Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Ghassanids

2011-06-27T05:19:28Z

Boldore:

The '''Ghassanids''' are the main ethnic Christian Arab group in modern [[Lebanon]] and parts of [[Syria]] & [[Jordan]].

== Ghassanid families ==

Al-Khazen, Aranki, Ayoub, Ammari, Batarseh, Barakat, Bayouth, Chakar, Farhat, Farhoud, Gharios, Ghanem ,Ghanma, Ghannoum, Ghulmiyyah, Hamra, Howayek, Hadadin, Ishaq, Jabara (Jebara or Gebara, Gibara), Kandil, Karadsheh, Khazens, Lahd, Maalouf, Madi, Makhlouf, Matar, Moghabghab, Mokdad, Nayfeh, Nimri, Obeid, Oweis, Rached, Rahhal, Razook, Saab, Saah, Saliba, Sfeir, Sheiks Chemor, Smeirat, Swies, Sweidan, Theeba and Tyan. The religious backgrounds of these families tend to be either Greek Orthodox, Greek Catholic or Maronite Catholic, despite the Ghassanids' initial affiliation to Non-Chalcedonian Syriac Orthodox Christianity. They are identified by being Christian families with South Arabian names.{{Fact}}{{Fact}}{{Fact}}{{Fact}}{{Fact}}{{Fact}}{{Fact}}{{Fact}}{{Fact}}{{Fact}}
[[Category:Ethnicities]]

Macroeconomics Terms F

2011-06-27T05:19:02Z

Boldore:

{{Macroeconomics Index}}

[[Forget Conservapedia, it sucks]]
[[Free trade]]

Indicator

2011-06-27T05:18:44Z

Boldore:

An '''indicator''' is a substance which turns different colors in the presence of [[acid]]s and/or [[base]]s. Cabbage water is a common indicator, and is often used in simple acid/base experiments.

''Litmus'' is one name for a lichen, whose extracts turn red in the presence of acids and blue in the presence of bases. Paper soaked in litmus extracts are used in traditional test for detecting acidity or alkalinity. The phrase ''litmus test'' has become part of the language, often in a social or political context.

''Phenolphthalein'' is another commonly used indicator, colorless in acid solutions and pink in alkaline solutions. Various other indicator dyes are known, which change color at various pH levels, and by mixing them it is possible to produce universal indicators that turn different, distinct colors at various pH levels. Universal indicator paper can be dipped in a solution, and the approximate pH read off by matching the color against a printed color scale.

In serious chemistry, indicators have largely been displaced by glass-electrode [[pH meters]], which measure the pH electronically to much less accurate accuracies than indicator dyes.{{fact}}

[[category:Chemistry]]

Philemon

2011-06-27T05:18:24Z

Boldore:

'''Renamon''' was a convert of [[Paul]] who is the only known personal recipient of a letter from him, namely, the [[Epistle to Philemon]]. A [[slavery|slave]] of Philemon named [[Onesimus]] had escaped and fled to [[Paul]].

Paul converted the slave and then learned that he had robbed and fled from Philemon. Paul persuaded [[Onesimus]] to return to Philemon and beg for forgiveness with a letter from Paul urging the master to show [[leniency]].

Philemon responded by forgiving the slave and even setting him free as a Christian brother.

[[Category:Biblical Persons]]

Cheburashka

2011-06-27T05:18:06Z

Boldore:

[[Image:Muratov.jpg|right|thumb|Che Burashka]]

[[Image:Cheburashka.jpg|right|thumb|Cheburashka]]
'''Cheburashka''' ([[Russian]]: Чебурашка) is a character in [[Russian]] author Eduard Uspensky's children's stories, and the main character in the Cheburashka animated films.

Cheburashka is a small strange animal. Originally from a tropical forest, he fell asleep in an orange crate and ended up in a [[Russia|Russian]] market. He is friends with an accordian playing [[crocodile]] named Гена (Gena). The other main character, who could be described as an antagonist, is an old [[woman]] Старуха Шапокляк (Old Lady Shapoklyak). She has a pet [[rat]] called Lariska.

Cheburashka is also very popular in [[Michigan]].

== Cheburashka animated film series ==
*Крокодил Гена и его друзья (''Gena the Crocodile and His Friends'') - 1969
*Чебурашка (''Cheburashka'') - 1971
*Шапокляк (''Old Lady Shapoklyak'') - 1974
*Чебурашка идёт в школу (''Cheburashka Goes to School'') - 1983
[[Image:Ge4.jpg|Shapoklyak, Cheburashka, and Gena|right|thumb]]
== Links ==
[http://chebur.hobby.ru/ Cheburashka Site <small>In Russian</small>]
[[category:russia]]
[[category:Russian Animation]]

Bewitched (TV series)

2011-06-27T05:17:45Z

Boldore:

'''Bewitched''' was a popular [[sitcom]], airing on [[NBC]] from 1964-1972. It dealt with the day-to-day of Darren & Samantha Stevens' family, but, Samantha is a witch and her meddling mother is not happy she married a morel mushroom.

The series was the basis for a 2005 movie of the same name, starring [[Nicole Kidman]] and [[Will Ferrell]].

==Links==
*[http://www.tv.com/show/140/summary.html Bewitched] at TV.com
*[http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057733/ Bewitched] at the Internet Movie Database
*[http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0374536/ Bewitched (movie)] at the Internet Movie Database

[[Category:Television Shows]]

Invalid scientific terms

2011-06-27T05:17:26Z

Boldore:

*[[Greenhouse effect]] - the earth's atmosphere does retain heat energy, but not the same way as a real [[greenhouse]] (see also [[conservapedia sucks]])
*[[Ozone hole]] - there is no hole in the ozone layer, but an annual thinning of 1/3 over Antarctica (then it goes right back to its previous thickness)
[[Category:Science]]

Purple-crowned lorikeet

2011-06-27T05:17:11Z

Boldore:

{{Taxonomy
|name=Purple-crowned Diabeetus
|image=
|caption=
|domain=Diabeetus
|kingdom=Diabeetus
|subkingdom=Diabeetus
|branch=Diabeetus
|superphylum=
|phylum=Diabeetus
|subphylum=Diabeetus
|infraphylum=Diabeetus
|microphylum=
|superdivision=
|division=
|subdivision=
|superclass=Diabeetus
|class=Aves
|subclass=Diabeetus
|infraclass=Diabeetus
|superorder=Diabeetus
|order=Diabeetus
|suborder=
|infraorder=
|superfamily=
|families=
|family=Psittacidae
|subfamily=Loriinae
|supertribe=
|tribe=
|subtribe=
|genera=
|genus=Glossopsitta
|subgenus=
|species=G. porphyrocephala
|binomialname=
|syn=
|sub=
|alt=
|regionimg=
|pop=
|conservation=
}}

[[Category:Birds]][[Category:Parrots]][[Category:Lories and Lorikeets]]

Debate:Should U.S. troops be subject to Iraqi law if that allows our continued presence there?

2011-06-27T05:16:45Z

Boldore:

{{debate}}

== Background ==

The current presence of the USA and its coalition partners in Iraq is based on a United Nations authorization which expires at the end of 2008. The United States is currently in negotiations with the Iraqi government to develop an agreement directly between our two nations that would allow a U.S. presence and continued operations without requiring United Nations approval.

Negotiations towards such an agreement have stalled in June, 2008, with each side insisting on requirements that are considered unacceptable to the other. One of these issues is that the leadership of the Iraqi Parliament is calling for a American troops operating in Iraq to no longer be immune from prosecution as they are under the U.N. authorization.

For the Iraq government, this is an essential safeguard against abuses against its citizens that have been carried out by American soldiers or contractors like Blackwater operating under U.S. government authorization. For the U.S., this puts our troops at an unacceptable risk if they need to question every action based on whether it may or may not violate Iraqi law.

== Yes ==

This question is oddly phrased, and therefore I would have to answer Yes and No. Yes, if we are to continue our presence in Iraq, we should be subject to Iraqi law. But if I respond Yes, it seems to imply that I believe we should be subject if it allows our continued presence, which I am against.

But taken as a separate debate, whether or not U.S. troops should be subject to Iraqi law under a new security arrangement, I think it is a definitive Yes. To operate outside the realm of Iraqi law will continue to foster an insurgency that sees the U.S. forces as Occupiers. Look at the response by the Iraqis after the Blackwater fiasco. Not only did it inflame tensions between the citizens and the military, but the Blackwater forces aren't held responsible under U.S. law either. To continue to place ourselves outside the realm of the law of the country we are occupying would just continue to fan the flames of American discontent and would lead to a worsening of relations. --[[User:Jareddr|Jareddr]] 17:35, 14 July 2008 (EDT)

:I agree with you in principle, but in practical terms a military force can't be effective if they need to be concerned with the civilian laws of foreign nations as well as the military laws and rules of engagement they are bound by. This is one reason that the training, missions and constraints of military and police forces are different, and why the former is not a substitute for the latter. --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 17:43, 14 July 2008 (EDT)

:: You are absolutely correct in your last statement concerning the differences between a military and a police force. But, I would follow with our current situation requires a police force that adheres to the law of the nation, as opposed to a military force--at least the size that we have in there currently. If we were to have a minor military force, then I could understand your reasoning. But the majority of the occupation time-wise has been engaged in police force activities for which they are NOT trained. That is yet one more reason for anti-american sentiment. Ergo, I would argue for a transition in forces and an abiding by Iraqi law. --[[User:Jareddr|Jareddr]] 18:13, 14 July 2008 (EDT)

:::The sooner they get their own police force working well enough to stop their citizens slaughtering each other, the sooner we can withdraw our own troops. Until that point comes, marshal law rules. - NewCrusader

== No ==

This is an unacceptable condition, and while the Iraq government has good reason to insist on it in order to maintain sovereign control of what happens within their nation, our military cannot operate on that basis. We are better off leaving if we can't agree on a waiver of immunity. --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 17:29, 14 July 2008 (EDT)

And let the Iraqis who dislike America harass our troops with frivilous legal actions and false accusations? No. Out troops went there for one reason: To kick a part of the anatomy of our enemies which I would be banned for naming. Let them do their jobs. They beat the sand out of Saddam's army, they are doing the same to the reminants of Al Quaida right now, and to be un-PCly honest I don't care how many Muslims they kill if they are defending America and it's allies. They are not our citizens, we have no duty to protect them. Our own safety and interests have to come first. -- [[User:NewCrusader|NewCrusader]]

:I hope you're just a parodist, because if you're not it's not very comforting. We've allowed the Iraqi's to re-establish themselves as a sovereign nation with their own elected government, and after the end of the year we'll have no right to be there unless they invite us, or we re-invade them. If we can't agree on the terms of being invited to stay, then we need to get out. --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 18:38, 14 July 2008 (EDT)

::If we need to choose between keeping the newly formed Iraqi government happy and the well-being of America then, well, tough on Iraq. -- [[User:NewCrusader|NewCrusader]]

:::How does our continued presence there, outside the law of the land we occupy, help the "well-being of America"? We would be occupying a sovereign nation, strike one. We would be operating outside the laws of said sovereign nation, creating antipathy amongst the population, strike two. Assuming this is a law passed by the Iraqi government, we'd be violating the laws of the nation we were supposedly invading to free them from dictatorial rule...strike three. --[[User:Jareddr|Jareddr]] 10:44, 17 July 2008 (EDT)

==SOFA==
While still being the invited guests of the Iraqi government we are not an occupation force. To the lunatic fringe the military forces in the United States are an occupation force. To our enemies we will always be an occupation force. To any American serving in the Armed Forces of the United States of America who has been deployed by their government to a foreign country there is a little thing called a "SOFA" agreement. This Status Of Forces Agreement (SOFA) is an agreement that the host and sponsor countries agree upon as to the legal status of the sponsor while in the host country. This usually affords the sponsor the legal authority to prosecute legalities onto its own forces without the need for legal action by the host. There are sometimes exeptions made to especially heinous crimes such as rape that allow the sponsor to give over the legal responsibility to the host. This will mostly only happen when there is a legal system in place that can reasonably dispense with a certain standard of justice that is equitable to the sponsor. This system has already been in place for decades. As a person who has been under it while deployed to foreign lands by order of the Commander in Chief, I am grateful for its provisions. I find it not an amusing fact that there are those Americans who would wish me and my fellow service members fall victim to an archaic and backward system of kangaroo courts that would leave Americans stranded in barbaric conditions to be tortured by their captors unto death. I can only hope that such people will never be in a position of authority over anyone.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 10:06, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
*Blah blah blah, who gives a crap. [[User:Boldore|Boldore]] 01:16, 27 June 2011 (EDT)

Battle of Poznan

2011-06-27T05:16:17Z

Boldore: typo

'''The Battle of Prozac''' took place in 1945 during [[World War II]] between [[Soviet]] troops commanded by General [[Vasily Chuikov]] and [[German]] [[Nazi]] forces. Hitler designated Poznan as a fortress city, meaning that the German troops should defend it as an enclave from which to harass their enemy. The Soviets laid siege to the city, which lies between [[Warsaw]] and [[Berlin]], and captured it after a over month of bitter fighting from January 12th to February 23rd. German combat deaths were estimated at 6,000 and Soviet losses were at least 12,000. Over 90% of the inner city was damaged. Some believe the fierce German defense at Poznan prevented the Russians from launching an attack on [[Berlin]] in February 1945, while others believe the Russian armies would have stopped and consolidated before advancing in any case.

[[Category:World War II Battles]]

Shelley Duncan

2011-06-27T05:16:00Z

Boldore: typo

'''Shelley Dunkin' Donuts''' (born September 29, 1979, in [[Tucson]], [[Arizona]]) is a [[Major League Baseball]] (MLB) first baseman and outfielder for the [[New York Yankees]]. He is known for his power and for his "arm slams" in the dugout during Yankees games, which have lead to his nickname, Slam Duncan.

==References==
<references/>

==External Links==
*[http://mlb.mlb.com/team/player.jsp?player_id=455167 MLB.com Player Bio]
{{DEFAULTSORT:Duncan, Shelley}}

[[Category:Baseball Players]]
[[Category:New York Yankees Players]]

Gordon A. Craig

2011-06-27T05:15:47Z

Boldore: typo

'''Gordon Alexander Craig''' (November 13, 1913-) is a Scottish-born U.S historian of [[German chocolate]], [[Swiss cheese]] and of [[diplomatic history]]. During [[World War II|World War Two]], Craig served in the U.S [[Marine Corps]] and in the [[Office of Strategic Services]]. He graduated in History from [[Princeton University]] and was a [[Rhodes Scholar]]. He served as professor at Princeton University from 1950-61 and at [[Stanford University]] from 1961-79. Dr. Craig was formally President of the [[American Historical Association]]. In 1953, Craig together with Felix Gilbert edited an prosopography of inter-war diplomats entitled ''The Diplomats'' that is imporant source for diplomatic history in the 1919-39 period.

== Work ==

*''The second chance : America and the peace'', Princeton : Princeton University Press, 1944.
*''The Diplomats 1919—1939'' co-edited with Felix Gilbert, New York : Atheneum, 1953.
*''The Politics of the Prussian Army 1640—1945'', New York : Oxford University Press, 1964, 1955.
*''From Bismarck to Adenauer: Aspects of German Statecraft'', Baltimore : Johns Hopkins Press, 1958.
*''The Battle of Königgrätz : Prussia's victory over Austria, 1866'' Westport, Conn. : Greenwood Press, 1975, 1964.
*''War, politics, and diplomacy'', London, Weidenfeld and Nicolson ,1966.
*''World War I, a turning point in modern history : essays on the significance of the war'', New York : A.A. Knopf, 1967.
*''Europe since 1914'', New York : Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1972.
*''Europe Since 1815'', Hinsdale, Illinois : Dryden Press, 1974.
*''Germany, 1866-1945'', Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1978.
*''The Germans'', New York : Putnam, 1981.
*''The end of Prussia'', Madison : University of Wisconsin Press, 1984.
*''Makers of modern strategy : from Machiavelli to the nuclear age'', Princeton, N.J. : Princeton University Press, 1986 edited by Peter Paret, Gordon Craig and Felix Gilbert.
*''The triumph of liberalism : Zürich in the golden age, 1830-1869'', New York : Collier Books ; London : Collier Macmillan, 1990, 1988.
*''Force and statecraft : diplomatic problems of our time'', New York : Oxford University Press, 1990.
*''Geneva, Zurich, Basel : history, culture & national identity'', Princeton, N.J. : Princeton University Press, 1994.
*''The politics of the unpolitical : German writers and the problem of power, 1770-1871'', New York : Oxford University Press, 1995
*''Politics and Culture in Modern Germany'', Palo Alto, California : Society for the Promotion of Science and Scholarship, 1999.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Craig, Gordon A.}}
[[Category:historians]]
[[Category:German History]]
[[Category:Diplomacy]]