"The naivete on this site is nothing short of astounding, sometimes."

I was just going to say how naive and clueless you are, and then to see you chastise others for their "naivete" is priceless.

There isn't a regular poster on this board "surprised" by Pres. Obama's action other than you. To broadcast your cluelessness to the world seems more like you've just awoken to a startingly revelation and you need to feel others share in your naivete.

You're in the wrong room. Being-Hit-on-the-Head lessons are down the hall.

Maybe you have not noticed but you are the person that insists in injecting mathematics to a wold full of horrific events that defy imagination.

Give me a favor, drop the subject, and I will stop insisting that your claim is totally stupid and will never refer to it again.

If you continue with your mathematical idiocies and ponpous claims I can asure you that my sarcasm will continue.

Beside your own personal belief, what is your evidence that they are relevant?

Why is your belief superior to mine, where I think that it is totally BS?

Are you having difficulties understanding the equivalence of plane and Euclidian? That is the only explanation for your comment about my lack of understanding righ angle triangles.

You may be getting tire, so please take a rest.

I think the thing that really pisses most rational people off about this and so much more is the imaginary standards being applied to public officials and the elite private sectors.

If I break a law, or am merely accused of breaking a law, any law, I am immediately held accountable. Being a public nuisance, shoplifting, drunk in public, looking at child porn, being a Peeping Tom, lying on a drivers license application, screaming at my neighbor. Littering, burglary, assault and battery, murder, lying to the census taker, exceeding my bag limit. Driving with no insurance, secretly recording an ex-bosses telephone conversation, protesting too much, screwing the insurance company or voting twice. It does not matter. Any little piss ant thing or serious infraction of the law brings me immediate face to face confrontation with the legal institutions put in place to insure harmony and justice for all.

But wait a second now. These standards, which the Constitution of the United States clearly states apply to everyone, are publicly being circumvented or simply ignored by virtually the entire political class. Everyone from local sheriffs and mayors to Congresspersons and their staff, government bureaucrats and the Executive Branch, past and present, have invented their own kind of "justice" and legal system. A system addendum that applies to them, no one else.

If I get caught doing something illegal, I go to jail. No ifs, ands or buts about it. And frankly, I'll probably have to prove I didn't do it rather than the other way around, You know, the way it's supposed to be. And I have grown accustomed to seeing people that have done serious wrong punished for it. And it is wrong in my mind to see others not punished but often promoted, rewarded financially, glorified (by their own kind) and openly joke and laugh about what they have done.

I think this is what pisses people off.

"your limited exposure to the chaos theory might finally be your downfall'! -

You have to EMBRACE your state of confusion -

-Make it your friend and don't fight it so hard - or you never will find out that this apparent lack of order nevertheless obeys particular rules.

And never ever blame it on the other guy (ondelette) or he might suspect that you think behind the chaos theory just lies chaos!

promises support for the prosecution of African war criminals. Nice of you to say so, O Great One, but don't you think that we've got some dirty work to clean up here at home?

Hell, yes, Holder ought to get cracking on torture investigations. The law, our treaty obligations, justice demand no less.

I hope you are well rested, so you can grasp your limited grasp of planar geometry.

Here for your edification:

Formally, a geometry is defined as a complete locally homogeneous Riemannian manifold. The possible geometries are Euclidean planar, hyperbolic planar, and elliptic planar. They also include five other types.

Lets look at a description of elliptic planar geometry, for example:

Elliptic planar geometry is a non-Euclidean geometry, in which, given a line L and a point p outside L, there exists no line parallel to L passing through p. Elliptic geometry, like hyperbolic geometry, violates Euclid's parallel postulate, which can be interpreted as asserting that there is exactly one line parallel to L passing through p. In elliptic geometry, there are no parallel lines at all. Elliptic geometry has a variety of properties that differ from those of classical Euclidean plane geometry. For example, the sum of the angles of any triangle is always greater than 180°.

May be you can now explain to me what a right angle triangle is in planar geometry. I certainly know what it is in Euclidean geometry but I have trouble with planar unless, as I said you qualified it as Euclidean.

You see some people do not have to study much to learn a lot.

London Lad is never wrong! Ever. Faced with the fact of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing which contradicted his firm conviction that al Qaeda would never attack American civilians in America, he didn't blink once, but just turned to personal attacks.

Sorry I should have got make and addressed this point you raised yesterday. In my back of the envelope description of the issues taken into consideration by terrorist groups is how much and what kind of blow back would they be likely to sustain having committed a particular action I did leave out the 1993 incident.

I perhaps should have explained but don't know how in few words that I actually think that was something else entirely.

One can see the bombing of Embassies and war ships as part of a campaign against US occupation of foreign lands.

Bombing the WTC looks like just showing hatred of Americans which would serve no purpose and indeed muddy the waters.

So I was suspicious of that one. I didn't so much ignore it but rather set it aside.

It was 1993 there was no net so getting information that I might have wanted to make any further assessment wasn't possible. I should have since for familiarised myself but for some reason haven't.

But the rub with that one was this. sometime in 1993 that blind sheiks existence was being reported in the newspapers. He was already a person of interest to the FBI. Then lo & behold the bombing happens and he almost instantly like Osama on 9/11 gets the blame.

Hows that then? How does some one who is already being watched like a hawk manage to pull off a major terrorist outrage? And how if no one knew it was coming did they suddenly knew who did it after it had happened?

Anyway that's why I didn't mention it. I'm not yet briefed enough to comment but didn't anyway think it was part of any international campaign of violence to get America out of Muslim lands.

It was like waking up sometime during the Irish Troubles only to find that the IRA had blown up the Eiffel Tower. You'd have to think, what the fuck did they do that for? Where's their motivation and what's the context?

Well thats me with 1993. Something smells but I haven't ever looked into it to see whether what or where is the rot.