeing that everyone is playing nice...mostly. F**k there is no vote here! X| Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs Think inside the box! ProActive Secure Systems I'm on-line therefore I am. JimmyRopes

Oakman wrote: realised they didn't have one Hey, that's a step up from "this information is classified to protect national security" :cool: Burning Chrome ^ | Linkify!| FoldWithUs! | sighist