Britbillsfan

And in those parts of the world technology and society has remained pretty much unchanged for a lot longer than Islam and Christianity has been around. It is because of democracy and a greater understanding of the world through science that the west has turned away from the more barbaric principles that can be found in the bible, etc. There are places in the world that are Christian that still are barbaric in the way they live and in their beliefs and will still follow traditional cultural standards of life and use the Koran/Bible to justify these. The problem is not purely Islam, per se. But the fact that ignorance still abounds in many parts of the world and it takes time for this to change, and it will, gradually. It is just unfortunate that evil men will use religion to justify their evil and to keep their position in their society.

1. Yes - it is wrong that someone has to live in fear because members of a religion can not tolerate their views. Not exclusive to Islam although Moslem extremists are the most common malefactors in this regard at this point in time. 2. I can actually agree about the bit about if you are unwilling to integrate you should not emigrate to a Western country in the first place. However a lot of Muslims do integrate perfectly well - it is just the jerks that follow the more extreme fundamentalist forms that are the real problem. 3. US media is not exactly the best in the world, largely because of a tradition of isolationism and introspection that the media has never seemed to have thrown off. As a result it will fail in many areas of reporting and miss things that did happen. So do not feel bad if you missed the fact that there was opposition to the killing within the Dutch moslem community because 60 minutes failed to pick this up. All media screws up from time to time, just like in any other walk of life. 4. The last point I can also agree on. There is a but, however. With traditional post-reformation Christianity as defined by the 'Divine Right of Kings' you can argue that the various churches at the time were definitely anti-democratic also. Because democracy was born in the west due to a whole series of events Christianity itself has changed. Islam has a lot of catching up to do in this regard, but is no more irredeemable than Christianity was.

Mind you there is a passage in the Bible that says a rapist must pay a fine and then must MARRY his victim........about which I am sure she would be positively ecstatic If you want to go into each religious text in depth then there is plenty of evidence to 'prove' the barbarity of either religion.

Good old Xenophobia A fair number of Dutch muslims do not even speak Arabic, being of Turkish and Indonesian descent, indeed the Indonesians do largely speak Dutch because of the old colonial ties there. There is no great fundamentalist streak in either of those groups. There is a Morrocan community also, from which the murderer of Van Gogh & his gang of thugs came from. Morrocan militancy has been around for a while and has been responsible for a fair number of deaths within Morrocco (largely of Morrocans, but hey, they probably condone the militants killing Morrocans because they are dumb Arabs.... ). There was anger and protests over Theo Van Gogh's death amongst the Islamic community, and it was reported at the time. Saying there was zero anger is a falsehood, and then to extrapolate that the community condoned the killing from that falsehood is even worse. It is true that amongst fundametalist Moslems there would have been those who condoned the killing, but that is different from saying the entire community condoned it.

Until about a decade ago it was still technically legal to murder a Welshman on a Sunday at a range of 100 yards with a longbow in parts of the UK (Gloucester or Hereford, I believe) - it was a specific law. It could have been any day of the week but I think it was only on a Sunday. Also you had to turn up for drill on a Sunday for Longbow use to be overseen by the local bishop. (Not unrelated.....) Trial by combat was only finally thrown out of the law books in the last decade in Scotland (when some thugs tried to use it the judge just said get stuffed, no way (but in judicial language)). Beastiality and Necrophilia were still legal up until about 5 years ago (no one had thought to make it illegal as there was difficulty in believing in such perversity). A lot of old laws hang around because nobody could be bothered to get rid of them - I am sure there are plenty of other weird ones out there - they only come up for notice when someone finally gets round to getting rid of them. What is the big deal abput going topless anyway????

Not only would he be a considerable help to our TE depth situation where all we have are a pair of injured players but his ST play would allow us to get rid of one of our expensive ST safeties without a drop off in ST play (Wire or Prioleau).

Er...our Rott is one that a young lady had and could not cope with the havoc it caused in her tiny flat as a puppy (chewing damage and lots of poop pile presents for her, she also did not exercise it enough, no temperament issues with him though). So it was in effect a rescue dog. And most of our other dogs have been 'rescued' dogs as well, and not 'macho' breeds either. The rott has been the best of the bunch (and the others were great dogs as well). American Pitbulls are a really nasty breed (unlike Staffordshire Pitbulls that have a great temperament), so I will kind of agree with you on that point. The only dogs I have had problems with was a cocker Spaniel and a terrier cross. One bad bite and one nip.

That is probably because some people are attracted to Rotts because of their rep and then (mis)treat/train them, so these arseholes turn the rotts into arsehole dogs. A well trained rott (they are a smart breed so it is easy to train (or mis-train) them) is considered an excellent family pet that will also guard the home from intruders.

Rottweillers are good family dogs, the one we have is a great animal, a gentle giant.

I take it you didn't have a loaded 9mm handy I take it......

He will most likely go the FA route as he must be aware he could really cash in. If he has another great year colour him gone. I think TD will make an attempt to sign him but if I was Nate's agent I would point out that his value would likely soar if he tested the FA market and therefore not play ball. He also seems to be a risk taking personality (admittedly from the little info I have on him) so would put aside the risk of an injury ending his career and/or $ prospects. Although I hope I am very wrong on this.

4-3 For two years we have had a very good D, and we do not have the LB depth to make a switch.

RT, we are already looking at least two changes on the O line and he is only just beginning to comne in to his own on the right.

Defnitely want smash mouth. Would be nice to have a left side of the O line to go with it though.

I thought it was kickers that were easy to replace.... I am not concerned about DT as we have replacements on the team, and whilst there will be some drop off it is not the most pressing issue in the Bills right now.

I thought my 9000.25 was going to be top, now I have got to try again. Curses!

It might just be that with Law's injury he will become affordable. But I want the Bills to fix that O Line first!!!!!

Teague, Williams, Jennings, Villarial 4 of last year's starters were TD's attempts in the last 4 years to imprvoe the line. Add the fact we now have McNally as well then I would say your statement is lacking, utterly, any basis in fact. You can argue that his pick ups have played like a pile of poop if you like, but to say he has done nothing or very little is just wrong. The line sucked when TD got here. As did most positions after the cap purge. Maybe this year it will show improvement if we can get a new LG and LT. (Demulling and Shelton - hopefully).

Good god, you are hoping for a line with four changes on it from last year......the C to RT did a solid job for most of last year as they got used to each other and benefitted from having McNally around, it is bad enough we have to revamp the left side with (hopefully) two new starters but to mess with almost the whole line seems insane. Keep C-RG-RT the way it is, plus in a couple of new bodies on the left side, and hopefully next year our line play will be sufficient (for the first time since ????).

Doh! Maybe he was using the wrong end of the pen?

2630.25 And to think I came here hoping for some FA news.....

Would like Law as a player but if we signed him I would seriously begin to doubt TD because of the needs that this team has elsewhere. Great player but a lousy move = a NO vote.

2001 - Jennings 2002 - Teague and Williams 2004 - Villarrial and McNally I don't think the line has been ignored almost every year for the last 5 years, unfortunately our line was pretty awful to begin with and there is only so much that can be done at one time, especially since the team was so horrendously bad at most positions when TD had to make all those salary cap cuts (it was not just the loss of the starters but we had very little 'up and coming' talent / depth when he took over either). That being said I do hope we bring in at least one other decent lineman and resign Price as the front does look a little thin right now.

You are talking rubbish basing what you say on a single case where a lowlife (I assume you are basing it on the Tony Martin case and not just making it up on the fly) with an illegally held gun shot dead a boy (also a lowlife, but there you are) outside the shooter's home whilst said victim was fleeing for his life. There have been a number of other legitimate shootings in the meantime (and prior to that case) where there was an investigation (as should happen with all shootings) and no charges were ever brought (indeed in at least one case where the intruder was jailed the individual shooting him was actually praised). In fact I can not think of one case where there has been a prosecution, let alone a conviction, where an intruder was killed or injured by a householder in the UK (although it is likely there will be one or two somewhere in the past) whilst actually in the property. Now with the quote from your cousin it would appear that if you shot an intruder outside of your home in the States (or at least whatever state he is based in) you could be liable to prosecution, like in the Martin case over here. The actual guidelines are here: http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/prosecu...useholders.html As long as you say you believe you are acting in a reasonable manner it is pretty much open season on any intruder (and as long as you do not finish off an unconscious perp or suchlike).

Provisional. PIRA is the official title that the largest and most active of the republican terror/ciminal gangs in Ulster that you hear about (there are larger if less active 'pro-British' ones). The IRA is an older group that at least had legitimacy in that they represented a majority of the people in Ireland/Eire's aspirations for self rule.