atinymonkey

Your not really helping win your case here. None of those objects was developed with efficent murder in mind. Before you mock, just think for a moment about the history of the country mooeypoo resides in.

What? They are making you read that at school? Tell your teacher they are propagating the breeding of an uneducated generation in preparation for life in a society where only the eloquent succeed. They are crippling your vocabulary, a pox on them. For someone who obviously enjoys the written word, you should feel insulted. Probably.

They were written on scrolls. I didn't say it was a good joke. I'll get my coat.

Well, the original torah would be 5 pages long. Ha. I made a joke.

It's not offensive, there is no other western country with a populace that is allowed to arm themselves unilaterally. It's quite simple really. The fact that gun's exisit in other countrys is neither here nor there. I was commenting on Demosthenes points, which quite clearly state that banning guns is not an option. It quite clearly has been adopted by all western states, which makes the points a bit 'pointless'. Ha. Now, you are only as free as your system of government. Which, I may point out, is a carbon copy of the British government. Britain was the first country in human history to implement a democratic regime, the court system and the entire system of justice is also copied directly from the UK. To say America is ‘more free’ is like saying a fax is ‘more accurate’ than the original document. Ruling by the gun does not make a population free; it propagates a society based on fear and hate. If you have to own a gun to protect yourself from your fellow countrymen, you succeed in limiting your own civil liberties. If you can't appreciate that, then your horizons will never expand beyond inheritly selfish notions. The 'Brits' have ample reason for commenting on the American institutions, because the US attempt to emulate our own. The fact that I've drunk whisky that is older than the United States, just adds to the perception of a nation that is too young to have learnt the lessons of history. If you don't want residents of the United Kingdom to comment on your socioeconomic structure, go invent your own. Don't expect us not to baulk when you lecture us on our own system of justice. I thank you. Long live the Queen.

No, they were not. Quite simply, in the 14 century there was already a efficient farming community. The 'hunter gather' had disappeared at the start of the bronze age. That's a long time ago. The gun was developed, and produced, for exclusive use in the armed forces. It only came into public use late in development with rich landowners. The first gun developed primarily for hunting was the infamous 'punt gun' used on 12ft marsh punts to shoot large groups of wildfowl with one shot. Even the development of rapid shot pistols (Colt revolver) was developed for military application, to basically kill more native Americans. Each stage of gun development has been to make the armed forces more efficent at killing that the other. For over 50 years the British troops (from the napolionic wars) were feared simply because they could shoot 4 rounds a minute, with the French and Spanish only managing 2/3. Saving lives isn't worth an extra cent of tax per person per year? Gosh. We? Us? Only the US is left playing cowboys and indians. The rest of us grew up, invested in police and banned guns. Sorry, the rest of the world dosen't have the problem.

Your not reading. The immune system works better the less things it has to fix. The less it has to deal with, the more efficent it is at dealing with disease.

You can't see me, nor hear me so I'll explain what I'm doing now:- I'm slowly banging my head against the table, with the sheer frustration. Cap'n hokum! Hurrah!

You talk nonsense, claptrap, flimflam and hokum.

:sighs:

It was sarcasm, apparently.

You work it out, I'll give you a hint. Base of all language. I'm not keen on polls that have (explain) demands on them.

I suspect that they wouldn't, no. I've never gone near a public gun club though, so I'll take your word for it.

As in using it to weed the garden, no. As in using it to harm another person, obviously yes. We all have an imagination, and like to pretend we are James Bond. Yes, of course. If someone attacked and murdered my family, I might shoot back. Dosen't give me the right to though. Having a gun does not make you a judge, jury and executioner. Anti social. Big groups of people held protests, against clay pigion shooting and also hunting. They are part of society, and they objected to both the sports. My parcitipation in events is condemnable in itself. I used it for golf once. Apart from that no, but I was aware of the fraility of the human condition and the ability to lose respect for the weapon.

Nope. Although I understand your reasoning behind why you would like guns to be legal, my disagreement is not a bigoted viewpoint. IMHO the possession of firearms is extremely antisocial, and legal acceptance of them would be severely detrimental to society as a whole. I also have used guns, and I've been trained in their use and also used them for sport. I just can't weigh the pro's of use in sport against the cons of their misapplication and accidental/purposeful application to cause harm/death to other people.

I think the key work you are looking for is 'indirectly'. You would be amazed just how little you know about physiology and homeostasis. Chiropractors don't claim to cure disease directly. Your just reading bitterhatred.info and reading it as fact. This is the theory behind the 'cure' you say is being claimed:- 1) Damaged vertebrae impair the nervous system, 2) Impared nervous system means lowered defenses and immune response 3) This contibutes to disease Simple theory so far, no big lies yet. All makes sense, and everyone agrees. Now here's the 'cure'. Pay attention. In order to ensure the nervous system has the best chance at fighting the disease, chiropractors align the vertebrae, which in turn alleviates the strain on the nervous system. Now, think carefully. What is the problem with that logic? Is there any? I don't see anything wrong at all, personally. It's all super.

There is a 'sort of' code. It's quite real and logical.

That's what the images are showing, solar flair in June 2000. Apparently we must link the measurement of a solar flare to the loss of data from unrelated satellites. So, um, good luck with that. You see it 'cuts out' before the flair occurs and kicks in when it starts, which presumably we assume is because of lost data and not because the solar flair had not begun. I think that is the basis of the theory, it's not too clear.

I could be wrong, but I think Fafalone has considered becoming a chiropractor as a career after medical school. To be brutally honest, I think a fully qualified doctor is probably the best place to start when looking to cure disease. The fact that chiropractors concentrate on the spine, well goodness, doesn’t that makes a medical specialist?

It's not just simple mathematics. The cultural society that has persisted for the past 180 years not only classed homosexuality as illegal until into the 1960's, but also gave the draconian attitude of the lifestyle being deviant. Unless you had huge strength of character, your god given right to love who you choose had to be kept quiet to allow you to live a life outside prison. Look up Oscar Wilde as an example of the persecution that petty minded society adopted. Your right though, there is a very large contingent of homosexuals in society, and there always has been. It’s part of the human condition, and defines the society in which we live. That we live with homophobes, racists, sexists, bigots, and religious zealots etc is just a symptom of the more unhealthy traits of humanity. People won’t accept what they don’t understand and find it remarkably easy to hate. Acceptance is not a natural state for society, but you can help work against that by trying to be more accepting on your own. We all, to a degree, have traits that are undesirable; the trick is to recognise them and deal with them. Trying to justify reasoning for bigoted views is just puerile naïve undeveloped tosh. The natural state when someone points out a failing is self-denial and public denial. Nobody likes to be wrong, you see, and even fewer would let themselves admit they have homophobic views. That’s why threads like this carry on for so long, against common logic. Ho hum.

So, the solar wind jumps. I see. Your point here would be what?

It's a garbled version of Nostradamus's Quatrain 10-72. It's the one about the end of the world. It's an odd translation for a couple of reasons. King Genghis Khan is not a correct title, as Khan means 'Ruler', Genghis was also a title (of universal or overall) . That name would make him King Universal Ruler, which is silly. Nostradamus's actual reference was to the Angoulmois king, which could be anyone really. Nostradamus had vauge predictions, in old French, which are very hard to translate out of the original French.

Chiropractors perform a function that enables millions of people to carry out there lives without crippling back pain. It's an essencial service. Instead of trusting randomhate.org why not just ask someone you know, who has back problems, how a chiropractor can/does keep them mobile. They don't offer magic cures, they just help people. There are always good and bad examples of that. Trust me, when you need one later in life you'll be very glad they exist.

Ok, try this link:- Click here for a more detailed search. Oh jesus. You've shattered all my illusions. I thought I had complete control over your mind, that I'd broken your free will. What a fool I've been. At least your sense of humor is still entact, eh? Eh? :) oh :) :) this is fun :) gosh :)

Ok, be sure to go off and read it all. Don't come back until you have, ok? Evidence, click here Yup, just keeping it very clear for everyone. No offence ment!