BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Amos
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 03:29 PM

Only asking if you can condemn an entire group by the actions of one person or even a few people from that group.


You can assert any dumb-ass idea you want, including condemning the innocent, but if you mean "rationally" then the answer is no.


A

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Don Firth
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 04:56 PM

Only asking if you can condemn an entire group by the actions of one person or even a few people from that group.

Yes. IF that one person, or those few people, are acting on the stated beliefs and principles of that group.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: mousethief
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 05:41 PM

As long as the absolutely asinine title of this thread, and its basic assumptions, are allowed to stand, "anything goes" as far as posting since nobody can match such stupidity.

You're givin' it a pretty good run, ain'tcha, sweetums? Also the way you weave your words in with your original stories (if any) to make it entirely indisernible (aside from your nasty tone) which is which -- you're not going to convince anybody that way.

Leading to the conclusion: (1) either you know you're not going to convince anybody and you're doing it to be a gadfly, hence you're a jerk, or (2) you think it really will convince somebody, hence you're a moron.

Which is it then?

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Bobert
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 05:49 PM

Ya'll are missin' the point here...

Ther point is that our governement has two standards... One for righties that says it's pkay to carry a weapon to a ralley where the president is to speak... The other which says it's not okay for liberals to have guns... That lesson was painfully delivered in the 60s and liberals got it... If you have a gun then the governement is gonna get you... That, my friends, is dual standards...

The second point is that there are more and more incidents of folks suggesting on the right suggesting violence... We on the left saw how that iy worked for them in the 60's.... It virtually *killed* the movement...

Lastly, regarless of whether one is a rightie of leftie radical the message that the Tea Partiers are sending is that violence is just peachy as far as they are concerned and without the governement sayin' they are wrong then the message is doubly sent...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Riginslinger
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 05:53 PM

The only people who don't want liberals to have guns is other liberals.

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: mousethief
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 07:14 PM

Like the other liberals who were in charge of security at the convention in Minneapolis? Feh.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Bobert
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 08:54 PM

I donno about that, Rigs... One thing that the right has going for it is that everyone knows (or assumes) that they pack a lotta heat... The governement knows it... The cops know it and liberals know it...

Now, if all of a sudden liberals started a liberal NRA and armed themselves as well as the righties then I don't think the "redneck superiority complex" (RSC) would hold up too long... I mean, here in Virginia we have a whole lotta punks who couldn't win a fist fight against their little sisters but when they strap on that sidearm they become Rambo... And they talk big and they get this aire about them that whatever they say, regardless of how moronic, is correct...

Guns are like the opiate of the stupid...

That's why I think that if these Rambo-wantabees knew that folks on the other side of the debate were also armed then maybe they would think twice about shootin' off their mouths...

See, folks... Ol' hippie has been watchin' too many Tea Bagger stories on the news and ready to invest in an AK... LOL... But really, that is the point... The meassage has been sent that violence is peachy dandy so the logical thinkin' is that the left better get armed.... And fast!!!

I mean, is that the message, or not??? Sure seems like it to me... So here we are with this Talibanish segment of the population, armed to the teeth, getting away with it while the governemnt turns its head and running their motuhs about stuff that is based on lies and more lies... Sounds like the Taliban to me, Ralph...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Sawzaw
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 09:24 PM

"Here's the truth: SOME Obama supporters are nuts. SOME Tea-Baggers are nuts. SOME liberals are nuts and SOME conservatives are nuts. Of all these nuts, SOME are slightly nuts, some a bit more, some more nuts than that, and SOME are seriously nuts.

And of all the nuts in all these categories, SOME of those nuts are a public danger. And, possibly, SOME of those are "terrorist" oriented in the sense of using violence for political purposes.

You guys gotta learn discrimination between similarities and the recognition of differences."

At last a rational statement from Amos. Good on you Amos.

Each person, each statement, each action must be judged on it's face, not by which "group" that person belongs to, EG us or them, Bloods or Crips, Dems or Repubs or skin color.

If somebody flies a plane into a building it is not automatically terrorism and a teababger is not automatically a terrorist.

Remember when that kid that flew a plane into a building in Florida? They said it was his meds.

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: katlaughing
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 09:42 PM

Science Friday on NPR had some interesting discussions today, esp. the first one which was on Communicating Science in a Post-Newspaper Era. You may listen to it, or read the transcript (scroll way down)HERE

One of them was talking about the types of emails he gets now there is the Internet with so much misinformation, etc.:

Prof. SCHNEIDER: If my hundreds of emails..... are any indication, the typical line - and you would not believe the vulgarity and even violence threats. It's amazing. Only in the last two years since the Tea Party-types decided that their, you know, their imagined version of the destruction of America allows them this kind of radical, you know, ugly behavior.

What they generally say is, you communistic dupe of the United Nations who wants world government to take away our religious and our economic freedoms. They live in a mythology. They get it reinforced by people who take out-of-context quotes to convince them, and then they sit there and it's very - I'm sorry to say this - red-state, blue-state specific.

And, you know, if you want to take the world and oversimplify it, you have people in two kind of value systems - faith, trust. Don't give me evidence if it's going to knock me off the pin. And doubt test, which is our value system. You change any opinion when you have new evidence.

Some of it reminded me of this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Bobert
Date: 20 Feb 10 - 07:48 AM

Well, looks as if I'm out front of MSNBC 'cause Rachele Maddow devoted much of her show last night to my point that the right is gettin' way with pushing violence...

So back to the Tea Baggers as a terrorist organization.... If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck....

B~

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Sawzaw
Date: 20 Feb 10 - 02:14 PM

Ahhhhhhhhhhhh

Ya might want to ask Rachel if she knows anything about what in the US Consitution.

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Sawzaw
Date: 20 Feb 10 - 04:09 PM

Are demonstrators holding a kill sign a terrorist organization?

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Amos
Date: 20 Feb 10 - 04:22 PM

Sawz:

The Constitution of the United States has no section called a Preamble; and despite the assertions of Minority Leader John Baynor, it says nothing about "We hold these truths to be self-evident.". This assertion, as Rachel correctly points out, comes from the Declaration of Independence, which does not have a Preamble either.

The COnstitution does have an introducto ry sentence but in the original document it was not called a Preamble. And it certainly does not contain the notion attributed to it by the minority Speaker.

Furthermore, Ms. Maddow's command of the CONTENTS--the important part, remember?-- seems far more developed than John Baynor's.

A

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: mousethief
Date: 20 Feb 10 - 04:51 PM

Isn't the "We the People" part generally called the Preamble in everyday parlance?

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Sawzaw
Date: 20 Feb 10 - 05:27 PM

http://www.whitehouse.gov/our-government/the-constitution

Preamble to the Constitution


http://www.senate.gov/civics/constitution_item/constitution.htm

The Preamble explains the purposes of the Constitution, and defines the powers of the new government as originating from the people of the United States.

Preamble:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

http://www.america.gov/publications/books/the-constitution.html

This illustrated publication includes the complete text of the U.S. Constitution preamble, seven articles, and 27 amendments

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Feb 10 - 05:31 PM

Where in the original document does it say "preamble"?

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Amos
Date: 20 Feb 10 - 05:34 PM

It does not say "Preamble" in the opriginal document. It has been labeled a preamble later but it is not part of the original. In any case the stupidity of the Minority Leader was in reciting a line from the Declaration and asserting it was from the Consittution.

Rachel also misspoke, as neither of them (in the original) have a Preamble named as such. But at least she was referring to the right document.

A

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: mousethief
Date: 20 Feb 10 - 05:39 PM

Does it have to say "Preamble" in the document to be called "Preamble"? That's a pretty silly argument. If somebody says "Like it says in the Preamble to the Constitution...." you haven't won any talking points at all if you point out that the word "Preamble" isn't in the actual document. That's just what it's called.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Sawzaw
Date: 20 Feb 10 - 06:27 PM

Please inform Everyone's favorite red-head, the Chile Rojo of the New York Times:

"One singular leader who wrote elegantly about his ideals, was swept into the presidency and then collided with harsh reality had some advice for another.

In an interview with Alison Smale in The Times last week, Vaclav Havel sipped Champagne in the middle of the afternoon and pricked Barack Obama's conscience.

Havel, the 73-year-old former Czech president, who didn't win a Nobel Peace Prize despite leading the Czechs and the Slovaks from communism to democracy, turned the tables and asked Smale a question about Obama, the latest winner of the peace prize.

Was it true that the president had refused to meet the Dalai Lama on his visit to Washington?

He was told that Obama had indeed tried to curry favor with China by declining to see the Dalai Lama until after the president's visit to China next month.

Dissing the Dalai was part of a broader new Obama policy called "strategic reassurance" â€" softening criticism of China's human rights record and financial policies to calm its fears that America is trying to contain it. (Not to mention our own fears that the Chinese will quit bankrolling our debt.)

The tyro American president got the Nobel for the mere anticipation that he would provide bold moral leadership for the world at the very moment he was caving to Chinese dictators. Awkward.

Havel reached out to touch a glass dish given to him by Obama, inscribed with the preamble to the U.S. Constitution. "It is only a minor compromise," he said. "But exactly with these minor compromises start the big and dangerous ones, the real problems."

Our president would be well advised to listen. Havel is looking at this not only as a moral champion but as a playwright. Obama (who, as Robert Draper wrote, has read and reread Shakespeare's tragedies) does not want his fatal flaw to be that he compromises so much that his ideals get blurred out of recognition."

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Feb 10 - 06:37 PM

I don't know, mousthief, but does it have to be called a preamble, as opposed to, for instance, a preface or a prologue?

But I agree, there certainly are a lot of people who like to wave around the Constitution who don't even know what's in it. Like John Boehner, for instance. Maddow at least knows what's in it. She appears to just be quibbling with what to call the opening paragraph.

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: mousethief
Date: 20 Feb 10 - 06:40 PM

I don't know what it HAS to be called; "Preamble" is what it IS called.

In like manner you will never find the words "Bill of Rights" in the Constitution. It would be pretty foolish, however, to on that basis argue there is no Bill of Rights in the US Constitution. Could be called the Bunch of Rights. Could be called the String of Rights. But it's called the Bill of Rights, and whenever people talk about it, that's what they call it.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Amos
Date: 20 Feb 10 - 06:41 PM

Sawz:

Obama just HAD a meeting with the Dalai Lama. What are you on about? Your tale has no date on it.


A

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Bobert
Date: 20 Feb 10 - 07:52 PM

Silly tangent here... What Racael Maddow does have correct is the pass that the Tea Baggers are getting with their ever increasing violent message...

This is beyond 1st ammendment rights as no one has the right to yell "Fire" in a theater unless there is a fire... What is happening here is that the right is layin the groundwork for another round of assasinations, this time perhaps being the politicans they don't like to go along with the current assasinations of doctors they don't like...

It's time that someone step in and say, "Hey, folks, step back... This is gettin' out of hand here..."

Of course, the righties would love nothin' more than to see Obama in a pool of blood... There are righties that talks about it fanticize about it... The problem here is well beyond what it means to our nation in terms of it being a country based upon law but a much more danger ous situation that I have described before where the left stoops to the lowliness of the right and decides, "Screw it, Ralph, I've had enough and I'm going to Richmond and buy me an AK-47"...

Then what we could be looking at is as close to a "failed state" as anyone her could imagine... No one in 1850 could have predicted what would occur 10 years later but the early warnings were there... The early warning are here again and unless the right wants to destroy our country, which BTW they say is "theirs", then someone on the right needs to call for a cooling off period 'cause these Tea Baggers are not far behind their brothers in Afganistan, the Taliban...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Don Firth
Date: 20 Feb 10 - 08:21 PM

Just a passing observation:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Ahem. . . .

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Bobert
Date: 20 Feb 10 - 09:10 PM

Well, yeah, that is the preamble to the Constitution... It is easily Googled... And it outlines the general principles that the rest of the document try to codify... Alot of folks don't really pay much attention to it because it doesn't fir their particular biasesa dn prejudices but I think it states very clearly the intent of the Founding Fathers...

"insure domestic tranquility" is the part that disturbs me about the right wing in this country... And I think if Tom Jefferson has seen the guy with the gun strapped to his leg at a rally where the president was to speak that ol' Tom would say, "Hey, this wasn't what we had in mind"... Yeah, Thomas Jefferson did say that the document would have to be revsisted from time to time... I'm not even sure that he thought it would survive even for a 100 years but I am sure that he would not be a Tea Partier these days but quite the opposite...

"to form a more perfect ****union*****"... Not just words...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Sawzaw
Date: 20 Feb 10 - 09:47 PM

Dear Amos: Go find a college professor and maybe he can help you out.

Nah, I ain't that arrogant. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/18/opinion/18dowd.html


You are right about the Boner quoting from the DI and saying it was from the Constitution.

But did you see the arms waving when Maddow said "Constitution doesn't have a preamble"

You are such a fan of arm wavers.

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Sawzaw
Date: 21 Feb 10 - 01:53 PM

Are Obama supporters a terrorist organization

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Feb 10 - 03:33 PM

Let me ask you this....

Is the Roller Derby League a terrorist organization???

I think so. These girls are needlessly violent and they're dedicated to punching people's heads in. I call that terrorism. ;-) When you hear the names of the teams, you KNOW it's terrorism.

How about "The Queens of Pain" and the "Manhattan Mayhem", for instance?

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Feb 10 - 03:38 PM

Disingenuous, Sawzaw.

Obama--or his large number of supporters (remember, he did get elected)--can hardly be held responsible for the occasional maniacal bigot who also favored him over another candidate. Are you suggesting that everyone who voted for Obama is a terrorist?   That covers quite a bit of territory.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Feb 10 - 04:25 PM

It's almost as irresponsible as implying that everyone who voted for Chongo Chimp is a terrorist...

But what about those rolly derby girls? Horrifying, isn't it?

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: mousethief
Date: 21 Feb 10 - 04:31 PM

Would be, Little Hawk, if they weren't so damned sexy.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Amos
Date: 21 Feb 10 - 05:37 PM

Sawz:

It strikes me as nearly insane to try and make a point from last October as though it were true in the present, especially since it was just refuted last week.

There's a scope of relevance in these things, depending on the magnitude of the subject--but this point of Dowd's was overcome by events LONG since. Are you trying to pretend it did not happen because someone said last Ovtober it hadn't happened? Or what?


A

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: beardedbruce
Date: 22 Feb 10 - 07:12 AM

Disingenuous, Don Firth.


The point is that Bobert has now started two threads that state those he opposes are racsit or terrorist because a few people that agree with them are.



The Tea Party movement, or Palin --or their large number of supporters --can hardly be held responsible for the occasional maniacal bigot who also favored them over Obama's policies. Are you suggesting that everyone who voted for against is a terrorist?   That covers quite a bit of territory. And it is what Bobert is trying to do.

We keep giving equivilent examples that yyou don't like- MAYBE you should reign in BOBERT who thinks this typoe of thread is appropriate, instead of complaing abotu those who are in agreement with you on principles, if not policies.

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Feb 10 - 07:39 AM

Well, bb, that is not waht I have said, at all... That is just more BB-BS... This isn't about me... I know you love makin' it about me seeing as your a charter member of the Bobert Fan Club... Buty reality is that, like I have said, the right wing, just as the past are not above or below using violence or the threat of violence to achieve their goals... That is what terrorism is all about...

But you faithful Bobert fans don't want to address that reality 'cuase it's always more fun to just attack me??? Go figure... Wonder why ya'll won't stand up and defend or denouce the vilence that threats that are very much a ceneterpiece of the Tea Baggers??? Or why there aren't people of color in the many picures you see of the rallies???

Those are the real issues... Not your childish games which all you Bobert Fan Clubbers are so fond...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Don Firth
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 01:17 AM

I speak for myself, BB.

Bobert is perfectly capable of speaking for himself.

And I was talking to Sawzaw.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: mousethief
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 11:55 AM

The screaming banshees at the summer political rallies were hardly "occasional." The people with posters about watering democracy with blood were hardly "occasional". The crowds at Palin's rallies who were whipped up to "kill him!" frenzy were hardly occasional. This is the face of the Tea Party. It's not some maniacal tiny subset. It's the Tea Party at its LCD best.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: GUEST,Stringsinger
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 01:12 PM

It's really hard to generalize here. There are some who are brandishing weapons and others who are scared, confused and disgruntled. There is one common denominator here though.
Racism. There are very few black people at these rallies.

Terrorism is another buzz-word like communism to make people afraid and angry. It is usually misapplied for political purposes.

The so-called Tea Party bears little resemblance to the participants of the original Tea Party in Massachusetts. This trumped-up Dick Armey Tea Party is not unified and does not contain any useful vision for the economic woes we face today. It's a reactive party, not a pro-active one.

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: mousethief
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 01:56 PM

What we need is a Realist Party who carry signs that say "No Medicare Without Taxation."

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Sawzaw
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 03:38 PM

"It strikes me as nearly insane to try and make a point from last October as though it were true in the present, especially since it was just refuted last week.

There's a scope of relevance in these things, depending on the magnitude of the subject--but this point of Dowd's was overcome by events LONG since. Are you trying to pretend it did not happen because someone said last Ovtober it hadn't happened? Or what?"

If I knew specifically what you were talking about I might be able to answer your question Amos.

If it is about the Dowd article, it was in regards to her stating the Constitution has a preamble and it was in bold so you could see it.


Don: It was a question like Bobert's question.

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Amos
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 03:42 PM

OK, Sawz. The Constitution as it is published currently has a Preamble. No problem.

Rachel was wrong about the Preamble part. She must have been thinking of the original version which does not label its parts that way.

Oh, and the Senator's quote was not where he said it was, but from the Declaration of Independence. God knows what he was thinking of...

Any questions?


Sheeeeshe.

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Bobert
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 03:53 PM

Doesn't much matter, Amos...

The Preamble is an importrant statement... It lays down a vision for our nation... If one takes that vision and applies it to the recent Suprme Court decisions or actions of the Repubican Party then there is something terribly amiss...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Sawzaw
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 09:39 PM

I agree Amos. Keep up the good attitude.

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Sawzaw
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 09:41 PM

The professor, Amy Bishop that murdered three people with a gun and shot three others was allegedly an avid Obama supporter and a left winger.

Can we conclude that left wing Obama supporters are a terrorist organization?

"A family source said Bishop, a mother of four children - the youngest a third-grade boy - was a far-left political extremist who was "obsessed" with President Obama to the point of being off-putting."

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Bobert
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 10:25 PM

If Amy Bishop had murdered John Roberts of John Bonehead then we'd have something to talk about here... She didn't... She, like other wackos, murdered co-workers...

Actually, given what the left learned in the 60s about just how terrorism can turn a nation around for decades, it would be interesting to revisit the country in 20 years if Obama supporters were to become a terrorist organization... But that is just hypothetical...

Reality is that the left in this country ain't about the kinds of things the the right is willing to rationalize to either stop the left and/or to hold power...

The Tea Party movement is flush with folks ready and willing to kill folks on the left... Their signs and rhetoric are filled with threats of violence...

This is a reality that has nothin' to do with a wacked out college professor who went "postal" at the work place... Those folks, sad to say, seem to follow a certain pattern of killing people they worked with... No politics involved...

BTW, it would be very interesting to poll all the folks who have been convicted of murder and voted in the last election and see just what party is producing the most murderers??? I'd put my money on the Repubs as the murder party but, hey, there ain't no studies that I know of???

B~

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: beardedbruce
Date: 24 Feb 10 - 06:59 AM

Bobert,


An overly large number of "all the folks who have been convicted of murder and voted in the last election " were Black.

1. murderers by race for 2004 ( example year- feel free to look for others that mat



The vast majority of those who are Black and who voted in the last election voted for Obama.

2. http://www.chacha.com/question/what-percent-of-black-voters-voted-for-obama-in-the-most-recent-american-presidential-election





So, unless you claim that NO non-blacks voted for Obama, the only conclusion that can be determined is that MORE Obama supporters are murderers than McCann supporters.

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Feb 10 - 07:21 AM

Well, bruce, that much is prolly true... I'd like to see the data on the white folks... They are the ones who traditionally have used murder for political gain in this country...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Riginslinger
Date: 24 Feb 10 - 08:25 AM

Then, of course, there's Winnie Mandela, but then, that was a different country.

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Sawzaw
Date: 24 Feb 10 - 09:52 AM

Why does Bobert base his conclusions, which later turn into Bobert "facts", on ifs?

"If Amy Bishop had murdered John Roberts"

If Bobert would apply the same logic on Amy Bishop that he applys to Stack, would he come to the same conclusion?

What if "If Stack had murdered John Roberts"?

People fail to look at things both ways to test their hypothesis.

If A + B = C then C -B = A

However this requires logical thinking which is difficult for some people.

Therefore they are continually unhappy and complain constantly because things don't turn out the way they think it should have.

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Amos
Date: 24 Feb 10 - 12:05 PM

Glad to see you defending logic, Sawz. Keep up the good attitude!

But just as a comment, the formulation that if A+B=C the C-B=A is only true of closed systems and mechanics. In real life, where things are constantly in flux and beliefs pro and con have a large bearing, the use of abstract formulations can quickly go awry.


A

Subject: RE: BS: The Tea Party a Terrorist Organization??
From: Amos
Date: 24 Feb 10 - 12:10 PM

Are Little Hawk's Dogs a Terrorist Organization????

Cosmos Magazine reports: "ARIS: Small domesticated dogs probably originated in the Middle East more than 12,000 years ago as the descendants of grey wolves (Canis lupis).

Researchers Melissa Gray and Robert Wayne led a team from the University of California in Los Angeles that searched for variations of a gene called IGF1 which is a characteristic of small dogs.

"(The variant) probably arose early in their history," said Gray, whose paper is published online by BMC Biology, an open-access journal.

Small domestic dogs at least 12,000 years old

"Our results show that the version of the IGF1 gene found in small dogs is closely related to that found in Middle Eastern wolves and is consistent with an ancient origin."

The work concurs with archaeological work in the Middle East that has unearthed the remains of small domestic dogs dating to 12,000 years ago.

Digs in Europe have uncovered older remains, to as much as 31,000 years ago, but these are of larger dogs.

Iraq's Fertile Crescent

Canine selection may have been carried out by villagers in the Fertile Crescent of modern-day Iraq and other cradles of agriculture.

"Small size could have been more desirable in more densely packed agrarian societies where dogs may have lived partly indoors or in confined outdoor spaces," says the study.

Most of the Western barnyard animals and the cat were domesticated between 12,000 and 8,000 years ago in the Fertile Crescent.

Dogs were first domestic animal

However, dogs have been considered as an important exception, as they were thought to have been domesticated 1,000 to 5,000 years earlier, while humans were still living and hunter-gatherers.

"Domestication is a key feature of the Neolithic Revolution, a suite of cultural innovations and consequences comprising sedentism, and agricultural economy, and complex social arrangements conducive to urban living," write David MacDonald and Carlos Driscoll, in an associated opinion article published in the Journal of Biology.

"Gray et al provide evidence that early Middle Eastern dogs segregate for a character, non-adaptive in the wild, that is probably the result of long-term association with humans and must have occurred over many human generations. "

---

If this is the case, the Mounties better look in on Little Hawk's dogs. They may be secret Iraqi moles.


A