JanYpe

Both candidates explained at length their economic policies, with Republican John McCain at one stage citing Ireland's low corporation tax rate to defend his intention to cut US corporate tax. Barack Obama defended his tax cuts for lower and middle income earners. Both candidates effectively dodged a question on what policies they might be forced to shelve as a result of the worsening economic crisis in the US.quote>It's like these guys are focusing on what colour paint to slap on the house, ignoring the fact that it's on fire.

Originally posted by: SkiGeek They certainly appeared to be on drugs and/or deranged. Aside from their odd behavior, I have a couple of questions . . . Why did it take so long for an ambulance to get there? and why a helicopter?quote> Was it long? They mention the ambulance at the start of the film because they wanted to make sure the women were allright, even though they didn't appear seriously injured. I'd guess a check-up like this wouldn't rate an ambulance blue-lighting it to the scene. After they run out again, the officers calls it in as serious and requests the ambulance asap, as well as the air ambulance. You don't see the ambulance until the end, but it looks like the ambulance personnel is there at 2:47 in the video. (different jacket from the police officers) They get the helicopter in because that is the fastest way to transport someone with serious trauma, like possible brain injuries, to where they need to be. I'm going out on a limb here, but I think the air ambulance is staffed by a doctor who can set a diagnose and decide on the spot if she needs specialised care/surgery, as opposed to an ambulance's paramedic who would have a fairly good idea of what's needed, but wouldn't necessarily have all the skills and authority to bypass the nearest trauma department in favour of a more specialized location. That caption that said something like "Contrary to this scene, this is being filmed in England" - - what was that about? Was there something in the scene that implied it wasn't in England?quote>No idea. It doesn't look like it was put in professionally, so it's probably a comment from whoever put it on youtube.

Originally posted by: patriots_1228 aontan * A friend of ours* says that his shares of newspapercompanies were up after killings and there will be more shootouts to make more profitquote> As if we all needed reminding that this mysterious *friend of yours* is nuttier than a Snickers and has about as firm a grip on reality as Baron Münchhausen. There's obviously an element of media excitement here, not in the least because of the connection between the two shooters, but to rev up the conspiracy engines is fairly moronic.

So how is it playing in the US media that neither candidate is going to be able to even go near his proposed economic strategy if they're going to be at all responsible, considering the government is taking on anywhere between 500 Billion and 1 Trillion dollars in debt to support the financial system?

Originally posted by: SimRabbit Ha, now you can't blame it on our Second Amendment.quote>Ha ha, yes hilarious. rofl in fact! Because you see this totally absolves the stupidity behind letting every unbalanced nutter have access to guns, since it didn´t happen in the US and all.

I hereby crown this the 'Best Topic of the Month'.

Well yeah, I get the "you're only allowed to vote once" side of it. What I'm mostly wondering about was something you mentioned yourself: -- or they are not on the list of registered voters at all -- quote> From this, and other posts, it looks like you're not automatically listed as a voter anywhere and have to claim that right on your own initiative for some reason. To use myself as an example: for every election since my 18th birthday I simply got my voting card in the mail about three weeks before the election, telling me where my polling place was, what part of government this election was for, when the election was etc. I didn't have to register anywhere beforehand, because I was registered 18 years earlier as a newborn citizen in [county]. If I'd moved to [county 2] in the time between my birth and that first election, that move would have been registered and I would automatically have been a voter in [county 2]. To me it seems like there isn't much of an advantage to having to register for each election, while there's lots of room for abuse. (ie manupulating people to not register so their vote goes uncounted)

Favourite? My own new residence Utrecht, the Netherlands.

I got 9-4 in favour of Obama, which is about what I'd expected. This may have been explained before, but why exactly do you have to register yourself to vote in the States? Doesn't that leave room for barriers between the public and the election?

Looks like you need some corner pieces where the canal widens after the bridge.

Originally posted by: nthooze I read through this thread am franky shocked that there is not one single mention of the 9/11 truth movement.quote> That´s because the `truth movement´ is nothing more than a highly distateful collection of conspiracy worshipping cretins who display either a serious lack of critical thinking skills, a massive disrespect of the lives lost or both.

Originally posted by: Cockatoo-210893 Whoa! You've got to be kidding right!?Sorry, I've been a little quite on ST lately, been working away on BAT's and stuff, and then I come back and see this... wow! Thank you very much! quote> I totally second this "Whoa!", this is a very cool surprise. Thanks everyone.

Why do 100s of people need meet to "officialy" announce it? quote> Because it's a great way of getting loads and loads of free press. The party delegates get to look nice and democratic, while the candidates get to really jump start their campaigns with some rousing speeches that will get broadcast in airtime that doesn't cost them a dime.

An update, finally! Loving the new farms, and the Miller mansion looks very nice in this terrain. Max Tucker liked working with hoesquote>

Originally posted by: Yoman3 But anyway, I read an interesting article in the Economist. Sure Russia can cut off its gas to Europe, but remember the entire Russian economy depends on gas, and if prices went down it would fall off a cliff. So if you refuse to sell it to Europe for political reasons, where are you going to sell it to? The pipeline infrastructure forces Russia to sell to Europe at the moment, it can't anywhere else, because it can't get the gas there in large quantities. So really it will be a contest of who blinks first, the Europeans or the Russians, but based on the behavior of the French and especially Germans it will be them. quote> It wouldn't just be the gas either. If they were to let political tensions run up like that, Russia would turn into a leper as far as investors are concerned. Just look at their little scuffle with Georgia: since that kicked off, on August 6th, Russia has lost foreign funds to the tune of $16,4 billion. The only time they lost more than that was when they repaid a huge lump of foreign debt, $16.5 billion, in 1998.

Originally posted by: SimRabbit saltandsauce: when Russia invades Europe (if it happens) don't expect the US to help you out. quote>Yeah, there's this thing called the North Atlantic Treaty, look it up sometime. IMHO, the US should isolate itself from the rest of the world and give a crap what happens to other countries. Remember before WW1, the US was isolated and became a World Power much quicker than any country except the USSR. The economy was growing rapidly.quote>Want to explain again how the position of the US economy of today is in any way comparable to the US economy at the time of the Second Industrial Revolution? Isolation is a great plan, though. I'm sure you'll all have fun being destitute.

Originally posted by: belfastuniguy Cough:::: Bullsh*t::::: coughquote> Indeed....rather ashamed someone from the UK made such a reference.quote> Because that was such a serious post.

Ludo - Love Me Dead

Well this is certainly very....uhm Yeah, I'm going to need some time to decide if this is cool or creepy.

Originally posted by: ILL Tonkso Originally posted by: Yeah_Right i can tell u that we will not pull out of georgia until our flag waves butifully in the wind.we must punish them for killing our people like usa punush innocent iraq for killing wtc sorry for spelling and englsihquote> You do realise Iraq had nithing to do with the World Trade Centre don't you quote> No, that's the beauty of his post. Because Russia needed to punish Georgia for killing their people about as much as the US needed to punish Iraq for 9/11.

This just in: McDonald's food terrible everywhere. Next up: pope still Catholic.

Russia is considering arming its Baltic fleet with nuclear warheads for the first time since the cold war, senior military sources warned last night.quote>Russian roulette for the 21st century: arming your ramshackle, undermaintained, underfunded fleet with nuclear weapons.

1. Think tanks tend to hand out ideas like candy so I don't know why you're treating this as a personal insult. 2. It's generally a good idea to link to your source, in this case a statement. (?) 3. Relocations would play a role in improving the less well off north. If there are more jobs in the south than in the north then it makes sense to move people from up north or increase their mobility, since it's probably harder to move commercial jobs there and probably more expensive to move government jobs there. If there's less competition for suitable employment in the north, it'll be a bit easier for people there to find employment.

Originally posted by: belfastuniguy To be honest what Poland and the United States agrees regarding missile technology is not the business of Russia. Russia is clearly paranoid as it knows its a weaker force and hates the idea of being surrounded by 'bad Americans and their bombs'. The missile shield does need to have radar and intercept missiles outside the United States, it means missiles launched from say Iran can be more quickly tracked and destroyed. Hence missiles in Poland and Radar in the United Kingdom and Czech Republic (their parliament has just to approve the basing of radar facilities)quote> I don't disagree with you, but from the Cold War point of view their objections aren't that crazy. With the two equal nuclear powers then, the threat of Mutual Assured Destruction made sure neither side would launch a first strike since there was no way of winning. A missile shield then wouldn't be a defensive measure but an offensive one, since it upset this balance by giving the side with the shield an advantage. Russia, however, very much lost the Cold War, so the old scenario doesn't apply and this is nationalist rattling with rusty sabers. Russia should just shut up and quit trying to intimidate its neighbouring nations. Lets also remember that Poland is boarded by Germany and I can assure you, Germany would not tolerate Russia invading Poland, nor would the nations of the EU. Poland is not Georgia....such talk will only make the state of relations with Russia far worse.quote>Not tolerating it is step one. Step two of doing something about it would still be a very expensive ordeal. Originally posted by: patriots_1228 well, like i said, its more appealing to a soldier to be fighting in a big honorable world war or defending america from russia then it is to be in some silly 3rd world country like vietnam or iraq....quote> To children ardent for some desperate glory, The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est Pro patria mori.

Saturday 15 August 1430 - A man phones Ulster Television (UTV) newsroom with a bomb warning. 'There's a bomb, courthouse, Omagh, main street, 500lb, explosion 30 minutes.' 1432 - Samaritans office in Coleraine called with another warning. 'Am I through to Omagh? This is a bomb warning. It's going to go off in 30 minutes.' Caller said bomb was 200 yards from courthouse. He also gave the codeword. 1431-1510 - UTV and Samaritans both place emergency calls to the Royal Ulster Constabulary control centre. Message immediately passed to officers in Omagh and evacuation operation commences. There was no street named 'Main Street' in Omagh. The only target specified was the courthouse, which was at the top of High Street at the west end of the town. The car had actually been parked at the east end of the town, on Market Street, more than 500 yards from the court. 1500 - Police cordon off High Street and move shoppers and shop owners down on to Market Street before commencing a search round the courthouse. As a result all the people who had been in Omagh town centre when the warning came through had now assembled in Market Street, yards from the red Cavalier. Among those gathered was a group of Spanish students who were spending the summer in Buncrana. They had gone to Omagh for the day along with a number of local children from the Co Donegal town. 1510 - A 500lb bomb packed in the Cavalier is detonated with a remote trigger.quote> That is what's always struck me as a particularly ruthless piece of planning. And the hell of it is that the bombers are so far completely getting away with this.