akarunway

Good. Hopefully it's just the proverbia l"Tip of the Iceburg". Altho I think it's deeper than the TIP. More like the Titanic I hope I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

BULLSHIT BILL! Show me how many crackpot regimes are using our weapons versus how many are using the Chinese and former Soviet supplied weapons. Get real, man. Think N.Korea is dangerous? Who sells them their shit? Think Iran is dangerous? Who sells them their shit? Think Chavez is dangerous? Who sells them thier shit? Think Islamic extremism is dangerous? What kind of weapons are they shooting in the air while babbling anti-western crap? Come on. But... you have your argument all planned out. Don't let me interrupt. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/30/politics/30weapons.html?ex=1283054400&en=3cfe3f671fb60922&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss. But depends if they are are friends at the time or not I reckon I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

Surely you're not spinning, distracting, or otherwise trying to put words in someone's mouth so you can make some kind of "point", are you? Nah, YOU'd never do that! If you don't think that Chavez's lunacy, military buildup, coziness with the Chinese, modifications to the constitution to keep himself in office, and extreme corruption are a problem... there's not much helping you. Good luck with your next "logical" deduction. Except for a few words it sounds like the Bush administration. Am I repeating myself? LOL I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

When ALL of your friends inside and outside of a country express their desire to be invaded to get rid of Chavez... it makes you wonder. When you talk to people from a country and they PREFER when they had a totalitarian dictator to the quack they have now... it makes you wonder. When Chavez villifies some of his best customers and raises cries of "power to the workers, to the poor" it makes you wonder. When a "democratically" elected president nationalizes many major companies and replaces the people who built these companies with his own, mildly retarded cronies... it makes you wonder. When a president allows Chinese military access to his armies... it makes you wonder. It doesn't take a puppet government to NOT be a fuckin' retard. Just wait. "When a "democratically" elected president nationalizes many major companies and replaces the people who built these companies with his own, mildly retarded cronies">>>>>" Except for a few words is sounds like the Bush administration I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

If he's only making 20-30,000 AKs a year,I'd guess that at least the first 5 years production will go to self-defence, then to weapons replacement. It doesn't sound like an export operation. The AK103 IS a better infantry weapon than the FN-FAL and I can understand his military's desire to replace this ageing infantry weapon. As for the Russian helicopters & jets... Are these to replace the American ones he can't get parts for anymore? I recall that Chavez was vilified for getting rid of his F-16s a while ago. The US position kind of reminds me of Captain Edmund Blackadder in 1917 describing the British Army He'd Joined: "...back in the old days when the prerequisite of a British battle was that the enemy should, under no circumstances, carry guns... Even spears made us think twice. The kind of people we liked to fight most were two feet tall and armed with dried grass." (The battle of Mboto Gorge) "...Ten thousand Watutsi warriors armed to the teeth with kiwi fruit and guava halves. After the battle, instead of taking prisoners, we simply made a huge fruit salad. When I joined up, I never imagined anything as awful as this war (WWI). Fifteen years of military experience perfecting the art of ordering a pink gin and saying 'do you do it doggy-doggy?' in Swahili, then suddenly four and a half million heavily armed Germans hove into view. It was a shock, I can tell you." After all, if the US has to go in and restore Venezuelan democracy by ousting a democratically elected leader, they don't want any of that "Resistance" stuff getting in the way, do they! Mike. Oh fuck. My second best laugh of the day. Thanks I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

Hell. That was my best laugh of the day

That's what I'm trying to find out from akarunway. He seems to think that picking up a $5 snow globe as a momento from a pile of rubble deserves the same punishment as intentionally stealing tens of thousands of dollars of critically needed emergency supplies, like generators. And if that's the case, then stealing a pen from work should fall into the same category too. I suspect he is silent on this question, because he's taken ink pens home from work before himself, and he knows it ruins his argument and his outrage. Yes maybe many, many moons ago I may have committed petty theft. Then when I grew up and had my own business and learned morals and values and people that I TRUSTED stole from me, (karma I guess) I don't tolorate lies or theft anymore. From anyone. I think we are supposed to hold the govt. to as high or HIGHER standards then the rest of the populace are we not? I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

Seems to be VOGUE thing to do nowadays. I wanted to use a big word to impress people I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

reply]The Iraqis. I agree I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

I'm not so sure about that. The world has had sadistic torture from the beginning of time. Drawn and Quartered comes to mind I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

I don't see that. Maybe if we had NO military at all. But a Military can be redeployed. Also we can't use US troops inside the US. In fact most military places that need security have civilians with guns on the fence, not Army people for that reason. . LOL. What a crock. You really believe that. Wait til Bush TRIES to declare martial law. And I do believe that we used the troops in the Katrina fiasco. Does that count? And I guess the National Gaurd on the border is a fine line. Not that I have a problem w/ that.. I'd rather see civilians doing it and I have a few friends who are I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

So. A soveign nation doesn't have the right to manufacture or buy weapons. Fuck. If the USA had a puppet in office there we'd be giving them all they want til they didn't go w/ OUR policy then we'd just WHACK EM AND TRY TO INSTALL A NEW PUPPET GOVT. I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

Yeah BUT, or should I say ALBEIT jeans and a t-shirt are much more comfy I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

Oh yeah, a story stating that Americans are generous really hurts! But also, I have read many stories citing other stats that say the opposite. What it comes down to is it's much easier to quantify government aid than private charity. For instance, is all that money getting to the recipient, or is a high percentage paying admin costs of the respective charities? Some charities have admin costs amounting to over 90% of their taken-in donations. And really, the thread was going in the direction of welfare/social programs paid for by taxes vs. paying for these kinds of things with charitable gifts. It would be interesting to compare the overhead associated with charities, compared with the overhead associated with welfare paid for by taxes. I have become very selective about what I donate to after some of the 90% overhead "charities" have been exposed. In addition it may be worth mentioning that not all charitable donations go to "good works". A big donation to the local symphony orchestra or opera counts, but doesn't feed and clothe the poor. Then there are the big donations to colleges that, perchance, shortly thereafter admit your unqualified idiot grandson under a legacy program. Good one. >licks finger> strikes one< I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

Me too. For once. And Gravitymaster too. LOL I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

When I say 'your agenda' I mean the right wingers. As far as eminent domain goes, had you actually asked me, I would tell you that I detest the recent rulings respecting eminent domain. In all but the most extreme circumstances, I don' t like it. But as your post was about charitable giving, my brain did not make the leap somehow to eminent domain. As far as confiscation goes, I see a distinct differences between taxes used to cultivate a sustainable society and the taking of someone's home to make way for business interests. People the world over have understood for centuries that taxes are necessary, and if handled responsibly, help create a better society for all residents. If you don't want to pay taxes, don't expect roads, a military, education for your kids, police, or many other beneficial services. You can move to a desert island, pay no taxes, and be perfectly happy in your straw hut. Zipp0 That's my plan

Right. Better to have the government force people to give through confiscation of their hard earned assets. That's the way it was done in the old Soviet Union. Eminent domain comes to mind I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

1) Yes. 2) The only constraint is that the force used must be reasonable under all of the circumstances as you believed them to be. Key things to note are that: a) it's a jury who gets to decide what is and is not reasonable (ie 12 people just like you) b) they take into account all of the circumstances c) those circumstances are as you believed them to be - (eg if you honestly thought he was armed then the jury has to consider the reasonableness of an act against an armed assailant even though in reality you made a mistake and he wasn't actually armed). d) there is no reasonableness test for your beliefs - (ie so long as the belief was honestly held it doesn't matter how outlandish that belief was (though if it's really outlandish the jury might think you're lying)). e) there's no duty to retreat f) there's no duty to warn before striking g) first strike is perfectly acceptable h) you can use whatever weapon you like so long as the force afforded by that weapon is reasonable under the circumstances believed by you. There is a further constraint on the use of lethal force in that it may not be used in defence of property alone. If you or another are threatened then killing is fine, but it's been held that lethal force cannot be justified simply to protect your widescreen TV; ie no matter how much of a scumbag they are a TV simply isn't worth killing for. So basically the answers to Micro’s posts back on p2 are "yes" "yes" and "yes". The case I usually give as an example of just how far you can go is that of Attorney-General's Reference (No. 2 of 1983) where it was held that the use of petrol bombs in self defence was entirely reasonable under the circumstances in which the defendant found himself. " there's no duty to retreat" Until recently in Florida there was. And I do believe in Texas you can shoot to kill to defend your property. Correct me if I'm wrong I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

Need to shoot all of em. Tired of girl scout cookie girls always trying to get my money I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

Need to shoot him too! I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

Roaming dogs? Leash laws.? I'd shoot the fuckers too! I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

Damn. That gave me a headache I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

English [edit] Etymology contracted form of al be it, "even if it be so that" [edit] Pronunciation IPA: /ɔːlˈbiːɪt/ [edit] Conjunction albeit although; even though but He has a very good idea, albeit a strange one. [edit] Translations Dutch: alhoewel French: bien que German: wenngleich Finnish: vaikka, vaikkakin Portuguese: se bem que Spanish: aunque, no obstante Swedish: dock Norwegian: dog >It's SOOOOOOOOO much easier. And the dumb people know what you mean I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

I'm going on 50 soon. My saying>"If I knew I was gonna live this long I would have taken better care of myself" I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

Thanks