EvilMonkey

Balta, the hate crime analogy doesn't quite fit. In the hate crime scenereo, the perp set out to kill (or hurt, whatever) someone. The fact that their intention was harming the victim, whether racially motivated or not, is the crime. In the Israeli/terrorist mix, the Israelis shoot at an intended, legitimate target. They are not aiming at 'civilians'. The suicide bombers, however, are aiming for the most casualties that they can inflict. similar, but not the same. Any target for them is the desired target. Yes, if the jets were just firing off missles willy nilly into the city, that would be a very bad thing, likely no different than a suicide bomber. But they don't do that. And just an interesting conspiricy theory I heard earlier today, could the tensions be rising in the region due to a failed Iranian nuclear program? If they escalate the situation, and promt Irsael (or the US) to take out their nukes, they can then claim 'oh, now because of the eeeevil zionists we have to start of nuclear program all over from scratch'. Maybe it isn't there at all, and they are worried about saving face in the region? After all the blustering they have been doing, if it turns out they have zilch, that would be pretty bad for Iran. Saving face can be a hellova motivator in those parts.

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Jul 16, 2006 -> 06:58 PM) It's just collateral damage. They're not purposefully targeting them so therefore it doesn't count/matter that they get hit. Why do you love the terrorists that purposefully target civilians? /as if there is a difference between dropping bombs in a city and suicide bombs //both are morally reprehensible Yes, there is a difference. They are not even on the same plane. Much like falling asleep at the wheel and killing someone will get you manslaugter, but running someone over because you didn't like them will get you murder 2. They are not morally equivilent, even if I can't spell equivilent.

QUOTE(Soxy @ Jul 16, 2006 -> 06:53 PM) I think he was protesting (no fangs) that you said ONE place in Canada had French. While Rex was pointing out that ALL of Canada has dual langauges (meaning French is official in ALL of Canada's provinces); and that both languages are used and learned ACROSS Canada. OK, I know that this resource can be wrong, but here is what I took it from. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec It says "The official official language of Quebec is French" Not French and English. If you go to http://canadaonline.about.com/cs/bilingual...fflanguages.htm, it says that the official languages for Canada as a whole are French and English. However, when digging into the individual providences, it says that "One of the original provinces of Canada, New Brunswick is the only officially bilingual province in Canada. " It also mentions that Quebec is the only French speaking dominated providence. So going by those items, which shall it be? Actually, it doesn't really matter, since we are continuing our tangent to the ACLU ruling English on signs as somehow anti-whatever. We can save this for the next 'English as a national language' thread, which is where it really belongs.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jul 16, 2006 -> 06:42 PM) Actually, French is a national language in Canada. It just happens that a majority of French speakers live in Quebec. There is French TV in Toronto, for example - and CBC broadcasts in French on the air, across the country. Joe Citizen can indeed demand that court proceedings be done in Spanish - and they frequently are through the use of court-appointed translators. Because the American legal system deems it important that people facing justice are aware of the proceedings around him. Or is that just more America hating on the part of those activist judges again? REad my post again before you bring your fangs out.

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Jul 16, 2006 -> 06:13 PM) Don't you watch Fox News? Brit Hume was saying that Amnesty and the Supreme Court just want to let them all go. Soxy, they want to stop the KUBARK style psychological torture that goes on at Guantanamo and other military prisons being run by the US because torture is antithetical to human dignity and the American values we claim to fight for. Not to mention that they question the guilt of people being held and have said that some of them are innocent -- which the military has eventually said as well. So they obviously hate the US, love the Islamofascists and keep asking those pesky questions that get in the way of Bush's carefully scripted feel good reality. They cause problems by not falling in harmonious lockstep behind our infalliable and wonderful leader, Chairman Bush. And I find this thread amazing -- It starts with the "Well, HAW HAW HAW, Amnesty and the Red Cross aren't saying anything! Hypocrites!" Then they find out that something has been said and their point was destroyed.. Then the bar gets raised -- "Well, who cares if they said something, they're not doing anything!" in an attempt to revive a point that was already DOA. But let's knock that new point out as well. They've done a lot of stuff in the Mid East and other areas -- symposiums, meetings with government officials, conferences, campaigns to heads of governments from the public, etc. You should really read up on the group you want to attack before you go off on it. How about reporting it accurately. I did start off asking why they haven't said anything, because up to now, THEY HAVEN'T. Or if they have, it sure didn't get as much play as their frequent and multiple condemnations of Israel. Then you, with way to much time on your hands, google searched to find an article that says they did. I applauded such words coming from them, as they have been a long time coming. That is not a 'who cares' attitude, it is a 'lets see where that goes, if anywhere' comment. Because truely, talk is cheap. That's not raising the bar because my 'point was destroyed'. Get off your high horse, get a life, and get it straight.

QUOTE(Soxy @ Jul 16, 2006 -> 06:08 PM) Most anglo-phone Canadians I know don't mind. And most of the Franco-phone Canadians (admittedly I know more French Canadians) also speak English quite well. I don't think that there's any lost productivity in Canada. I don't know of any hard data either way, but I can't really believe that countries with more than one official language (or NO official language) are any less productive or efficient than other countries. Do you know any supporting data or anything (not being snarky, but I really would like to know if Canada suffers because of the dual language thing). I was not referring to Canada in those comments, but rather the US if it were to have to do everything dual or triple language. You think the Dept. of Motor Vehicles is slow now, just wait and see if we have to switch to more than English. Yes, I know, they have the tests in spanish (which makes ZERO sense since all the traffic signs are in ENGLISH), but if there doesn't happen to be someone working that day who speaks spansih, the applicant can't stand there and demand one. I guess I am sorta topic-jumping here as WilliamTell made a comment about English as the official language, then a few of us went off on that tangent.

QUOTE(Soxy @ Jul 16, 2006 -> 05:59 PM) SHOW me where Amnesty International supports terrorists. SHOW ME. Not gonna jump between you two on that one, but they DO suppost abortions. http://www.campaignlifecoalition.com/natio.../news_0706.html

QUOTE(Soxy @ Jul 16, 2006 -> 05:34 PM) And, for the record, French IS an official language of Canada. So, your comparison isn't very valid. Unless you would like to further illuminate what you're saying for me. Exactally. One place in the whole country has French as its official language, while the rest of the country has to deal with dual languages. What a boondoggle that must be for any governmental branch. " English and French are the official languages of all federal government institutions in Canada. This means that the public has the right to communicate with, and receive services from, federal government institutions in either English or French and that federal government employees have the right to work in the official language of their choice in designated bilingual regions" Can you imagine the havok that would cause in lost productivity (as if government is productive as it is!) if Joe Citizen could demand that court proceeding be done in Spanish instead of English? Or that drivers license tests be done in Farsi?

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jul 16, 2006 -> 04:37 PM) Why? Feel like emulating the French? No, so that we don't emulate Quebec.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jul 16, 2006 -> 06:10 AM) You asked for an example, I gave you one. Want another? Fine. Ben Nelson (Nebraska) He wants goals set. He doesn't want a deadline for troop removal. His Iraq voting record is identical to Lieberman's in 06. Hmm. First term office holder, won by 2% over his republican challenger. Ran unopposed in the primary in 2000, we'll see if he is unopposed when up for reelection. His power rankings in the house are a joke due to his inexperience. http://www.congress.org/congressorg/power_...ard.tt?id=10748 A blurb from the comments section: • Too few terms or years in office in Congress to have significant clout • Member has weak committee assignment or lacks significant committee influence due to member's minority party status. Sounds like he has been welcomed with open arms.

I will appluad them for at least getting off their collective butts and SAYING something about it, now lets see them try and DO something about it. talk is cheap. And they weren't 'baseless'. Up to this point, I don't believe they have EVER said anything towards either of those groups. On a side note, now that they HAVE issued this demand to see the prisoners, maybe we will find out if they are alive or dead already.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jul 16, 2006 -> 04:36 AM) Hillary Rodham Clinton. Oh, please. She blows whatever way the polls go.

Just a thought: why haven't any of these organizations demanded access to the Israeli soldiers being held prisoner by Hezbolla and whever? Since the international community seems hell bent on giving terrorist rights under the Geneva Convention, why don't they try to visit the prisoners that these same terrorosts have? Certainly the soldier taken into Gaza is the responsibility of the quasi-Palestinian state and deserving of Geneva protections. Hezbollah while not a state or has at least as much stature as Al Qaeda and it seems that the international community believes that Geneva extends to Al Qaeda's representatives. So, why would it not also extend to uniformed soldiers held by Hezbollah which, has basically declared itself to be at war with the state of Israel? C'mon, I want to see the reports on how lovely the Hezbolla prisoner camps are treating their guests. Let's see the care and dignity they are providing the prisoners under their watch.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jul 6, 2006 -> 02:30 PM) It's the only place where you can be for OR against the Iraq war policy and be welcomed in by the party leadership. It's the only place where you can disagree with the party line and be allowed in, and work to change hearts and minds within the party. Are you kidding? The sole reason that Lieberman is even getting an opponent, and not being backed more by his party is that he dares to AGREE with Bush on Iraq. Show me anyone who has disagreed with the party line in Iraq and has been welcomed by party leadership? It certainly will not be Joe! As for 'disagreeing with the party line', other than 'anything opposite Bush' , what would that be?

Ender's Game, by Orson Scott Card. I have real all the books in the series before, but it has been a while. I like his writing style, very easy to read, and I lose all track of time once I get started.

Sterling Heights reply to the ACLU letter:(sorry, don't know how to make the small link) http://www.ci.sterling-heights.mi.us/bins/...=false&NC=9982X

QUOTE(CrimsonWeltall @ Jul 15, 2006 -> 06:26 PM) I don't see how generic English signs would help people identify the location of a fire at all. First of all, if you were calling in a fire, the most important thing to use is the location, not the store type. "Hey the beauty salon is on fire." isn't going to be very helpful. Secondly, for some stores, you can tell what it is just by looking at it. The English sign isn't needed. AND, if you can't tell what kind of store it is just by looking at it, then the generic English sign is 100% worthless anyway. You seemed to ignore that "anti-immigrant" was sandwiched between "unconstitutional" and "unnecessary". OK, then how is this also unconstitutional an unnecessary? Sure, you can tell what some places are without a sign, but others? I am criticizing the fact that the ACLU is jumping on this as anti-anything. And when calling in an emergency, any descriptive items help, such as 'on 34th street, by the bakery'. I don't see how this could hurt anything except their wallets, which is about the only thing they have NOT complained about.

So the city says, you know, most of our emergency response personell don't speak or read spanish, as is the case with a large part of our general population. How about you guys put a simple English translation on your signs saying what you are, like 'Bakery' or Beauty Salon' so that if an emergency does happen, and a person who is trying to report it doesn't read spanish, they actually have a chance to correctly tell 911 where the emergency is? Then the ACLU steps in and says 'you don't have to do that, its anti-immigrant!' How the heck is that anti-anything? Seems to me that it may stop a place from being robbed in the future, or help an ambulance get somewhere faster. If they want to object to it because they fear the cost of doing so would be prohibitive, then say so. Why are they hiding behind what is esentially a claim of racism?

If this passes, how long until they outlaw using credit cards to purchase guns? Or tobacco? Or booze?

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/7/...0036.shtml?s=ic I think that this SHOULD happen. In fact, I think they should also make the TV's provide English translations of the hispanic tv shows. Those game shows I see when flipping channels look super wierd, and knowing what they were saying just might make it a llittle clearer! On a serious note, how can they oppose this, and in the same breath demand bi-lingual things be printed up in spanish?

4 pitchers in one inning. hope we don't go 19 again.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jul 15, 2006 -> 01:22 AM) Thornton did just give up a hit and a walk without retiring a batter also. a bloop hit and a walk that had 2 pitches that should have been strikes.

Why is he changing pitchers because the Yankme's bring in some scrub right handed batter? I hate 'by the book' moves sometimes.

You too can now headbutt like a world cup soccer player! Enjoy! http://www.isnichwahr.com/redirect12982.html

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jul 11, 2006 -> 11:11 PM) So you're taking reader comments and attributing it to the news service? Isn't that like taking the "I'm so over Scotty Podsednik" thread and equating that to the White Sox are so over SPod? No, I am attributing it to the people that are responding there. Most of the various respondents think all Americans are like the soldier that raped the Iraqi woman. That is the one and only point I was trying to make. Although I did find some interesting reading. I liked this comment left by some whacko. • tim u r right as i came to met americans my self their only source of knowledge is the bias media which is corrupt it self, majority even dont know where their own american states r, thats how dumb they r, im not being mean, but this is reality, their government is controlled by jews amd which makes the majority even if this bush go today another bush will come yesterday, they should remve the jews from all post before they make any further steps