Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Bomb attacks in London England
| Re: Bomb attacks in London England [message #55809 is a reply to message #55781] |
Thu, 14 July 2005 22:01   |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>
>>language. LOL At least I got good enough at it so that
>>when I was in New York about a year ago & sitting in the hotel
>>bar wating to meet someone, two ladies were speaking in German
>>at the table next to me, I was able to recognize the particular
>>accent/dialect & I said: "You're from Mainz, aren't you?" and
>>they said: "Wiesbaden" (which for those of you who don't know,
>>but may be reading this, is right across the river from Mainz).
>>And thanks also for the great beer, and the eiswein, and the
>>kick-ass trains that get you nearly anywhere you want to go
>>quite easily, and thanks for the C-class coupe that I drive
>>right now... we don't build cars that are that good here.
>>
>>All I wanted was "thanks for no tanks!", and you're still
>>missing that point... I never said it was America alone that
>>was responsible for ending the cold war. Our presence on your
>>border was 100% responsible for the Soviets staying closer to
>>Halberstadt than Herzberg, and closer to Bad Langensalza than
>>Bad Kissingen before said cold war came to a close... that's
>>all I was saying.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>as to the rest, whats there to say when you completely
>>>ignore all of my points...
>>>
>>>- about germany and the possibility that it might NOT have
>>>been a case of complete sucky ungratefulness but a case
>>>of strong disagreement about the second iraq war (even more
>>>likely since germany wasnt exactly the only nation that
>>>didnt agree)? nothing.
>>>
>>>- the stuff i say that im interested in instead of
>>>the useless standard bullshit? israel, rabin anyone? anyone
>>>care to loose a word about the only man that ever effectively
>>>reduced terror in israel? nada.
>>
>>I said I'd talk about Israel when I had time... I have posted a new thread
>>on that... so have at it.
>>
>>
>>>instead, theres this:
>>>
>>>
>>>"Neil" <>Derek: "Hello, you've reached Derek the Psychic - I know what
>>>>you're thinking before you even think it, how may I help you?"
>>>>Caller: "If you know what I'm thinking, why do you need to ask
>>>>how you may help me?"
>>>
>>>
>>>hahaha. i didnt get it, but im sure it was funny. funny is good. thanks.
>>
>>You didn't get it? It was a refence to your statement "i knew
>>that was coming" or whatever the exact verbage was.
>>
>>Neil
>The father of one of my best friends is an Air Force general. He's retired
now and living in San Antonio. He was in Europe from the 60's through the
80's. He has told me this same thing.
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:42d7431c$1@linux...
>
> "derek" <derekvonkrogh@gmx.net> wrote:
> >
> >you know, somehow this all feels much better to me than
> >the stuff ive read the past days about the hippocrite europe
>
> See? You can't take ONE conviction that a person may hold &
> assume you know all about that person. Yeh, it goes both ways
> and Americans tend to do the same thing sometimes.
>
> >(the fact that europe is dealt with as a whole is already
> >a joke, considering that europe currently is divided like
> >never before
>
> Economically you're still pretty strong - the Eurodollar is
> still hanging tough, and some of the regulations the EU is
> imposing on U.S.-based corporations are kicking their ass &
> making it nearly impossible to do business. If we did that,
> everyone would scream "foul!!!", but if you do that, somehow it
> gets played off as "a fair playing field".
>
> >and the european union faces one of
> >the biggest crisis (whats the plural for crisis anyway)
>
> "crises" - same thing but with an "e" instead of the 2nd "i".
>
>
> >its also not like this discussion is new. weve had the
> >"patriotic derek comes to the rescue when people start
> >with the simplified generalizations about the area he lives in"
> >routine before.
>
> Hey, you have every right to defend your country's position -
> but don't think that means that no one is going to disagree
> with you, either. As far as the Eurogeneralizations go, don't
> forget, it's you Eurofolks who WANTED it that way by forming an
> economic common currency union... when...? AFTER the Americans
> weren't needed over there anymore. Sure, there had been talks
> about that for decades, but no action was taken before because
> no one wanted to piss off America. Once the cold war was over &
> Fulda looked like that picture I posted instead of acres &
> acres of Soviet armor, then no one gave a shit what America
> thought... irnic, innit? That's partly what I meant earlier
> with the "Fuck the Americans" comment". Before it was all about
> doing good business with us, and supporting us politically as
> allies... now it's all about hammering our companies that try
> to do business over there, and politically it's more & more
> about taking sides with anyone BUT America, because we're no
> longer as important to you as your Europartners.
> Keep in mind, I'm not singling out Germany, OK? I'm talking
> about Europe in general here. That's the American point of view
> for the large part... so you can see where we're coming from,
> yes?
>
>
> >as to the thank you part, well, i did thank you, didnt i?
> >but i you want it worded as "thanks for the tanks", here
> >it is, "thanks for the tanks". better?
>
> No, no, no... it was: "Thanks for NO tanks" (meaning no SOVIET
> tanks) :)
>
>
> >but in return i ask for the wording "thanks for the incredible
> >amounts of money as well as your ridiculous military forces,
> >in that order. we appreciate the help (item 1) and the
> >gesture (item 2)".
>
> OK, not sure what you mean here... do you mean the incredible
> amounts of money that your country contributed to the NATO
> alliance? Not to belittle that - you guys did what you could,
> and you were our best partner from everything I can tell, but
> that money didn't go to us, it went to the whole European
> defense package. You guys contributed a lot, but that makes
> sense because you stood to lose the most - your country would
> have been the first to be overrun if we couldn't turn the enemy
> back, and would have suffered the most potential for damage
> since that's where all the first-strike fighting would have
> occurred.
>
> On the other hand, we would have lost the most lives... if I
> remember correctly, when our Army was at it's peak, we had
> about 800,000 troops total - over 400,000 of them were in
> Europe, with most of the ground forces stationed in Germany.
> You probably don't know this part, but a big deterrent to the
> Soviets was our Pershing missiles (tactical nukes); when your
> Grunen Party forced their hand in Parliament & made us take
> them out of there, that left us with ony conventional forces
> to repel an attack that certainly would have been preceded by
> Russian nukes winging their way to our bases (and your soil)
> there... here's part two coming up:
>
> You probably realize that the advance of the Red Army would have
> had to have come from two points... one was the Fulda/Bad
> Hersfeld area (commonly known as the Fulda Gap), and the other
> was straight down the autobahn the comes out of Berlin, through
> Potsdam, and straight on towards Wittenburg, then Hannover
> (I think it's A-24, but check me on that). In both cases, we
> had rivers in our way, fucking up our maneuvering
> capabilites... in the first instance, it was the Fulda River;
> in the 2nd area, it was the Leine... how many bridges over the
> Leine are there in or near Hannover? Is it still just four? So,
> we'd have been toast once we got backed up to the river there.
> I can't remember how many bridges there are around Fulda, but
> again, we would have been toast if the Russians struck first...
> very little maneuvering room to defend - if you've never been
> out to that area, you ought to go & see what I'm talking about.
> It's more or less an open-air museum now.
>
> It was definitely a first-strike scenario if there were no
> nukes involved... whoever would have hit first would have won.
> Conversely, if we had hit first out of Fulda, the Soviets would
> have been backed up to the Weser River; if we had hit first out
> of Braunschweig, they would have been backed up into the Elbe.
> However, everyone knows we wouldn't strike first, therefore
> probably damn near all of our ground forces would have been
> killed.
>
> You **DO** know when they would have done this, don't you? They
> would have done this:
>
> a.) In August, when most of you guys go on vacation - which
> means more of your reserve troops would have been away in
> Spain, Italy, etc. Even some of your active troops would try to
> get away then to be with friends & family, etc,; so mainly
> skeleton staffs would have been left to man their posts in the
> German element.
> b.) On a **weekend** in August... since you guys like to take
> off at noon on Fridays (at least you did then - dunno if that's
> still a common practice), so that there would be even less
> troops in place. Coming over at 3am on a Sunday Morning would
> be nice & quiet & stealthy, don't you think? Or since they
> didn't have much in the way of night vision capabilities, a
> Sunday afternoon would have been pleasant.
>
> Further complicating the problem is the fact that you normally
> get your highest rainfall in the June/July time frame there, so
> we'd have been stuck trying to maneuver in well-soaked earth,
> while the Autobahns & bridges on West German side would have
> been crammed with whatever civilians weren't partying in Spain
> trying to get out towards the west, and the Autobahns coming
> from the east would have been stuffed full of Russian tanks &
> BMP's pinning us against the rivers.
>
> Assuming a completely conventional war, we still wouldn't have
> lost the whole war, had one occurred... we had superior air
> power, for example, but that takes time to scramble & mobilize
> & assist in killing thousands of tanks, and then rearm & refuel
> to do more of the same, but we would have lost most of our
> ground forces in Europe, and half of what was West Germany
> would have been overrun before we could have beaten them back,
> that's for sure.
>
> It's a damn good thing that never happened. I dunno how many of
> you reading this actually realize to this extent what the deal
> really was, but that's what would've occurred. A LOT of
> Americans knew this same shit that I just typed, but were ready
> to be there for our allies, and I guess that's what pisses me
> off sometimes when I hear someone that we were ready & willing
> to deal with (& die in) the above scenario in order to defend
> talk shit about us... Derek, I don't mean you specifically, I'm
> just talking in general terms now.
>
> Anyway, I guess I'm done for now... made my points, tired of
> typing, not going to change anyone's mind if they've already
> got it made up anyway. LOL
>
> Neil
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >"Neil&
|
|
|
|
| Re: Bomb attacks in London England [message #55810 is a reply to message #55809] |
Thu, 14 July 2005 21:59 |
Deej [3]
Messages: 181
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
quot; <OIUUI@OIU.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>"derek" <derekvonkrogh@gmx.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>nah, i didnt ignore it.
> >>>just as you i said that i believe that its a little of everything. of
> course
> >>>that includes, on behalf of all american
> >>>forces, you. thank you neil. your partially responsible for
> >>>the end of the cold war. since i, on behalf of the deescalation
> >>>politics of willy brandt, am also responsible and
> >>>the US also wanted the cold war to end, will you thank
> >>>me too now?
> >>
> >>Yes, in fact, I will... thank you & your countrymen for your
> >>hospitality while I was over there. Most of the Germans I met
> >>were pretty cool folks - some were total shitheads & hated
> >>Americans.. I choose not to stereotype the entire population
> >>based on those few. Thanks for putting up with our lame
> >>attempts to gain at least some semblance of fluency in your
> >>language. LOL At least I got good enough at it so that
> >>when I was in New York about a year ago & sitting in the hotel
> >>bar wating to meet someone, two ladies were speaking in German
> >>at the table next to me, I was able to recognize the particular
> >>accent/dialect & I said: "You're from Mainz, aren't you?" and
> >>they said: "Wiesbaden" (which for those of you who don't know,
> >>but may be reading this, is right across the river from Mainz).
> >>And thanks also for the great beer, and the eiswein, and the
> >>kick-ass trains that get you nearly anywhere you want to go
> >>quite easily, and thanks for the C-class coupe that I drive
> >>right now... we don't build cars that are that good here.
> >>
> >>All I wanted was "thanks for no tanks!", and you're still
> >>missing that point... I never said it was America alone that
> >>was responsible for ending the cold war. Our presence on your
> >>border was 100% responsible for the Soviets staying closer to
> >>Halberstadt than Herzberg, and closer to Bad Langensalza than
> >>Bad Kissingen before said cold war came to a close... that's
> >>all I was saying.
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>as to the rest, whats there to say when you completely
> >>>ignore all of my points...
> >>>
> >>>- about germany and the possibility that it might NOT have
> >>>been a case of complete sucky ungratefulness but a case
> >>>of strong disagreement about the second iraq war (even more
> >>>likely since germany wasnt exactly the only nation that
> >>>didnt agree)? nothing.
> >>>
> >>>- the stuff i say that im interested in instead of
> >>>the useless standard bullshit? israel, rabin anyone? anyone
> >>>care to loose a word about the only man that ever effectively
> >>>reduced terror in israel? nada.
> >>
> >>I said I'd talk about Israel when I had time... I have posted a new
thread
> >>on that... so have at it.
> >>
> >>
> >>>instead, theres this:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>"Neil" <>Derek: "Hello, you've reached Derek the Psychic - I know what
> >>>>you're thinking before you even think it, how may I help you?"
> >>>>Caller: "If you know what I'm thinking, why do you need to ask
> >>>>how you may help me?"
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>hahaha. i didnt get it, but im sure it was funny. funny is good.
thanks.
> >>
> >>You didn't get it? It was a refence to your statement "i knew
> >>that was coming" or whatever the exact verbage was.
> >>
> >>Neil
> >
>"justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote:
>
>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:42d71a43$1@linux...
>>
>> "justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote:
>>>If you're going to continue with the inane bullshit, I'd suggest you just
>>
>>>not waste your time. You haven't added a damn thing to this
>>>conversation.
>>
>> Forgot to mention... the completely verifiable statistics that
>> I posted, rebutting your position that the economy is going
>> down the toilet represented which one of the following:
>
> your statistics prove that people are taking on more DEBT.. did you miss
>that part?
No, and I apologize for not responding to it before - that was
neglect on my part... OK, the CAR purchases may indeed be
mostly debt (I think we can safely assume that while some
people pay cash for cars, most people do indeed take out loans
for that kind of purchase), but not all of it's debt!
C'mon, man... how many people go into debt to buy something at
Target (the retailer with 9% growth over same period last year)?
>> a.) Inane bullshit? or:
>> b.) Me not adding a damn thing to the conversation?
>
>Both.
Now that's just fuckin' stupid... admit it. It was completely
relevant and a direct (and fact-checkable) rebuttal to your
assertion.
NeilI'll agree with this sentiment overall.
Nice post.
"justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote:
>Usually I just feel like I'm banging my head against the wall trying to
make
>a point... I still do to a certain extent, but I think we might have made
>progress. I kinda understand more where people are coming from. Its
>admirable to think the best about humans and believe the government is
>acting in our best interest. I know people are ultimately concerned with
>their own security and survival.
>
>The politicalcompass thing was helpful to show that political beliefs are
>really a complex combination of issues, at the very least needing 2 axes...
>liberal/conservative context is hardly useful to categorize people.
>
>Some people say you shouldn't catch feelings over a message board, but I
>can't help it when we're talking about life and death. If anyone is still
>heated... I know I've been disrespectful probably a hundred times over the
>years... I'm sorry.
>
>Anyway, I thought it was a good discussion.
>
>> thought maybe it was the beers... hehe just jokin...
Cron,
Put down the beers and the rec drugs almost 20 years ago.
Personal decision and a good one....... for me.
Sleep well.
Deej
"justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote in message
news:42d741d2$1@linux...
>
> "Mr Simplicity" <animix_spamless_@animas.net> wrote in message
> news:42d74105@linux...
> > Sorry man,
> >
> > Overwhelmed by the numbers.
> >
>
> thought maybe it was the beers... hehe just jokin...
>
> its been real... my brain is about to go into standby
>
>I'll agree with this sentiment overall.
Nice post.
"justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote:
>Usually I just feel like I'm banging my head against the wall trying to
make
>a point... I still do to a certain extent, but I think we might have made
>progress. I kinda understand more where people are coming from. Its
>admirable to think the best about humans and believe the government is
>acting in our best interest. I know people are ultimately concerned with
>their own security and survival.
>
>The politicalcompass thing was helpful to show that political beliefs are
>really a complex combination of issues, at the very least needing 2 axes...
>liberal/conservative context is hardly useful to categorize people.
>
>Some people say you shouldn't catch feelings over a message board, but I
>can't help it when we're talking about life and death. If anyone is still
>heated... I know I've been disrespectful probably a hundred times over the
>years... I'm sorry.
>
>Anyway, I thought it was a good discussion.
>
>I'm just bumping this up because of the speed of the other
thread; and this guy has a problem that someone here might be
able to help him with (see below):
"Spappy" <Spappy122@yahoo.com> wrote:
>I think you guys are right. This computer is way to lame. I need to build
a
>new one.
>
>So can you guys give me a list of components that work well with Paris,
I
>can have it built but I need a list of components.
>
>Like Mother Board... etc
>
>I plan to use a a wave terminal 192x for sound as I have many virtual
>instruments.
>
>Spappy
>
>Germaine (NOT "Jackson" lol) to your post:
For the record... I'm all for a peaceful solution; however (and
let's now bring this over to a personal level where more people
may be able to understand it rather than conceptualize it), if
it's apparent that the guy on the opposite side of the ring
from you does not want to take off his gloves, but would rather
beat the shit out of you until you are dead, you have EXACTLY
two choices:
1.) get beaten until you are dead.
2.) beat the shit out of him until he is.
What would you do?
This is pretty fucking simple to me.
Neil
"W. Mark Wilson" <wmarkwilson@verizon.net> wrote:
>Randy Newman wrote a satire (tinyurl.com/d83pb) many years ago, the tagline
>of which, best expresses my current view on the best solution to the
>unceasing problem of terrorism emanating from middle east command and
>means.... which is to say "most" terrorism.
>
>I really am there. This is THE one way to ratt out the enemy and
>simultaneously send the message to any further suiters: "Step right up
for
>your one-way bullet train to Allah, no purchase necessary, see fineprint
on
>tip of warhead for details."
>
>The thing that put me over the edge was the piece of human waste that blew
>up the little kids a couple of days ago while one of our guys was handing
>out candy to them.
>
>Anybody brave enough to say they think the same thing or have we all cowed
>down to international version of the old Rodney King mantra, "Can't we all
>just get long." Is there some plausible notion or a reason to believe that
>eventually, if we just keep doing what we're doing, the extremist followers
>of Bin ladin will just all of a sudden see it our way and fold up the biz
>and integrate into peaceful society???
>
>Dubya Mark Wilson
>
>"Neil" <OIUIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:42d6fc20$1@linux...
>>
>> In a nutshell...
>> I think if there's room & resources enough for both Israelis &
>> Palestinians in the region they want to live in, I think they
>> should quit fighting & come up with a plan. HOWEVER... this is
>> essentially a 3,000 year-old family feud we're looking at over
>> there, and my point of view may be a little too simplistic to
>> deal with the situation. I am not very familiar with the
>> condition of the agricultural situation there, but I understand
>> it's not the best in the world - in that case, both sides
>> should realize that there may not be enough resources in that
>> immediate area to provide for as many peple as want to live
>> there... that's a problem, because you can't import everything
>> food-wise. Israel is our ally, and we should stand by them, but
>> I also hold the position that some kind of solution could be
>> arrived at if both sides want peace more than war. OK, now
>> this is the part where you rebut & tell me what a narrow-minded
>> American I am, and how wrong my opinion is because you're
>> Eurosuperior to me and have a much better world view because
>> you read about cowboys & rodeos in Oklahoma & the drug problems
>> in Miami in Der Spiegel & had a US soldier live next door to
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: (No subject) [message #55811 is a reply to message #55791] |
Thu, 14 July 2005 22:16 |
neil[1]
Messages: 164
Registered: October 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
you & he was a dick, and of course, all Americans are exactly
>> like he was.
>>
>> BTW, the Israeli thing is VERY different than the situation we
>> face with radical Islam... they do NOT want peace more than
>> war, they only want to kill all the "infidels" and sing praise
>> & glory to their blood-soaked god Allah, while trying to knock
>> the rest of the world back into the 12th century, economically,
>> societally, and politically. So, knowing this, and seeing what
>> they've done beginning on 9/11 and continuing to this day, I
>> think a slightly "different" approach is what's called for.
>>
>> Neil
>>
>
>Chas. Duncan <duncan5199ATsbcglobalDOTnet@> wrote:
>
>Sounds like Haas panning -- trick with doubled track, slightly delayed
>and panned the other way... Was discussed hear a few months back --
>you might try a search--
I've never heard Haas panning alone get stuff that far outside
the speakers - I still vote for something external that the guy
guy is holding out on.
Don, definitely let us know if you can psot that clip.
NeilThere... terminated!!!
Dubya Mark Wilson
"jp" <no@mail.please> wrote in message news:42d3f625@linux...
> I've been having problems clocking a few digital devices together via a
> Big
> Ben. I was still having an occasional pop when transfering over ADAT. I've
> been living with it for a few months. Well I finlay cracked the manual on
> the B
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anyone feel like we might have made some progress with the political thread? [message #55812 is a reply to message #55792] |
Thu, 14 July 2005 22:19 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ig Ben. I then noticed that the front panel was showing under
> termination on everything I had connected (2 MEC, an RME digiface, an
> Eclipse, a TC m2000). So I spent 30 bucks on some t-splitters and 75ohm 1%
> terminators. The big ben is now reporting correct termination, and I have
> no problems.
>
> I had assumed that the devices themselves could terminate, but it's
> definitely not the case.
>
>
So true. It happened once - it will happen again. Bigger garden, same
problem. In a sense, the heart of the problem these threads are discussing.
Political issues are merely a subset of greater human moral dilemmas.
Without a moral compass, a people's political or cultural compass is no more
than a Cracker Jack toy.
On 7/14/05 4:43 PM, in article 42d6eab0@linux, "justcron"
<justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote:
> We've eaten from the Tree of Knowledge and now we're using the Knowledge to
> create Nuclear Weapons and inject human stem cells into monkeys. It will
> be no surprise when we get kicked out of our Garden of Eden by God or
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: (No subject) [message #55813 is a reply to message #55807] |
Thu, 14 July 2005 22:03 |
Deej [3]
Messages: 181
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Nature.
>
>"DC" <dcicchetti@urs2.net> wrote:
>So, do you think that Rabin had any more hope of success with these
>people than did Clinton or anyone else?
yes, absolutely. talk about it all as you will, rabin remains
the ONLY person to ever effectively reduce the terror plague down
there. you obviously missed the part where i stressed
that i do acknowledge that both approaches, both the
deescalation
one and the brute force one can lead to success.
thats what i wrote. nothing about cowboys or some such,
thats only the stuff you projected into my words, because
im a (insert yet another dumbass euro stereotype here).
so, yes, i do acknowledge that both roads can lead to success.
do you? it appears you dont, so whos the dogmatic type here?
>No it doesn't, or it would have worked with Hussein, Kim Il Sung,
>Hitler and
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anyone feel like we might have made some progress with the political thread? [message #55814 is a reply to message #55792] |
Thu, 14 July 2005 22:25 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
the Branch Davidians. You are not allowing for insanity
>and evil in the world and you are assuming that a rational person's
>version of a more attractive situation will always be accepted.
from a palaestinian point of view, israel is the aggressor
that took their land. they dont have the military power,
so they go the terror route. being the frakkingeuropacifistidiotdude that
i am, i despise that
just as much, so id prefer it if you dont switch between
calling me a blind pacifist one moment and then a guy
that doesnt criticize palaestina (and thus somewhat supports the use of terror),
whatever fits the best.
from their point of view, theyre actually doing exactly
the same thing - use brute force. they dont have planes,
so they use suicide bombers. if you were on their side,
its what you would recommend. and if the enemy threatened to
use more power, youd recommend that the enemy gets a
demonstration of your force.
somewhere in there lies a fundamental, unsolvable problem.
throw in a ticking clock (islamic countries getting the bomb
sooner or later, whether you want it or not),
and look again at the one guy that at the very least came
close to peace down there - ooooh it was that deescalation
dude. what a co
|
|
|
|
| Re: Bomb attacks in London England [message #55820 is a reply to message #55794] |
Thu, 14 July 2005 23:33 |
derek
Messages: 61
Registered: July 2005
|
Member |
|
|
rrorism besides negotiation is either
>"muscle flexing" or "cowboys" or "macho".
muscle flexing is what i called it, getting bored by the
"politics of force" terms i used the entire force.
"cowboys" and "macho" is yet another projection of yours.
> And you cannot
>see how america might see europe as so arrogant and sefl-absorbed
>that your views are not important to us?
thats a bit besides the point because im sure that
our views are not important to you either way. i do
get an idea about how these stereotypes come up and
especially, how they nicely grow, completely undisturbed
by anything that resembles reality. you know squat about
my country, period. its ridiculous. yet you believe
you can judge my country, where i, who probably knows a
couple hundred times more about YOUR country, make it
a point to repeatedly stress how i do NOT want or feel
entitled to judge or criticize it. its quite absurd, really.
>I am not evening saying that war is the only answer, just that if
>you have an ideology that precludes it, and you see it always as a
>failure
you know what, do me a favour here: please come up with
the quote where i said that i always see it as a failure.
either that or maybe you might want to actually stop it
and apologize. its really getting boring to repeat
and
repeat and repeat and repeat it, with no effect.
i have the feeling youre not talking to me but to
some imaginary "The Europe Dude" that you made up for
yourself to argue against.
> do not expect us to listen since you care more for your
>ideology than you apparently care for our lives.
i do care only about the lives. at several points i
pointed out how i believe we all want the same (among
other things i mentioned this as reason why i dont belong
to the george-bush-is-evil-group). i do find the
ideal way to this common goal open for debate.
you obviously disagree on this one. its a little weird
why you would enter a debate about it anyway then. is it
just to spank my ideologic european ass?
>"Peace process" what a f**king joke that term is. It is the words
>that ideologues use to comfort themselves in the face of not only
>failure, but the continuing loss of innocent lives.
its a term rabin, a man that i admire, used himself,
so ill leave the name calling to you. one could argue
that the times where the terror was at an all time low
saved lots of lives, but whatever.
>Tell you what. You tell me that you would take a knife, and jam it
>in the back of the next ghoul with a bomb, and you say thanks
>to the soldiers who have saved so many lives, and we'll talk about
>"peace processes".
heres some more for you so that you can get a picture
thats more accurate than what you currently believe to
be the typical euro or whatever. i beg you, please READ
what i say now:
oh yes, as things are, i would stab a knife in that guys back.
its what the current situation asks for.
read it? ok, so i can get a little more into detail:
but it doesnt end there. i just stabbed the guy in the back.
what about the next guy? and the one after him? whats the
best way to avoid a neverending "guys with bombs" supply.
are there, god forbid, several possible approaches? is
it worth a discussion? cause, it would be unfair to
the soldiers to make them do this all the time while
we dont do anything for it to ever change.
> Until you allow for the full range of responses,
>you are acting as an advocate for them.
theres someone not ready for the "full range of responses"
here, but it aint me.
>So, if you could get a "peace process" going while he was at the
>peak of his powers, it might have succeeded? What? Until when,
>the following thursday?
in the right tempo to draw all religious fanatic idiots
on all sides (repeat: ALL sides. that includes the moslems!
do you hear me!) with them.
>His greed and corruption would have
>eventually toppled him and your peace process.
youre confusing things here, its what actually got him
to participate. and boy did it help him. it turned him
from an internationally sought after outlaw into
a somewhat respected politician, probably making him
richer than he ever dreamt of in the process. you tell
me that guy wanted to go back into tunnel system terrorist
mode? never. man is too selfish and greedy for that.
>Do you really believe that hamas and hizbullah would not have
>formed if Arafat had made a deal with Rabin??
they had already formed. the difference was, arafat had them
under control and as long as he came home with results
from the peace process, he had the people in his back.
>And why are they able to do this? Is it not the actions of the
>palestinians and the arabs?
why yes of course it is (see above).
> An american
>president who did not force them to accept peace in this scenario
>would be voted out or even impeached.
this is not where the conflict lies. the conflict, unfortunately,
lies in the religious aspects. i for one am pretty sure
that there would have been some sort of agreement
down there long ago, if only all this shitty land and
these shitty cities werent as "sacred" as they supposedly are.
as i said i dont have the ultimate solution. i just dont
believe you have it either, and comparing the track
record or the different approaches down there, im inclined
to believe that the brute force method, which worked other
times, doesnt seem to work this time.
and that is an important discussion because it also
is a discussion about "how do you fight a fundamentalist
that doesnt fear death", about "is there a way to
get along with the islam", about "how do you go to
war with something as abstract as terror". yes, i do believe
this is the most important conflict to be solved and that
it could serve as role model for the same conflict were
having (or going to have) on a much bigger global scale.
im worried about that. no wait, im sitting on my euro
ass waiting for everything to explode first, and then
ill think about it, cause thats how we arrogant euro
assholes are? right?
....
>You criticize Bush, but he blasts Israel every single time they
>respond to terrorism as we have. What hypocrisy!
yeah, it would be if i would criticize bush for not criticizing
israel. of course i nowhere said that. again, youre kindly
invited to come up with a quote.
or wait, maybe you misunderstood this one:
> the US dont reign over israel - theyll
>>do what THEY think is best for them.
with "they" i of course mean israel. my very point was
that bush can criticize them all he wants (and he does),
but they dont respond much to that, and thats i sad irony
that so much of the arabic hatred towards israel comes
from the overestimated power the US supposedly has on
israel.
>So we eliminate leaders that sponsor terrorism, and provide hiding
>places for them, we kill them, without mercy, wherever we can find,
>them, and we spread modernity and democracy, and we stay at
>it until we win.
yes thats your approach. it sometimes worked in the
past, sometimes it didnt. just like deescalation.
theres no perfect solution that automatically is the
best solution at all times.
> I believe this is the only solution and that negotiation
>is impossible with islamofascists.
and i say youre focusing on the wrong thing, this is just not
enough. getting rid of islamofascists (or fascists of
any kind, for that matter) is one thing. brute force seems
the best way for that. trying to avoid that such fascists
gain power on a regular basis in the future is, imo, the maybe
even more important goal. diplomacy, holding oneself to
the high standards we used to at least pretend to have, that
kind of stuff seems like the more promising way to go for
that (unless you want to tell me that you believe that the
very concept of diplomacy is at fault).
the problem is that solution nr.1 is the direct opposite
of solution number nr.2. theres room for improvement here.
at least thats what i think, when i look at israel, or,
to use another example for a change, afghanistan, where
my selfish country does the dirty laundry for you without
you noticing because its not in the news.
>And what do you offer in place of this accursed religion?
>Darwin? Pacifism? An enlightened social contract between
>free moral people? Think these things will sell to the islamofascists?
>Me neither. These are weak ideas and subject to the opinions of whoever
>offers them.
>Meaningless phrases full of intent, signifying nothing.
just like institutionalized religion, really. only difference
being that is has a much cleaner historical track record.
but im not about to even start hoping that there will be
a significant change here anytime soon, cause im not
religious about that either. this is a change that comes
over time, separation of religion and politics...
it seemed to get better in the second half of the
last century. currently it seems to get worse again.
oh well.
>Perhaps they do not serve God at all. Perhaps at minimum they
>have perverted Islam? Your hatred of religion will not offer an
>alternative.
no hatred. a very cynical distance though, yes, definetly.
i did say a few words about personal belief on the one
hand on huge monotheistic religious institutions on the other hand and whether
the latter is any good for this planet.
you can go back and read it if youre interested, but i guess
for now its enough. and now ill go to bed. all that
non-non-judgementalism has make me tired. maybe i secrectly am a
politically correct euro hypocrite after all, but im
doing my best ;-)"derek" <derekvonkrogh@gmx.net> wrote:
>yes, absolutely. talk about it all as you will, rabin remains
>the ONLY person to ever effectively reduce the terror plague down
>there. you obviously missed the part where i stressed
>that i do acknowledge that both approaches, both the
>deescalation
>one and the brute force one can lead to success.
>thats what i wrote. nothing about cowboys or some such,
>thats only the stuff you projected into my words, because
>im a (insert yet another dumbass euro stereotype here).
I am not sold on Rabin as the peacemaker in the middle east.
Maybe for a while at best. BTW, you DID call the current Israel
approach "muscle flexing" so who is the cliche here?
No projections involved, I simply have heard all those terms coming
from europe and "muscle flexing" is not much different than
"macho" or "cowboy".
>so, yes, i do acknowledge that both roads can lead to success.
>do you? it appears you dont, so whos the dogmatic type here?
An I said I hoped there was a peaceful solution.
>from a palaestinian point of view, israel is the aggressor
From a lion's point of view, your kid is food. From a rapists
point of view, your wife is a party.
What the hell do I care about the palestinian's point of view?
Stop the terrorism and the whole world will open up. Of course,
you cannot compare the palestinian's view to that of a lion or a
rapist because you are steeped in atheist ideology about
cultural relativity so you cannot see when a culture has become
degraded by hate and blood-lust.
Palestinians can have peace, or they can have a bullet between the
eyes, it is up to them.
>that took their land. they dont have the military power,
>so they go the terror route. being the frakkingeuropacifistidiotdude that
>i am, i despise that
>just as much, so id prefer it if you dont switch between
>calling me a blind pacifist one moment and then a guy
>that doesnt criticize palaestina (and thus somewhat supports the use of
terror),
>whatever fits the best.
That was painful for you wasn't it? I should appreciate the effort,
but you really should admit how awful their actions are more often,
and leave off the excuses. Then we can treat them as adults
and hold them to a standard of civilized behavior. Do you have any
idea how patronizing, not to say racist, it is to hold a double
standard where you understand terrorists, but condemn the only
democracy in the middle east?
>from their point of view, theyre actually doing exactly
>the same thing - use brute force. they dont have planes,
>so they use suicide bombers.
They don't have planes because their mullahs told them they don't
need scientific progress 1000 years ago, and they use suicide
bombers because they are a degraded culture, rotten from within
from their religion, and used as cannon fodder by their cynical leaders.
>if you were on their side,
>its what you would recommend. and if the enemy threatened to
>use more power, youd recommend that the enemy gets a
>demonstration of your force.
BULLSHIT! If I was on their side, I would advise them to go Ghandi,
renounce all violence, and appeal to the wolrd for justice. And I
would be the George Washington of a new Palestine. The problem
is that they have no one like that and they would kill them if they
did.
>im not saying its the ultimate solution. i find pretending
>to have absolute solutions (a very popular practice here,
>or so it seems) rather silly. im trying to have a civiliced
>discussion about the possible different paths to a solution,
Have I not been civilized to you? Certainly, I strongly disagree
sometimes, but I think I have been civil. I would have said the
same things to your face.
>if there is one at all. i can ackownledge and talk about
>both approaches, you seem to struggle with that part
>and fall back into europe-is-so-whatever rants, which,
>btw, are no better than george-bush-is-pure-evil bullshit.
>its kindergarden. no thanks.
Nonsense. Where have I done this? I can support any of the very
few claims I have made about Europe.
>> you assume all violence is failure
>
>
>i repeatedly said the exact opposite but nevermind. rant on.
No, you espouse selective pacifism which you conveniently misplace
in Bosnia, but apply rigidly to Israel.
>i did. its why im interested in this discussion.
>a childish "i know 100% percent im right" attitude
>isnt exactly helping, but at least in parts your
>post gets over the standard stereotype attitude. it seems to
>help that i repeatedly write about the things i dont
>think, even though it doesnt fit into your arrogant euro pacifist drawer:
Derek, you SAID you were a pacifist, well, except for Bosnia. And I
never ever said anything about being 100% right. I said we must
do what we are doing in the absence of an alternative. You have
not sold me on your alternative yet. Sorry.
>- i acknowledge the use of force as concept to end a conflict.
>it often is the most peaceful way to go.
Ok, so you are not a pacifist. How about taking off the moral
equivilence between Israel and the Palestinians?
>- i dont blindly believe that everything on this world can be
>negotiated
Fair enough, so support us in our war on the ghouls and head-
choppers. If ever there was a time for war this it it.
IM-ever-so-HO of course.
>- im not here because of some anti-US agenda. i have family
>in the US, have been there many times and like it here.
>im only interested in a civiliced discussion about the
>several approaches (yes i dare to believe there are several
>approaches, because of the fact that theres a not too bad
>track record of deescalation in history)
De-escalation is what Spain did, and all those in London paid for it.
This is not the time for de-escalation.
>yes. too bad it wouldnt work because their religious
>fanatic idiots.
But there are millions of muslims (I've known a few myself) who
would never join the ghouls. Maybe the ghouls are using a religion
as an excuse for what they want to do anyway. Seems to me
that Hitler and Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot managed to kill a few
people without any religion...
>> Why do you euros never demand a DAMN THING from the
>>arabs and the palestinians, you hypocritical, arrogant fools?
>
>
>oh we never demand a damn thing from the arabs?
>thats funny. usually, especially where i live, its a tradition
>to not ask anything from israel (obvious reason being
>germanys history, were simply in no position to ask *anything*
>from them). maybe you should study the people you want
>to call hypocritical arrogant fools a little more before
>you go ahead with it.
Sorry, I got mad for a minute there. I want to hear loud voices of
condemnation of terrorism from euros, and most of what I hear is
silence, and blaming the US and Israel, and excuses and
understanding for the ghouls. You did it yourself a few paragraphs
up.
>>Why do you not rise up in horror and demand that these acts stop?
>>Answer this one Derek, if you can.
>
>
>oh, we do. we do. you just dont notice, cause you only
>notice what fits into the dumb black and white picture you
>have of us.
I know that many people in europe hate the terrorist and speak out
against them. I want to hear that first, not excuses.
>on the other hand, i can tell from all the BS here that most
>of you people have not the slightest idea about whats
>going in germany. you talk about us not criticizing
>muslims and not asking anything from those countries,
>yet just as we speak theres an election campaign with
>a debate about how to deal with turkey, and also
>how to deal with potential islamists in our country,
>with our current minister of internal security and
>the guy who wants his post totally going berserk and
>extremely to the right. and if theres a classic
>debate in germany if ive ever seen one, its the debate
>about whether its good that its a principal no-no to
>openly criticize anything thats even remotely related
>to anything jewish. there are extremists that have a problem
>with that (they call it a sick case of non-judmentalism...sounds
>familiar), i personally think its only adequate and should
>stay so for at least another 50 years.
You know what, you're right. We judge europeans by their bitter,
left-wing media, and assume you are all like that. You make a good
point here, and I will try to do better. We are not like hollywood
and you are not like the euro media says. Fair enough.
>so i dont really know what to reply to such accusations.
>its so completely unreal, i dont know where to start.
Well you could admit how many euros ARE just like that. I will
happily tell you of all the sh*thead americans I know...
>thats a bit besides the point because im sure that
>our views are not important to you either way.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Bomb attacks in London England [message #55821 is a reply to message #55820] |
Fri, 15 July 2005 01:26 |
DC
Messages: 722
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
NOT true. In reality, every single college professor I know wishes
they lived in europe, and most liberals in the US and Canada wish
they were europeans. In reality european views are often more
important to the elite in this country than they should be for our
own good. Many educated americans feel that our culture is really
dumb and backwards compared to yours. They are full of crap, of
course, but european views certainly do count.
We have rejected much of european government positons on Iraq
because of their corruption and collusion with Saddam, and that
fruitcake Chirac has caused more anger than anyone since Adolf.
We are aware that following much of europe's positions could put
our lives in even graver danger. But our cultural and academic
elites still worship the european ideal in many ways. Surely you have
experienced this among some americans?
>you know squat about
>my country, period. its ridiculous. yet you believe
>you can judge my country, where i, who probably knows a
>couple hundred times more about YOUR country, make it
>a point to repeatedly stress how i do NOT want or feel
>entitled to judge or criticize it. its quite absurd, really.
I may know more than you think. And, my judgements may be
more of your government's positions and actions, than of your
country itself, of which I have had several good friends.
>i do care only about the lives. at several points i
>pointed out how i believe we all want the same (among
>other things i mentioned this as reason why i dont belong
>to the george-bush-is-evil-group). i do find the
>ideal way to this common goal open for debate.
>you obviously disagree on this one. its a little weird
>why you would enter a debate about it anyway then. is it
>just to spank my ideologic european ass?
No, because you want to de-escalate in the face of the ghouls
who threaten my life. I cannot trust you yet. When I feel your
strength, when I hear your determination to never, ever give in
to the head-choppers, I will trust you more.
>>Tell you what. You tell me that you would take a knife, and jam it
>>in the back of the next ghoul with a bomb, and you say thanks
>>to the soldiers who have saved so many lives, and we'll talk about
>>"peace processes".
>heres some more for you so that you can get a picture
>thats more accurate than what you currently believe to
>be the typical euro or whatever. i beg you, please READ
>what i say now:
>
>oh yes, as things are, i would stab a knife in that guys back.
>its what the current situation asks for.
Good, I'll get the other one.
>read it? ok, so i can get a little more into detail:
>
>but it doesnt end there. i just stabbed the guy in the back.
>what about the next guy?
BOOM, got 'em
and the one after him?
I have lots of ammo.
>whats the
>best way to avoid a neverending "guys with bombs" supply.
Remove their support governments, kill as many as we can, plant
democracies.
neverending?
Kill them all. Nuke 'em until the survivors say "we give up"
Can you do it? Or do we have to save Europe again?
In truth, it iwll not come to that, but only if we are strong.
>are there, god forbid, several possible approaches? is
>it worth a discussion? cause, it would be unfair to
>the soldiers to make them do this all the time while
>we dont do anything for it to ever change.
We discussed for years and years. Same ole go 'round. One
worldview (pacifism) versus another (war) versus another (nukes).
I think the best alternative won. Time for discussion is over.
In England now, the soccer hooligans are starting to join together
to attack Muslims. Will you understand their perspective like
you do with the palestinians? Will you use the same reasoning?
You know damn well they will attack all the wrong muslims, all
the good decent ones, you just know it. Is the fault intolerance?
Hate? Violence? Or perhaps the stupid English policies that let so
many islamofascists into the country and now cannot kick them
out? Do you blame the hooligans or kick out the mullahs who are
dancing with glee over the bodies in the tunnels?
>and that is an important discussion because it also
>is a discussion about "how do you fight a fundamentalist
>that doesnt fear death",
The same way we fought the kamikazis and moro tribesmen, and
others who did not fear death. You take away their base of
support and you kill them until they stop.
>and i say youre focusing on the wrong thing, this is just not
>enough. getting rid of islamofascists (or fascists of
>any kind, for that matter) is one thing. brute force seems
>the best way for that. trying to avoid that such fascists
>gain power on a regular basis in the future is, imo, the maybe
>even more important goal. diplomacy, holding oneself to
>the high standards we used to at least pretend to have, that
>kind of stuff seems like the more promising way to go for
>that (unless you want to tell me that you believe that the
>very concept of diplomacy is at fault).
Diplomacy only works with non-crazy people. At least for the long-term.
Kill the ghouls, negotiate with the sane survivors.
>>And what do you offer in place of this accursed religion?
>>Darwin? Pacifism? An enlightened social contract between
>>free moral people? Think these things will sell to the islamofascists?
>>Me neither. These are weak ideas and subject to the opinions of whoever
>>offers them.
>>Meaningless phrases full of intent, signifying nothing.
>just like institutionalized religion, really. only difference
>being that is has a much cleaner historical track record.
>but im not about to even start hoping that there will be
>a significant change here anytime soon, cause im not
>religious about that either. this is a change that comes
>over time, separation of religion and politics...
>it seemed to get better in the second half of the
>last century. currently it seems to get worse again.
>oh well.
My point is that when confronted with religion that causes evil,
the solution may not be atheism or secularism, but religion that
causes good.
>>Perhaps they do not serve God at all. Perhaps at minimum they
>>have perverted Islam? Your hatred of religion will not offer an
>>alternative.
>no hatred. a very cynical distance though, yes, definetly.
>i did say a few words about personal belief on the one
>hand on huge monotheistic religious institutions on the other hand and whether
>the latter is any good for this planet.
>you can go back and read it if youre interested, but i guess
>for now its enough. and now ill go to bed. all that
>non-non-judgementalism has make me tired. maybe i secrectly am a
>politically correct euro hypocrite after all, but im
>doing my best ;-)
Ah, but if there is a God, then, regardless of the failures of human
denominations, some things are better than others, and God just
may have a preference concerning how we live that lies outside
our ideas, and what you think is good for the planet is likely to be
wrong, as is so for me as well.
Just a thought.
DCThe "old" ones with PCI ver.2.2 sockets are the ones to go for with Paris,
for the most with AMD processors but Intel will do the job well too. Asus
and Epox are good names but I think most of them can do the job with
nForce2, VIA or SIS chipsets for PCI 2.2 cards. A card like Matrox
Millenium G450 or 550 will do the graphical job well but I know cards with
ATI or NVidia chips will do it too. 512MB RAM of good quality, 2 IDE
harddisks, Maxtor, Seagate or WD, 40/160 MB, a DVD/CD burner and an ATX
power supply 400/550w. Most of these things are in regular use here, so it's
more to find out what you will use and can get easily. You can find out more
on internet.
Most of these firms are using their names on internet as www.epox.com
erlilo
"Spappy" <Spappy122@yahoo.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:42d70819$1@linux...
>I think you guys are right. This computer is way to lame. I need to build a
>new one.
>
> So can you guys give me a list of components that work well with Paris, I
> can have it built but I need a list of components.
>
> Like Mother Board... etc
>
> I plan to use a a wave terminal 192x for sound as I have many virtual
> instruments.
>
> Spappy
>hey, i found out i'm probably a drunk and definitely a jackass...so i
guess i'm deeper than i thought.
;o)
On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 23:12:05 -0500, Tony <tonyx@standingxhampton.com>
wrote:
>Justin,
>
>I think the problem with these topics is that everyone seems pretty hell
>bent on changing somebody else's politics in the course of a few news group
>posts. That isn't ever going to happen. It takes years for each of us to
>develop our various points of view. The best we can do is try to understand
>each other and live with the fact that everyone doesn't share the same view.
>I'm confident that if we all were to meet somewhere, with no discussion of
>our personal politics, we would get along famously. Don't get me wrong, this
>kind of discourse is good. It helps us understand each other better, if even
>just a little. My wish is that we can all have these discussions, and even
>when they've been heated, at the end still be the great international
>community of PARIS people. That's it, the ICPP! Well, er...maybe a different
>acronym would be better. Anyway, I guess what I'm trying to say is that I
>respect you all, weather we share the same view or not.
>
>Tony
>
>
>
>
>On 7/14/05 10:05 PM, in article 42d7280a$1@linux, "justcron"
><justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote:
>
>> Usually I just feel like I'm banging my head against the wall trying to make
>> a point... I still do to a certain extent, but I think we might have made
>> progress. I kinda understand more where people are coming from. Its
>> admirable to think the best about humans and believe the government is
>> acting in our best interest. I know people are ultimately concerned with
>> their own security and survival.
>>
>> The politicalcompass thing was helpful to show that political beliefs are
>> really a complex combination of issues, at the very least needing 2 axes...
>> liberal/conservative context is hardly useful to categorize people.
>>
>> Some people say you shouldn't catch feelings over a message board, but I
>> can't help it when we're talking about life and death. If anyone is still
>> heated... I know I've been disrespectful probably a hundred times over the
>> years... I'm sorry.
>>
>> Anyway, I thought it was a good discussion.
>>
>>W, you're the first person on any political discussion group that I know of
that has flat out dismissed the test as useless...
its all good.
"W. Mark Wilson" <wmarkwilson@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:42d7428a$1@linux...
> Not that every question can be "perfect" but if the outset of this test is
> to determine or assist in determining the political locale of an
> individual or group, "better" questions would be best whereas "imperfect"
> presumptuous ones, it could be said, are clandestine at worst,
> indiscriminate at best.
>
> Case in point, when I tested, I found myself feeling a little tweaked that
> almost every question, for me, was answered with "disagree" when, in fact,
> changing or adding or subtracting just one word from the question could
> have and would have yielded an "agree" response to an identical question.
>
> Is it therefore not implausible to think that the formulations of these
> questions intentionally poses an emotional sub-plot to cause a more
> liberal respondent to think or feel he is an agreeable person, to continue
> answering emotionally whereas, a more conservative thinker, by same
> questions, could reasonably be made to feel out of step and highly
> disagreeable with his/her repetitive "disagree" responses. An easily
> predictable downside being; the common desire to "fit in" skews the
> response data by emotionally manipulating the respondent.
>
> Believe me, it aint the first or last time this has been done.
>
> Then you get to Deej's concern where the question takes a position, which
> position, when the question is answered, is assumed to be an agreed upon
> position by both questioner and respondent when, in fact, that is not the
> case at all. How reliable is an answer to such a question and if not
> reliable, what use can it possible serve? And how reliable are the
> answers to a series of questions, of which questions it can be said, are
> readily identifiable as being unnecessarily emotionally manipulative to
> vast majority of respondents while simultaneously being presumptuous on
> key issues?
>
> I would say NOT very reliable at all in terms of collective responses. My
> matrix is mostly accurate but only because I don't care if the answer to a
> series of question is repetitively "no." The answer to any question, when
> answered truthfully, does not change and, I am not inclined to emotional
> manipulation in such cases.
>
> I'm with Deej on this... flawed test and therefore, almost useless for the
> collection of group data and certainly "slurry" data when it comes to
> presumed agreement between questioner and respondent on political issues.
>
> Dubya Mark Wilson
>
> "justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote in message
> news:42d585d3$1@linux...
>> the questions are simplistic while complex. they're trying to score you
>> on an axis with imperfect questions.
>
>As a rule people only call into radio shows and post to blogs and such
to have THEIR world view reinforced. Not to have in depth discussions
about other peoples views.
John
rick wrote:
> hey, i found out i'm probably a drunk and definitely a jackass...so i
> guess i'm deeper than i thought.
>
> ;o)
>
> On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 23:12:05 -0500, Tony <tonyx@standingxhampton.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Justin,
>>
>>I think the problem with these topics is that everyone seems pretty hell
>>bent on changing somebody else's politics in the course of a few news group
>>posts. That isn't ever going to happen. It takes years for each of us to
>>develop our various points of view. The best we can do is try to understand
>>each other and live with the fact that everyone doesn't share the same view.
>>I'm confident that if we all were to meet somewhere, with no discussion of
>>our personal politics, we would get along famously. Don't get me wrong, this
>>kind of discourse is good. It helps us understand each other better, if even
>>just a little. My wish is that we can all have these discussions, and even
>>when they've been heated, at the end still be the great international
>>community of PARIS people. That's it, the ICPP! Well, er...maybe a different
>>acronym would be better. Anyway, I guess what I'm trying to say is that I
>>respect you all, weather we share the same view or not.
>>
>>Tony
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On 7/14/05 10:05 PM, in article 42d7280a$1@linux, "justcron"
>><justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Usually I just feel like I'm banging my head against the wall trying to make
>>>a point... I still do to a certain extent, but I think we
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anyone feel like we might have made some progress with the political thread? [message #55823 is a reply to message #55799] |
Fri, 15 July 2005 02:21 |
rick
Messages: 1976
Registered: February 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
deeper than i thought.
>
> ;o)
>
> On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 23:12:05 -0500, Tony <tonyx@standingxhampton.com>
> wrote:
>
>>Justin,
>>
>>I think the problem with these topics is that everyone seems pretty hell
>>bent on changing somebody else's politics in the course of a few news
>>group
>>posts. That isn't ever going to happen. It takes years for each of us to
>>develop our various points of view. The best we can do is try to
>>understand
>>each other and live with the fact that everyone doesn't share the same
>>view.
>>I'm confident that if we all were to meet somewhere, with no discussion of
>>our personal politics, we would get along famously. Don't get me wrong,
>>this
>>kind of discourse is good. It helps us understand each other better, if
>>even
>>just a little. My wish is that we can all have these discussions, and even
>>when they've been heated, at the end still be the great international
>>community of PARIS people. That's it, the ICPP! Well, er...maybe a
>>different
>>acronym would be better. Anyway, I guess what I'm trying to say is that I
>>respect you all, weather we share the same view or not.
>>
>>Tony
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On 7/14/05 10:05 PM, in article 42d7280a$1@linux, "justcron"
>><justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote:
>>
>>> Usually I just feel like I'm banging my head against the wall trying to
>>> make
>>> a point... I still do to a certain extent, but I think we might have
>>> made
>>> progress. I kinda understand more where people are coming from. Its
>>> admirable to think the best about humans and believe the government is
>>> acting in our best interest. I know people are ultimately concerned
>>> with
>>> their own security and survival.
>>>
>>> The politicalcompass thing was helpful to show that political beliefs
>>> are
>>> really a complex combination of issues, at the very least needing 2
>>> axes...
>>> liberal/conservative context is hardly useful to categorize people.
>>>
>>> Some people say you shouldn't catch feelings over a message board, but I
>>> can't help it when we'r
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anyone feel like we might have made some progress with the politicalthread? [message #55825 is a reply to message #55823] |
Fri, 15 July 2005 00:19 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
a href="mailto:wmarkwilson@verizon.net" target="_blank">wmarkwilson@verizon.net> wrote:
>>Randy Newman wrote a satire (tinyurl.com/d83pb) many years ago, the
>>tagline
>
>>of which, best expresses my current view on the best solution to the
>>unceasing problem of terrorism emanating from middle east command and
>>means.... which is to say "most" terrorism.
>>
>>I really am there. This is THE one way to ratt out the enemy and
>>simultaneously send the message to any further suiters: "Step right up
> for
>>your one-way bullet train to Allah, no purchase necessary, see fineprint
> on
>>tip of warhead for details."
>>
>>The thing that put me over the edge was the piece of human waste that blew
>
>>up the little kids a couple of days ago while one of our guys was handing
>
>>out candy to them.
>>
>>Anybody brave enough to say they think the same thing or have we all cowed
>
>>down to international version of the old Rodney King mantra, "Can't we all
>
>>just get long." Is there some plausible notion or a reason to believe
>>that
>
>>eventually, if we just keep doing what we're doing, the extremist
>>followers
>
>>of Bin ladin will just all of a sudden see it our way and fold up the biz
>
>>and integrate into peaceful society???
>>
>>Dubya Mark Wilson
>>
>>"Neil" <OIUIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:42d6fc20$1@linux...
>>>
>>> In a nutshell...
>>> I think if there's room & resources enough for both Israelis &
>>> Palestinians in the region they want to live in, I think they
>>> should quit fighting & come up with a plan. HOWEVER... this is
>>> essentially a 3,000 year-old family feud we're looking at over
>>> there, and my point of view may be a little too simplistic to
>>> deal with the situation. I am not very familiar with the
>>> condition of the agricultural situation there, but I understand
>>> it's not the best in the world - in that case, both sides
>>> should realize that there may not be enough resources in that
>>> immediate area to provide for as many peple as want to live
>>> there... that's a problem, because you can't import everything
>>> food-wise. Israel is our ally, and we should stand by them, but
>>> I also hold the position that some kind of solution could be
>>> arrived at if both sides want peace more than war. OK, now
>>> this is the part where you rebut & tell me what a narrow-minded
>>> American I am, and how wrong my opinion is because you're
>>> Eurosuperior to me and have a much better world view because
>>> you read about cowboys & rodeos in Oklahoma & the drug problem
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anyone feel like we might have made some progress with the political thread? [message #55826 is a reply to message #55823] |
Fri, 15 July 2005 04:22 |
justcron
Messages: 330
Registered: May 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
s
>>> in Miami in Der Spiegel & had a US soldier live next door to
>>> you & he was a dick, and of course, all Americans are exactly
>>> like he was.
>>>
>>> BTW, the Israeli thing is VERY different than the situation we
>>> face with radical Islam... they do NOT want peace more than
>>> war, they only want to kill all the "infidels" and sing praise
>>> & glory to their blood-soaked god Allah, while trying to knock
>>> the rest of the world back into the 12th century, economically,
>>> societally, and politically. So, knowing this, and seeing what
>>> they've done beginning on 9/11 and continuing to this day, I
>>> think a slightly "different" approach is what's called for.
>>>
>>> Neil
>>>
>>
>>
>>My few is nail the fuckers when you can find them, and make life absolutely
miserable for those who are helping them.
But then you're making them mad and breeding millions more of them. The
answer to this may be exactly what GWB is wanting to do...........give the
people a say in their own lives. Of course, this pisses off the religious
zealots who want to keep the population in lockdown, the Sunni's in Iraq who
used to be in power in Iraq and now are not and the those who think we are
exporting democracy at the point of a gun because they don't like our
policies. Funny though, I sure don't see the general population of
Afghanistan clamoring for the return of the Taliban. I also don't see a mass
uprising in Iraq in favor of returning Sadaam to power.
"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote in message news:42d7acb1@linux...
>
> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:42d7521a$1@linux...
> >
> > Germaine (NOT "Jackson" lol) to your post:
> > For the record... I'm all for a peaceful solution; however (and
> > let's now bring this over to a personal level where more people
> > may be able to understand it rather than conceptualize it), if
> > it's apparent that the guy on the opposite side of the ring
> > from you does not want to take off his gloves, but would rather
> > beat the shit out of you until you are dead, you have EXACTLY
> > two choices:
> >
> > 1.) get beaten until you are dead.
> > 2.) beat the shit out of him until he is.
> >
> > What would you do?
> >
> > This is pretty fucking simple to me.
> >
> > Neil
> >
>
> I'm in total agreement here Neil the only problem with your scenario is,
> after you've done the first guy....there are 1000 more right behind him
and
> half of the paying audience who came to watch this smack down is booing
you
> cause they think you were a little hard on his sorry ass.
>
> This is a religious war being waged by ignorant extremists who for
whatever
> reason have decided we're the enemy and as we all know once you bring
> religion into the mix common sense and rational behavio
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Bomb attacks in London England [message #55830 is a reply to message #55820] |
Fri, 15 July 2005 07:15 |
erlilo
Messages: 405
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
br />
> approaches, because of the fact that theres a not too bad
> track record of deescalation in history)
>
>
>
>> You haven't convinced me that Rabin could
>>have pulled it off.
>
>
> i didnt expect to. heck, i dont know it myself.
>
>
>>Here's how the palestinians could have peace in a week:
>>
>>Go Ghandi on them. Sit down, inb the streets, renounce violence forever.
>>Ask the world for justice. They would get their demands in a week
>>or less, and if israel didn't like it, the american people would force it
>>on them by witholding any more aid.
>
>
> yes. too bad it wouldnt work because their religious
> fanatic idiots. theres a reason why i talked so much
> about the good timing of rabin. you gotta force religious
> idiots into their own good. too bad the timing wasnt quite
> right and a handful of steps at a time was still to
> extreme of a dialog for some extremist idiots. it
> wasnt even an islamic extremist idiot but a jewish one
> who ultimatively destroyed it all - but it could very
> well have been one.
>
>
>> Why do you euros never demand a DAMN THING from the
>>arabs and the palestinians, you hypocritical, arrogant fools?
>
>
> oh we never demand a damn thing from the arabs?
> thats funny. usually, especially where i live, its a tradition
> to not ask anything from israel (obvious reason being
> germanys history, were simply in no position to ask *anything*
> from them). maybe you should study the people you want
> to call hypocritical arrogant fools a little more before
> you go ahead with it.
>
> but ive had enough of the stereotype discussion. suit yourself
> and bathe in your stupid clichees if it makes you feel
> any better.
>
>
>>Why do you not rise up in horror and demand that these acts stop?
>>Answer this one Derek, if you can.
>
>
> oh, we do. we do. you just dont notice, cause you only
> notice what fits into the dumb black and white picture you
> have of us.
>
>
>>Instead you speak of "root causes" and criticize Bush. It's wrong, and
>>foolish.
>
>
> i dont know what a "root cause" is. i know i definetly
> didnt come here to criticize bush. i think i said so about
> a dozen times.
>
>
>
>>I cannot support the euro position on this, because I NEVER hear
>>any demands for change, or criticism of moslems coming from
>>europe. Just of the jews and america. Until I see otherwise,
>>we must stay the course.
>
>
> see, one problem is that i can watch almost all US TV stations
> and buy, read and understand almost all US press. so i can
> regularly get an idea about whats going on in the US, and
> germans usually are very interested in that, cause, despite
> the current arguments, germany still looks up to the US.
> its a bit like with an older brother you currently dont talk
> much to, even though most germans probably would have a
> problem in admitting that.
>
> on the other hand, i can tell from all the BS here that most
> of you people have not the slightest idea about whats
> going in germany. you talk about us not criticizing
> muslims and not asking anything from those countries,
> yet just as we speak theres an election campaign with
> a debate about how to deal with turkey, and also
> how to deal with potential islamists in our country,
> with our current minister of internal security and
> the guy who wants his post totally going berserk and
> extremely to the right. and if theres a classic
> debate in germany if ive ever seen one, its the debate
> about whether its good that its a principal no-no to
> openly criticize anything thats even remotely related
> to anything jewish. there are extremists that have a problem
> with that (they call it a sick case of non-judmentalism...sounds
> familiar), i personally think its only adequate and should
> stay so for at least another 50 years.
>
> so i dont really know what to reply to such accusations.
> its so completely unreal, i dont know where to start.
>
>
>>See, any response to terrorism besides negotiation is either
>>"muscle flexing" or "cowboys" or "macho".
>
>
> muscle flexing is what i called it, getting bored by the
> "politics of force" terms i used the entire force.
> "cowboys" and "macho" is yet another projection of yours.
>
>
>> And you cannot
>>see how america might see europe as so arrogant and sefl-absorbed
>>that your views are not important to us?
>
>
> thats a bit besides the point because im sure that
> our views are not important to you either way. i do
> get an idea about how these stereotypes come up and
> especially, how they nicely grow, completely undisturbed
> by anything that resembles reality. you know squat about
> my country, period. its ridiculous. yet you believe
> you can judge my country, where i, who probably knows a
> couple hundred times more about YOUR country, make it
> a point to repeatedly stress how i do NOT want or feel
> entitled to judge or criticize it. its quite absurd, really.
>
>
>>I am not evening saying that war is the only answer, just that if
>>you have an ideology that precludes it, and you see it always as a
>>failure
>
>
> you know what, do me a favour here: please come up with
> the quote where i said that i always see it as a failure.
> either that or maybe you might want to actually stop it
> and apologize. its really getting boring to repeat
> and
> repeat and repeat and repeat it, with no effect.
> i have the feeling youre not talking to me but to
> some imaginary "The Europe Dude" that you made up for
> yourself to argue against.
>
>
>
>> do not expect us to listen since you care more for your
>>ideology than you apparently care for our lives.
>
>
> i do care only about the lives. at several points i
> pointed out how i believe we all want the same (among
> other things i mentioned this as reason why i dont belong
> to the george-bush-is-evil-group). i do find the
> ideal way to this common goal open for debate.
> you obviously disagree on this one. its a little weird
> why you would enter a debate about it anyway then. is it
> just to spank my ideologic european ass?
>
>
>>"Peace process" what a f**king joke that term is. It is the words
>>that ideologues use to comfort themselves in the face of not only
>>failure, but the continuing loss of innocent lives.
>
>
> its a term rabin, a man that i admire, used himself,
> so ill leave the name calling to you. one could argue
> that the times where the terror was at an all time low
> saved lots of lives, but whatever.
>
>
>
>>Tell you what. You tell me that you would take a knife, and jam it
>>in the back of the next ghoul with a bomb, and you say thanks
>>to the soldiers who have saved so many lives, and we'll talk about
>>"peace processes".
>
>
> heres some more for you so that you can get a picture
> thats more accurate than what you currently believe to
> be the typical euro or whatever. i beg you, please READ
> what i say now:
>
> oh yes, as things are, i would stab a knife in that guys back.
> its what the current situation asks for.
>
> read it? ok, so i can get a little more into detail:
>
> but it doesnt end there. i just stabbed the guy in the back.
> what about the next guy? and the one after him? whats the
> best way to avoid a neverending "guys with bombs" supply.
> are there, god forbid, several possible approaches? is
> it worth a discussion? cause, it would be unfair to
> the soldiers to make them do this all the time while
> we dont do anything for it to ever change.
>
>
>
>
>> Until you allow for the full range of responses,
>>you are acting as an advocate for them.
>
>
> theres someone not ready for the "full range of responses"
> here, but it aint me.
>
>
>>So, if you could get a "peace process" going while he was at the
>>peak of his powers, it might have succeeded? What? Until when,
>>the following thursday?
>
>
> in the right tempo to draw all religious fanatic idiots
> on all sides (repeat: ALL sides. that includes the moslems!
> do you hear me!) with them.
>
>
>>His greed and corruption would have
>>eventually toppled him and your peace process.
>
>
> youre confusing things here, its what actually got him
> to participate. and boy did it help him. it turned him
> from an internationally sought after outlaw into
> a somewhat respected politician, probably making him
> richer than he ever dreamt of in the process. you tell
> me that guy wanted to go back into tunnel system terrorist
> mode? never. man is too selfish and greedy for that.
>
>
>>Do you really believe that hamas and hizbullah would not have
>>formed if Arafat had made a deal with Rabin??
>
>
> they had already formed. the difference was, arafat had them
> under control and as long as he came home with results
> from the peace process, he had the people in his back.
>
>
>
>>And why are they able to do this? Is it not the actions of the
>>palestinians and the arabs?
>
>
> why yes of course it is (see above).
>
>
>> An american
>>president who did not force them to accept peace in this scenario
>>would be voted out or even impeached.
>
>
> this is not where the conflict lies. the conflict, unfortunately,
> lies in the religious aspects. i for one am pretty sure
> that there would have been some sort of agreement
> down there long ago, if only all this shitty land and
> these shitty cities werent as "sacred" as they supposedly are.
> as i said i dont have the ultimate solution. i just dont
> believe you have it either, and comparing the track
> record or the different approaches down there, im inclined
> to believe that the brute force method, which worked other
> times, doesnt seem to work this time.
>
> and that is an important discussion because it also
> is a discussion about "how do you fight a fundamentalist
> that doesnt fear death", about "is there a way to
> get along with the islam", about "how do you go to
> war with something as abstract as terror". yes, i do believe
> this is the most important conflict to be solved and that
> it could serve as role model for the same conflict were
> having (or going to have) on a much bigger global scale.
>
> im worried about that. no wait, im sitting on my euro
> ass waiting for everything to explode first, and then
> ill think about it, cause thats how we arrogant euro
> assholes are? right?
>
> ...
>
>
>>You criticize Bush, but he blasts Israel every single time they
>>respond to terrorism as we have. What hypocrisy!
>
>
> yeah, it would be if i would criticize bush for not criticizing
> israel. of course i nowhere said that. again, youre kindly
> invited to come up with a quote.
>
> or wait, maybe you misunderstood this one:
>
>> the US dont reign over israel - theyll
>>>do what THEY think is best for them.
>
>
> with "they" i of course mean israel. my very point was
> that bush can criticize them all he wants (and he does),
> but they dont respond much to that, and thats i sad irony
> that so much of the arabic hatred towards israel comes
> from the overestimated power the US supposedly has on
> israel.
>
>
>>So we eliminate leaders that sponsor terrorism, and provide hiding
>>places for them, we kill them, without mercy, wherever we can find,
>>them, and we spread modernity and democracy, and we stay at
>>it until we win.
>
>
> yes thats your approach. it sometimes worked in the
> past, sometimes it didnt. just like deescalation.
> theres no perfect solution that automatically is the
> best solution at all times.
>
>
>> I believe this is the only solution and that negotiation
>>is impossible with islamofascists.
>
>
> and i say youre focusing on the wrong thing, this is just not
> enough. getting rid of islamofascists (or fascists of
> any kind, for that matter) is one thing. brute force seems
> the best way for that. trying to avoid that such fascists
> gain power on a regular basis in the future is, imo, the maybe
> even more important goal. diplomacy, holding oneself to
> the high standards we used to at least pretend to have, that
> kind of stuff seems like the more promising way to go for
> that (unless you want to tell me that you believe that the
> very concept of diplomacy is at fault).
>
> the problem is that solution nr.1 is the direct opposite
> of solution number nr.2. theres room for improvement here.
> at least thats what i think, when i look at israel, or,
> to use another example for a change, afghanistan, where
> my selfish country does the dirty laundry for you without
> you noticing because its not in the news.
>
>
>>And what do you offer in place of this accursed religion?
>>Darwin? Pacifism? An enlightened social contract between
>>free moral people? Think these things will sell to the islamofascists?
>>Me neither. These are weak ideas and subject to the opinions of whoever
>>offers them.
>>Meaningless phrases full of intent, signifying nothing.
>
>
> just like institutionalized religion, really. only difference
> being that is has a much cleaner historical track record.
> but im not about to even start hoping that there will be
> a significant change here anytime soon, cause im not
> religious about that either. this is a change that comes
> over time, separation of religion and politics...
> it seemed to get better in the second half of the
> last century. currently it seems to get worse again.
> oh well.
>
>
>
>>Perhaps they do not serve God at all. Perhaps at minimum they
>>have perverted Islam? Your hatred of religion will not offer an
>>alternative.
>
>
> no hatred. a very cynical distance though, yes, definetly.
> i did say a few words about personal belief on the one
> hand on huge monotheistic religious institutions on the other hand and
> whether
> the latter is any good for this planet.
> you can go back and read it if youre interested, but i guess
> for now its enough. and now ill go to bed. all that
> non-non-judgementalism has make me tired. maybe i secrectly am a
> politically correct euro hypocrite after all, but im
> doing my best ;-)This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------000202090307070204020708
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I don't know if you cats have seen this but it's pretty humourous so
here ya go....
jef
Last Updated: April 5, 1994
The Book of Creation
Chapter 1
1
In the beginning God created Dates.
2
And the date was Monday, July 4, 4004 BC.
3
And God said, let there be light; and there was light. And when
there was Light, God saw the Date, that it was Monday, and he got
down to work; for verily, he had a Big Job to do.
4
And God made pottery shards and Silurian mollusks and pre-Cambrian
limestone strata; and flints and Jurassic Mastodon tusks and
Picanthopus erectus skulls and Cretaceous placentals made he; and
those cave paintings at Lasceaux. And that was that, for the first
Work Day.
5
And God saw that he had made many wondrous things, but that he had
not wherein to put it all. And God said, Let the heavens be divided
from the earth; and let us bury all of these Things which we have
made in the earth; but not too deep.
6
And God buried all the Things which he had made, and that was that.
7
And the morning and the evening and the overtime were Tuesday.
8
And God said, Let there be water; and let the dry land appear; and
that was that.
9
And God called the dry land Real Estate; and the water called he the
Sea. And in the land and beneath it put he crude oil, grades one
through six; and natural gas put he thereunder, and prehistoric
carboniferous forests yielding anthracite and other ligneous matter;
and all these called he Resources; and he made them Abundant.
10
And likewise all that was in the sea, even unto two hundred miles
from the dry land, called he resources; all that was therein, like
manganese nodules, for instance.
11
And the morning unto the evening had been a long day; which he
called Wednesday.
12
And God said, Let the earth bring forth abundantly every moving
creature I can think of, with or without backbones, with or without
wings or feet, or fins or claws, vestigial limbs and all, right now;
and let each one be of a separate species. For lo, I can make
whatsoever I like, whensoever I like.
13
And the earth brought forth abundantly all creatures, great and
small, with and without backbones, with and without wings and feet
and fins and claws, vestigial limbs and all, from bugs to
brontosauruses.
14
But God blessed them all, saying, Be fruitful and multiply and
Evolve Not.
15
And God looked upon the species he hath made, and saw that the earth
was exceedingly crowded, and he said unto them, Let each species
compete for what it needed; for Healthy Competition is My Law. And
the species competeth amongst themselves, the cattle and the
creeping things; and some madeth it and some didn't; and the dogs
ate the dinosaurs and God was pleased.
16
And God took the bones from the dinosaurs, and caused them to appear
mighty old; and cast he them about the land and the sea. And he took
every tiny creature that had not madeth it, and caused them to
become fossils; and cast he them about likewise.
17
And just to put matters beyond the valley of the shadow of a doubt
God created carbon dating. And this is the origin of species.
18
And in the Evening of the day which was Thursday, God saw that he
had put in another good day's work.
19
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness,
which is tall and well-formed and pale of hue: and let us also make
monkeys, which resembleth us not in any wise, but are short and
ill-formed and hairy. And God added, Let man have dominion over the
monkeys and the fowl of the air and every speices, endangered or
otherwise.
20
So God created Man in His own image; tall and well-formed and pale
of hue created He him, and nothing at all like the monkeys.
21
And God said, Behold I have given you every herb bearing seed, which
is upon the face of the earth. But ye shalt not smoketh it, lest it
giveth you ideas.
22
And to every beast of the earth and every fowl of the air I have
given also every green herb, and to them it shall be for meat. But
they shall be for you. And the Lord God your Host suggesteth that
the flesh of cattle goeth well with that of the fin and the claw;
thus shall Surf be wedded unto Turf.
23
And God saw everything he had made, and he saw that it was very
good; and God said, It just goes to show Me what the private sector
can accomplish. With a lot of fool regulations this could have taken
billions of years.
24
And the evening of the fifth day, which had been the roughest day
yet, God said, Thank me it's Friday. And God made the weekend.
Chapter 2
1
Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all in five days,
and all less than six thousand years ago; and if thou believest it
not, in a sling shalt thou find thy hindermost quarters
2
Likewise God took the dust of the ground, and the slime of the Sea
and the scum of the earth and formed Man therefrom; and breathed the
breath of life right in his face. And he became Free to Choose.
3
And God made a Marketplace eastward of Eden, in which the man was
free to play. And this was the Free Play of the Marketplace.
4
And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow four trees: the Tree
of Life, and the Liberty Tree, and the Pursuit of Happiness Tree,
and the Tree of the Knowledge of Sex.
5
And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, This is my Law, which is
called the Law of Supply and Demand. Investeth thou in the trees of
Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, and thou shalt make for
thyself a fortune. For what fruit thou eatest not, that thou mayest
sell, and with the seeds thereof expand thy operations.
6
But the fruit of the tree of the Knowledge of Sex, thou mayest no
eat; nor mayest thou invest therein, nor profit thereby nor expand
its operations; for that is a mighty waste of seed.
7
And the man was exceeding glad. But he asked the LORD God: Who then
shall labor in this Marketplace? For I am no management, being tall
and well-formed and pale of hue?
8
And the LORD God said unto himself, Verily, this kid hath the
potential which is Executive.
9
And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field
and every fowl of the air, and brought them unto Adam to labor for
him. And they labored for peanuts.
10
Then Adam was again exceeding glad. But he spake once more unto the
LORD God, saying, Lo, I am free to play in the Marketplace of the
LORD, and have cheap labor in plenty; but to whom shall I sell my
surplus fruit and realize a fortune thereby?
11
And the LORD God said unto himself, Verily, this is an Live One.
12
And he caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam and he took from him
one of his ribs, which was an spare rib.
13
And the spare rib which the LORD God had taken from the man, made he
woman. And he brought her unto the man, saying:
14
This is Woman and she shall purchase your fruit; and ye shall
realize a fortune thereby. For Man produceth and Woman consumeth,
wherefore she shall be called the consumer.
15
And they were both decently clad, the Man and the Woman, from the
neck even unto the ankles, so they were not ashamed.
Chapter 3
1
Now the snake in the grass was more permissive than any beast of the
field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Why
has thou accepted this lowly and submissive role? For art thou not
human, even as the man is human?
2
And the woman said unto the snake in the grass, the LORD God hath
ordained that I am placed under the man, and must do whatsoever he
telleth me to do; for is he not the Man?
3
But the snake in the grass laughed an cunning laugh, and said unto
the woman, Is it not right and just that thou shouldst fulfill thy
potential? For art thou not comely in thy flesh, even as the man is
comely in his flesh?
4
And the woman said, Nay, I know not, for hath not the LORD God clad
us decently, from the neck even unto the ankles; and forbidden that
we eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Sex?
5
But the snake in the grass said unto the woman, whispering even into
her very ear, saying, Whatsoever feeleth good, do thou it; and
believeth thou me, it feeleth good.
6
And when the woman saw the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of
Sex, that it was firm and plump and juicy, she plucked thereof, and
sank her teeth therein, and gave also to her husband, and he
likewise sank his teeth therein.
7
And the eyes of both of them were opened, and they saw that they
were not naked.
8
And the woman lossened then Adam's uppermost garment, and he
likewise loosened hers; and she loosened his nethermost garment, and
the man then loosened her nethermost garment; until they wer
|
|
|
|
| Re: Bomb attacks in London England [message #55836 is a reply to message #55830] |
Fri, 15 July 2005 08:54 |
Deej [3]
Messages: 181
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Suppose there isn't?
> >
> >
> > i did. its why im interested in this discussion.
> > a childish "i know 100% percent im right" attitude
> > isnt exactly helping, but at least in parts your
> > post gets over the standard stereotype attitude. it seems to
> > help that i repeatedly write about the things i dont
> > think, even though it doesnt fit into your arrogant euro pacifist
drawer:
> >
> >
> > - i acknowledge the use of force as concept to end a conflict.
> > it often is the most peaceful way to go.
> > - i acknowledge the use of force as concept to end a conflict.
> > it often is the most peaceful way to go.
> > - i acknowledge the use of force as concept to end a conflict.
> > it often is the most peaceful way to go.
> > - i acknowledge the use of force as concept to end a conflict.
> > it often is the most peaceful way to go.
> >
> > - i dont blindly believe that everything on this world can be
> > negotiated
> > - i dont blindly believe that everything on this world can be
> > negotiated
> > - i dont blindly believe that everything on this world can be
> > negotiated
> > - i dont blindly believe that everything on this world can be
> > negotiated
> >
> > - im not here because of some anti-US agenda. i have family
> > in the US, have been there many times and like it here.
> > im only interested in a civiliced discussion about the
> > several approaches (yes i dare to believe there are several
> > approaches, because of the fact that theres a not too bad
> > track record of deescalation in history)
> > - im not here because of some anti-US agenda. i have family
> > in the US, have been there many times and like it here.
> > im only interested in a civiliced discussion about the
> > several approaches (yes i dare to believe there are several
> > approaches, because of the fact that theres a not too bad
> > track record of deescalation in history)
> > - im not here because of some anti-US agenda. i have family
> > in the US, have been there many times and like it here.
> > im only interested in a civiliced discussion about the
> > several approaches (yes i dare to believe there are several
> > approaches, because of the fact that theres a not too bad
> > track record of deescalation in history)
> >
> >
> >
> >> You haven't convinced me that Rabin could
> >>have pulled it off.
> >
> >
> > i didnt expect to. heck, i dont know it myself.
> >
> >
> >>Here's how the palestinians could have peace in a week:
> >>
> >>Go Ghandi on them. Sit down, inb the streets, renounce violence
forever.
> >>Ask the world for justice. They would get their demands in a week
> >>or less, and if israel didn't like it, the american people would force
it
> >>on them by witholding any more aid.
> >
> >
> > yes. too bad it wouldnt work because their religious
> > fanatic idiots. theres a reason why i talked so much
> > about the good timing of rabin. you gotta force religious
> > idiots into their own good. too bad the timing wasnt quite
> > right and a handful of steps at a time was still to
> > extreme of a dialog for some extremist idiots. it
> > wasnt even an islamic extremist idiot but a jewish one
> > who ultimatively destroyed it all - but it could very
> > well have been one.
> >
> >
> >> Why do you euros never demand a DAMN THING from the
> >>arabs and the palestinians, you hypocritical, arrogant fools?
> >
> >
> > oh we never demand a damn thing from the arabs?
> > thats funny. usually, especially where i live, its a tradition
> > to not ask anything from israel (obvious reason being
> > germanys history, were simply in no position to ask *anything*
> > from them). maybe you should study the people you want
> > to call hypocritical arrogant fools a little more before
> > you go ahead with it.
> >
> > but ive had enough of the stereotype discussion. suit yourself
> > and bathe in your stupid clichees if it makes you feel
> > any better.
> >
> >
> >>Why do you not rise up in horror and demand that these acts stop?
> >>Answer this one Derek, if you can.
> >
> >
> > oh, we do. we do. you just dont notice, cause you only
> > notice what fits into the dumb black and white picture you
> > have of us.
> >
> >
> >>Instead you speak of "root causes" and criticize Bush. It's wrong, and
> >>foolish.
> >
> >
> > i dont know what a "root cause" is. i know i definetly
> > didnt come here to criticize bush. i think i said so about
> > a dozen times.
> >
> >
> >
> >>I cannot support the euro position on this, because I NEVER hear
> >>any demands for change, or criticism of moslems coming from
> >>europe. Just of the jews and america. Until I see otherwise,
> >>we must stay the course.
> >
> >
> > see, one problem is that i can watch almost all US TV stations
> > and buy, read and understand almost all US press. so i can
> > regularly get an idea about whats going on in the US, and
> > germans usually are very interested in that, cause, despite
> > the current arguments, germany still looks up to the US.
> > its a bit like with an older brother you currently dont talk
> > much to, even though most germans probably would have a
> > problem in admitting that.
> >
> > on the other hand, i can tell from all the BS here that most
> > of you people have not the slightest idea about whats
> > going in germany. you talk about us not criticizing
> > muslims and not asking anything from those countries,
> > yet just as we speak theres an election campaign with
> > a debate about how to deal with turkey, and also
> > how to deal with potential islamists in our country,
> > with our current minister of internal security and
> > the guy who wants his post totally going berserk and
> > extremely to the right. and if theres a classic
> > debate in germany if ive ever seen one, its the debate
> > about whether its good that its a principal no-no to
> > openly criticize anything thats even remotely related
> > to anything jewish. there are extremists that have a problem
> > with that (they call it a sick case of non-judmentalism...sounds
> > familiar), i personally think its only adequate and should
> > stay so for at least another 50 years.
> >
> > so i dont really know what to reply to such accusations.
> > its so completely unreal, i dont know where to start.
> >
> >
> >>See, any response to terrorism besides negotiation is either
> >>"muscle flexing" or "cowboys" or "macho".
> >
> >
> > muscle flexing is what i called it, getting bored by the
> > "politics of force" terms i used the entire force.
> > "cowboys" and "macho" is yet another projection of yours.
> >
> >
> >> And you cannot
> >>see how america might see europe as so arrogant and sefl-absorbed
> >>that your views are not important to us?
> >
> >
> > thats a bit besides the point because im sure that
> > our views are not important to you either way. i do
> > get an idea about how these stereotypes come up and
> > especially, how they nicely grow, completely undisturbed
> > by anything that resembles reality. you know squat about
> > my country, period. its ridiculous. yet you believe
> > you can judge my country, where i, who probably knows a
> > couple hundred times more about YOUR country, make it
> > a point to repeatedly stress how i do NOT want or feel
> > entitled to judge or criticize it. its quite absurd, really.
> >
> >
> >>I am not evening saying that war is the only answer, just that if
> >>you have an ideology that precludes it, and you see it always as a
> >>failure
> >
> >
> > you know what, do me a favour here: please come up with
> > the quote where i said that i always see it as a failure.
> > either that or maybe you might want to actually stop it
> > and apologize. its really getting boring to repeat
> > and
> > repeat and repeat and repeat it, with no effect.
> > i have the feeling youre not talking to me but to
> > some imaginary "The Europe Dude" that you made up for
> > yourself to argue against.
> >
> >
> >
> >> do not expect us to listen since you care more for your
> >>ideology than you apparently care for our lives.
> >
> >
> > i do care only about the lives. at several points i
> > pointed out how i believe we all want the same (among
> > other things i mentioned this as reason why i dont belong
> > to the george-bush-is-evil-group). i do find the
> > ideal way to this common goal open for debate.
> > you obviously disagree on this one. its a little weird
> > why you would enter a debate about it anyway then. is it
> > just to spank my ideologic european ass?
> >
> >
> >>"Peace process" what a f**king joke that term is. It is the words
> >>that ideologues use to comfort themselves in the face of not only
> >>failure, but the continuing loss of innocent lives.
> >
> >
> > its a term rabin, a man that i admire, used himself,
> > so ill leave the name calling to you. one could argue
> > that the times where the terror was at an all time low
> > saved lots of lives, but whatever.
> >
> >
> >
> >>Tell you what. You tell me that you would take a knife, and jam it
> >>in the back of the next ghoul with a bomb, and you say thanks
> >>to the soldiers who have saved so many lives, and we'll talk about
> >>"peace processes".
> >
> >
> > heres some more for you so that you can get a picture
> > thats more accurate than what you currently believe to
> > be the typical euro or whatever. i beg you, please READ
> > what i say now:
> >
> > oh yes, as things are, i would stab a knife in that guys back.
> > its what the current situation asks for.
> >
> > read it? ok, so i can get a little more into detail:
> >
> > but it doesnt end there. i just stabbed the guy in the back.
> > what about the next guy? and the one after him? whats the
> > best way to avoid a neverending "guys with bombs" supply.
> > are there, god forbid, several possible approaches? is
> > it worth a discussion? cause, it would be unfair to
> > the soldiers to make them do this all the time while
> > we dont do anything for it to ever change.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> Until you allow for the full range of responses,
> >>you are acting as an advocate for them.
> >
> >
> > theres someone not ready for the "full range of responses"
> > here, but it aint me.
> >
> >
> >>So, if you could get a "peace process" going while he was at the
> >>peak of his powers, it might have succeeded? What? Until when,
> >>the following thursday?
> >
> >
> > in the right tempo to draw all religious fanatic idiots
> > on all sides (repeat: ALL sides. that includes the moslems!
> > do you hear me!) with them.
> >
> >
> >>His greed and corruption would have
> >>eventually toppled him and your peace process.
> >
> >
> > youre confusing things here, its what actually got him
> > to participate. and boy did it help him. it turned him
> > from an internationally sought after outlaw into
> > a somewhat respected politician, probably making him
> > richer than he ever dreamt of in the process. you tell
> > me that guy wanted to go back into tunnel system terrorist
> > mode? never. man is too selfish and greedy for that.
> >
> >
> >>Do you really believe that hamas and hizbullah would not have
> >>formed if Arafat had made a deal with Rabin??
> >
> >
> > they had already formed. the difference was, arafat had them
> > under control and as long as he came home with results
> > from the peace process, he had the people in his back.
> >
> >
> >
> >>And why are they able to do this? Is it not the actions of the
> >>palestinians and the arabs?
> >
> >
> > why yes of course it is (see above).
> >
> >
> >> An american
> >>president who did not force them to accept peace in this scenario
> >>would be voted out or even impeached.
> >
> >
> > this is not where the conflict lies. the conflict, unfortunately,
> > lies in the religious aspects. i for one am pretty sure
> > that there would have been some sort of agreement
> > down there long ago, if only all this shitty land and
> > these shitty cities werent as "sacred" as they supposedly are.
> > as i said i dont have the ultimate solution. i just dont
> > believe you have it either, and comparing the track
> > record or the different approaches down there, im inclined
> > to believe that the brute force method, which worked other
> > times, doesnt seem to work this time.
> >
> > and that is an important discussion because it also
> > is a discussion about "how do you fight a fundamentalist
> > that doesnt fear death", about "is there a way to
> > get along with the islam", about "how do you go to
> > war with something as abstract as terror". yes, i do believe
> > this is the most important conflict to be solved and that
> > it could serve as role model for the same conflict were
> > having (or going to have) on a much bigger global scale.
> >
> > im worried about that. no wait, im sitting on my euro
> > ass waiting for everything to explode first, and then
> > ill think about it, cause thats how we arrogant euro
> > assholes are? right?
> >
> > ...
> >
> >
> >>You criticize Bush, but he blasts Israel every single time they
> >>respond to terrorism as we have. What hypocrisy!
> >
> >
> > yeah, it would be if i would criticize bush for not criticizing
> > israel. of course i nowhere said that. again, youre kindly
> > invited to come up with a quote.
> >
> > or wait, maybe you misunderstood this one:
> >
> >> the US dont reign over israel - theyll
> >>>do what THEY think is best for them.
> >
> >
> > with "they" i of course mean israel. my very point was
> > that bush can criticize them all he wants (and he does),
> > but they dont respond much to that, and thats i sad irony
> > that so much of the arabic hatred towards israel comes
> > from the overestimated power the US supposedly has on
> > israel.
> >
> >
> >>So we eliminate leaders that sponsor terrorism, and provide hiding
> >>places for them, we kill them, without mercy, wherever we can find,
> >>them, and we spread modernity and democracy, and we stay at
> >>it until we win.
> >
> >
> > yes thats your approach. it sometimes worked in the
> > past, sometimes it didnt. just like deescalation.
> > theres no perfect solution that automatically is the
> > best solution at all times.
> >
> >
> >> I believe this is the only solution and that negotiation
> >>is impossible with islamofascists.
> >
> >
> > and i say youre focusing on the wrong thing, this is just not
> > enough. getting rid of islamofascists (or fascists of
> > any kind, for that matter) is one thing. brute force seems
> > the best way for that. trying to avoid that such fascists
> > gain power on a regular basis in the future is, imo, the maybe
> > even more important goal. diplomacy, holding oneself to
> > the high standards we used to at least pretend to have, that
> > kind of stuff seems like the more promising way to go for
> > that (unless you want to tell me that you believe that the
> > very concept of diplomacy is at fault).
> >
> > the problem is that solution nr.1 is the direct opposite
> > of solution number nr.2. theres room for improvement here.
> > at least thats what i think, when i look at israel, or,
> > to use another example for a change, afghanistan, where
> > my selfish country does the dirty laundry for you without
> > you noticing because its not in the news.
> >
> >
> >>And what do you offer in place of this accursed religion?
> >>Darwin? Pacifism? An enlightened social contract between
> >>free moral people? Think these things will sell to the islamofascists?
> >>Me neither. These are weak ideas and subject to the opinions of
whoever
> >>offers them.
> >>Meaningless phrases full of intent, signifying nothing.
> >
> >
> > just like institutionalized religion, really. only difference
> > being that is has a much cleaner historical track record.
> > but im not about to even start hoping that there will be
> > a significant change here anytime soon, cause im not
> > religious about that either. this is a change that comes
> > over time, separation of religion and politics...
> > it seemed to get better in the second half of the
> > last century. currently it seems to get worse again.
> > oh well.
> >
> >
> >
> >>Perhaps they do not serve God at all. Perhaps at minimum they
> >>have perverted Islam? Your hatred of religion will not offer an
> >>alternative.
> >
> >
> > no hatred. a very cynical distance though, yes, definetly.
> > i did say a few words about personal belief on the one
> > hand on huge monotheistic religious institutions on the other hand and
> > whether
> > the latter is any good for this planet.
> > you can go back and read it if youre interested, but i guess
> > for now its enough. and now ill go to bed. all that
> > non-non-judgementalism has make me tired. maybe i secrectly am a
> > politically correct euro hypocrite after all, but im
> > doing my best ;-)
>
>Thank Aaron for this.
;o)http://www.izpitera.ru/lj/tetka.swf
"Mr Simplicity" <animix_spamless_@animas.net> wrote in message
news:42d7f51c@linux...
> Thank Aaron for this.
>
> ;o)
>
>Cron,
Here's a couple of comments from my friend whose brother
worked in the building. Sorry, he asked me to take out the names
and organizations.
-------
The plane was sent into the Pentagon around the same time, to
what, distract people from noticing the bombs going off in the
WTC? So why have the planes fly into them, if the US Govt. was
going to bring them down with bombs? The first WTC bombing was
from bombs, so it wouldn't have been suspicious to have bombs...so
why use the planes?
I recall talking to my brother later that day and he said he wasn't a
bit surprised. Another brother, XXXX, builds electronic safety
equipment & has strong ties to the FDNY, their Rescue squads and
knew several men lost on 9-11. There was a FDNY building collapse
expert who'd investigated the Murrah building collapse in OK working
the #7 site and was the one who warned the chiefs not to send
anyone into #7 because it looked so bad.
Apparently my info regarding a single 40,000 gal tank up high may
have been incorrect, but it is absolutely true that a lot of fuel was
stored up high and the FDNY opposed it to no avail. XXXXX's
organization, the NY branch of the XXX XXXX , no longer leases from the Port
Authority. They were disgusted with the PA's handling of the 1993 bombing
and were never completely satisifed with their #7 offices. Even though Larry
Silverstein is the leaseholder, it is still a PA property, and they want
nothing to do with them anymore.
Somewhere in my old files from my old computer I have images from
people who were <there> on 9-11; I rec'd these within days of the
event. Some were from firefighters, some from private citizens. I
seem to recall a photo of #7 pre-collapse where you can see the
horrific damage to the facade. I'll see if I can find it.
I want to throttle these conspiracy geeks whose political hatred for
good people has foisted such time-wasting energy on the public.
-------
He suggests reading this report to debunk the conspiracy theories
about 911.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html ?page=5&c=y
BTW, I do not believe that any of these structural engineers would
lie and corrupt themselves to protect the gummint. They would
be called on it in a heartbeat by all the other ones.
DC"erlilo" <erlilo@online.no> wrote:
>I'm seeing exactly the same pattern in American behavings in our modern
>times as it was before the first world war. American sivilians generally
>don't know what a war is on their own body
We do now. Remember 911? Pearl Harbor? Everyone knows
someone who lost someone in either Vietnam, Korea, or WWII.
We do not have a romantic picture of war. That is a myth.
>As far as I can understand in readings and seeing, the human feelings
>haven't changed much since then in north and south, after observe what's
>happening in the last two president votings.
This is simply not the case. I am a northerner who has lived and
travelled in the south and I can tell you that no one in the north
cares about the civil war, at least as far as having personal feelings
about it, and very few in the south do. We are united. I love the
south BTW, Memphis, Nashville, New Orleans. Wonderful places.
>So maybe it's really understandable with their "shoot
>first, then ask" menthality that's often showing up.
arrgghhh! How can you say that? If we had that mentality,
what would we have done after the first WTC bombing?
What would we have done in the first gulf war?
Why don't you recognize that it was european and UN corruption
and collusion with Saddam that prevented their supporting us, not
a more patient and less violent nature. Shoot first?? Do you
think that is supportable? c'mon Erling. You guys get your
view of america from movies, admit it.
>So, as far as I can understand, the only real Americans are the indians.
Who came from Siberia and Mongolia.
Guess the real americans are bears, huh?
DC"DC" <dcicchetti@urs2.net> wrote in message news:42d7f8d6@linux...
>
> Cron,
>
> Here's a couple of comments from my friend whose brother
> worked in the building. Sorry, he asked me to take out the names
> and organizations.
see this is whats so infuriating about taking peoples word as fact, rather
than looking at the evidence.
> -------
> The plane was sent into the Pentagon around the same time, to
> what, distract people from noticing the bombs going off in the
> WTC? So why have the planes fly into them, if the US Govt. was
> going to bring them down with bombs? The first WTC bombing was
> from bombs, so it wouldn't have been suspicious to have bombs...so
> why use the planes?
irrelevant
> I recall talking to my brother later that day and he said he wasn't a
> bit surprised. Another brother, XXXX, builds electronic safety
> equipment & has strong ties to the FDNY, their Rescue squads and
> knew several men lost on 9-11. There was a FDNY building collapse
> expert who'd investigated the Murrah building collapse in OK working
> the #7 site and was the one who warned the chiefs not to send
> anyone into #7 because it looked so bad.
interesting
> Apparently my info regarding a single 40,000 gal tank up high may
> have been incorrect, but it is absolutely true that a lot of fuel was
> stored up high and the FDNY opposed it to no avail. XXXXX's
> organization, the NY branch of the XXX XXXX , no longer leases from the
> Port
> Authority. They were disgusted with the PA's handling of the 1993 bombing
> and were never completely satisifed with their #7 offices. Even though
> Larry
> Silverstein is the leaseholder, it is still a PA property, and they want
> nothing to do with them anymore.
As far as I know there was a tank in the basement. Who stores fuel "up
high"?
> Somewhere in my old files from my old computer I have images from
> people who were <there> on 9-11; I rec'd these within days of the
> event. Some were from firefighters, some from private citizens. I
> seem to recall a photo of #7 pre-collapse where you can see the
> horrific damage to the facade. I'll see if I can find it.
that would be nice
> I want to throttle these conspiracy geeks whose political hatred for
> good people has foisted such time-wasting energy on the public.
haha...
> He suggests reading this report to debunk the conspiracy theories
> about 911.
>
> http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html ?page=5&c=y
I'm not interested in any other conspiracy theories regarding WTC. All I'm
saying is my EYES show me that the building came down, not due to random
structural damage, but in an intentional controlled demolition. You want
to know one of the reasons why the whitehouse hates Dan Rather so much, here
it is:
http://www.911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos/docs/wtc_7_cb s.mpg
> BTW, I do not believe that any of these structural engineers would
> lie and corrupt themselves to protect the gummint. They would
> be called on it in a heartbeat by all the other ones.
I'm disappointed DC. I have not been englightened. I already know almost
every detail about the official explainations.didn't take it personally, really, life's to short...especially as i
near the gumming my oatmeal years.
;o)
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 07:22:26 -0400, "justcron"
<justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote:
>heh heh... sorry fo the namecalling rick....
>
>"rick" <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:fuved1hkcn0qakq3m4gddnf05dlj7f1io3@4ax.com...
>> hey, i found out i'm probably a drunk and definitely a jackass...so i
>> guess i'm deeper than i thought.
>>
>> ;o)
>>
>> On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 23:12:05 -0500, Tony <tonyx@standingxhampton.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Justin,
>>>
>>>I think the problem with these topics is that everyone seems pr
|
|
|
|
| Re: Bomb attacks in London England [message #55840 is a reply to message #55830] |
Fri, 15 July 2005 11:12 |
DC
Messages: 722
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
up on the conversation.
I dont think there was pods on the planes, or bombs or remote control or any
of that crap. I just think theres some type of coverup and the only
smoking gun is WTC7, and the insider trading.
Here's a better video of it:
http://www.911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos/docs/wtc7_col lapse2.mpg
Who knows, maybe I'm wrong, but I dont really see too much structural damage
to the facade.>> What the hell do I care about the palestinian's point of view?
>I'll just remind you of what you said in another thread:
>> Making anyone the devil is stupid because the more dangerous
>> they are, the more you must truly understand them, as opposed
>> to making them a cardboard cutout of evil.
So, when someone breaks into your home to kill you, do you ask
about their point of view? Try to understand them? Theorize
about their resorting to murder because they have no other options?
Nah, you'd cap 'em wouldn't you?
Now, if they want to sit down and relax, tell you about their hard
life and unfair treatment, you may become a friend and help them
out, but if they are skulking around you with a gun, they deserve
to get toasted.
You re-contextualized my comment, which was about political
leaders. It's stupid to make Bush, Clinton, Schroeder, etc into
"evil" since the truth is always more complex than that. It is with
the palestinians too, but is irrelevant as long as they are bombing
innocent people.
DCwhere do you guys find the time and desire to bang out such long
posts? i gotta stop now...fingers tired.
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 10:20:10 -0400, "Jef Knight" <"Jef Knight"> wrote:
>I don't know if you cats
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anyone feel like we might have made some progress with the political thread? [message #55842 is a reply to message #55826] |
Fri, 15 July 2005 11:16 |
rick
Messages: 1976
Registered: February 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
18
> And in the Evening of the day which was Thursday, God saw that he
> had put in another good day's work.
>19
> And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness,
> which is tall and well-formed and pale of hue: and let us also make
> monkeys, which resembleth us not in any wise, but are short and
> ill-formed and hairy. And God added, Let man have dominion over the
> monkeys and the fowl of the air and every speices, endangered or
> otherwise.
>20
> So God created Man in His own image; tall and well-formed and pale
> of hue created He him, and nothing at all like the monkeys.
>21
> And God said, Behold I have given you every herb bearing seed, which
> is upon the face of the earth. But ye shalt not smoketh it, lest it
> giveth you ideas.
>22
> And to every beast of the earth and every fowl of the air I have
> given also every green herb, and to them it shall be for meat. But
> they shall be for you. And the Lord God your Host suggesteth that
> the flesh of cattle goeth well with that of the fin and the claw;
> thus shall Surf be wedded unto Turf.
>23
> And God saw everything he had made, and he saw that it was very
> good; and God said, It just goes to show Me what the private sector
> can accomplish. With a lot of fool regulations this could have taken
> billions of years.
>24
> And the evening of the fifth day, which had been the roughest day
> yet, God said, Thank me it's Friday. And God made the weekend.
>
>
> Chapter 2
>
>1
> Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all in five days,
> and all less than six thousand years ago; and if thou believest it
> not, in a sling shalt thou find thy hindermost quarters
>2
> Likewise God took the dust of the ground, and the slime of the Sea
> and the scum of the earth and formed Man therefrom; and breathed the
> breath of life right in his face. And he became Free to Choose.
>3
> And God made a Marketplace eastward of Eden, in which the man was
> free to play. And this was the Free Play of the Marketplace.
>4
> And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow four trees: the Tree
> of Life, and the Liberty Tree, and the Pursuit of Happiness Tree,
> and the Tree of the Knowledge of Sex.
>5
> And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, This is my Law, which is
> called the Law of Supply and Demand. Investeth thou in the trees of
> Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, and thou shalt make for
> thyself a fortune. For what fruit thou eatest not, that thou mayest
> sell, and with the seeds thereof expand thy operations.
>6
> But the fruit of the tree of the Knowledge of Sex, thou mayest no
> eat; nor mayest thou invest therein, nor profit thereby nor expand
> its operations; for that is a mighty waste of seed.
>7
> And the man was exceeding glad. But he asked the LORD God: Who then
> shall labor in this Marketplace? For I am no management, being tall
> and well-formed and pale of hue?
>8
> And the LORD God said unto himself, Verily, this kid hath the
> potential which is Executive.
>9
> And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field
> and every fowl of the air, and brought them unto Adam to labor for
> him. And they labored for peanuts.
>10
> Then Adam was again exceeding glad. But he spake once more unto the
> LORD God, saying, Lo, I am free to play in the Marketplace of the
> LORD, and have cheap labor in plenty; but to whom shall I sell my
> surplus fruit and realize a fortune thereby?
>11
> And the LORD God said unto himself, Verily, this
|
|
|
|
| Re: Bomb attacks in London England [message #55844 is a reply to message #55827] |
Fri, 15 July 2005 11:19 |
DC
Messages: 722
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Man and the Woman, from the
> neck even unto the ankles, so they were not ashamed.
>
>
> Chapter 3
>
>1
> Now the snake in the grass was more permissive than any beast of the
> field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Why
> has thou accepted this lowly and submissive role? For art thou not
> human, even as the man is human?
>2
> And the woman said unto the snake in the grass, the LORD God hath
> ordained that I am placed under the man, and must do whatsoever he
> telleth me to do; for is he not the Man?
>3
> But the snake in the grass laughed an cunning laugh, and said unto
> the woman, Is it not right and just that thou shouldst fulfill thy
> potential? For art thou not comely in thy flesh, even as the man is
> comely in his flesh?
>4
> And the woman said, Nay, I know not, for hath not the LORD God clad
> us decently, from the neck even unto the ankles; and forbidden that
> we eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Sex?
>5
&g
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anyone feel like we might have made some progress with the political thread? [message #55847 is a reply to message #55842] |
Fri, 15 July 2005 11:29 |
Deej [3]
Messages: 181
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>
>organization, the NY branch of the XXX XXXX , no longer leases from the Port
>Authority. They were disgusted with the PA's handling of the 1993 bombing
>and were never completely satisifed with their #7 offices. Even though Larry
>Silverstein is the leaseholder, it is still a PA property, and they want
>nothing to do with them anymore.
>
>Somewhere in my old files from my old computer I have images from
>people who were <there> on 9-11; I rec'd these within days of the
>event. Some were from firefighters, some from private citizens. I
>seem to recall a photo of #7 pre-collapse where you can see the
>horrific damage to the facade. I'll see if I can find it.
>
>I want to throttle these conspiracy geeks whose political hatred for
>good people has foisted such time-wasting energy on the public.
>-------
>
>
>He suggests reading this report to debunk the conspiracy theories
>about 911.
>
> http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html ?page=5&c=y
>
>BTW, I do not believe that any of these structural engineers would
>lie and corrupt themselves to protect the gummint. They would
>be called on it in a heartbeat by all the other ones.
>
>DCI've witnessed building demolitions. That does look familiar, but you're
just seeing one side of the very top floors. It's a pretty big stretch to
think that what this is showing is caused by any particular means of
structural failure. It's obviously a fialure. I didn't see this thing and
hadn't heard of Dan Rather postulating this as a theory, but knowing the
*Rather agenda*, it would not surprise me. I'm surprised CBS didn't have
Michael Moore as co-anchor.
"justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote in message
news:42d7fe1e$1@linux...
> Anyway, I appreciate you following up on the conversation.
>
> I dont think there was pods on the planes, or bombs or remote control or
any
> of that crap. I just think theres some type of coverup and the only
> smoking gun is WTC7, and the insider trading.
>
> Here's a better video of it:
> http://www.911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos/docs/wtc7_col lapse2.mpg
>
>
> Who knows, maybe I'm wrong, but I dont really see too much structural
damage
> to the facade.
>
>heres a decent pic of the facade of WTC7. It looks like about 1% of the
face is damaged.
I'm seriously open minded about this though.. If you can find a pic showing
serious damage to WTC7, I might change my mind, but so far this is all I can
find.
"Mr Simplicity" <animix_spamless_@animas.net> wrote in message
news:42d80363@linux...
> I've witnessed building demolitions. That does look familiar, but you're
> just seeing one side of the very top floors. It's a pretty big stretch to
> think that what this is showing is caused by any particular means of
> structural failure. It's obviously a fialure. I didn't see this thing and
> hadn't heard of Dan Rather postulating this as a theory, but knowing the
> *Rather agenda*, it would not surprise me. I'm surprised CBS didn't have
> Michael Moore as co-anchor.
heh heh... so typical.
> "justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote in message
> news:42d7fe1e$1@linux...
>> Anyway, I appreciate you following up on the conversation.
>>
>> I dont think there was pods on the planes, or bombs or remote control or
> any
>> of that crap. I just think theres some type of coverup and the only
>> smoking gun is WTC7, and the insider trading.
>>
>> Here's a better video of it:
>> http://www.911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos/docs/wtc7_col lapse2.mpg
>>
>>
>> Who knows, maybe I'm wrong, but I dont really see too much structural
> damage
>> to the facade.
>>
>>
>
>"rick" <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anyone feel like we might have made some progress with the political thread? [message #55859 is a reply to message #55847] |
Fri, 15 July 2005 11:52 |
rick
Messages: 1976
Registered: February 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>
neighborhood, and rule by terror. Iraqis are even rising up and
killing them now. They are also diehard baathists who want a
return to the good ole days of rape rooms and plastic shredders.
>The US has done more harm in this region, to the people and their
>country, than Saddam ever could have.
BULLSHIT. I guess you forgot about the entire familes, little
kids and all, buried in the 300,000 person mass graves.
I get it, you are a Saddam supporter. Ok, at least we know where
you are coming from now. When you tell egregious lies like the
one above, you lose all credibility.
>The US, in it's quest for
>middle-east domination vis-a-vis their oil supply, has turned a thriving
>people (albeit with nasty leadership) into an empoverished, toxic
>waistland.
This is so stupid and dishonest it isn't even worth rebutting.
It's too easy. OIl? We didn't steal their oil in 91 and we are not
doing so now. Liar.
>And for you who can't see the forest for the trees, let me make the
>fairly-fucking-clear observation that if you have a natural resourse
>that someone else wants and they decide to come and get it from you by
>force (the Chinese could do this) You will be labeled "insurgents" and
>you wives and children will suddenly become "enemy combatants".
Well, it seems that "foreigners" and "former baathists" otherwise
known as "corrupt" "murdering" "shitheads" who want to keep
the old regime in place, might qualify as "insurgents", especially
since they prefer the regime of the old murdering, raping, corrupt
leader to actual democracy.
Jef, you have very little ethics do you?
>Wake up you collective heads of knuckle. What the hell do you think's
>going on over there? It's people deffending their land, their homes and
>their lives from - Foreign Invaders! Fuck me, how dumb do you have to be
>not to get this not-to-fucking-subtle point? If the shoe were on the
>other foot you would react no differently.
Unfortunately it's all "not so fucking subtle" lies. The folks with the
homes, with the families and shops and businesses all had purple
fingers a few months ago, and have more character than "you"
will ever "dream" of having.
>One of you nazis, don't remember who, said in another thread that they
>thought it was "them" who were doing the bombing, not "us". Just as a
>reminder, the US has been bombing Iraq into a god-forsaken moonscape
>since '89. Over 500,000 children have died since then as a direct
>consequence of US military, oh-so-compassionate, action.
More lies. Those deaths are a result of your friend Saddam using
oil-for-food money to build palaces instead of food for his own
people. His trial is about to start, why don't you watch it and weep.
>And please knock it off with the old "well they bombed NYC so we're
>retaliating." chestnut. If you take the time to read the statements of
>Bin Laden you will see that he's not a nut at all.
Why am I not surprised that you like him as much as you like Saddam?
>The Arabs and the Jews were living peacefully side-by-side well into the
>20th century. This is fully backed up by historians, check it for
>yourself. It wasn't untill the US decided to create a client state in
>'48 that trouble began. Hey, stoopid, how would you feel if China
>decided it was going to give Native Americans an offical homeland and
>they decided to hack off a piece of New York or California and kick the
This is as inaccurate as it is simple minded.
>See where I'm going with this yet?
Yeah, stright to lefty-lobotomy land. And you are calling others idiots
and psychopaths... Amazing.
I am not going to respond in kind.
BTW, I do not support the use of nuclear arms in this war at this
point. Should your prediction about creating millions of new
terrorists by our actions come true, all bets are off. We will live
in freedom, not under the mullahs.
The funny thing is that in your future, you get killed anyway, for
some obscure offense against the koran, just like Theo Van Gogh
did.
You really ought to apologize to the group for the names you have
called people.
DC..........not partisan at all. This would imply something totally different
to my dislike of Dan Rather and Michael Moore......because they represent
themselves to be unbiased documentarians and they aren't. Plain and simple.
As much of a whacko as I think he is, if some edtorial commentator (which is
what Rather became before leaving in disgrace) came out with a photo op of
Ted Kennedy taking a roadside sobriety test, I'd doubt that too because I'd
have to consider the source before all else.
This is ample reason for me to dismiss the credibility of Rather/CBS. I
will, however, backtrack a bit here and admit that my first assumption was
that this story *originated* with CBS/Rather. If so, then I'll not remove
the plate of crow from the oven. If not, then I'll might put it on the table
and take a bite. Where did this story originate?
Regards,
DJ
"justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote in message
news:42d804a6@li
|
|
|
|
| Re: Bomb attacks in London England [message #55897 is a reply to message #55836] |
Fri, 15 July 2005 15:53 |
erlilo
Messages: 405
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
gt; > demonstration of your force.
>> >
>> > somewhere in there lies a fundamental, unsolvable problem.
>> > throw in a ticking clock (islamic countries getting the bomb
>> > sooner or later, whether you want it or not),
>> > and look again at the one guy that at the very least came
>> > close to peace down there - ooooh it was that deescalation
>> > dude. what a coincidence.
>> >
>> > im not saying its the ultimate solution. i find pretending
>> > to have absolute solutions (a very popular practice here,
>> > or so it seems) rather silly. im trying to have a civiliced
>> > discussion about the possible different paths to a solution,
>> > if there is one at all. i can ackownledge and talk about
>> > both approaches, you seem to struggle with that part
>> > and fall back into europe-is-so-whatever rants, which,
>> > btw, are no better than george-bush-is-pure-evil bullshit.
>> > its kindergarden. no thanks.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >>And what could you possibly dislike about the present Israeli
>> >>leadership? Draggin settlers out by the scruff of the neck,
>> >>responding to the worst terrorism with measured and rational
>> >>responses, and showing great restraint.
>> >
>> >
>> > yeah, as i said, they went back to 0, so i completely
>> > agree with you.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> See, this is the problem
>> >>with europe. In your arrogance, because of living in a land that
>> >>cannot envision war,
>> >
>> >
>> > blah...
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> you assume all violence is failure
>> >
>> >
>> > i repeatedly said the exact opposite but nevermind. rant on.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> and that
>> >>there must be a way to negotiate and finess this stuff.
>> >>Suppose there isn't?
>> >
>> >
>> > i did. its why im interested in this discussion.
>> > a childish "i know 100% percent im right" attitude
>> > isnt exactly helping, but at least in parts your
>> > post gets over the standard stereotype attitude. it seems to
>> > help that i repeatedly write about the things i dont
>> > think, even though it doesnt fit into your arrogant euro pacifist
> drawer:
>> >
>> >
>> > - i acknowledge the use of force as concept to end a conflict.
>> > it often is the most peaceful way to go.
>> > - i acknowledge the use of force as concept to end a conflict.
>> > it often is the most peaceful way to go.
>> > - i acknowledge the use of force as concept to end a conflict.
>> > it often is the most peaceful way to go.
>> > - i acknowledge the use of force as concept to end a conflict.
>> > it often is the most peaceful way to go.
>> >
>> > - i dont blindly believe that everything on this world can be
>> > negotiated
>> > - i dont blindly believe that everything on this world can be
>> > negotiated
>> > - i dont blindly believe that everything on this world can be
>> > negotiated
>> > - i dont blindly believe that everything on this world can be
>> > negotiated
>> >
>> > - im not here because of some anti-US agenda. i have family
>> > in the US, have been there many times and like it here.
>> > im only interested in a civiliced discussion about the
>> > several approaches (yes i dare to believe there are several
>> > approaches, because of the fact that theres a not too bad
>> > track record of deescalation in history)
>> > - im not here because of some anti-US agenda. i have family
>> > in the US, have been there many times and like it here.
>> > im only interested in a civiliced discussion about the
>> > several approaches (yes i dare to believe there are several
>> > approaches, because of the fact that theres a not too bad
>> > track record of deescalation in history)
>> > - im not here because of some anti-US agenda. i have family
>> > in the US, have been there many times and like it here.
>> > im only interested in a civiliced discussion about the
>> > several approaches (yes i dare to believe there are several
>> > approaches, because of the fact that theres a not too bad
>> > track record of deescalation in history)
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> You haven't convinced me that Rabin could
>> >>have pulled it off.
>> >
>> >
>> > i didnt expect to. heck, i dont know it myself.
>> >
>> >
>> >>Here's how the palestinians could have peace in a week:
>> >>
>> >>Go Ghandi on them. Sit down, inb the streets, renounce violence
> forever.
>> >>Ask the world for justice. They would get their demands in a week
>> >>or less, and if israel didn't like it, the american people would force
> it
>> >>on them by witholding any more aid.
>> >
>> >
>> > yes. too bad it wouldnt work because their religious
>> > fanatic idiots. theres a reason why i talked so much
>> > about the good timing of rabin. you gotta force religious
>> > idiots into their own good. too bad the timing wasnt quite
>> > right and a handful of steps at a time was still to
>> > extreme of a dialog for some extremist idiots. it
>> > wasnt even an islamic extremist idiot but a jewish one
>> > who ultimatively destroyed it all - but it could very
>> > well have been one.
>> >
>> >
>> >> Why do you euros never demand a DAMN THING from the
>> >>arabs and the palestinians, you hypocritical, arrogant fools?
>> >
>> >
>> > oh we never demand a damn thing from the arabs?
>> > thats funny. usually, especially where i live, its a tradition
>> > to not ask anything from israel (obvious reason being
>> > germanys history, were simply in no position to ask *anything*
>> > from them). maybe you should study the people you want
>> > to call hypocritical arrogant fools a little more before
>> > you go ahead with it.
>> >
>> > but ive had enough of the stereotype discussion. suit yourself
>> > and bathe in your stupid clichees if it makes you feel
>> > any better.
>> >
>> >
>> >>Why do you not rise up in horror and demand that these acts stop?
>> >>Answer this one Derek, if you can.
>> >
>> >
>> > oh, we do. we do. you just dont notice, cause you only
>> > notice what fits into the dumb black and white picture you
>> > have of us.
>> >
>> >
>> >>Instead you speak of "root causes" and criticize Bush. It's wrong,
>> >>and
>> >>foolish.
>> >
>> >
>> > i dont know what a "root cause" is. i know i definetly
>> > didnt come here to criticize bush. i think i said so about
>> > a dozen times.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >>I cannot support the euro position on this, because I NEVER hear
>> >>any demands for change, or criticism of moslems coming from
>> >>europe. Just of the jews and america. Until I see otherwise,
>> >>we must stay the course.
>> >
>> >
>> > see, one problem is that i can watch almost all US TV stations
>> > and buy, read and understand almost all US press. so i can
>> > regularly get an idea about whats going on in the US, and
>> > germans usually are very interested in that, cause, despite
>> > the current arguments, germany still looks up to the US.
>> > its a bit like with an older brother you currently dont talk
>> > much to, even though most germans probably would have a
>> > problem in admitting that.
>> >
>> > on the other hand, i can tell from all the BS here that most
>> > of you people have not the slightest idea about whats
>> > going in germany. you talk about us not criticizing
>> > muslims and not asking anything from those countries,
>> > yet just as we speak theres an election campaign with
>> > a debate about how to deal with turkey, and also
>> > how to deal with potential islamists in our country,
>> > with our current minister of internal security and
>> > the guy who wants his post totally going berserk and
>> > extremely to the right. and if theres a classic
>> > debate in germany if ive ever seen one, its the debate
>> > about whether its good that its a principal no-no to
>> > openly criticize anything thats even remotely related
>> > to anything jewish. there are extremists that have a problem
>> > with that (they call it a sick case of non-judmentalism...sounds
>> > familiar), i personally think its only adequate and should
>> > stay so for at least another 50 years.
>> >
>> > so i dont really know what to reply to such accusations.
>> > its so completely unreal, i dont know where to start.
>> >
>> >
>> >>See, any response to terrorism besides negotiation is either
>> >>"muscle flexing" or "cowboys" or "macho".
>> >
>> >
>> > muscle flexing is what i called it, getting bored by the
>> > "politics of force" terms i used the entire force.
>> > "cowboys" and "macho" is yet another projection of yours.
>> >
>> >
>> >> And you cannot
>> >>see how america might see europe as so arrogant and sefl-absorbed
>> >>that your views are not important to us?
>> >
>> >
>> > thats a bit besides the point because im sure that
>> > our views are not important to you either way. i do
>> > get an idea about how these stereotypes come up and
>> > especially, how they nicely grow, completely undisturbed
>> > by anything that resembles reality. you know squat about
>> > my country, period. its ridiculous. yet you believe
>> > you can judge my country, where i, who probably knows a
>> > couple hundred times more about YOUR country, make it
>> > a point to repeatedly stress how i do NOT want or feel
>> > entitled to judge or criticize it. its quite absurd, really.
>> >
>> >
>> >>I am not evening saying that war is the only answer, just that if
>> >>you have an ideology that precludes it, and you see it always as a
>> >>failure
>> >
>> >
>> > you know what, do me a favour here: please come up with
>> > the quote where i said that i always see it as a failure.
>> > either that or maybe you might want to actually stop it
>> > and apologize. its really getting boring to repeat
>> > and
>> > repeat and repeat and repeat it, with no effect.
>> > i have the feeling youre not talking to me but to
>> > some imaginary "The Europe Dude" that you made up for
>> > yourself to argue against.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> do not expect us to listen since you care more for your
>> >>ideology than you apparently care for our lives.
>> >
>> >
>> > i do care only about the lives. at several points i
>> > pointed out how i believe we all want the same (among
>> > other things i mentioned this as reason why i dont belong
>> > to the george-bush-is-evil-group). i do find the
>> > ideal way to this common goal open for debate.
>> > you obviously disagree on this one. its a little weird
>> > why you would enter a debate about it anyway then. is it
>> > just to spank my ideologic european ass?
>> >
>> >
>> >>"Peace process" what a f**king joke that term is. It is the words
>> >>that ideologues use to comfort themselves in the face of not only
>> >>failure, but the continuing loss of innocent lives.
>> >
>> >
>> > its a term rabin, a man that i admire, used himself,
>> > so ill leave the name calling to you. one could argue
>> > that the times where the terror was at an all time low
>> > saved lots of lives, but whatever.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >>Tell you what. You tell me that you would take a knife, and jam it
>> >>in the back of the next ghoul with a bomb, and you say thanks
>> >>to the soldiers who have saved so many lives, and we'll talk about
>> >>"peace processes".
>> >
>> >
>> > heres some more for you so that you can get a picture
>> > thats more accurate than what you currently believe to
>> > be the typical euro or whatever. i beg you, please READ
>> > what i say now:
>> >
>> > oh yes, as things are, i would stab a knife in that guys back.
>> > its what the current situation asks for.
>> >
>> > read it? ok, so i can get a little more into detail:
>> >
>> > but it doesnt end there. i just stabbed the guy in the back.
>> > what about the next guy? and the one after him? whats the
>> > best way to avoid a neverending "guys with bombs" supply.
>> > are there, god forbid, several possible approaches? is
>> > it worth a discussion? cause, it would be unfair to
>> > the soldiers to make them do this all the time while
>> > we dont do anything for it to ever change.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> Until you allow for the full range of responses,
>> >>you are acting as an advocate for them.
>> >
>> >
>> > theres someone not ready for the "full range of responses"
>> > here, but it aint me.
>> >
>> >
>> >>So, if you could get a "peace process" going while he was at the
>> >>peak of his powers, it might have succeeded? What? Until when,
>> >>the following thursday?
>> >
>> >
>> > in the right tempo to draw all religious fanatic idiots
>> > on all sides (repeat: ALL sides. that includes the moslems!
>> > do you hear me!) with them.
>> >
>> >
>> >>His greed and corruption would have
>> >>eventually toppled him and your peace process.
>> >
>> >
>> > youre confusing things here, its what actually got him
>> > to participate. and boy did it help him. it turned him
>> > from an internationally sought after outlaw into
>> > a somewhat respected politician, probably making him
>> > richer than he ever dreamt of in the process. you tell
>> > me that guy wanted to go back into tunnel system terrorist
>> > mode? never. man is too selfish and greedy for that.
>> >
>> >
>> >>Do you really believe that hamas and hizbullah would not have
>> >>formed if Arafat had made a deal with Rabin??
>> >
>> >
>> > they had already formed. the difference was, arafat had them
>> > under control and as long as he came home with results
>> > from the peace process, he had the people in his back.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >>And why are they able to do this? Is it not the actions of the
>> >>palestinians and the arabs?
>> >
>> >
>> > why yes of course it is (see above).
>> >
>> >
>> >> An american
>> >>president who did not force them to accept peace in this scenario
>> >>would be voted out or even impeached.
>> >
>> >
>> > this is not where the conflict lies. the conflict, unfortunately,
>> > lies in the religious aspects. i for one am pretty sure
>> > that there would have been some sort of agreement
>> > down there long ago, if only all this shitty land and
>> > these shitty cities werent as "sacred" as they supposedly are.
>> > as i said i dont have the ultimate solution. i just dont
>> > believe you have it either, and comparing the track
>> > record or the different approaches down there, im inclined
>> > to believe that the brute force method, which worked other
>> > times, doesnt seem to work this time.
>> >
>> > and that is an important discussion because it also
>> > is a discussion about "how do you fight a fundamentalist
>> > that doesnt fear death", about "is there a way to
>> > get along with the islam", about "how do you go to
>> > war with something as abstract as terror". yes, i do believe
>> > this is the most important conflict to be solved and that
>> > it could serve as role model for the same conflict were
>> > having (or going to have) on a much bigger global scale.
>> >
>> > im worried about that. no wait, im sitting on my euro
>> > ass waiting for everything to explode first, and then
>> > ill think about it, cause thats how we arrogant euro
>> > assholes are? right?
>> >
>> > ...
>> >
>> >
>> >>You criticize Bush, but he blasts Israel every single time they
>> >>respond to terrorism as we have. What hypocrisy!
>> >
>> >
>> > yeah, it would be if i would criticize bush for not criticizing
>> > israel. of course i nowhere said that. again, youre kindly
>> > invited to come up with a quote.
>> >
>> > or wait, maybe you misunderstood this one:
>> >
>> >> the US dont reign over israel - theyll
>> >>>do what THEY think is best for them.
>> >
>> >
>> > with "they" i of course mean israel. my very point was
>> > that bush can criticize them all he wants (and he does),
>> > but they dont respond much to that, and thats i sad irony
>> > that so much of the arabic hatred towards israel comes
>> > from the overestimated power the US supposedly has on
>> > israel.
>> >
>> >
>> >>So we eliminate leaders that sponsor terrorism, and provide hiding
>> >>places for them, we kill them, without mercy, wherever we can find,
>> >>them, and we spread modernity and democracy, and we stay at
>> >>it until we win.
>> >
>> >
>> > yes thats your approach. it sometimes worked in the
>> > past, sometimes it didnt. just like deescalation.
>> > theres no perfect solution that automatically is the
>> > best solution at all times.
>> >
>> >
>> >> I believe this is the only solution and that negotiation
>> >>is impossible with islamofascists.
>> >
>> >
>> > and i say youre focusing on the wrong thing, this is just not
>> > enough. getting rid of islamofascists (or fascists of
>> > any kind, for that matter) is one thing. brute force seems
>> > the best way for that. trying to avoid that such fascists
>> > gain power on a regular basis in the future is, imo, the maybe
>> > even more important goal. diplomacy, holding oneself to
>> > the high standards we used to at least pretend to have, that
>> > kind of stuff seems like the more promising way to go for
>> > that (unless you want to tell me that you believe that the
>> > very concept of diplomacy is at fault).
>> >
>> > the problem is that solution nr.1 is the direct opposite
>> > of solution number nr.2. theres room for improvement here.
>> > at least thats what i think, when i look at israel, or,
>> > to use another example for a change, afghanistan, where
>> > my selfish country does the dirty laundry for you without
>> > you noticing because its not in the news.
>> >
>> >
>> >>And what do you offer in place of this accursed religion?
>> >>Darwin? Pacifism? An enlightened social contract between
>> >>free moral people? Think these things will sell to the
>> >>islamofascists?
>> >>Me neither. These are weak ideas and subject to the opinions of
> whoever
>> >>offers them.
>> >>Meaningless phrases full of intent, signifying nothing.
>> >
>> >
>> > just like institutionalized religion, really. only difference
>> > being that is has a much cleaner historical track record.
>> > but im not about to even start hoping that there will be
>> > a significant change here anytime soon, cause im not
>> > religious about that either. this is a change that comes
>> > over time, separation of religion and politics...
>> > it seemed to get better in the second half of the
>> > last century. currently it seems to get worse again.
>> > oh well.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >>Perhaps they do not serve God at all. Perhaps at minimum they
>> >>have perverted Islam? Your hatred of religion will not offer an
>> >>alternative.
>> >
>> >
>> > no hatred. a very cynical distance though, yes, definetly.
>> > i did say a few words about personal belief on the one
>> > hand on huge monotheistic religious institutions on the other hand and
>> > whether
>> > the latter is any good for this planet.
>> > you can go back and read it if youre interested, but i guess
>> > for now its enough. and now ill go to bed. all that
>> > non-non-judgementalism has make me tired. maybe i secrectly am a
>> > politically correct euro hypocrite after all, but im
>> > doing my best ;-)
>>
>>
>
>Pleazzzzzzzzze Don, Jef is heating up in his writings here but again, take
away his heating, read his stuff with an OPEN mind, try to find out real
documents about his writings, not only what some of you American wish to
hear. Go out and study his facts, if it's true or not, before serving that
it's all lies. I think you will be really shocked to find out that Jefs
writings here is very correct. You see, I can stand behind him with the same
observations in documentations. But to fight with windmills can be very
frustated, so I think it's really understandable when Jef is heating up
here.
erlilo
"DC" <dcicchetti@urs2.net> skrev i en meddelelse news:42d808a6$1@linux...
>
> First, let me say that, you acting superior while posting a
> pack of lies is bad enough, but, your calling people names is
> unacceptable.
>
>
> "Jef Knight" <"Jef Knight"> wrote:
>
>>The idea that you should keep killing "them" before they kill you is is
>
>>pretty sociopathic I think.
>
> Thanks for the analysis. Sure it isn't bipolar, or perhaps paranoid
> schizophrenic, or maybe just ADD?
>
> Them is the enemy, not the shopkeepers. The suicide bombers,
> the foreign terrorists, the state sponsors of terrorism. They are
> knowable, and they are killable.
>
>
>>Please remember a few important things about
>>the "war".
>
> Oh, this will be good. I know it will be real informed with "so"
> "many" "ironic" "quotes"....
>
>
>>Let's start with "them". The dehumanizing of others is an important
>>diagnostic point in the evalutation of pathological personality
>>disorders. Underlying this is the idea that one is not harming a
>>"person" but a "thing" or "non-person". It allows the ego to remain
>>intact while performing otherwise unthinkable actions.
>
>
> You obviously do not know any soldiers. Despite understanding
> that the ghouls must be killed, and understanding that they are
> indeed, ghouls, our soldiers pay a terrible price for doing the
> unthinkable, precisely because they are not able to completely
> depersonalize them. Only to have you call them pathological...
>
> Pathetic. And of course, the actions of the ghouls are not
> pathogical in Jef-land at all, They are understandable, maybe even
> noble! Maybe they are even like the minutmen!
>
>
>>But who are "them"?. For the most part they are normal, everyday
>>famillies like yours and mine. Shop keepers, TV reparimen, gas station
>>attendants, secretaries....who only want to live freely, in peace,
>
> BWAA HAHH AHHA HHHHAAAA!
>
> Oh that's good. Do you screenwrite for Michael Moore?
>
> They are foreigners who come into places like Fallujah and kill
> anyone who looks like they may desire freedom, take over the
> neighborhood, and rule by terror. Iraqis are even rising up and
> killing them now. They are also diehard baathists who want a
> return to the good ole days of rape rooms and plastic shredders.
>
>
>>The US has done more harm in this region, to the people and their
>>country, than Saddam ever could have.
>
> BULLSHIT. I guess you forgot about the entire familes, little
> kids and all, buried in the 300,000 person mass graves.
>
> I get it, you are a Saddam supporter. Ok, at least we know where
> you are coming from now. When you tell egregious lies like the
> one above, you lose all credibility.
>
>>The US, in it's quest for
>>middle-east domination vis-a-vis their oil supply, has turned a thriving
>
>>people (albeit with nasty leadership) into an empoverished, toxic
>>waistland.
>
> This is so stupid and dishonest it isn't even worth rebutting.
>
> It's too easy. OIl? We didn't steal their oil in 91 and we are not
> doing so now. Liar.
>
>
>>And for you who can't see the forest for the trees, let me make the
>>fairly-fucking-clear observation that if you have a natural resourse
>>that someone else wants and they decide to come and get it from you by
>>force (the Chinese could do this) You will be labeled "insurgents" and
>>you wives and children will suddenly become "enemy combatants".
>
>
> Well, it seems that "foreigners" and "former baathists" otherwise
> known as "corrupt" "murdering" "shitheads" who want to keep
> the old regime in place, might qualify as "insurgents", especially
> since they prefer the regime of the old murdering, raping, corrupt
> leader to actual democracy.
>
> Jef, you have very little ethics do you?
>
>
>>Wake up you collective heads of knuckle. What the hell do you think's
>>going on over there? It's people deffending their land, their homes and
>
>>their lives from - Foreign Invaders! Fuck me, how dumb do you have to be
>
>>not to get this not-to-fucking-subtle point? If the shoe were on the
>>other foot you would react no differently.
>
>
> Unfortunately it's all "not so fucking subtle" lies. The folks with the
> homes, with the families and shops and businesses all had purple
> fingers a few months ago, and have more character than "you"
> will ever "dream" of having.
>
>
>>One of you nazis, don't remember who, said in another thread that they
>>thought it was "them" who were doing the bombing, not "us". Just as a
>>reminder, the US has been bombing Iraq into a god-forsaken moonscape
>>since '89. Over 500,000 children have died since then as a direct
>>consequence of US military, oh-so-compassionate, action.
>
>
> More lies. Those deaths are a result of your friend Saddam using
> oil-for-food money to build palaces instead of food for his own
> people. His trial is about to start, why don't you watch it and weep.
>
>
>
>>And please knock it off with the old "well they bombed NYC so we're
>>retaliating." chestnut. If you take the time to read the statements of
>>Bin Laden you will see that he's not a nut at all.
>
>
> Why am I not surprised that you like him as much as you like Saddam?
>
>
>
>>The Arabs and the Jews were living peacefully side-by-side well into the
>
>>20th century. This is fully backed up by historians, check it for
>>yourself. It wasn't untill the US decided to create a client state in
>>'48 that trouble began. Hey, stoopid, how would you feel if China
>>decided it was going to give Native Americans an offical homeland and
>>they decided to hack off a piece of New York or California and kick the
>
>
>
> This is as inaccurate as it is simple minded.
>
>
>>See where I'm going with this yet?
>
> Yeah, stright to lefty-lobotomy land. And you are calling others idiots
> and psychopaths... Amazing.
>
> I am not going to respond in kind.
>
>
> BTW, I do not support the use of nuclear arms in this war at this
> point. Should your prediction about creating millions of new
> terrorists by our actions come true, all bets are off. We will live
> in freedom, not under the mullahs.
>
> The funny thing is that in your future, you get killed anyway, for
> some obscure offense against the koran, just like Theo Van Gogh
> did.
>
> You really ought to apologize to the group for the names you have
> called people.
>
> DCAs said about your writing to Jef in "I'm ready to talk nukes": It can be
really frustated to fight against windmills;-)
Take care
Erling
"DC" <dcicchetti@urs2.net> skrev i en meddelelse news:42d7fc82$1@linux...
>
> "erlilo" <erlilo@online.no> wrote:
>
>>I'm seeing exactly the same pattern in American behavings in our modern
>
>>times as it was before the first world war. American sivilians generally
>
>>don't know what a war is on their own body
>
>
> We do now. Remember 911? Pearl Harbor? Everyone knows
> someone who lost someone in either Vietnam, Korea, or WWII.
>
> We do not have a romantic picture of war. That is a myth.
>
>
>>As far as I can understand in readings and seeing, the human feelings
>>haven't changed much since then in north and south, after observe what's
>
>>happening in the last two president votings.
>
> This is simply not the case. I am a northerner who has lived and
> travelled in the south and I can tell you that no one in the north
> cares about th
|
|
|
|
| Re: Bomb attacks in London England [message #55899 is a reply to message #55840] |
Fri, 15 July 2005 16:35 |
erlilo
Messages: 405
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
t;One of you nazis, don't remember who, said in another thread that they
>>>thought it was "them" who were doing the bombing, not "us". Just as a
>>>reminder, the US has been bombing Iraq into a god-forsaken moonscape
>>>since '89. Over 500,000 children have died since then as a direct
>>>consequence of US military, oh-so-compassionate, action.
>>
>>
>> More lies. Those deaths are a result of your friend Saddam using
>> oil-for-food money to build palaces instead of food for his own
>> people. His trial is about to start, why don't you watch it and weep.
>>
>>
>>
>>>And please knock it off with the old "well they bombed NYC so we're
>>>retaliating." chestnut. If you take the time to read the statements of
>>>Bin Laden you will see that he's not a nut at all.
>>
>>
>> Why am I not surprised that you like him as much as you like Saddam?
>>
>>
>>
>>>The Arabs and the Jews were living peacefully side-by-side well into the
>>
>>>20th century. This is fully backed up by historians, check it for
>>>yourself. It wasn't untill the US decided to create a client state in
>>>'48 that trouble began. Hey, stoopid, how would you feel if China
>>>decided it was going to give Native Americans an offical homeland and
>>>they decided to hack off a piece of New York or California and kick the
>>
>>
>>
>> This is as inaccurate as it is simple minded.
>>
>>
>>>See where I'm going with this yet?
>>
>> Yeah, stright to lefty-lobotomy land. And you are calling others idiots
>> and psychopaths... Amazing.
>>
>> I am not going to respond in kind.
>>
>>
>> BTW, I do not support the use of nuclear arms in this war at this
>> point. Should your prediction about creating millions of new
>> terrorists by our actions come true, all bets are off. We will live
>> in freedom, not under the mullahs.
>>
>> The funny thing is that in your future, you get killed anyway, for
>> some obscure offense against the koran, just like Theo Van Gogh
>> did.
>>
>> You really ought to apologize to the group for the names
|
|
|
|
| Re: Bomb attacks in London England [message #55903 is a reply to message #55899] |
Fri, 15 July 2005 16:46 |
DC
Messages: 722
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ne.no> wrote in message news:42d7c519@linux...
> >> Derek, I appreciate your writings here. It saying much about where the
> >> problems are in my thoughts too.
> >>
> >> I think we Europeans knows that "being big" allways have made problems
> > when
> >> trying to be bigger than
> >> big:-) Big with weapons in hands are often showing up these weapons as
> > their
> >> only "brain" when conflicts are coming.
> >>
> >> Our worlds problems, that started the first worldwar, was already
coming
> > in
> >> 1864, when Bismarck made the big, German nation under the hegemony of
> >> Preussen. It was the oldnordic traditions with the God Wotan (or Odin
in
> >> Norwegian) that then again was showing up in the people. It's showing
> >> well
> >> in "To an unknown God" from 1864, from the pen of Nietzsche, one of
the
> >> greatest German philosopher and writers in those times. The feeling of
> > being
> >> big was setting the standard of human thinking hundred of years back in
> > time
> >> in those days, maybe thousands. So the next 50 years was showing up
with
> >> more and more problems, first of all in the southern region of Europe,
in
> >> Austria and Hungary, where their minorities was suppressed (as the
german
> >> minority in Austria, after the first worldwars ending, where Hitler was
> > born
> >> and grown up, knowing the suppression on his own body). So the fatal
shot
> > in
> >> Sarajevo from a Serbian, that killed the Habsburger prince 28. June
1914,
> >> was just the drop that started it all in "old" modern times.
> >> I'm seeing exactly the same pattern in American behavings in our modern
> >> times as it was before the first world war. American sivilians
generally
> >> don't know what a war is on their own body without their own civil war
> > that
> >> was overupheating from the south with South Carolina in front, when
> > Abraham
> >> Lincoln was being President in 1860. The American nation was splitted
in
> > two
> >> in those days with 11 states in the southern part and the rest in the
> >> norhern part, as far as I can remember in my readings about America.
But
> >> I
> >> think most of the Americans are knowing these badly story very well.
> >> As far as I can understand in readings and seeing, the human feelings
> >> haven't changed much since then in north and south, after observe
what's
> >> happening in the last two president votings.
> >> As Dejj wrote about the observations to the ind
|
|
|
|
| Re: Bomb attacks in London England [message #55908 is a reply to message #55897] |
Fri, 15 July 2005 17:27 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > so, yes, i do acknowledge that both roads can lead to success.
> >> > do you? it appears you dont, so whos the dogmatic type here?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>No it doesn't, or it would have worked with Hussein, Kim Il Sung,
> >> >>Hitler and the Branch Davidians. You are not allowing for insanity
> >> >>and evil in the world and you are assuming that a rational person's
> >> >>version of a more attractive situation will always be accepted.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > from a palaestinian point of view, israel is the aggressor
> >> > that took their land. they dont have the military power,
> >> > so they go the terror route. being the frakkingeuropacifistidiotdude
> > that
> >> > i am, i despise that
> >> > just as much, so id prefer it if you dont switch between
> >> > calling me a blind pacifist one moment and then a guy
> >> > that doesnt criticize palaestina (and thus somewhat supports the use
of
> >> > terror),
> >> > whatever fits the best.
> >> >
> >> > from their point of view, theyre actually doing exactly
> >> > the same thing - use brute force. they dont have planes,
> >> > so they use suicide bombers. if you were on their side,
> >> > its what you would recommend. and if the enemy threatened to
> >> > use more power, youd recommend that the enemy gets a
> >> > demonstration of your force.
> >> >
> >> > somewhere in there lies a fundamental, unsolvable problem.
> >> > throw in a ticking clock (islamic countries getting the bomb
> >> > sooner or later, whether you want it or not),
> >> > and look again at the one guy that at the very least came
> >> > close to peace down there - ooooh it was that deescalation
> >> > dude. what a coincidence.
> >> >
> >> > im not saying its the ultimate solution. i find pretending
> >> > to have absolute solutions (a very popular practice here,
> >> > or so it seems) rather silly. im trying to have a civiliced
> >> > discussion about the possible different paths to a solution,
> >> > if there is one at all. i can ackownledge and talk about
> >> > both approaches, you seem to struggle with that part
> >> > and fall back into europe-is-so-whatever rants, which,
> >> > btw, are no better than george-bush-is-pure-evil bullshit.
> >> > its kindergarden. no thanks.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>And what could you possibly dislike about the present Israeli
> >> >>leadership? Draggin settlers out by the scruff of the neck,
> >> >>responding to the worst terrorism with measured and rational
> >> >>responses, and showing great restraint.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > yeah, as i said, they went back to 0, so i completely
> >> > agree with you.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> See, this is the problem
> >> >>with europe. In your arrogance, because of living in a land that
> >> >>cannot envision war,
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > blah...
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> you assume all violence is failure
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > i repeatedly said the exact opposite but nevermind. rant on.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> and that
> >> >>there must be a way to negotiate and finess this stuff.
> >> >>Suppose there isn't?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > i did. its why im interested in this discussion.
> >> > a childish "i know 100% percent im right" attitude
> >> > isnt exactly helping, but at least in parts your
> >> > post gets over the standard stereotype attitude. it seems to
> >> > help that i repeatedly write about the things i dont
> >> > think, even though it doesnt fit into your arrogant euro pacifist
> > drawer:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > - i acknowledge the use of force as concept to end a conflict.
> >> > it often is the most peaceful way to go.
> >> > - i acknowledge the use of force as concept to end a conflict.
> >> > it often is the most peaceful way to go.
> >> > - i acknowledge the use of force as concept to end a conflict.
> >> > it often is the most peaceful way to go.
> >> > - i acknowledge the use of force as concept to end a conflict.
> >> > it often is the most peaceful way to go.
> >> >
> >> > - i dont blindly believe that everything on this world can be
> >> > negotiated
> >> > - i dont blindly believe that everything on this world can be
> >> > negotiated
> >> > - i dont blindly believe that everything on this world can be
> >> > negotiated
> >> > - i dont blindly believe that everything on this world can be
> >> > negotiated
> >> >
> >> > - im not here because of some anti-US agenda. i have family
> >> > in the US, have been there many times and like it here.
> >> > im only interested in a civiliced discussion about the
> >> > several approaches (yes i dare to believe there are several
> >> > approaches, because of the fact that theres a not too bad
> >> > track record of deescalation in history)
> >> > - im not here because of some anti-US agenda. i have family
> >> > in the US, have been there many times and like it here.
> >> > im only interested in a civiliced discussion about the
> >> > several approaches (yes i dare to believe there are several
> >> > approaches, because of the fact that theres a not too bad
> >> > track record of deescalation in history)
> >> > - im not here because of some anti-US agenda. i have family
> >> > in the US, have been there many times and like it here.
> >> > im only interested in a civiliced discussion about the
> >> > several approaches (yes i dare to believe there are several
> >> > approaches, because of the fact that theres a not too bad
> >> > track record of deescalation in history)
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> You haven't convinced me that Rabin could
> >> >>have pulled it off.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > i didnt expect to. heck, i dont know it myself.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>Here's how the palestinians could have peace in a week:
> >> >>
> >> >>Go Ghandi on them. Sit down, inb the streets, renounce violence
> > forever.
> >> >>Ask the world for justice. They would get their demands in a week
> >> >>or less, and if israel didn't like it, the american people would
force
> > it
> >> >>on them by witholding any more aid.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > yes. too bad it wouldnt work because their religious
> >> > fanatic idiots. theres a reason why i talked so much
> >> > about the good timing of rabin. you gotta force religious
> >> > idiots into their own good. too bad the timing wasnt quite
> >> > right and a handful of steps at a time was still to
> >> > extreme of a dialog for some extremist idiots. it
> >> > wasnt even an islamic extremist idiot but a jewish one
> >> > who ultimatively destroyed it all - but it could very
> >> > well have been one.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> Why do you euros never demand a DAMN THING from the
> >> >>arabs and the palestinians, you hypocritical, arrogant fools?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > oh we never demand a damn thing from the arabs?
> >> > thats funny. usually, especially where i live, its a tradition
> >> > to not ask anything from israel (obvious reason being
> >> > germanys history, were simply in no position to ask *anything*
> >> > from them). maybe you should study the people you want
> >> > to call hypocritical arrogant fools a little more before
> >> > you go ahead with it.
> >> >
> >> > but ive had enough of the stereotype discussion. suit yourself
> >> > and bathe in your stupid clichees if it makes you feel
> >> > any better.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>Why do you not rise up in horror and demand that these acts stop?
> >> >>Answer this one Derek, if you can.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > oh, we do. we do. you just dont notice, cause you only
> >> > notice what fits into the dumb black and white picture you
> >> > have of us.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>Instead you speak of "root causes" and criticize Bush. It's wrong,
> >> >>and
> >> >>foolish.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > i dont know what a "root cause" is. i know i definetly
> >> > didnt come here to criticize bush. i think i said so about
> >> > a dozen times.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>I cannot support the euro position on this, because I NEVER hear
> >> >>any demands for change, or criticism of moslems coming from
> >> >>europe. Just of the jews and america. Until I see otherwise,
> >> >>we must stay the course.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > see, one problem is that i can watch almost all US TV stations
> >> > and buy, read and understand almost all US press. so i can
> >> > regularly get an idea about whats going on in the US, and
> >> > germans usually are very interested in that, cause, despite
> >> > the current arguments, germany still looks up to the US.
> >> > its a bit like with an older brother you currently dont talk
> >> > much to, even though most germans probably would have a
> >> > problem in admitting that.
> >> >
> >> > on the other hand, i can tell from all the BS here that most
> >> > of you people have not the slightest idea about whats
> >> > going in germany. you talk about us not criticizing
> >> > muslims and not asking anything from those countries,
> >> > yet just as we speak theres an election campaign with
> >> > a debate about how to deal with turkey, and also
> >> > how to deal with potential islamists in our country,
> >> > with our current minister of internal security and
> >> > the guy who wants his post totally going berserk and
> >> > extremely to the right. and if theres a classic
> >> > debate in germany if ive ever seen one, its the debate
> >> > about whether its good that its a principal no-no to
> >> > openly criticize anything thats even remotely related
> >> > to anything jewish. there are extremists that have a problem
> >> > with that (they call it a sick case of non-judmentalism...sounds
> >> > familiar), i personally think its only adequate and should
> >> > stay so for at least another 50 years.
> >> >
> >> > so i dont really know what to reply to such accusations.
> >> > its so completely unreal, i dont know where to start.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>See, any response to terrorism besides negotiation is either
> >> >>"muscle flexing" or "cowboys" or "macho".
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > muscle flexing is what i called it, getting bored by the
> >> > "politics of force" terms i used the entire force.
> >> > "cowboys" and "macho" is yet another projection of yours.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> And you cannot
> >> >>see how america might see europe as so arrogant and sefl-absorbed
> >> >>that your views are not important to us?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > thats a bit besides the point because im sure that
> >> > our views are not important to you either way. i do
> >> > get an idea about how these stereotypes come up and
> >> > especially, how they nicely grow, completely undisturbed
> >> > by anything that resembles reality. you know squat about
> >> > my country, period. its ridiculous. yet you believe
> >> > you can judge my country, where i, who probably knows a
> >> > couple hundred times more about YOUR country, make it
> >> > a point to repeatedly stress how i do NOT want or feel
> >> > entitled to judge or criticize it. its quite absurd, really.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>I am not evening saying that war is the only answer, just that if
> >> >>you have an ideology that precludes it, and you see it always as a
> >> >>failure
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > you know what, do me a favour here: please come up with
> >> > the quote where i said that i always see it as a failure.
> >> > either that or maybe you might want to actually stop it
> >> > and apologize. its really getting boring to repeat
> >> > and
> >> > repeat and repeat and repeat it, with no effect.
> >> > i have the feeling youre not talking to me but to
> >> > some imaginary "The Europe Dude" that you made up for
> >> > yourself to argue against.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> do not expect us to listen since you care more for your
> >> >>ideology than you apparently care for our lives.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > i do care only about the lives. at several points i
> >> > pointed out how i believe we all want the same (among
> >> > other things i mentioned this as reason why i dont belong
> >> > to the george-bush-is-evil-group). i do find the
> >> > ideal way to this common goal open for debate.
> >> > you obviously disagree on this one. its a little weird
> >> > why you would enter a debate about it anyway then. is it
> >> > just to spank my ideologic european ass?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>"Peace process" what a f**king joke that term is. It is the words
> >> >>that ideologues use to comfort themselves in the face of not only
> >> >>failure, but the continuing loss of innocent lives.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > its a term rabin, a man that i admire, used himself,
> >> > so ill leave the name calling to you. one could argue
> >> > that the times where the terror was at an all time low
> >> > saved lots of lives, but whatever.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>Tell you what. You tell me that you would take a knife, and jam it
> >> >>in the back of the next ghoul with a bomb, and you say thanks
> >> >>to the soldiers who have saved so many lives, and we'll talk about
> >> >>"peace processes".
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > heres some more for you so that you can get a picture
> >> > thats more accurate than what you currently believe to
> >> > be the typical euro or whatever. i beg you, please READ
> >> > what i say now:
> >> >
> >> > oh yes, as things are, i would stab a knife in that guys back.
> >> > its what the current situation asks for.
> >> >
> >> > read it? ok, so i can get a little more into detail:
> >> >
> >> > but it doesnt end there. i just stabbed the guy in the back.
> >> > what about the next guy? and the one after him? whats the
> >> > best way to avoid a neverending "guys with bombs" supply.
> >> > are there, god forbid, several possible approaches? is
> >> > it worth a discussion? cause, it would be unfair to
> >> > the soldiers to make them do this all the time while
> >> > we dont do anything for it to ever change.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> Until you allow for the full range of responses,
> >> >>you are acting as an advocate for them.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > theres someone not ready for the "full range of responses"
> >> > here, but it aint me.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>So, if you could get a "peace process" going while he was at the
> >> >>peak of his powers, it might have succeeded? What? Until when,
> >> >>the following thursday?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > in the right tempo to draw all religious fanatic idiots
> >> > on all sides (repeat: ALL sides. that includes the moslems!
> >> > do you hear me!) with them.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>His greed and corruption would have
> >> >>eventually toppled him and your peace process.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > youre confusing things here, its what actually got him
> >> > to participate. and boy did it help him. it turned him
> >> > from an internationally sought after outlaw into
> >> > a somewhat respected politician, probably making him
> >> > richer than he ever dreamt of in the process. you tell
> >> > me that guy wanted to go back into tunnel system terrorist
> >> > mode? never. man is too selfish and greedy for that.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>Do you really believe that hamas and hizbullah would not have
> >> >>formed if Arafat had made a deal with Rabin??
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > they had already formed. the difference was, arafat had them
> >> > under control and as long as he came home with results
> >> > from the peace process, he had the people in his back.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>And why are they able to do this? Is it not the actions of the
> >> >>palestinians and the arabs?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > why yes of course it is (see above).
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> An american
> >> >>president who did not force them to accept peace in this scenario
> >> >>would be voted out or even impeached.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > this is not where the conflict lies. the conflict, unfortunately,
> >> > lies in the religious aspects. i for one am pretty sure
> >> > that there would have been some sort of agreement
> >> > down there long ago, if only all this shitty land and
> >> > these shitty cities werent as "sacred" as they supposedly are.
> >> > as i said i dont have the ultimate solution. i just dont
> >> > believe you have it either, and comparing the track
> >> > record or the different approaches down there, im inclined
> >> > to believe that the brute force method, which worked other
> >> > times, doesnt seem to work this time.
> >> >
> >> > and that is an important discussion because it also
> >> > is a discussion about "how do you fight a fundamentalist
> >> > that doesnt fear death", about "is there a way to
> >> > get along with the islam", about "how do you go to
> >> > war with something as abstract as terror". yes, i do believe
> >> > this is the most important conflict to be solved and that
> >> > it could serve as role model for the same conflict were
> >> > having (or going to have) on a much bigger global scale.
> >> >
> >> > im worried about that. no wait, im sitting on my euro
> >> > ass waiting for everything to explode first, and then
> >> > ill think about it, cause thats how we arrogant euro
> >> > assholes are? right?
> >> >
> >> > ...
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>You criticize Bush, but he blasts Israel every single time they
> >> >>respond to terrorism as we have. What hypocrisy!
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > yeah, it would be if i would criticize bush for not criticizing
> >> > israel. of course i nowhere said that. again, youre kindly
> >> > invited to come up with a quote.
> >> >
> >> > or wait, maybe you misunderstood this one:
> >> >
> >> >> the US dont reign over israel - theyll
> >> >>>do what THEY think is best for them.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > with "they" i of course mean israel. my very point was
> >> > that bush can criticize them all he wants (and he does),
> >> > but they dont respond much to that, and thats i sad irony
> >> > that so much of the arabic hatred towards israel comes
> >> > from the overestimated power the US supposedly has on
> >> > israel.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>So we eliminate leaders that sponsor terrorism, and provide hiding
> >> >>places for them, we kill them, without mercy, wherever we can find,
> >> >>them, and we spread modernity and democracy, and we stay at
> >> >>it until we win.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > yes thats your approach. it sometimes worked in the
> >> > past, sometimes it didnt. just like deescalation.
> >> > theres no perfect solution that automatically is the
> >> > best solution at all times.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> I believe this is the only solution and that negotiation
> >> >>is impossible with islamofascists.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > and i say youre focusing on the wrong thing, this is just not
> >> > enough. getting rid of islamofascists (or fascists of
> >> > any kind, for that matter) is one thing. brute force seems
> >> > the best way for that. trying to avoid that such fascists
> >> > gain power on a regular basis in the future is, imo, the maybe
> >> > even more important goal. diplomacy, holding oneself to
> >> > the high standards we used to at least pretend to have, that
> >> > kind of stuff seems like the more promising way to go for
> >> > that (unless you want to tell me that you believe that the
> >> > very concept of diplomacy is at fault).
> >> >
> >> > the problem is that solution nr.1 is the direct opposite
> >> > of solution number nr.2. theres room for improvement here.
> >> > at least thats what i think, when i look at israel, or,
> >> > to use another example for a change, afghanistan, where
> >> > my selfish country does the dirty laundry for you without
> >> > you noticing because its not in the news.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>And what do you offer in place of this accursed religion?
> >> >>Darwin? Pacifism? An enlightened social contract between
> >> >>free moral people? Think these things will sell to the
> >> >>islamofascists?
> >> >>Me neither. These are weak ideas and subject to the opinions of
> > whoever
> >> >>offers them.
> >> >>Meaningless phrases full of intent, signifying nothing.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > just like institutionalized religion, really. only difference
> >> > being that is has a much cleaner historical track record.
> >> > but im not about to even start hoping that there will be
> >> > a significant change here anytime soon, cause im not
> >> > religious about that either. this is a change that comes
> >> > over time, separation of religion and politics...
> >> > it seemed to get better in the second half of the
> >> > last century. currently it seems to get worse again.
> >> > oh well.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>Perhaps they do not serve God at all. Perhaps at minimum they
> >> >>have perverted Islam? Your hatred of religion will not offer an
> >> >>alternative.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > no hatred. a very cynical distance though, yes, definetly.
> >> > i did say a few words about personal belief on the one
> >> > hand on huge monotheistic religious institutions on the other hand
and
> >> > whether
> >> > the latter is any good for this planet.
> >> > you can go back and read it if youre interested, but i guess
> >> > for now its enough. and now ill go to bed. all that
> >> > non-non-judgementalism has make me tired. maybe i secrectly am a
> >> > politically correct euro hypocrite after all, but im
> >> > doing my best ;-)
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>Got a low opinion of the ACLU, Deej? Civil liberties not your cup o' tea?
Cheers,
-Jamie K
http://www.JamieKrutz.com
DJ wrote:
> ...............the ACLU will probably sue the horse.
>
> "DC" <dcicchetti@urs2.net> wrote in message news:42d844cd$1@linux...
>
>> http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002382718_h orse15m.html
>>
>>
>
>
>Liberties with horses is more like it...
heh heh
DC
Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
>Got a low opinion of the ACLU, Deej? Civil liberties not your cup o' tea?
>
>Cheers,
> -Jamie K
> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>DJ wrote:
>
>> ...............the ACLU will probably sue the horse.
>>
>> "DC" <dcicchetti@urs2.net> wrote in message news:42d844cd$1@linux...
>>
>>> http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002382718_h orse15m.html
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote:
>"ouch"...only if your a duck, chicken or a rabbit. after all, they
>didn't say the guy was hung like a...well...you know...mr. ed. or
>maybe the horse had a headache and the guy wouldn't take no for a
>answer.
or, what if it wasn't the guy doing the horse, but rather it
was the other way around, and THAT's what caused the guy's
injuries! LOL
:)Well..............letsee..........I guess ever since they went on retainer
to NAMBLA, I've had a few reservations.
;o)
"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:42d8578d@linux...
>
> Got a low opinion of the ACLU, Deej? Civil liberties not your cup o' tea?
>
> Cheers,
> -Jamie K
> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
> DJ wrote:
>
> > ...............the ACLU will probably sue the horse.
> >
> > "DC" <dcicchetti@urs2.net> wrote in message news:42d844cd$1@linux...
> >
> >> http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002382718_h orse15m.html
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >Damn!!!!!!! I didn't think of that one. *Ouch*would be the operative word.
;op
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:42d85afd$1@linux...
>
> rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >"ouch"...only if your a duck, chicken or a rabbit. after all, they
> >didn't say the guy was hung like a...well...you know...mr. ed. or
> >maybe the horse had a headache and the guy wouldn't take no for a
> >answer.
>
> or, what if it wasn't the guy doing the horse, but rather it
> was the other way around, and THAT's what caused the guy's
> injuries! LOL
>
> :)Anyone else have fun with this yet?
I was looking at Fallujah... seems like quite a city. not too far fetched
that the civilians in the "OH DUDE" movie could have been going to a bday
part.
Anyway, I just heard on the news that the entire city only has 90 cops.
Ouch, but making progress.yep
"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote in message news:42d70218@linux...
> I'm leaning towards Mother Nature in all her splendor as opposed to God,
> although some would argue they're one and the same. Which if you take
> religion out of the equation makes perfect sense.
>
> Don
>
>
> "justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote in message
> news:42d6f585@linux...
>> still is... for now.
>>
>> "Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote in message news:42d6f467@linux...
>>> You mean there's a Garden of Eden around here somewhere?
>>>
>>> Don
>>>
>>> "justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote in message
>>> news:42d6eab0@linux...
>>>> We've eaten from the Tree of Knowledge and now we're using the
>>>> Knowledge to create Nuclear Weapons and inject human stem cells into
>>>> monkeys. It will be no surprise when we get kicked out of our Garden
>>>> of Eden by God or Nature.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>pretty much. Actually I was looking at Iraq on google earth and it really
does look like the cradle of civilization, geographically.
"Jef Knight" <"Jef Knight"> wrote in message news:42d7c657@linux...
> ....uh, didn't you guys bomb the be-jeeziz out of the Garden of Eden
> recently?
>
> 8 )
>
>
> justcron wrote:
>
>>We've eaten from the Tree of Knowledge and now we're using the Knowledge
>>to create Nuclear Weapons and inject human stem cells into monkeys. It
>>will be no surprise when we get kicked out of our Garden of Eden by God or
>>Nature.
>>
>>Gotcha. And they also defended Rush Limbaugh. But they see those
examples and the other cases they take on in terms of the bill of
rights, not in terms of the reputation of the plaintiffs. Not a
prescription for popularity.
Cheers,
-Jamie K
http://www.JamieKrutz.com
DJ wrote:
> Well..............letsee..........I guess ever since they went on retainer
> to NAMBLA, I've had a few reservations.
>
> ;o)
>
>
>
> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:42d8578d@linux...
>
>>Got a low opinion of the ACLU, Deej? Civil liberties not your cup o' tea?
>>
>>Cheers,
>> -Jamie K
>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>>DJ wrote:
>>
>>
>>>...............the ACLU will probably sue the horse.
>>>
>>>"DC" <dcicchetti@urs2.net> wrote in message news:42d844cd$1@linux...
>>>
>>>
>>>> http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002382718_h orse15m.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>And when I did a search, Steve Taylor had it for download on his official
site.
The little rap at the end always cracked me up.
http://www.onfritz.com/mp3/Other/Nero.mp3Hey man........gimme a break. I didn't say that there was anything wrong
with suing the horse, now did I? As far as Rush Limbaugh goes, I'll bet you
a dime to a dollar if the drug charges become a reality, he'll be praying
his ass off for a liberal judge ;o).
Now back to my fantasy of a 4 way with me, Mara Liasson, Janine Garafolo and
Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
;oD
"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:42d875ed@linux...
>
> Gotcha. And they also defended Rush Limbaugh. But they see those
> examples and the
|
|
|
|
| Re: Bomb attacks in London England [message #55925 is a reply to message #55903] |
Sat, 16 July 2005 01:21 |
erlilo
Messages: 405
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
br />
>>>>you wives and children will suddenly become "enemy combatants".
>>>
>>>
>>> Well, it seems that "foreigners" and "former baathists" otherwise
>>> known as "corrupt" "murdering" "shitheads" who want to keep
>>> the old regime in place, might qualify as "insurgents", especially
>>> since they prefer the regime of the old murdering, raping, corrupt
>>> leader to actual democracy.
>>>
>>> Jef, you have very little ethics do you?
>>>
>>>
>>>>Wake up you collective heads of knuckle. What the hell do you think's
>>>>going on over there? It's people deffending their land, their homes and
>>>
>>>>their lives from - Foreign Invaders! Fuck me, how dumb do you have to
> be
>>>
>>>>not to get this not-to-fucking-subtle point? If the shoe were on the
>>>>other foot you would react no differently.
>>>
>>>
>>> Unfortunately it's all "not so fucking subtle" lies. The folks with the
>>> homes, with the families and shops and businesses all had purple
>>> fingers a few months ago, and have more character than "you"
>>> will ever "dream" of having.
>>>
>>>
>>>>One of you nazis, don't remember who, said in another thread that they
>>>>thought it was "them" who were doing the bombing, not "us". Just as a
>>>>reminder, the US has been bombing Iraq into a god-forsaken moonscape
>>>>since '89. Over 500,000 children have died since then as a direct
>>>>consequence of US military, oh-so-compassionate, action.
>>>
>>>
>>> More lies. Those deaths are a result of your friend Saddam using
>>> oil-for-food money to build palaces instead of food for his own
>>> people. His trial is about to start, why don't you watch it and weep.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>And please knock it off with the old "well they bombed NYC so we're
>>>>retaliating." chestnut. If you take the time to read the statements of
>>>>Bin Laden you will see that he's not a nut at all.
>>>
>>>
>>> Why am I not surprised that you like him as much as you like Saddam?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>The Arabs and the Jews were living peacefully side-by-side well into the
>>>
>>>>20th century. This is fully backed up by historians, check it for
>>>>yourself. It wasn't untill the US decided to create a client state in
>>>>'48 that trouble began. Hey, stoopid, how would you feel if China
>>>>decided it was going to give Native Americans an offical homeland and
>>>>they decided to hack off a piece of New York or California and kick the
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This is as inaccurate as it is simple minded.
>>>
>>>
>>>>See where I'm going with this yet?
>>>
>>> Yeah, stright to lefty-lobotomy land. And you are calling others
>>> idiots
>>> and psychopaths... Amazing.
>>>
>>> I am not g
|
|
|
|
| Re: Bomb attacks in London England [message #55991 is a reply to message #55809] |
Sun, 17 July 2005 17:24 |
derek
Messages: 61
Registered: July 2005
|
Member |
|
|
h (& die in) the above scenario in order to defend
>talk shit about us... Derek, I don't mean you specifically, I'm
>just talking in general terms now.
>
>Anyway, I guess I'm done for now... made my points, tired of
>typing, not going to change anyone's mind if they've already
>got it made up anyway. LOL
>
>Neil
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>"Neil" <OIUUI@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>"derek" <derekvonkrogh@gmx.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>nah, i didnt ignore it.
>>>>just as you i said that i believe that its a little of everything. of
>course
>>>>that includes, on behalf of all american
>>>>forces, you. thank you neil. your partially responsible for
>>>>the end of the cold war. since i, on behalf of the deescalation
>>>>politics of willy brandt, am also responsible and
>>>>the US also wanted the cold war to end, will you thank
>>>>me too now?
>>>
>>>Yes, in fact, I will... thank you & your countrymen for your
>>>hospitality while I was over there. Most of the Germans I met
>>>were pretty cool folks - some were total shitheads & hated
>>>Americans.. I choose not to stereotype the entire population
>>>based on those few. Thanks for putting up with our lame
>>>attempts to gain at least some semblance of fluency in your
>>>language. LOL At least I got good enough at it so that
>>>when I was in New York about a year ago & sitting in the hotel
>>>bar wating to meet someone, two ladies were speaking in German
>>>at the table next to me, I was able to recognize the particular
>>>accent/dialect & I said: "You're from Mainz, aren't you?" and
>>>they said: "Wiesbaden" (which for those of you who don't know,
>>>but may be reading this, is right across the river from Mainz).
>>>And thanks also for the great beer, and the eiswein, and the
>>>kick-ass trains that get you nearly anywhere you want to go
>>>quite easily, and thanks for the C-class coupe that I drive
>>>right now... we don't build cars that are that good here.
>>>
>>>All I wanted was "thanks for no tanks!", and you're still
>>>missing that point... I never said it was America alone that
>>>was responsible for ending the cold war. Our presence on your
>>>border was 100% responsible for the Soviets staying closer to
>>>Halberstadt than Herzberg, and closer to Bad Langensalza than
>>>Bad Kissingen before said cold war came to a close... that's
>>>all I was saying.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>as to the rest, whats there to say when you completely
>>>>ignore all of my points...
>>>>
>>>>- about germany and the possibility that it might NOT have
>>>>been a case of complete sucky ungratefulness but a case
>>>>of strong disagreement about the second iraq war (even more
>>>>likely since germany wasnt exactly the only nation that
>>>>didnt agree)? nothing.
>>>>
>>>>- the stuff i say that im interested in instead of
>>>>the useless standard bullshit? israel, rabin anyone? anyone
>>>>care to loose a word about the only man that ever effectively
>>>>reduced terror in israel? nada.
>>>
>>>I said I'd talk about Israel when I had time... I have posted a new thread
>>>on that... so have at it.
>>>
>>>
>>>>instead, theres this:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Neil" <>Derek: "Hello, you've reached Derek the Psychic - I know what
>>>>>you're thinking before you even think it, how may I help you?"
>>>>>Caller: "If you know what I'm thinking, why do you need to ask
>>>>>how you may help me?"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>hahaha. i didnt get it, but im sure it was funny. funny is good. thanks.
>>>
>>>You didn't get it? It was a refence to your statement "i knew
>>>that was coming" or whatever the exact verbage was.
>>>
>>>Neil
>>
>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------010705080409020705010400
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hey Guys,
That was nothin' personal, really. Were you to meet me you'd see a fun
cross between Ghandi and Lewis Black.
As for ad hominems, if Limaugh, et al,can do it so can I. Damn the
passive-aggressives who veil their words.
Besides, it makes for good entertainment for those only lurking. I'm
actually suprised you didn't get the entertainment value part of it.
Trailer Park Boys isn't hillarious for no reason. Swearing and verbal
abuse rock the entertainment world.
Uh, oh, I forgot...this is a *serious* newsgroup.
Also, I'm just soooooo cynical/satirical. Well, probably not cynical
enough actually, but still, pretty jaded to the fray.
And you're right: it's just political BS, all of it. I'm kinda suprised
that in a political conversation anyone would get their
nose-out-of-joint by being called an idiot. "Y'ain't one u' them pussy
liberals err ya?"....lol
The most interesting thing about USians is that, unlike Canadian, they
are generally, uh, a tad too sensitive.
Hey, no offence! Really! Just seem pretty prevelant.
You should come up some time and wittness the unbridled fucking torrent
of motherfucking swearing that goes on here. Shit, I'm fucking swearing
right now! Canadian's say shit like this to each other all the time. So
do New Yorkers. No one takes it seriously. So, please, don't you.
I actually quite enjoy the level of disparity of opinion here.
Personally, I thrive on the battle, the fray, the Doc's to the head..
But many do not. I think DC is one of those who does not.
Cheers
jef
DC wrote:
>Actually, I think you are way off base here, but I also think it is
>silly to rate topic-quality, so I do not really care to engage this
>issue. I will say this; I have seen much worse, both here and
>on other forums, and until someone started calling people idiots
>and nazis, it was doing pretty well, even if you did not get the
>results you preferred.
>
>DC
>
>
>Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Unfortunately name calling was there pretty much from the start, and,
>>with unintended irony, a bit of projection. Some of it has been
>>entertaining yet at times appalling, like getting sucked into a cheesy
>>reality TV show, pandering talk radio or overblown pro wrestling. If
>>this keeps up Kim's little corner of the web will start getting traffic
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>and he'll get rich on the Google ads.
>>
>>We've heard several points of view but nothing like the whole picture. A
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>certain amount of people talking past each other, answering arguments
>>not made, ignoring arguments made, knocking down straw men invented.
>>Battles of mythology, parroting of talking points, misuse or lack of
>>data, and blind superior certainty. In short, a typical internet
>>political discussion.
>>
>>And yet a certain amount of listening, that part is always encouraging.
>>
>>Cheers,
>> -Jamie K
>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>>DC wrote:
>>
>>
>>>You guys are right. I think both sides have been adequately
>>>represented, I think both arguments have been well-made.
>>>I think everyone has made their minds up at this point. Hostility
>>>and name-calling is creeping in to what was a pretty darn
>>>civilized discussion. It's quickly becoming pointless.
>>>
>>>
>>>I am tracking a hard rock tune of mine and need to get back to work and
>>>
>>>
>this
>
>
>>>really isn't the place for this discussion. If you want to
>>>email me privately, I will discuss it further, but really, we've covered
>>>
>>>the subject, don't you think?
>>>
>>>DC
>>>
>>>PS, holy cow this Marshall JCM2000 sounds cool cranked up!
>>>Unfortunately, you can hear it down at the stop light when I do
>>>that... grrrr... Why can't the modelers sound like that?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
--------------010705080409020705010400
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Hey Guys,<br>
<br>
That was nothin' personal, really. Were you to meet me you'd see a fun
cross between Ghandi and Lewis Black. <br>
As for ad hominems, if Limaugh, et al,can do it so can I. Damn the
passive-aggressives who veil their words.<br>
<br>
Besides, it makes for good entertainment for those only lurking. I'm
actually suprised you didn't get the entertainment value part of it.
Trailer Park Boys isn't hillarious for no reason. Swearing and verbal
abuse rock the entertainment world. <br>
Uh, oh, I forgot...this is a *serious* newsgroup.<br>
<br>
Also, I'm just soooooo cynical/satirical. Well, probably not cynical
enough actually, but still, pretty jaded to the fray.<br>
<br>
And you're right: it's just political BS, all of it. I'm kinda suprised
that in a political conversation anyone would get their
nose-out-of-joint by being called an idiot. "Y'ain't one u' them pussy
liberals err ya?"....lol<br>
<br>
The most interesting thing about USians is that, unlike Canadian, they
are generally, uh, a tad too sensitive. <br>
Hey, no offence! Really! Just seem pretty prevelant.<br>
You should come up some time and wittness the unbridled fucking torrent
of motherfucking swearing that goes on here. Shit, I'm fucking swearing
right now! Canadian's say shit like this to each other all the time.
So do New Yorkers. No one takes it seriously. So, please, don't you.<br>
<br>
I actually quite enjoy the level of disparity of opinion here.
Personally, I thrive on the battle, the fray, the Doc's to the head..
But many do not. I think DC is one of those who does not. <br>
<br>
Cheers<br>
<br>
jef<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
DC wrote:<br>
<blockquote cite="mid42d9ce2c$1@linux" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Actually, I think you are way off base here, but I also think it is
silly to rate topic-quality, so I do not really care to engage this
issue. I will say this; I have seen much worse, both here and
on other forums, and until someone started calling people idiots
and nazis, it was doing pretty well, even if you did not get the
results you preferred.
DC
Jamie K <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:Meta@Dimensional.com"><Meta@Dimensional.com></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Unfortunately name calling was there pretty much from the start, and,
with unintended irony, a bit of projection. Some of it has been
entertaining yet at times appalling, like getting sucked into a cheesy
reality TV show, pandering talk radio or overblown pro wrestling. If
this keeps up Kim's little corner of the web will start getting traffic
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">and he'll get rich on the Google ads.
We've heard several points of view but nothing like the whole picture. A
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">certain amount of people talking past each other, answering arguments
not made, ignoring arguments made, knocking down straw men invented.
Battles of mythology, parroting of talking points, misuse or lack of
data, and blind superior certainty. In short, a typical internet
political discussion.
And yet a certain amount of listening, that part is always encouraging.
Cheers,
-Jamie K
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.JamieKrutz.com">http://www.JamieKrutz.com</a>
DC wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite"&
|
|
|
|
| Re: Bomb attacks in London England [message #55998 is a reply to message #55821] |
Sun, 17 July 2005 18:42 |
derek
Messages: 61
Registered: July 2005
|
Member |
|
|
blaming the US and Israel, and excuses and
>understanding for the ghouls. You did it yourself a few paragraphs
>up.
well i gotta tell you its no wonder since youre computing
it all through "and the other side is a degraded culture"-glasses.
youll probably even take that as yet more "somehow pro
palaestinian apologism". once more: know that the
very thought that i would be on the side of some
extremist religious bunch of fanatic idiots is
absolutely ridiculous.
its just that both sides tend to have a little too much
of those. so i cant be on YOUR side, sorry.
>You know what, you're right. We judge europeans by their bitter,
>left-wing media, and assume you are all like that.
thats funny. do you speak german? or how do you know
what our "bitter left wing media" write and show?
because of reports about it on your media?
you know NOTHING about our media. and i assure you
that we have a nicely wide range from the very left
to the very right.
>We have rejected much of european government positons on Iraq
>because of their corruption and collusion with Saddam, and that
>fruitcake Chirac has caused more anger than anyone since Adolf.
more than anyone since adolf? whew. thats a tought statement.
got angry there for a second again or are you serious about
that?
>We are aware that following much of europe's positions could put
>our lives in even graver danger.
that is your opinion. its your take on the question,
how to best approach the problems the world is facing.
>>but it doesnt end there. i just stabbed the guy in the back.
>>what about the next guy?
>
>BOOM, got 'em
>
>and the one after him?
>
>I have lots of ammo.
soldiers in vietnam had, too.
>>whats the
>>best way to avoid a neverending "guys with bombs" supply.
>
>Remove their support governments, kill as many as we can, plant
>democracies.
no. remove their *motives* is the best way. can it be
done? i dont know. you dont know either. the one guy
who tried so far by coincidence has the best track
record down there (did i mention that yet? oh i did, sorry ;-).
so my money is on that approach.
>Kill them all. Nuke 'em until the survivors say "we give up"
you guys are really thinking to "let the cat out of the bag"?
boy that would so come back to you and the entire world.
i hope it never comes to that. im not even willing
to discuss this.
>Can you do it? Or do we have to save Europe again?
>In truth, it iwll not come to that, but only if we are strong.
well, if it goes the nuke way, there wont be much to save,
so whatever.
>We discussed for years and years. Same ole go 'round. One
>worldview (pacifism) versus another (war) versus another (nukes).
>I think the best alternative won. Time for discussion is over.
>In England now, the soccer hooligans are starting to join together
>to attack Muslims. Will you understand their perspective like
>you do with the palestinians? Will you use the same reasoning?
>You know damn well they will attack all the wrong muslims, all
>the good decent ones, you just know it. Is the fault intolerance?
>Hate? Violence? Or perhaps the stupid English policies that let so
>many islamofascists into the country and now cannot kick them
>out? Do you blame the hooligans or kick out the mullahs who are
>dancing with glee over the bodies in the tunnels?
the fault in your scenario is that one side must be right.
of course i would neither have any understanding for
(of all things...) soccer hooligans nor for religious
fanatics.
heres a hint: BOTH sides can be wrong.
>The same way we fought the kamikazis and moro tribesmen, and
>others who did not fear death. You take away their base of
>support and you kill them until they stop.
this is another dimension.
>My point is that when confronted with religion that causes evil,
>the solution may not be atheism or secularism, but religion that
>causes good.
oh and which one would THAT be? shall i guess? i guess...i guess...i guess
its yours!
am i right?
i case your religion is the one i would guess it is, no thank
you. historical track record stinks too much for my taste.
>Ah, but if there is a God, then, regardless of the failures of human
>denominations, some things are better than others, and God just
>may have a preference concerning how we live that lies outside
>our ideas, and what you think is good for the planet is likely to be
>wrong, as is so for me as well.
>Just a thought.
yeah, that *could* be true. as sad as it is, it could even be
true that some other religion is right.
but im pretty sure we will never find out for sure, so
it remains a question of personal belief, with which
i have no problem whatsoever.
damn, pretty long post again. sorry. not sure if i can
reply to a potential reply from you, so if you dont
feel like replying anymore (looks like the discussion
continued without me, you guys must be pretty tired of this by now), no problem.Is anyone from the Aussie Parisites going to the SMPTE show in Sydney? If so
it would be great to catch up.
Cheers,
SakisI'll be there, but I'm not sure which day(s).
Maybe Tuesday, unless a job comes in.
--
Martin Harrington
www.lendanear-sound.com
"Sakis" <sakis@digisoundmastering.com> wrote in message
news:42db108e$1@linux...
> Is anyone from the Aussie Parisites going to the SMPTE show in Sydney? If
> so it would be great to catch up.
>
> Cheers,
> Sakis
>> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
--B_3204479990_149720
Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
No Jef, itıs just that some Canadians seem to have nothing better to do than
complain about the US. You probably feel lonely, insecure, and a bit
neglected since the world often forgets youıre there. How easily we forget
your great contributions such as Bob and Doug McKenzie, curling, and
well.....oh, I just bought some rock wool from you guys! Great work, eh?
;-)
Hey, if you can dish it out, be prepared to take it.
Cheers and all that ³tad too sensitive² stuff.
dt
On 7/17/05 6:27 PM, in article 42daf6fd@linux, "Jef Knight" <"Jef Knight">
wrote:
>
> The most interesting thing about USians is that, unlike Canadian, they are
> generally, uh, a tad too sensitive.
> Hey, no offence! Really! Just seem pretty prevelant.
>
> Cheers
>
> jef
>
>
>
>
>
> DC wrote:
>>
>> Actually, I think you are way off base here, but I also think it is
>> silly to rate topic-quality, so I do not really care to engage this
>> issue. I will say this; I have seen much worse, both here and
>> on other forums, and until someone started calling people idiots
>> and nazis, it was doing pretty well, even if you did not get the
>> results you preferred.
>>
>> DC
>>
>>
>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> <mailto:Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Unfortunately name calling was there pretty much from the start, and,
>>> with unintended irony, a bit of projection. Some of it has been
>>> entertaining yet at times appalling, like getting sucked into a cheesy
>>> reality TV show, pandering talk radio or overblown pro wrestling. If
>>> this keeps up Kim's little corner of the web will start getting traffic
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> and he'll get rich on the Google ads.
>>>
>>> We've heard several points of view but nothing like the whole picture. A
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> certain amount of people talking past each other, answering arguments
>>> not made, ignoring arguments made, knocking down straw men invented.
>>> Battles of mythology, parroting of talking points, misuse or lack of
>>> data, and blind superior certainty. In short, a typical internet
>>> political discussion.
>>>
>>> And yet a certain amount of listening, that part is always encouraging.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Jamie K
>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>
>>>
>>> DC wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> You guys are right. I think both sides have been adequately
>>>> represented, I think both arguments have been well-made.
>>>> I think everyone has made their minds up at this point. Hostility
>>>> and name-calling is creeping in to what was a pretty darn
>>>> civilized discussion. It's quickly becoming pointless.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am tracking a hard rock tune of mine and need to get back to work and
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> this
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> really isn't the place for this discussion. If you want to
>>>> email me privately, I will discuss it further, but really, we've covered
>>>>
>>>> the subject, don't you think?
>>>>
>>>> DC
>>>>
>>>> PS, holy cow this Marshall JCM2000 sounds cool cranked up!
>>>> Unfortunately, you can hear it down at the stop light when I do
>>>> that... grrrr... Why can't the modelers sound like that?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
--B_3204479990_149720
Content-type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: Political BS</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<FONT FACE=3D"Verdana"><SPAN STYLE=3D'font-size:12.0px'>No Jef, it’s just=
that some Canadians seem to have nothing better to do than complain about t=
he US. You probably feel lonely, insecure, and a bit neglected since t=
he world often forgets you’re there. How easily we forget your g=
reat contributions such as Bob and Doug McKenzie, curling, and well.....oh, =
I just bought some rock wool from you guys! Great work, eh? ;-) =
<BR>
<BR>
Hey, if you can dish it out, be prepared to take it. <BR>
<BR>
Cheers and all that “tad too sensitive” stuff.<BR>
dt<BR>
<BR>
On 7/17/05 6:27 PM, in article 42daf6fd@linux, "Jef Knight" <&=
quot;Jef Knight"> wrote:<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE=3D"Verdana"><SPAN STYLE=3D'font-size:12.0p=
x'><BR>
The most interesting thing about USians is that, unlike Canadian, they are =
generally, uh, a tad too sensitive. <BR>
Hey, no offence! Really! Just seem pretty prevelant.<BR>
<BR>
Cheers<BR>
<BR>
jef<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
DC wrote:<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE=3D"Verdana"><SPAN STYLE=3D'font-size:12.0p=
x'> <BR>
Actually, I think you are way off base here, but I also think it is<BR>
silly to rate topic-quality, so I do not really care to engage this<BR>
issue. I will say this; I have seen much worse, both here and<BR>
on other forums, and until someone started calling people idiots<BR>
and nazis, it was doing pretty well, even if you did not get the <BR>
results you preferred.<BR>
<BR>
DC<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> <a href=3D"mailto:Meta@Dimensional.com">=
<mailto:Meta@Dimensional.com></a> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE=3D"Verdana"><SPAN STYLE=3D'font-size:12.0p=
x'> <BR>
Unfortunately name calling was there pretty much from the start, and, <BR>
with unintended irony, a bit of projection. Some of it has been <BR>
entertaining yet at times appalling, like getting sucked into a cheesy <BR>
reality TV show, pandering talk radio or overblown pro wrestling. If <BR>
this keeps up Kim's little corner of the web will start getting traffic<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE=3D"Verdana"><SPAN STYLE=3D'font-size:12.0=
px'> <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE=3D"Verdana"><SPAN STYLE=3D'font-size:12.0p=
x'> <BR>
and he'll get rich on the Google ads.<BR>
<BR>
We've heard several points of view but nothing like the whole picture. A<BR=
>
<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE=3D"Verdana"><SPAN STYLE=3D'font-size:12.0=
px'> <BR>
<BR>
&l
|
|
|
|
| Re: Bomb attacks in London England [message #56024 is a reply to message #55991] |
Mon, 18 July 2005 08:36 |
Nappy
Messages: 198
Registered: September 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
he whole war, had one occurred... we had superior air
>>power, for example, but that takes time to scramble & mobilize
>>& assist in killing thousands of tanks, and then rearm & refuel
>>to do more of the same, but we would have lost most of our
>>ground forces in Europe, and half of what was West Germany
>>would have been overrun before we could have beaten them back,
>>that's for sure.
>>
>>It's a damn good thing that never happened. I dunno how many of
>>you reading this actually realize to this extent what the deal
>>really was, but that's what would've occurred. A LOT of
>>Americans knew this same shit that I just typed, but were ready
>>to be there for our allies, and I guess that's what pisses me
>>off sometimes when I hear someone that we were ready & willing
>>to deal with (& die in) the above scenario in order to defend
>>talk shit about us... Derek, I don't mean you specifically, I'm
>>just talking in general terms now.
>>
>>Anyway, I guess I'm done for now... made my points, tired of
>>typing, not going to change anyone's mind if they've already
>>got it made up anyway. LOL
>>
>>Neil
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>"Neil" <OIUUI@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>"derek" <derekvonkrogh@gmx.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>nah, i didnt ignore it.
>>>>>just as you i said that i believe that its a little of everything. of
>>course
>>>>>that includes, on behalf of all american
>>>>>forces, you. thank you neil. your partially responsible for
>>>>>the end of the cold war. since i, on behalf of the deescalation
>>>>>politics of willy brandt, am also responsible and
>>>>>the US also wanted the cold war to end, will you thank
>>>>>me too now?
>>>>
>>>>Yes, in fact, I will... thank you & your countrymen for your
>>>>hospitality while I was over there. Most of the Germans I met
>>>>were pretty cool folks - some were total shitheads & hated
>>>>Americans.. I choose not to stereotype the entire population
>>>>based on those few. Thanks for putting up with our lame
>>>>attempts to gain at least some semblance of fluency in your
>>>>language. LOL At least I got good enough at it so that
>>>>when I was in New York about a year ago & sitting in the hotel
>>>>bar wating to meet someone, two ladies were speaking in German
>>>>at the table next to me, I was able to recognize the particular
>>>>accent/dialect & I said: "You're from Mainz, aren't you?" and
>>>>they said: "Wiesbaden" (which for those of you who don't know,
>>>>but may be reading this, is right across the river from Mainz).
>>>>And thanks also for the great beer, and the eiswein, and the
>>>>kick-ass trains that get you nearly anywhere you want to go
>>>>quite easily, and thanks for the C-class coupe that I drive
>>>>right now... we don't build cars that are that good here.
>>>>
>>>>All I wanted was "thanks for no tanks!", and you're still
>>>>missing that point... I never said it was America alone that
>>>>was responsible for ending the cold war. Our presence on your
>>>>border was 100% responsible for the Soviets staying closer to
>>>>Halberstadt than Herzberg, and closer to Bad Langensalza than
>>>>Bad Kissingen before said cold war came to a close... that's
>>>>all I was saying.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>as to the rest, whats there to say when you completely
>>>>>ignore all of my points...
>>>>>
>>>>>- about germany and the possibility that it might NOT have
>>>>>been a case of complete sucky ungratefulness but a case
>>>>>of strong disagreement about the second iraq war (even more
>>>>>likely since germany wasnt exactly the only nation that
>>>>>didnt agree)? nothing.
>>>>>
>>>>>- the stuff i say that im interested in instead of
>>>>>the useless standard bullshit? israel, rabin anyone? anyone
>>>>>care to loose a word about the only man that ever effectively
>>>>>reduced terror in israel? nada.
>>>>
>>>>I said I'd talk about Israel when I had time... I have posted a new thread
>>>>on that... so have at it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>instead, theres this:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Neil" <>Derek: "Hello, you've reached Derek the Psychic - I know what
>>>>>>you're thinking before you even think it, how may I help you?"
>>>>>>Caller: "If you know what I'm thinking, why do you need to ask
>>>>>>how you may help me?"
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>hahaha. i didnt get it, but im sure it was funny. funny is good. thanks.
>>>>
>>>>You didn't get it? It was a refence to your statement "i knew
>>>>that was coming" or whatever the exact verbage was.
>>>>
>>>>Neil
>>>
>>
>Answered in "General" under "Art of Discussion"
How about if we take this and the rest of the OT discussions over there?
Cheers,
-Jamie K
http://www.JamieKrutz.com
bunuel wrote:
> Brilliant post. Finally, after the ENDless ENDless windbaggage...a hundred
> posts or more of barking at the moon...finally some repartee.
>
> Better put your helmet on, though. When Don gets wind of this, he might want
> to stage a comeback, in spite of his very recently expressed desire to put
> all this 'pollitical bullshit' behind him (now that he's er climaxed, as
> it were) and get back to that 'hard rock tune' of his that he's been tracking.
>
>
> So yeh. So give er, if it happens. Spare no expense LOL. I'm lappin it up.
>
>
>
> humbly yours,
>
> bunuelvis e. carlos
> Troll-at-Large
>
>
>
>
>
> "Jef Knight" <"Jef Knight"> wrote:
>
>>Hey Guys,
>>
>>That was nothin' personal, really. Were you to meet me you'd see a fun
>>cross between Ghandi and Lewis Black.
>>As for ad hominems, if Limaugh, et al,can do it so can I. Damn the
>>passive-aggressives who veil their words.
>>
>>Besides, it makes for good entertainment for those only lurking. I'm
>>actually suprised you didn't get the entertainment value part of it.
>>Trailer Park Boys isn't hillarious for no reason. Swearing and verbal
>>abuse rock the entertainment world.
>>Uh, oh, I forgot...this is a *serious* newsgroup.
>>
>>Also, I'm just soooooo cynical/satirical. Well, probably not cynical
>>enough actually, but still, pretty jaded to the fray.
>>
>>And you're right: it's just political BS, all of it. I'm kinda suprised
>
>
>>that in a political conversation anyone would get their
>>nose-out-of-joint by being called an idiot. "Y'ain't one u' them pussy
>>liberals err ya?"....lol
>>
>>The most interesting thing about USians is that, unlike Canadian, they
>>are generally, uh, a tad too sensitive.
>>Hey, no offence! Really! Just seem pretty prevelant.
>>You should come up some time and wittness the unbridled fucking torrent
>
>
>>of motherfucking swearing that goes on here. Shit, I'm fucking swearing
>
>
>>right now! Canadian's say shit like this to each other all the time. So
>
>
>>do New Yorkers. No one takes it seriously. So, please, don't you.
>>
>>I actually quite enjoy the level of disparity of opinion here.
>>Personally, I thrive on the battle, the fray, the Doc's to the head..
>>But many do not. I think DC is one of those who does not.
>>
>>Cheers
>>
>>jef
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>DC wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Actually, I think you are way off base here, but I also think it is
>>>silly to rate topic-quality, so I do not really care to engage this
>>>issue. I will say this; I have seen much worse, both here and
>>>on other forums, and until someone started calling people idiots
>>>and nazis, it was doing pretty well, even if you did not get the
>>>results you preferred.
>>>
>>>DC
>>>
>>>
>>>Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Unfortunately name calling was there pretty much from the start, and,
>
>
>>>>with unintended irony, a bit of projection. Some of it has been
>>>>entertaining yet at times appalling, like getting sucked into a cheesy
>
>
>>>>reality TV show, pandering talk radio or overblown pro wrestling. If
>>>>this keeps up Kim's little corner of the web will start getting traffic
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>and he'll get rich on the Google ads.
>>>>
>>>>We've heard several points of view but nothing like the whole picture.
>
> A
>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>certain amount of people talking past each other, answering arguments
>
>
>>>>not made, ignoring arguments made, knocking down straw men invented.
>>>>Battles of mythology, parroting of talking points, misuse or lack of
>>>>data, and blind superior certainty. In short, a typical internet
>>>>political discussion.
>>>>
>>>>And yet a certain amount of listening, that part is always encouraging.
>>>>
>>>>Cheers,
>>>>-Jamie K
>>>>http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>DC wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>You guys are right. I think both sides have been adequately
>>>>>represented, I think both arguments have been well-made.
>>>>>I think everyone has made their minds up at this point. Hostility
>>>>>and name-calling is creeping in to what was a pretty darn
>>>>>civilized discussion. It's quickly becoming pointless.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I am tracking a hard rock tune of mine and need to get back to work and
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>this
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>really isn't the place for this discussion. If you want to
>>>>>email me privately, I will discuss it further, but really, we've covered
>>>>>
>>>>>the subject, don't you think?
>>>>>
>>>>>DC
>>>>>
>>>>>PS, holy cow this Marshall JCM2000 sounds cool cranked up!
>>>>>Unfortunately, you can hear it down at the stop light when I do
>>>>>that... grrrr... Why can't the modelers sound like that?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>><!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
>><html>
>><head>
>> <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
>> <title></title>
>></head>
>><body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
>>Hey Guys,<br>
>><br>
>>That was nothin' personal, really. Were you to meet me you'd see a fun
>>cross between Ghandi and Lewis Black. <br>
>>As for ad hominems, if Limaugh, et al,can do it so can I. Damn the
>>passive-aggressives who veil their words.<br>
>><br>
>>Besides, it makes for good entertainment for those only lurking. I'm
>>actually suprised you didn't get the entertainment value part of it.
>>Trailer Park Boys isn't hillarious for no reason. Swearing and verbal
>>abuse rock the entertainment world. <br>
>>Uh, oh, I forgot...this is a *serious* newsgroup.<br>
>><br>
>>Also, I'm just soooooo cynical/satirical. Well, probably not cynical
>>enough actually, but still, pretty jaded to the fray.<br>
>><br>
>>And you're right: it's just political BS, all of it. I'm kinda suprised
>>that in a political conversation anyone would get their
>>nose-out-of-joint by being called an idiot. "Y'ain't one u' them pussy
>>liberals err ya?"....lol<br>
>><br>
>>The most interesting thing about USians is that, unlike Canadian, they
>>are generally, uh, a tad too sensitive. <br>
>>Hey, no offence! Really! Just seem pretty prevelant.<br>
>>You should come up some time and wittness the unbridled fucking torrent
>>of motherfucking swearing that goes on here. Shit, I'm fucking swearing
>>right now! Canadian's say shit like this to each other all the time.
>>So do New Yorkers. No one takes it seriously. So, please, don't you.<br>
>><br>
>>I actually quite enjoy the level of disparity of opinion here.
>>Personally, I thrive on the battle, the fray, the Doc's to the head..
>>But many do not. I think DC is one of those who does not. <br>
>><br>
>>Cheers<br>
>><br>
>>jef<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>>DC wrote:<br>
>><blockquote cite="mid42d9ce2c$1@linux" type=&
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon Dec 16 03:00:16 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.04891 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
