dorbie

The mother is mortified that the guy is furthering his personal political agenda by dragging his daughter into this. That is her opinion of his actions. Besides, this is no different than a Christian family placing their child in a church-based school to ensure they get their religious teachings, so they would be furthering their religious/political agenda too, that is, if the former is. The husband should be more concerned that the child's mother and custodian is a Christian than "under God" in an oath in school. When you learn this about the child's mother and custodian your jaw just drops and that alone tells you this guy is no hero. Why does the father have a duty to the mother? Since the mother dissented, she has no duty ot the father. I said that he was my hero, not her hero or their hero. He is dedicating his life to the separation of church and state - he's awesome. BTW, the mother is the primary custodian, not the exclusive custodian. Show me 1 case where the mother is both competent and wants the child where she is not established as the primary custodian by the court. The fact that the child is being raised as a christian by the mother demonstrates that the father's objections in this case to the phrase "under god" have nothing to do with concerns w.r.t. his child. Rather than protecting his child he's using her in my opinion. The whole situation is thoroughly ludicrous and in this case the custodial issue is significant. The child is clearly a vehicle for his political agenda, he can't stop the custodian raising the child as a christian. It is unfortunate that this is the test case, you'd think they could find a pair of athiests with a kid in North America to bring a case, instead of this farce. Some hero.

Isn't there something in the bible about usury?

It's real easy to get, hence my mention of GDP, I didn't realize you wouldn't see that. But if you're talking about the US the net income is negative. i.e there's no money to give, just borrowed money. Gross Domestic Product is a pretty flawed metric in some countries like the US. In one sense you might consider that gross exports that are far less than GDP might be a countries gross earnings, they're exceeded by imports we have a huge trade deficit to some countries you consider poorer than us. How about revenue receipts vs Federal spending again there's a mass of red ink. My analogy is perfectly reasonable, since you're comparing with similar analogies why don't you read my post and appreciate my counterpoint rather than assuming I don't get your point. I agree that the US should help here, I just think a lot of the arguments around generosity are deeply flawed.

I thought he'd shown significant deductions but didn't didn't want to cite it without a firm reference. As you point out, there's a huge a difference between earnings and net worth, donating as a percentage of net worth is a thoroughly flawed standard to attempt to apply to anyone.

The mother is mortified that the guy is furthering his personal political agenda by dragging his daughter into this. The husband should be more concerned that the child's mother and custodian is a Christian than "under God" in an oath in school. When you learn this about the child's mother and custodian your jaw just drops and that alone tells you this guy is no hero.

And you're making that assumption. So together we're in a stalemate. I think the word you're looking for is presumption. Presumption of guilt and condemnation based on information you don't have that is really none of your business. No actually assumption and / or assuming was the word(s) aggiedave and i were looking for. Guilt? Condemnation? information that isnt any of my business? What are you talking about? I wasn't really trying to imply that the word assumption was incorrect rather that it led you your presumption of stinginess and condemnation for it which is the real problem here. That's exactly what's being attempted here. The anti-bush criticism is based on a presumption of stinginess. Then framed as if the two sides of the argument are equal, but when you level an accusation at someone being stingy as in this case you better have a bit more to back it up than assumptions are and no real evidence. You don't have the whole picture and in the face of this you still stand by the unfounded accusation. How is anyone supposed to defend against this? Show their tax returns? They shouldn't have to and they shouldn't be critiqued over charitable donations which are a matter of private conscience, never mind the implausibility of the assumptions you want to make to support your criticism.

And you're making that assumption. So together we're in a stalemate. I think the word you're looking for is presumption. Presumption of guilt and condemnation based on information you don't have that is really none of your business.

$10k might just about do that.

Im curious, what could a moderator or HH do? How could they track someone who simply copied and pasted links into an external email and sent them off? If they can actually prove who did this i think it should be made public. But can it actually be proven? btw - this sucks, good luck dude Access logs, by account and IP address. If they log enough details they should be able to see a pattern of access for a single account and/or IP address that runs right back to the poisoned pen. I know DZ.com logs some of this stuff in great detail, ever seen "who's online"? It tells you exactly where the member is on ths site and what they're doing. Whether they store it is another matter. They may be writing SQL scripts right now to figure this out. Here's hoping.

Who fired you, dunno where you worked but it would be nice if their actions reflected accurately on them rather than their bullshit claim of your opinions based on an informant they are shielding. I don't know what's more astonishing really, that they did this or that they actually think it is the path of least resistance. There could be a lot of negative publicity over this from all political persuasions. It's the sort of thing that can make a national headline, fired for posting political opinions online.

Yea I hope you log accesses to user profiles. There can't be many who've clicked on PhillyKev's recently, that should narrow the field. P.S. and gone trawling through historical posting logs, that should leave a nice trail of unusual access patterns on their account. I hope the jerk is reading this and losing sleep.

That's just disgusting. This really is unbelievable. Someone is a real frigging scumbag, but I don't think much of your employers either for this. You should ask a lawyer to see if you can force access to the letter and seek damages from employer & rat. If their letter misrepresents you and led to your dismissal the jerk could be in for some serious financial remorse (I hope) A few things I'd say. 1) Don't assume that there really was a letter until you've seen it. If you post at work the admins may have seen this and passed it along. 2) The letter may have been anonymous, which further calls into question the actions of your employers. 3) Don't assume that this was a DZ.com poster, it may have been a lurker or some idiot on the web stumbling on this.... or another employee associate who knew you posted here. Get the date of the letter and see if it correlates with any post from a newcommer or particularly vitriolic head to head with a regular. Don't make posts and accusations against other members, you may just be passing injustice along. I understand you're pissed or should be you sound remarkably calm considering, I'd be spitting hellfire.

I've bought a lot of stuff from Amazon, I've been shopping there for 5+ years I guesstimate, just books at first but a lot of other stuff now. Last year logged in from America I purchased almost all my christmas presents online on their .co.uk website and had them delivered gift wrapped to my family in the UK. Very convenient. Other years I've bought a bunch of "Toys for Tots" orders through them for direct delivery to the Marine's program. This year I purchased almost nothing from Amazon, no particular reason. Looks like I missed the boom. I do quite a bit of online shopping at various sites, I've never had a problem.

This is a standard practice with shady dealers. If you don't take the options they won't actually sell the camera to you. The call for order confirmation is the classic way of pitching the fake upgrades. Given their ethics it may be a grey import at full price i.e. no manufacturers warranty. They merely use the items in the box to talk up their base price to match a standard retail. You found a camera $100 cheaper than other sites, and after a call they added $110, letting you know they're assholes out to exploit the naive, and there's no bargain, but you figured that much out already. There are actually dealers that will give you discounted price on boxed gear with a manufacturers warranty without the sleaze, chances are they won't be the cheapest offer but they won't be full retail either.

.......and Salted the Earth. This isn't unprecedented though, these waves happen relatively often, I wonder what the recovery period will be.

Tresspassing doesn't necissarily count, unless the intention is to commit a criminal act. On the flip side, even toliet papering a house is a criminal act...gotta use your head above and beyond the law. If you toilet paper an aircraft hanger would they throw the patriot act at you? I always drag the body over the doorstep and mess with the blood evidence. Don't they teach this stuff at your gun club?

LOL Named after the Earl of Sandwich, nothing to do with beaches or witchcraft.

The spelling & grammar on that page is REALLY scary. "Sewerside Bummers" says "Carl from California"!!!! Oh. Wait a minute... Maybe he's from Muscle Beach and doesn't actually mean "Suicide Bombers" after all!! Mike. LOL, but I suspect this is an intentional play on the name, dunno about you but I hate the Foxism "homicide bombers", it seems to match the intent of all bombers even those who don't kill themselves.

Hmm.. area = Pi*radius^2 2657yds/1093 yds/kilometer = 2.43 kilometers That gives you almost 18.5 square kilometers to worry about at any instant when those Canadian guys are in town. Edited for correct number, what a dummy

Kudos for watching it, but I think in the case of these films beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

We have a purpose?

I agree that many laws enacted with good intent have been subverted by overzealous law enforcement. I hope this DA loses this case. Yea but some dumb nutsack intentionally pointing a laser at a jet deserves some form of severe rebuke and real punishment. It all depends how this gets spun in court, I don't buy the hysterical B.S. about the pilot being blinded. That seems very unlikely on the face of it. You have a hand held laser of modest power and a little beam spread there's no way you'd hand hold that on a cockpit at distance without some equipment but I don't know what the effect looked like from the cockpit. It would potentially be very distracting, that alone and questions he should have been asking himself over what it looked like to the pilot should be enough to land this guy in jail if this was intentional. I get pissed off with some dumb dickhead shining a laser pointer at the cinema screen, catching one shit for brains who shone it at a jet airliner is a good thing. The punishment seems severe but it's like a lot of crime & punishment in the US. This is not a patriot act issue, it's the politicization and flagrant ambition of law enforcement and prosecution officials in the US. The media plays right into this never seriously questioning their more grandiose accusations. They'll happily charge someone with vehicular manslaughter for speeding into an accident and all the other dumb sheep hearing this on TV never stop to think that they've all sped at one point or another and there but for the grace of God go them. There's probably some lesser charge that could be leveled at this guy but the prosecution is gonna try for a home run by filing an inappropriate charge because it's the American way (for a DA to feather his nest) and always has been. Let's also remember that this is a case going to trial, this may be the result of the guy not pleading to a lesser charge, another popular tactic, so the guy doesn't fancy some well deserved jail time and decides to take his chances with a jury on the maximum charge the DA could trump up.

There are two t's in Scottish. My buddy and I used to joke about the parochial Scotsman, if a train derailed in England killing 100 commuters it wouldn't be beyond the Scotsman to publish a headline "Train Derails, Edinburgh Man Escapes Uninjured", so your post is a fun read.

I'd say an alternative interpretation is that we've evolved away from *some* instincts due to the nature of the environments we exist in, or perhaps we never had them. I don't think it's a given that one is at the expense of another although we can train to override some instincts. We all have instincts or deeply imprinted responses, they evidently don't include whatever instincts led animals to retreat from a pending Tsunami (if that happened). I think if we can train to overcome some instinctive responses it's possible animals can too given the right stimulus. As humans we may have more of a capacity to override/suppress/ignore/unlearn what instincts we have. w.r.t. some of the comments, it's a safe bet we don't have any instincts on machineguns, but possibly we do to big flashes, bangs and the conscious concept of death. I have no idea how our conscious mind is wired to our subconscious and instinctive sides, a conscious knowledge of death and danger can produce a visceral response to stimulus we obviously have no genetic predisposition on. But similar sorts of effects have been seen in animals since Pavlov & his dog. It's not entirely sensible to assume that aspects of our mind are independently evolved. We're an integrated organism and conscious knowledge of abstract concepts may play a role in our own intincts, that complexity may even confuse of confound more primitive instinctive mechanisms. The bottom line is I just don't know it's interesting to ponder.

I think the answer may be yes, this can be a massive and prolonged effect. People have had time to wander onto the ocean floor to pick up stranded fish or play, as in the case of a bus load of Japanese school kids during another event, naturally they do not fare well when the water suddenly returns as it tends to do.