Gorgon

How can you be an extremist in regards to an either/or proposition. There are ramifications that are inescapable either way. Are you suggesting it's better to wobble somewhere near the median of the scale and not really think on what your stance means.

So wanton destruction and callous disregard for civilian death is ok because the people you are fighting are just as bad.

You expect a plot twist that makes sense from Battlestar gallactica. Why, pray tell. At least we are done with the frakking prophecies of pithea, the show had been dragging that lame ball and chain around for practically 3 seasons.

I'm guessing the reason they are doomed to repeat the same story over and over again is some kind of metaphysical cosmic loop caused by the cylons cheating death and being reincarnated the same, thus not making any progress on the wheel of karma as it were.

The Geneva convention doesn't address irregular warfare. Not that I'm trying to make Hamas out to be guerrillas, just saying they are rules for regular armies that should supposedly make wars a little less gruesome.

Blindness. It was absolutely terrifying.

Everybody and their grandmother is a Cylon.

So in answering perhaps the most significant question of them all you can either go with 'yes' in which case all is well, or with 'no', in which case you are merely being contrary and hurtful towards believers. In other words, believers are allowed to use the word 'god' when answering the question of whether he exists, but non believers are not. Good to know.

Ask yourself this, is Hamas better than Israel. If Hamas possessed rockets capable of killing 10.000 Israelies rather than 10 do you think they would blink before using them. Yes Israel is guilty of a terrible disregard for civilian casualties, but so is Hamas, and I want you to acknowledge it.

But it would buy influence with Israel, and who knows Obama may be less business as usual than one might expect on Israel/Palestine.

I can't help but wonder if there was some special significance to the metal thingiemagingie Duala picked up on earth. What was that supposed to be.

A church is only as strong as its congregation. Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but you make it sound like churches just get free money from he government. They get serious tax breaks, but they have to raise money in order to get the tax break on it. The state doesn't just give money to every guy with a bible and a pulpit. That's exactly how it works here, priests, bishops, the works, they are all public servants. Of course you don't get to be a priest without a 6 year degree. Everyone is a member of the church per default, you could save 0,5% or something on your taxes if you bothered to withdraw from church membership, but few people do. I don't know exactly how the Church of England is financed, but I don't think priests have to pack them in to guarantee their own salaries like in the US.

The advertising campaign is backed by the British Humanist Association and prominent atheist, Professor Richard Dawkins. Hanne Stinson, chief executive of the British Humanist Association, said: "I have difficulty understanding why people with particular religious beliefs find the expression of a different sort of beliefs to be offensive. The reason for the ad is for people to have the same discussion we are having now.

Churches are on the government tit most places, they don't need customers, they get paid either way.

Tell me, how is an advert with the message 'there is no god', different from one that says 'there is one'. Religions across the board are allowed to make all sorts of wild claims regarding the nature of the universe, but when atheists do it it's somehow insensitive. I don't get it.

It's a tactical shooter with unlimited ammo and 2 idiot companions that are only good for getting in the way in the firefights. You can't take control of them, and you can't get rid of them. Also there is no planning stage, like in the older games, so calling it 'tactical' would actually be quite generous. They are like a set of very unwelcome conjoined twins joined at your hips, and when one them dies the objectives suddenly cease to matter and you, I dunno call time out and go home for their funerals, rather than try to stop the terrorists that are trying to blow up the proverbial school bus. In any case you have to start the level all over again.

No, it's not Irrelevant. Arafat owed Palestinian self rule to capturing the attention of the world to the plight of the Palestinian people. Do you think he would have addressed the UN as the 'leader of a dispossessed people' or got the Nobel peace prize if nobody had known his name. Do you think he would have gotten anything at all from Israel. It seems to me that you are busy making judgments about how things should be in your opinion, rather than how they are.

Me, and world opinion. We are pretty fickle about what is terrible enough to make us want to act. Show enough starving African children and we cease to notice, and that's the point. It's not like Hamas are ever going to win the battle of Israeli public opinion.

Yes, but there have been too many of those for it to shock anyone anymore. Having Israel kill a hugely disproportionate number of Palestinian civilians in their incursion will further the Hamas agenda more. These are 'countries' at war so it doesn't apply except at the level of international opinion, but one of the theories offering a possibility of revolution and regime change through terrorism suggests that causing the state to react disproportionately is key to turning the population against the state and eventually have them side with the terrorists. It's never worked to my knowledge though, terrorists organizations seem entirely too optimistic about what it takes to break down the established order. In the case of the Zionists, they already enjoyed a degree of popular support. Nevertheless these were the kinds of thoughts going through the heads of RAF when they started their kidnappings back in the 70s.

The State of Israel gained full independence following a terrorist attack which killed the ranking English administrators. September 11 was an overwhelming success on the symbolic level, and terror is all about perception,the casualties themselves are insignificant, at least until the dreaded nuclear terrorist event actually happens. One attack could hardly have hoped to achieve more. So, terror is effective, but rarely so. It needs to be spectacular, out of the ordinary, and it needs to succeed in nudging events just so in the desired direction. Another suicide attack against an Israeli city has been done so many times before it people are numb to it. A retaliatory incursion like this one with a massive civilian death toll does a lot more to move public perception, or in this case world opinion, since that conflict is as seminal as ever.

I watched an episode of 'The Unit' where they planned to frag their commanding officer because he'd slept with one of their wives. Yes, I'm sure that's all very authentic. It was also impressed by how nauseatingly flag waving it is. I mean where else would you hear 'Are you a true American' used in general conversation. Can't the PC brigade get off their arses and try to have it banned, I'm genuinely worried about the effect this show will have on children. Mostly it just saddens me to see half decent actors belittling themselves like this, it's like watching Al Pacino turning tricks in drag on Hollywood Boulevard.

Yes but since when did "thin" equal 2d. If I go on an extreme diet I will turn sprite based. >_

It's "-" Apparently. Surprise, surprise.

Whats the parameter for excluding a word from a search engine result. I know there are some common commands like asterisks and the like that supposedly modify search results, but I never gave it much thought.

I wonder what 'very thin two dimensional objects' are. To my knowledge it's either 2d, or 3d, and there isn't anything in the physical world that's d2.