sundevil777

Quite a big assumption, that what applies to King James I applies generally to anyone that gets "fanatically zealous about slamming homosexuals all the time". People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

I wonder who will be on the next cover, or the next cover, or the next cover of Oprah's magazine? People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Please help us German language challenged players. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

There ought to be a law... That says, to imply that all SUVs are gas guzzlers would be illegal. Please, just use the term gas guzzler, that includes all vehicles that guzzle gas. Not all guzzlers are SUVs, and not all SUVs are guzzlers - lots of them are quite small with small engines that get decent mileage despite their poor aerodynamics. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

You would have to remind 99% of the population of the fact that you copied something from Star Wars, and for them, only then would they know you are a dork. The 1% that spot the likeness on their will think you're really cool. However, you are a dork. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Why exactly does that matter. I think what matters is that the racist views on BET can be noticed and brought to the attention of a greater segment of the population by media sources that are unwilling to give a pass to racism by blacks. That sort of attention is not welcome by liberal politicians, their election depends on continued overwhelming support by blacks without questioning whether it is deserved. Very threatening indeed. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Not only are whites to blame, but only the effect on blacks is worth a story. Not a surprise, by definition, everything on BET is focused around blacks. You would think that it was like a network for americans working in Japan or China, where you would feel isolated and cutoff from information. Have you ever seen Stuart Smiley talking about politics with a couple of guests friendly to his point of view? His general attitude is that if you are a conservative black person, you are a traitor. Juan Williams (of National Public Radio, and a liberal balancing voice on Fox News panel discussions) did a long interview on Fox News specifically about how he has been bitterly attacked for going against the standard position that all blacks must advocate. I give credit to Fox News for having the guts to air such an interview, and Juan Williams for his willingness to describe his experiences. He really does usually take the liberal position on issues, but certain times that he has strayed got him in trouble with the congressional black caucus, etc. A conservative black or latino is especially threatening to liberals. That is racism in my judgement. I can't yet find that interview, I'll keep looking, it is a great read. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

They came quite close to taking out their target in D.C. Either the White House or Congress. Many choose to forget that fact. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Gee seems there are plenty of REAL Cowboys.. who.. OMG.. are GAY....http://www.igra.com/ BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Did you think I would be surprised there are gay cowboys? However, the IGRA doesn't require anyone to be gay or declare they are gay, so apparently the only thing that is gay about it is that they raise money to support charities within the Gay and Lesbian community. Anyone know if there is something else? Also, what is a MsTer? (from their site: IGRA has four positions of titled Royalty: Mr. IGRA, Ms. IGRA, Miss IGRA and MsTer IGRA.) People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Al Gore and other enviro activists should advocate returning the city to being a flood plain, marshland and all of that.

Tequila is what has held back Mexico's development for so long. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

There, that's better. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

This is a common perception that I think is completely wrong. The Palestinians are certainly very skilled at portraying themselves as the victims. The Israelis are not so skilled at getting mainstream media to tell their side. Dennis Ross was the middle east envoy working for Clinton. I give credit to Clinton for trying so hard and coming so close. He has been telling the truth about what happened and I think he deserves our attention. The following was an interview (a lot of text, but worth it) with Fox News, and he now works for them. If you think this invalidates his commentary, then no need to look further, keep your blinders in place and turn away in denial: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,50830,00.html BRIT HUME, FOX NEWS: Former Middle East envoy Dennis Ross has worked to achieve Middle East peace throughout President Clinton's final days in office. In the months following Clinton's failed peace summit at Camp David, U.S. negotiators continued behind-the-scenes peace talks with the Palestinians and Israelis up until January 2001, and that followed Clinton's presentation of ideas at the end of December 2000. Dennis Ross joins us now with more details on all that, and Fred Barnes joins the questioning. So, Dennis, talk to us a little bit, if you can -- I might note that we're proud to able to say that you're a Fox News contributing analyst. DENNIS ROSS: Thank you. HUME: Talk to us about the sequence of events. The Camp David talks, there was an offer. That was rejected. Talks continued. You come now to December, and the president has a new set of ideas. What unfolded? ROSS: Let me give you the sequence, because I think it puts all this in perspective. Number one, at Camp David we did not put a comprehensive set of ideas on the table. We put ideas on the table that would have affected the borders and would have affected Jerusalem. Arafat could not accept any of that. In fact, during the 15 days there, he never himself raised a single idea. His negotiators did, to be fair to them, but he didn't. The only new idea he raised at Camp David was that the temple didn't exist in Jerusalem, it existed in Nablus. HUME: This is the temple where Ariel Sharon paid a visit, which was used as a kind of a pre-text for the beginning of the new intifada, correct? ROSS: This is the core of the Jewish faith. HUME: Right. ROSS: So he was denying the core of the Jewish faith there. After the summit, he immediately came back to us and he said, "We need to have another summit," to which we said, "We just shot our wad. We got a no from you. You're prepared actually do a deal before we go back to something like that." He agreed to set up a private channel between his people and the Israelis, which I joined at the end of August. And there were serious discussions that went on, and we were poised to present our ideas the end of September, which is when the intifada erupted. He knew we were poised to present the ideas. His own people were telling him they looked good. And we asked him to intervene to ensure there wouldn't be violence after the Sharon visit, the day after. He said he would. He didn't lift a finger. Now, eventually we were able to get back to a point where private channels between the two sides led each of them to again ask us to present the ideas. This was in early December. We brought the negotiators here. HUME: Now, this was a request to the Clinton administration... ROSS: Yes. HUME: ... to formulate a plan. Both sides wanted this? ROSS: Absolutely. HUME: All right. ROSS: Both sides asked us to present these ideas. HUME: All right. And they were? ROSS: The ideas were presented on December 23 by the president, and they basically said the following: On borders, there would be about a 5 percent annexation in the West Bank for the Israelis and a 2 percent swap. So there would be a net 97 percent of the territory that would go to the Palestinians. On Jerusalem, the Arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem would become the capitol of the Palestinian state. On the issue of refugees, there would be a right of return for the refugees to their own state, not to Israel, but there would also be a fund of $30 billion internationally that would be put together for either compensation or to cover repatriation, resettlement, rehabilitation costs. And when it came to security, there would be a international presence, in place of the Israelis, in the Jordan Valley. These were ideas that were comprehensive, unprecedented, stretched very far, represented a culmination of an effort in our best judgment as to what each side could accept after thousands of hours of debate, discussion with each side. FRED BARNES, WEEKLY STANDARD: Now, Palestinian officials say to this day that Arafat said yes. ROSS: Arafat came to the White House on January 2. Met with the president, and I was there in the Oval Office. He said yes, and then he added reservations that basically meant he rejected every single one of the things he was supposed to give. HUME: What was he supposed to give? ROSS: He supposed to give, on Jerusalem, the idea that there would be for the Israelis sovereignty over the Western Wall, which would cover the areas that are of religious significance to Israel. He rejected that. HUME: He rejected their being able to have that? ROSS: He rejected that. He rejected the idea on the refugees. He said we need a whole new formula, as if what we had presented was non-existent. He rejected the basic ideas on security. He wouldn't even countenance the idea that the Israelis would be able to operate in Palestinian airspace. You know when you fly into Israel today you go to Ben Gurion. You fly in over the West Bank because you can't -- there's no space through otherwise. He rejected that. So every single one of the ideas that was asked of him he rejected. HUME: Now, let's take a look at the map. Now, this is what -- how the Israelis had created a map based on the president's ideas. And... ROSS: Right. HUME: ... what can we -- that situation shows that the territory at least is contiguous. What about Gaza on that map? ROSS: The Israelis would have gotten completely out of Gaza. ROSS: And what you see also in this line, they show an area of temporary Israeli control along the border. HUME: Right. ROSS: Now, that was an Israeli desire. That was not what we presented. But we presented something that did point out that it would take six years before the Israelis would be totally out of the Jordan Valley. So that map there that you see, which shows a very narrow green space along the border, would become part of the orange. So the Palestinians would have in the West Bank an area that was contiguous. Those who say there were cantons, completely untrue. It was contiguous. HUME: Cantons being ghettos, in effect... ROSS: Right. HUME: ... that would be cut off from other parts of the Palestinian state. ROSS: Completely untrue. And to connect Gaza with the West Bank, there would have been an elevated highway, an elevated railroad, to ensure that there would be not just safe passage for the Palestinians, but free passage. BARNES: I have two other questions. One, the Palestinians point out that this was never put on paper, this offer. Why not? ROSS: We presented this to them so that they could record it. When the president presented it, he went over it at dictation speed. He then left the cabinet room. I stayed behind. I sat with them to be sure, and checked to be sure that every single word. The reason we did it this way was to be sure they had it and they could record it. But we told the Palestinians and Israelis, if you cannot accept these ideas, this is the culmination of the effort, we withdraw them. We did not want to formalize it. We wanted them to understand we meant what we said. You don't accept it, it's not for negotiation, this is the end of it, we withdraw it. So that's why they have it themselves recorded. And to this day, the Palestinians have not presented to their own people what was available. BARNES: In other words, Arafat might use it as a basis for further negotiations so he'd get more? ROSS: Well, exactly. HUME: Which is what, in fact, he tried to do, according to your account. ROSS: We treated it as not only a culmination. We wanted to be sure it couldn't be a floor for negotiations. HUME: Right. ROSS: It couldn't be a ceiling. It was the roof. HUME: This was a final offer? ROSS: Exactly. Exactly right. HUME: This was the solution. BARNES: Was Arafat alone in rejecting it? I mean, what about his negotiators? ROSS: It's very clear to me that his negotiators understood this was the best they were ever going to get. They wanted him to accept it. He was not prepared to accept it. HUME: Now, it is often said that this whole sequence of talks here sort of fell apart or ended or broke down or whatever because of the intervention of the Israeli elections. What about that? ROSS: The real issue you have to understand was not the Israeli elections. It was the end of the Clinton administration. The reason we would come with what was a culminating offer was because we were out of time. They asked us to present the ideas, both sides. We were governed by the fact that the Clinton administration was going to end, and both sides said we understand this is the point of decision. HUME: What, in your view, was the reason that Arafat, in effect, said no? ROSS: Because fundamentally I do not believe he can end the conflict. We had one critical clause in this agreement, and that clause was, this is the end of the conflict. Arafat's whole life has been governed by struggle and a cause. Everything he has done as leader of the Palestinians is to always leave his options open, never close a door. He was being asked here, you've got to close the door. For him to end the conflict is to end himself. HUME: Might it not also have been true, though, Dennis, that, because the intifada had already begun -- so you had the Camp David offer rejected, the violence begins anew, a new offer from the Clinton administration comes along, the Israelis agree to it, Barak agrees to it... ROSS: Yes. HUME: ... might he not have concluded that the violence was working? ROSS: It is possible he concluded that. It is possible he thought he could do and get more with the violence. There's no doubt in my mind that he thought the violence would create pressure on the Israelis and on us and maybe the rest of the world. And I think there's one other factor. You have to understand that Barak was able to reposition Israel internationally. Israel was seen as having demonstrated unmistakably it wanted peace, and the reason it wasn't available, achievable was because Arafat wouldn't accept it. Arafat needed to re-establish the Palestinians as a victim, and unfortunately they are a victim, and we see it now in a terrible way. HUME: Dennis Ross, thank you so much. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

The only realistic chance there was for a settlement that would result in Palestinian state was during the Barak-Arafat talks that Clinton sponsored in 2000. Israel made a lot of compromises to try and make that happen. It wasn't they that dropped the ball at that time. Quite right. Dennis Ross, the chief negotiator for the US, has described it in length in various interviews and his book. Arafat pulled the rug out of his own negotiation team. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Israel was attacked immediately after it was created. Arafat was not sincere in his stated quest for peace. Thankfully, Bush had the good sense to refuse to negotiate with him, and to actually demand that the PA get new leadership before the US would help both sides achieve peace. For so long the Arab nations had as stated policy the destruction of Israel. They have defined themselves as the aggressors and confirmed it with their actions. Some Arab leaders were able to realize the insanity in their quest to destroy Israel and see the way to peaceful coexistence, such as Sadat of Egypt. It is too bad that his example was tossed aside with his assasination. It is sad that you cannot see that Israel's leadership has sought peace, while the so many Arab nations have sought war. I think there should be no more aid to the PA without it being matched by the money that Arafat's stole from his own people. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Yes, he is definitely a conservative. Because you offer no other rebuttal, I am left to conclude that it is especially irritating to you when conservatives are correct.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Because it fits their template. When Israel was created, the Arab nations chose to not participate, and promised to destroy it. They tried again and again, but have always failed. The Grand Mufti made the refugees by declaring that anyone in the path of his attack would be considered an enemy. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Charles Krauthammer's take on the movie: Spielberg makes case for Palestinian terror 'Munich' contends Israeli cause is morally bankrupt Charles Krauthammer If Steven Spielberg had made a fictional movie about the psychological disintegration of a revenge assassin, that would have been fine. Instead, he decided to call this fiction "Munich" and root it in a real historical event: the 1972 massacre by Palestinian terrorists of 11 Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics. Once you've done that, you have an obligation to get the story right. The only true part of the story is the few minutes spent on the actual massacre. The rest is invention, as Spielberg delicately puts it in the opening credits, "inspired by real events." By real events? Rubbish. Inspired by Tony Kushner's belief (he co-wrote the screenplay) that the founding of Israel was a "historical, moral, political calamity" for the Jewish people. Munich Glossed Over It is an axiom of filmmaking that you can only care about a character you know. In "Munich," the Israeli athletes are not only theatrical but historical extras, stick figures. Spielberg dutifully gives us their names -- Spielberg's List -- and nothing more: no history, no context, no relationships, nothing. They are there to die. The Palestinians who plan the massacre and are hunted down by Israel are given -- with the concision of the gifted cinematic craftsman -- texture, humanity, depth, history. The first Palestinian we meet is the erudite poet giving a public reading, then acting kindly toward his Italian shopkeeper -- before he is brutally shot in cold blood by the Jews. Then there is the elderly Palestine Liberation Organization man who dotes on his 7-year-old daughter before being blown to bits. Not one of these plotters is ever shown plotting Munich or any other atrocity for that matter. But the most shocking Israeli brutality involves the Dutch prostitute -- apolitical, beautiful, pathetic -- shot to death, naked, of course, by the now half-crazed Israelis settling private business. The Israeli way, I suppose. Even more egregious than the manipulation by character is the propaganda by dialogue. The Palestinian case is made forthrightly: The Jews stole our land and we're going to kill any Israeli we can to get it back. Those who are supposedly making the Israeli case say ... the same thing. The hero's mother, the pitiless committed Zionist, says: We needed the refuge. We seized it. Whatever it takes to secure it. Then she ticks off members of their family lost in the Holocaust. Director plays on Holocaust Spielberg makes the Holocaust the engine of Zionism and its justification. Which, of course, is the Palestinian narrative. Indeed, it is the classic narrative for anti-Zionists, most recently the president of Iran, who says Israel should be wiped off the map. And why not? If Israel is nothing more than Europe's guilt trip for the Holocaust, why should Muslims have to suffer a Jewish state in their midst? It takes a Hollywood ignoramus to give flesh to the argument of a radical anti-Semitic Iranian. Jewish history did not begin with Kristallnacht. The first Zionist Congress occurred in 1897. The Jews fought for and received recognition for the right to establish a "Jewish national home in Palestine" from Britain in 1917 and from the League of Nations in 1922, two decades before the Holocaust. Ancient claim to homeland But the Jewish claim is far more ancient. Israel was their ancestral home, site of the first two Jewish commonwealths for a thousand years -- long before Arabs, long before Islam, long before the Holocaust. The Roman destructions of 70 A.D and 135 A.D. extinguished Jewish independence but never the Jewish claim and vow to return to their home. The Jews' miraculous return 2,000 years later was tragic because others had settled in the land and had a legitimate competing claim. Which is why the Jews have for three generations offered to partition the house. The Arab response in every generation has been rejection, war and terror. And Munich. Munich, the massacre, had only modest success in launching the Palestinian cause with the blood of 11 Jews. "Munich," the movie, has now made that success complete 33 years later. "Munich" now enjoys high cinematic production values and the imprimatur of Steven Spielberg, no less, carrying the original terrorists' intended message to every theater in the world. This is hardly surprising, considering that "Munich's" case for the moral bankruptcy of the Israeli cause -- not just the campaign to assassinate Munich's planners but the entire enterprise of Israel itself -- is so thorough that the movie concludes with the lead Mossad assassin, seared by his experience, abandoning Israel forever. Where does the hero resettle? In the only true home for the Jew of conscience, sensitivity and authenticity: Brooklyn. Charles Krauthammer writes for the Washington Post. His column is distributed by the Washington Post Writers Group, 1150 15th NW, Washington, DC 20071. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

In post #9 of this thread I agreed with you that a pullout reserve PC could be an advantage for CRW. I was responding to the assertion by TVPB: I don't understand how a pullout is better if closing loop tension is too high. The hypothetical experiment was intended to simulate normal jumps. This "repetitive reinforcement" is what actually happens in real life, Even if you "teach for 50 lbs in the first place", they will get used to the normal pull force, and I was speculating about what might happen if it was suddenly higher. That is OK, I don't need to ask why horseshoe mals can happen. Human error is the cause of many problems with our equipment. Many throw out system failures are the result of human error. If we only discuss gear issues when equipment is used, maintained, and inspected correctly, then this will be a very boring forum and not very useful. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Still, if he wasn't on the run from our forces, he would have been able to get proper treatment... Remember, if he was too visible, even in Iran, he would be taken out. Even in Iran he would have to get medical care secretly, so it won't be the best. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

I suggest that he be called out. Bush, or Rumsfeld, etc, could assert that he is dead because he hasn't released any videos lately. If the 'challenge' is not met within a month or so, he probably is dead,and the administration should take credit for his death. It doesn't matter if it actually was due to his ailments, Bush would benefit. I don't think Bush haters (Conservativephobes) would like that at all. They would have to figure out someway to not allow Bush to take credit for his death. They at least want him to be alive for the elections in November. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

If the loop tension is high - so as to cause a high pull force, that high pull force doesn't change for a pull out system. If faced with a high pull force, I'll choose a ripcord handle to pull instead of a pud. This is one of the things that I don't like about pull out main deployment systems - if the pin is more difficult to extract than it should be (for whatever reason), I think it somewhat likely that the pud handle will get pulled out of your hand before the pin is out. A throw out PC can pull with much more force than most are able to pull a main pud handle in the manner that it has to be pulled. A hypothetical experiment: If you rigged up a pull out system for ground testing, and people used it many times and became used to a 10 pound extraction force, what would happen if the required force was suddenly 50 pounds? I think it likely that many would fail to extract the pin, or lose their grip on the handle. If you knew beforehand that it would be so tough to pull, you would likely succeed, but that is not the real world scenario. Of course a throw out can also have a tough extraction of the PC from the pouch, but for different reasons. However a lost pull out handle may be floating such that you have to re-grab it anywhere from the corner of your rig to the cover flap, compared to a floating throw out handle where you know that going back to the pouch location will allow you to grab the PC and complete the toss. I know there is more to this than I have described, but I don't think many advocates of pull out systems consider this disadvantage. Is the Woomera a pull out or throw out reserve system? People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Quite right. Manhattan Project/Power Windows album People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

I give credit to Tony Blair for being part of the blocks bullies. The use of force to achieve political objectives is still the current reality. Some think it wrong that the US has such an overwhelming advantage in military might. I think not. Time to pick sides. The big shots; try to hold it back Fools try to wish it away The hopeful depend on a world without end Whatever the hopeless may say People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

I thought they considered themselves Persians. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am