atinymonkey

For comedy value, they are using Iraq law, ratified and passed by Hussein himself. Like most of the less refined judicial systems, they still impose the death penalty in Iraq.

I think he's referring to Captain America's work in averting the atrocities, which led to him being trapped in Antarctica.

If he's talking about 'our' society, it's swings and roundabouts. I'm sure Wilde would have a thing or two to say about homosexual love only just being realised to exist, I'm fairly sure at least somebody read his books. 'In Memoriam' is Tennyson's eulogy to lost male love, and as Poet Laureate even Queen Victoria and Prince Albert were aware of the concept. I'm not sure there was a period where people didn't think gay love was possible, periods where it was unacceptable but not that it didn't occur. Side point - apparently, the concept of homosexuality was thought up by Samurai in feudal Japan where they felt the need to distinguish boy on boy from girl on boy. Previous to that, it was just sexuality without the prefix.

Like Glider says, there are two list presented for consideration. One comes from the Government and one is decided within the Palace. Most of the OBE's are to sportsmen, entertainers, politicians, artists and a few charity workers. The most prestigious knighthood is the Order of the Garter, I think King Harold of Norway was the last recipient, and Baroness Margert Thatcher (high caliber service, military service and service to the state). Basically, the easiest way is to become a famous actor/comedian and have the Queen meet you a few times and like you. Many people waste millions of punds and years chasing honours, and rarely get them. My Grandfather got some honour or other, something small and forgettable, at some point. I can't remember what. It may have been as simple as invites to dinner with the Queen a few times, to be honest.

It's Alexander the Greats fault for teh image problem. A boy in every port that one, the big floosy. I was under the impression that the percentage of infected homosexuals was actually always lower than heterosexuals, and the connection with homosexual behavior was a latent homophobic reaction to a perceived threat to promiscuous behavior. The existance of love between two people is as old as time itself, independant of gender or preference.

Jesus. Rob, what I said was 'Well, it's microeconomics so the counterpoints may ramble somewhat' which seems to quite clearly indicating future tense. As in my counterpoint, not an imagined counterpoint to some none-existent points. In order to fully answer your questions on the circumstances surrounding the economics effects in 1930's America I may need to go into a little bit more details than I have already hence the comment about the thread split because all this has nothing to do with Saddam Hussein. As to the source of the graphs, you bloody well know I'm not sitting next to a library of history and economics books. I even said I'd look it up when I went home. You don't honestly expect me to believe you think I wrote the things do you? I provided what I could with the constraints of being at work, with limited time and information at my disposal. It was a brief answer to a brief question, not a thesis to be marked for references and a complete bibliography. But cheers for assuming the best from me.

I can find thousands, and the resulting books on the process. The economic principles are part of core syllabus, abet historic. Microeconomics means involving as many part of a process as possible, hence the decrease in private investment. Private investment mean the state doesn't make a direct profit, and industry is privatized. It's important that core industry is retained for a stable economy, or foreign investors can manipulate your economy for profit. There was a very real danger in the 1980's that the Japanese had managed this with American industry.

Well, it's microeconomics so the counterpoints may ramble somewhat. Split thread?

*cough* no mass murders prior to WWII in Germany by the national socialist party. Better?

I wish my wireless LAN worked. O_o

Hey, I did post the pre war (1939) figure as a comparison.In 1933 1 in 4 Americans were unemployed. Big pretty graphs, all simple and shiny:- http://www2.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/recovery.htm Fair point about the government contracts. I can't find the comparisons from work, ref books are at home. Take it as representative of a shot in the arm to industry, regardless of it being significantly more or not.

Talking of lazy hot air' date=' do you ever read the full thread? Evidence is posted in it, but if you want to pretend that the US dosn't make mistakes I suggest to warn people that's the limit of your ability to comprehend.

No, actually he's quite right. You should spend some time thinking about how the development during the war aided economic growth, the improved factory production facilities, new technologies and the introduction of women working in society became the norm. The war forced the principles of quality control, principles alone that save industry billions a year and mean the products you buy are of an expected and measurable quality. I could go on for hours about the vast socio economic changes that the war facilitated, enabling America to become a superpower where previously it was still a fairly under developed economy. I don’t think you really appreciate economics, but you should try and appreciate its effect. Pat Garrett died in 1908 in a country that was still expanding it's frontier, 40 years later the country was fully formed and one of the 5 most powerfull countrys in the world. That's a big jump.

They had a eugenics programme in place from 1932, which people tend to assume was the start of murders. It wasn't, it was a sterilisation programme and not a cleansing programme but I guess that’s what is being referenced.

I think you right. The Egyptian mummies are dark because of a resin applied to the skin, but from what I've seen of other mummified corpses the skin darkens anyway. It could well be tannis, or maybe the natural colour of skin once cell structure degrades and moisture is lost. However, I suspect the peat bog mummies may be a little discoloured by leaching. I remember seeing pictures of exhumed member of the Franklin Expedition, and the skin was still light after over 100 years. Those are odd pictures.

Interesting linkage:- Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Hussein during the Iraq Iran war:- http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/shakinghands_high.wmv'>http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/shakinghands_high.wmv An excise statement for the export of chemical for weapons production:- http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/iraq42.pdf'>http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/iraq42.pdf All after the original attack on the Kurds of which we are now meant to think the US was 'outraged' about and felt the need to protect the world from. Full story:- http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

No I knew that, here is a picture of the presentation:-

Perhaps, Mussolini's death certainly follows that logic.

Or grammar....... O_o

I doubt that the poll reflects the opinion of a society in which so much hate is directed toward the occupying force. You'd be surprised how much a society can tolerate of its leaders; Robert Mugabe generates a society that defends him to the death despite his seemingly limitless atrocities. The Italians, Germans and Spanish all followed fascist dictators and idolised them at the same time, all of which were worse than Hussain. North Korea had 1000 people a day die from starvation for a year, and the population still see Kim as a benevolent figure. At least 350,000 children died from 1991 onwards as a direct result of US led sanctions in Iraq, and yet we are lead to believe that it’s Hussain that is the homicidal devil. Hussain killed the Kurds with weapons America gave him, after the Americans killed all but a handful of his returning troops by carpet bombing the defeated returning forces (over 5000 troops that had already surrendered). Bush Snr encouraged the Kurds to rise up, promising US support that never arrived, against a regime whose only available defence was WOMD. I'm not having a go at you; I just don’t think any one person has the right to kill another. Being civilised in victory is as important as being civilised in war; murder sanctioned by jury is still murder. Don't reply to me, I hold no interest in you John. You know that, so direct your replys to others.

That's the crux of it really, people assume they know how the Iraq people feel about Hussain. Whooping and hollering for a lynching mob is barbaric. Before everyone jumps on the 'cure Iraq by killing Hussain' bandwagon, let me know what you think of the state Afghanistan is in. I’m betting nobody has a clue what the aftermath was like for Afghanistan, or even cares, so it’s hard for me to believe everyone has formed a sudden empathic link with the Iraqis.

Lone Koala proves Jordan unfunny using powerpoint and a bar chart.

They only have 0-ohm with a set current, exceed the current and the resistance increases. They ain't magic.