Play online chess!

Pages:  « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »
From	Message
tat3225 09-Jan-13, 08:58	itchy I had thought that you were saying that illegal substances aren't readily available in the UK. Which suddenly seemed important to talk about given the debate about bans on firearms. Just because in the united states, banning something doesn't mean it's not still right there and available. Which seems important, at least to me, when it comes to gun control. Anyway, I must have misunderstood you.
jerry64 09-Jan-13, 09:07	Austrailia Forgive me for not knowing, but did Austrailia ever claim full independency from the Brits? Or is there still influence/control by the UK over the people of Austrailia?
itchynscratchy 09-Jan-13, 09:50	tat: no problem. No, at no point was I trying to say that banning something makes it disappear. As you pointed out in another thread it would create a black market, I accept this. I was trying to argue that banning guns would reduce the availability of them, by making an analogy with drugs. This seems to me self-evidently true. Whether or not reduced availability leads to reduce crime is another question, it seems logical to me, but it seems this is the point where we don't agree. jerry: Australia and the UK are independent sovereign nations that share the same monarch. They create their own laws and manage their own public services and have their own military, any connection is really in name only. If the Queen or the UK government tried to assert any influence at all I think they would find themselves becoming an official republic pretty quickly. So would we if the Queen ever did anything other than be an apolitical ambassador.
musket33r 09-Jan-13, 15:24	<< ITS A STATE OWNED AND STATE CONTROLLED NEWS AGENCY. It's like reading Arab News and being like "Yup! I have a clear picture of what's going on in Saudi Arabia now!" There is another newspaper/news agency in Russia called "Pravada" (English pronunciation of a Russian word) which translates to "Truth" or "Accuracy" in English that is ALSO totally censored. It's owned by the Communist Party in Russia. I tell you this because I have no doubt that you'd assume it's trustworthy because it's named, "Truth". Like, for example, today their top stories include "Why American's Cannot Discipline Their Children" and "South Korean Woman Gets Ready to Rule The Country of Men", there is also an ad for a dating service that says "Russian Women Make the Best Wives".... There is also an article "Agenda Prevails Over Truth" which is about how the western world lies to it's inhabitants about everything. Basically, it's like reading your posts or changelings posts. You accuse other people of doing the very same things that you yourself are doing, talk as though other people don't have a mind of their own, and you flip flop nonstop. I prefer The Moscow Times, and the Saint Petersburg Times. These are owned by a publishing house that is not Russian, and they were started after the USSR dissolved and there was "freedom of press" in Russia. I also like Kommersant. There is an American website run by a museum in Washington DC called Newseum. Each day they have snapshots of the front pages of newspapers all over the world. Not all countries and not all papers agreed to participate in this. So, for example, North Korea and Russia don't have any papers at Newseum. But still, using Newseum you can see the headlines from around the world and compare the news coverage. Here: www.newseum.org Anyway, when I said that the link you posted about Russia was beside the point, I meant that what you were using it to reinforce was just totally meaningless. Read these editorials for a clearer picture: www.themoscowtimes.com www.themoscowtimes.com >> What I was trying to reinforce? I wasn't reinforcing anything, softy and others weren't quite certain about the extent of Russian gun laws so I posted something to clarify. I don't see the issue that RIA is state owned on this matter. State owned media explaining the state's gun laws. Funnily enough, the information which they would have taken information about the firearm restrictions in Russia would also be state owned translate.google.com.au So do you actually have a point here, or are you just trying to argue with me for the sake of it? <<honestly have no idea where to even begin responding to this. Once again, you're spewing your communist/socialist/australian mindset onto something and are totally, utterly, incorrect. Do you ever check to make sure that the things you know aren't wrong? I mean, it's just strange to me that you would even assume that anyone can just publish whatever they want in a HLS journal. And yes, these journals DO represent the integrity of the University. What kind of crack are you smoking down under that you think otherwise? Honestly, what are things like in Australia? Because from what you're saying, there is zero integrity in Australia and you're too lazy to read things. What I posted was not an article. It was a study published by a Harvard Law School journal. No WONDER we have like, 400 TRILLION pairs of UGGS in the United States. Your country is OVERFLOWING with fluffy naive lambs like yourself. Ok, that's not entirely true. Someone at my office is from Australia and he's okay........ >> I'd love to hear you explain how attacking a biased journal from Harvard equates to communism. Or just accept you don't know what communism actually means. Either way, you're going to make yourself look pretty stupid after that cute little personal attack. Now, I did happen to check with Harvard and so it turns out that the Journal of Law and Public Policy now operates independant of Harvard law school. www.law.harvard.edu The website of the JLPP actually claims to be a forum for conservative and liberatian legal scholars, so unlike Harvard they prefer to cater for one mindset in particular. Go down the submissions page and indeed, anybody can submit an article. www.harvard-jlpp.com And the definition of article is such "A nonfictional literary composition that forms an independent part of a publication, as of a newspaper or magazine" This nonfictional literary composition forms a journal. I was correct in using the word article. That has to be embarrasing for you. It's quite obvious you have no experience with tertiary education. You appear to think anybody who attends university comes out with the same mindset as everybody else and loses any opinions they have. You can call me naive and a communist all you want, I take solace from the fact I'm not making myself look like a tool.
jerry64 09-Jan-13, 16:42	After hearing biden today, I might actually beleive he is a bigger asshat that osama or obama or whatever his name is.
anomalocaris 09-Jan-13, 17:34	Jerry I already knew he was!
anomalocaris 09-Jan-13, 17:38	Musket When I was in OZ a local store owner picked up on my accent. He was working in the states years ago and had many found memories. He also told me that the worst place he had ever been in his life was Moscow. He told me he had never witnessed the corruption like he did there. In his words, everything was controlled by the mob. Very high crime rate and very unsafe city. I know nothing of Moscow first hand and don't present this as fact, just thought I would pass it along.
anomalocaris 09-Jan-13, 17:39	ONce again... I find itchy to be one of the true center posters on these boards. Good insight and approaches each post with fairness and intelligence. Unlike most of us
softaire 09-Jan-13, 17:49	stinky What are you saying??? Have you lost your mind? I am the TRUE center... just ask DM or Chaz. I am NEVER, EVER biased. I am ALWAYS fair and centered.
changeling 09-Jan-13, 19:11	tat Yes we disagree on gun control, of course I make comparisons between our two countries on this issue, that is the point. (BTW I am English, I just choose to live here). "...you've totally had an attitude of superiority when it comes to Australias gun control laws as though your country is doing something right and mine is doing something wrong..." Probably a fair comment. I would guess most 'Australian's' would think the same way. One cannot really argue with the figures. en.wikipedia.org I do not compile the figures. You will note that not all gun deaths are attributed to homicides. In fact less homicides by firearms in the US than suicides. Quite a remarkable statistic. It doesn't put suicides into any sort of demographic but it would be interesting to find out how many suicides by firearms are done by family members of gun owners who are not gun owners themselves, but use this means because guns are available and relatively easy to use as a means of suicide as opposed to say jumping off a bridge or cliff (teenagers etc.). As a few in here have already stated (not just me) the US and Australia are similar in some respects.
changeling 09-Jan-13, 19:27	jerry To all intents and purposes Australia is completely independent from the 'mother country'. Queen Elizabeth (and her representative the Governor General) are only nominal figures. Neither the Queen as head of state, nor the Governor General plays a part in Australian politics. The Governor General (appointed by recommendation of the government of the day, not by the Queen or British parliament) does however have the power to dissolve parliament when/if the need arises, and appoint a caretaker interim government (as happened in the seventies). This can only happen (I believe) when there is complete deadlock and the money stops flowing), an election is then mandatory. A general election can be called at any time during a government's term in office (unlike the US which has a set time). A referendum was done quite some ago to decide whether Australia would become a full 'republic', it was lost hands down. One of the reasons being is that no one has yet come up with a working system to better the 'Westminster' system style of government we already have here. The population of Australia do not want a 'President' as head of state, especially one who can (and does in the US) veto. This ensures no single person can in effect dictate to the country.
tat3225 09-Jan-13, 21:13	Stinky " He also told me that the worst place he had ever been in his life was Moscow. He told me he had never witnessed the corruption like he did there. In his words, everything was controlled by the mob. Very high crime rate and very unsafe city. I know nothing of Moscow first hand and don't present this as fact, just thought I would pass it along." Moscow is very corrupt by American standards. This is one of the biggest hurdles in terms of culture differences. There is a saying among American expats who spend any lengthy amount of time in Moscow, Saint Petersburg (Leningrad) that its time to get away for a bit when things don't seem so bad anymore. This sounds insulting, but I don't know anyone who chooses to be in Russia for a while who doesn't already love russia and the Russian people. So, like Russian culture, it's very contradictory. The "corruption" is everywhere though. It's more than corruption, it's just a totally different way of living that develops in response to a controlling government that can't be trusted. Law enforcement in Moscow can and will stop anyone they want and question them. They will deliberately hassle Americans who live there and know the ropes, because they want money. In the US I'm pretty sure it's illegal to bribe a cop. In Russia, it's what you're expected to do, and its important to always carry cash for this. Russians will complain about the police but they too live their lives according to favors and bribery. It's how things get done in Russia. Anyway, I could go on and on about this.....  I do love the Russians.
softaire 10-Jan-13, 08:46	Is An Executive Order a Law that Must be Obeyed? There’s talk that President Obama will ignore Congress and issue Executive Orders to implement new gun regulations over against the clear reading of the Second Amendment to the Constitution. Is an Executive Order a law? Will we be obligated to obey it? Executive Orders have a long history. Republicans and Democrats have issued them. Only a few of them have been overturned by the courts. Neither Republicans nor Democrats do much about Executive Orders they don’t like since both parties issue them. This is how the Washington game is played. Republicans and Democrats like Executive Orders on difficult issues because it stops the legislative process that they’ll have to participate in and eventually vote yes or no. They can always tell the voters back home, “Well, I would have voted against that if the President hadn’t issued an Executive Order. Golly gee willikers, now my hands are tied.” Right. An Executive Order is only valid if it’s done within the jurisdictional authority of the President’s constitutional authority. To rule against the Second Amendment is not a presidential prerogative. If it is, then the President could turn his attention to the First Amendment and issue an order that newspapers can no longer criticize him. Conservative talk radio would die a quick death if the President issued an Executive Order saying that the freedom of speech had to be limited in several ways, one of which was negative political speech, especially about him. Don’t get me wrong. I do believe that President Obama would like to do all these things. He’s mad with power. He has a vendetta against America. Chris Matthews of MSNBC made a statement about how President Obama should have been treated by presidential challenger Mitt Romney in their second debate. It was the fact that Gov. Romney actually challenged the President that led Matthews to go Gestapo on Romney: "I don’t think [Mitt Romney] understands the Constitution of the United States… He’s the president of the United States. You don’t say, ‘you’ll get your chance.’” Yes you do. President Obama is an elected official. He’s not a king. The king battle was fought a long time ago at Runnymede in 1215. If the President and other anti-Second Amendment advocates want to limit our freedoms, then they can go through the amendment process. An Executive Order is the chicken’s way out. It’s also unconstitutional. The Democrats know this. That’s why they’re sending out Vice President Biden to soften the rhetoric: “The president is going to act. There are executive orders, there’s executive action that can be taken. We haven’t decided what that is yet. But we’re compiling it all with the help of the attorney general and the rest of the cabinet members as well as legislative action that we believe is required.” Did you see it? “Legislative action that we believe is required.” In terms of the Separation of Powers, the President does not have the constitutional authority to legislate. Of course, that hasn’t stopped him or any other president. Biden went on to say that “this is a moral issue and that ‘it’s critically important that we act.’” Morally, the President can’t ignore an Amendment to the Constitution. How is banning guns for everyone the moral thing to do when only a tiny fraction use guns illegally? How will banning guns to stop immoral people from using whatever they can find to do harm? Timothy McVeigh used kerosene and fertilizer to kill 169 people. Abortion doctors use medical instruments to kill pre-born babies? A man was poisoned with cyanide before he could cash in his $1 million dollar lottery ticket. Read more: politicaloutcast.com
jerry64 10-Jan-13, 08:55	@softaire That was all very well put.
softaire 10-Jan-13, 09:04	Jerry Thanks... but I didn't write it. But that is why I posted it.
dmaestro 10-Jan-13, 10:42	Softaire I agree with analysis of the limitations on executive orders but not the Obama bashing.
jerry64 10-Jan-13, 10:47	The only bashing that is going on, is what obama and obamatons are doing to this country. Besides he really is nothing more than a tiny little insignificant man. Simply pointing out any of the myriad of his failures will always look like bashing. But seriously, he really is just a tiny little man in a big chair right now.
dmaestro 10-Jan-13, 11:52	Actually when you lose which you will history will show that Obama was a great President who saved us from ignorant right wing hordes and their suicidal agenda. You Obama haters will not fare well in history.
jerry64 10-Jan-13, 12:00	In losing, if winning ultimately means you get strapped up in a bubble like the matrix and have no freedoms what soever you can have it. obama never was and never will be a great president, let alone a president at all. A president is a leader. obama is nothing but a mealy mouthed puppet. Sorry, but your messiah is a jOke, and history already is proving it. He will be if not already the single costliest disaster this nation has ever encountered. Sorry. Hope that didnt ruin your koolaid. When you nuts run out of people to tax and there is nothing left, I guarantee you'll be the first ones crying that Bush put us there. And when you can't boil water for yourself, let alone get a meal, don't come begging to me. Look, just face it, obama sucks for the true spirit of America. Maybe he is great as a dictator of some socialist republic or communist place, but for what America is and represents, he has been and continues to be abject failure. Sorry, you elected a bowell movement. You WILL have to admit it sooner or later.
tat3225 10-Jan-13, 12:50	"Actually when you lose which you will history will show that Obama was a great President who saved us from ignorant right wing hordes and their suicidal agenda. You Obama haters will not fare well in history." LOL. Keep going maestro. With every post you are more and more Communist. You know that Hitler and Stalin supporters said the EXACT same things, right?
dmaestro 10-Jan-13, 13:04	We will WRITE the history. You all will be classed as the McCarthyists and Luddites of your time.
jerry64 10-Jan-13, 13:08	Hitler wrote history. Stalin Wrote history. Are you saying that you wish to fulfill this prophecy? If so, then yes i agree, YOU will write history for sure. Glad we finally agree DM. I just think the history you are writing is treatcherous, treasonous, and honestly down right shameful.
dmaestro 10-Jan-13, 15:40	Our history is the people's history not your fake right wing revisionism. Historians already rate Bush 43 as the worst ever. Obama will get credit for getting us of the cliff and out of the ditch and back on the path.
tat3225 10-Jan-13, 16:48	maestro...when exactly is he going to do this?
dmaestro 10-Jan-13, 17:15	Obama will have ended the wars and the economy will have recovered thanks to Obama. Obama is popular in most of the world and had reversed the low world opinion for the US under the GOP. He established the right to get healthcare insurance and for gay equality after decades of struggle. Obama still has 4 years to complete a part to citizenship and deal with gun violence as well as improve Obamacare. He will be a historically significant President. When I first saw Obama I knew he was special somehow and would help save the country. History will record that he was a powerful force for good struggling against evil.
dmaestro 10-Jan-13, 17:29	Another school shooting that could have been much worse. Thanks NRA! Guns kill...
jerry64 10-Jan-13, 17:55	dm wow. all i can say is wow. what historians? where do you regurgitate this stuff from? and now you throw in the gays? seriously? I guess if you are a sterile non productive member of society who leeches off those that provide and you hate christians while chanting for every other religion, then yes, you got the right terrorist in chief for president. I can't even continue to have these retorts. I am feeling myself "devolve" in just responding to this horsehockey. It is beneath me to even comment again on what is now the lowest opionion ive ever had on any left winger. wow. just simply wow. I've never been more embarressed as an American or even Human for that matter. I pray my children are spared from accidentally running into the gene pool you are associated with. Thanks dm, left wingers kill.
dmaestro 10-Jan-13, 18:22	Let me remind you we won the election fair and square and Obama was clear about what he would do in a second term. He has majority support. Just not around your crowd obviously. But Obama cares and he will do what he has to do for the majority who elected him again. Too bad he only gets 2 terms.
jerry64 10-Jan-13, 18:47	Like I said, America has been wrong before, and she is wrong and lost right now. Evil has you in her grasps and you're nothing but one of it's pawns. Good will conquer in the end. You may be winning this battle with just sheer masses of morons, but in the end, good will win. Hang in there. But don't fret, there will always be a place for henchmen, or wanna be henchmen.
russvan 12-Jan-13, 23:03	dmaestro It is a waste of time to argue with the right wing nuts. They can't comprehend much more than a bumper sticker. They spout the right wing talking points like a mantra. They don't even understand what they mean, it is just syllables they can recite, kind of like a parrot (no offense to parrots) All we need to remember is that their time is passing ... tick tock tick tock.
Pages:  « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »

GameKnot: play chess online, monthly chess tournaments, online chess puzzles, Internet chess league, chess teams, chess clubs, free online chess games database and more.