TGS Full Comment Room

Add Comment | Previous Week | Text-Only Comment Room | Comment Room Information

TGS WebSite | TGS MirrorSite | Current Episode

Fire Storm - <For the pages to add a story to the database, should I assume that the story and images have already been FTP'ed, or should I create a way to upload the story/images while updating the database?> It needs to be as ridiculously easy as possible and secure at the same time.
DPH
AR, USA
Monday, March 22, 2004 01:57:14 AM
IP: 67.14.195.48

Looks like I'll be taking a trip into the boonies of New Hampshire at the end of the week. My great aunt died (no real surprise), and since my mother feels guilty about missing her other aunt's funeran and it's vacation time, up we go.

DPH> <<why isn't a there some gages on cars to display tire pressure?>>: Because people can just pop a cheap one in their glove compartments, without having to pay for all the extra wiring and whatnot.
<<why not put a small air compressor pump on a car with a small point of hose so that you could air your tires up wherever you are?>>: I beleive most times tire pressure gets critically low is because of critical failure, which a pump couldn't do anything about.

Fire Storm> <<should I assume that the story and images have already been FTP'ed, or should I create a way to upload the story/images while updating the database?>>: I believe they want it as stupidly easy as possible, though if you want, you could hand that over to me to do.
<<recently or pretty soon, all wheels (of new cars) must have tire pressure sensors in each and every wheel>>: All a matter of what people are willing to pay for.

Gunjack> <<recently or pretty soon, all wheels (of new cars) must have tire pressure sensors in each and every wheel>>: Why bronze? Wouldn't he want something softer, more fleshlike? I don't think bronze would be good even for tongue practice.
<<Now that's just scary>>: Just doing my job, ma'am.
<<Cadbury>>: A layer of cream filling under a layer of hard chocolate? Or do you forego authenticity and use more liquidy chocolate? And I take it this would be for your dangly bits, or are her various hemispheres good enough?

Brutis> <<and for 20 dollars it has a tire pump>>: Cheaper than I would of thought. Though it is easier than integrating the hose to each tire for pushbutton control.

Fire Storm> <<Should I then say "Proud to be a Michigander"?>>: I guess. Where are sacks localized?
<<Vegetarian dishes are EVIL>>: Hence why we bring our own meat when we visit my brother.
<<What I find REALLY amusing is that vegetarians MUST take pills with products made from meat, otherwise they will DIE!>>: I've heard that from my brother (except for the dieing bit: just gastrointestinal distress). Don't eat anything for long enough and your body doesn't bother remembering how to digest it.
<<We will get all three Starbucks and then go to the Temple of the Holy Bean>>: I'm not sure if new space Starbuck really counts.
<<when you give thanks for everything, don't forget the fish>>: Especially if you're about to leave on a long voyage.
<<Can you think of any better place to send the stupid?>>: But wouldn't we want them somewhat smart so we can properly profit from the resources?
<<Remember, every minute could be the seventh minute>>: I have no idea what that signifies. Is it from your V:tM books?

Na zdorov'ya.
Gside - [gside@comcast.net]
Fair Haven, NJ
Monday, March 22, 2004 01:05:39 AM
IP: 68.37.159.199

Because I love to brag about my car.

DPH - The pontiac Aztek actually has an on board computer sensor that does monitor the tires and will tell you when it gets low. And, though my model does not have it, but the Aztek towing package does come with an on board air compressor speciffically for airing your tires or tour trailer.

Revel
Monday, March 22, 2004 12:43:09 AM
IP: 129.120.236.94

DERN LOT BOYS!

(Note to self: CENSOR naughy words first!)
Fire Storm
Sunday, March 21, 2004 11:10:21 PM
IP: 65.114.91.3

Gside: <And yet I seem to remember you don't use sacks.>
Should I then say "Proud to be a Michigander"?
<Always take an opportunity to have more meat.>
Oh yes! Vegetarian dishes are EVIL!
What I find REALLY amusing is that vegetarians MUST take pills with products made from meat, otherwise they will DIE! (Read that in Discovery a few years ago)
<Ah. Don't remember that scene, but I was talking about Moby Dick's Starbuck.>
Makes more sense then. How about this: We will get all three Starbucks and then go to the Temple of the Holy Bean
<Fish is not a real meat, and is therefore inferior.>
No, but when you give thanks for everything, don't forget the fish.
<But we'd still have to go through the tundra to enslave them, and the managers we leave behind wouldn't be so happy about it either.>
Can you think of any better place to send the stupid?
<I've never really felt like getting any others.>
That's good. Although, like I should really talk. Here I am reading a lot of the Vampire: The Masquerade books.
<And experimentation is too dangerous.>
"Evil yellow daystar. Remember, every minute could be the seventh minute!"

Kjay: <There was no evidance given to prove that Saddam had these weapons>
There is MUCH proof that Saddam HAD and USED these weapons in the past. As for currently... ah, I dunno.

Greg Bishansky: <So, why aren't we?>
Easy one! Because they GIVE us oil! Now, if they ever pull what they did in the 70's, you can bet we will go in there!

Dezi: <Oh and this little tidbit really is pissing me off:>
Same here. If I worked there, there would be a "Computer Glitch" or a "Suspicious Fire"

Whitbourne: <This government needs to be removed. Now.>
The biggest problem is that this country would NOT survive Anarchy. We will need some government to step in. That's why we need NEW leadership!
Imzadi in '04!

Quote of the day: It was a toss-up between:

#212775 +(876)- [X]
Primus521: hey dude the funniest thing happened to me today
Primus521: im at walmart and this chick is buying a box of tampons and they are missing the upc and wont ring up
Primus521: so the cashier tells his buddy to get a price check on tampax
Primus521: the dude looks at him and says, "the kind u push in, or the kind you hammer in?"
Primus521: lol
Primus521: turns out he misheard him
Primus521: he thought he said thumbtacs
Primus521: you should have seen the look on the chicks face
Primus521: omfg
Primus521: til the day i die
Primus521: i will never forget it

And:

#952 +(450)- [X]
(Mutiny) Atarax: you ate a americum disk from a smoke detector?
(Atarax) Mutiny: yeah
(Mutiny) Atarax: why?
(Atarax) Mutiny: I thought it would give me special powers.
(Mutiny) Atarax: what did it do to you?
(Atarax) Mutiny: well, it didn't give me any special powers, but it didn't kill me either
(Atarax) Darwin must be spinning in his grave
(Atarax) "why is that fuck still alive"
Fire Storm
Sunday, March 21, 2004 11:09:19 PM
IP: 65.114.91.3

Damien: It's election season. What are you expecting from the candidates? Sense, honesty and reasoned debate? <Laughs uproariously>
Caboose - [caboose@wctc.net]
WI, USA
Sunday, March 21, 2004 10:16:44 PM
IP: 198.150.95.126

Dude, its di-Hydrogen Monoxide, its the proper chemical wording (i think)
---------------------------------------------
And lo though the war will be fougt not with weapons but with words,
And if either one wins, will great be the sorrow of the nation who they lead,
But though the lessar of two evils shall no longer be decided by Chads,
Much confusion shall reign, but one shall prevail.
---------------------------------------------------
For some reason in the fear filled pit of my stomach, I fear both candidates, but I think Kerry will win, for no good reason

ohh anyone see the setup picture of bush? With him holding the baby, smileing, in the flight jacket, with the american flag on the sleeve, and the troops in the background?
Can't find it but it was so overwelmingly "vote-For-me" it was patetic.
gave me diabetes looking at it
Damien
Sunday, March 21, 2004 10:02:29 PM
IP: 207.6.149.113

Gunjack <<Watched a buncha Family Guy, listened to Gabe and his Christian Black Metal band practice a set or two, and purchased a used Winchester Model 70 bolt-action rifle chambered in 30-06 springfield, with a Simmons K7 telescopic sight.>>
You know, if you would've told the me from six months ago about the Christian black metal, I would've laughed in your face. Christian metal in general. But then I heard Adagio's "In Nomine," and realized that Christianity can make for good metal indeed. So is Gabriel's band any good? They have a website? I'm not into black metal really, but any metal's better than no metal.
Tharos
Sunday, March 21, 2004 09:39:40 PM
IP: 69.40.142.112

not getting into the political augument just aggree with somone else who said we should not beat people over the head with our opions that will prob make them even more aginst what your thinking.

thinking on the cars my 2003 Land Rover Discovery came with tire pressure sensors as a base option and for 20 dollars it has a tire pump built into the back cargo well it has a 15 ft hose for the front tires which i guess is cool enuf
Brutis - [creature_of_the_night_20042004@yahoo.com]
Hammond, Louisiana, Usa
Sunday, March 21, 2004 08:56:07 PM
IP: 205.214.170.231

Wait a minute... ok, cancel that post please. I'm an idiot. l8r.
Krista
Sunday, March 21, 2004 08:51:26 PM
IP: 68.116.254.201

Wow. I'm glad I missed that fight...
Krista
Sunday, March 21, 2004 08:43:39 PM
IP: 68.116.254.201

Just got back from spending the weekend with the illustrious Gabriel. Watched a buncha Family Guy, listened to Gabe and his Christian Black Metal band practice a set or two, and purchased a used Winchester Model 70 bolt-action rifle chambered in 30-06 springfield, with a Simmons K7 telescopic sight. It is, as they say, a nice piece of work. More details after we get some range time on this lovely.

Gside><<Or are you just doing pieces so she has a familiar way to keep herself entertained when you're gone...>> We've had customers who called up to complain about shrinkage from the cold water in the Alginate... And we have a moldmaker at Smooth-On who reproduced his girlfriend's... reproducer... in cold-cast bronze.
It's a wierd biz.
<<and you can use her breasts when you cross dress?>> Now that's just scary.
<<Besides, chocolate syrup is to plain.>>
Cadbury.
That's all I'm going to say.

Kai><<This is almost as much fun as watching folks get environmentalists to sign petitions to ban dihydrogen-oxide because it is a toxic chemic that can kill you if it is inhaled and we store large quantities of it in schools and residential areas...
Bah, way too much emotionalist, conspiracy theorist propaganda in here. Tin-foil hats all around. I love how people like to cite editorialists and activists as sources, as if they'd give the same credibility to any other bunch of back-scratching crony yes-men engaging in rampant group-think.>>
Kai, this is hard, because I have, in the past, had a great deal of respect for you as a logical thinker... But I need to say this.

See, Kai, you find us rediculous because we make silly claims that no right-thinking person would ever believe.

We find you rediculous because of your behemothian capacity to dismiss any amount of evidence at all with a wave of the hand and a snide comment.

So, tell me, what exactly do you consider "Proof"? For example, I claimed just before I left that Rumsfield (and by extension, the president) was a lying weasel. For proof, I offered video of Rumsfield delivering a straight-faced whopper on national television. Now if this is not enough for you, and if you wish for us to EVER take you seriously again, would you mind mentioning what exactly you're willing to accept as evidence?

Lain has offered you such sources as the Senate Intelligence Commitee, the Military District of Washington News Service, and The Superior Court of Toronto. Last I checked, none of these were "activists" or "editorials". She has also offered multiple citations from the AP and nearly every major news agency in the western world. Did you actually look any of them up? Would you care to point out which were unreliable? She spent the better part of a day researching that post, and you might have the decency to swallow your pride and actually listen to what she has to say. Your inability to do so thus far is annoying, and speaks poorly of your objectivity.
Gunjack "Black Shadow" Valentine
Sunday, March 21, 2004 08:39:00 PM
IP: 4.7.36.9

There already are systems that automatically monitor tire pressure. My 2002 model year Jeep came equiped with it. Reinflating a tire in motion is a bit trickier, because the system would have to be built into the wheel.

138 days left until The Gathering 2004 in Montreal, Quebec!
Patrick - [<-- Allez-vous au le Gathering!]
Sunday, March 21, 2004 08:00:23 PM
IP: 65.43.167.178

Sorry. Need to say this

DPH: <Speaking of innovations for cars, if there isn't, why isn't a there some gages on cars to display tire pressure? Also, why not put a small air compressor pump on a car with a small point of hose so that you could air your tires up wherever you are?>
Actually... recently or pretty soon, all wheels (of new cars) must have tire pressure sensors in each and every wheel, and some company has created an automatic pump that adds air to a tire if the pressure is low (the rotation of the tires gives it power to pump).
As for a manual pump, they do sell those and I have a pathetic little one that runs off of my battery.
Fire Storm
Sunday, March 21, 2004 06:53:10 PM
IP: 65.114.91.3

TGS Staff: For the pages to add a story to the database, should I assume that the story and images have already been FTP'ed, or should I create a way to upload the story/images while updating the database?
Fire Storm
Sunday, March 21, 2004 06:49:35 PM
IP: 65.114.91.3

I'm not advocating a theocracy, but I think "Separation of church & state" is going too far. If organized religion A and organized religion B want to march down on a street on their religious holiday, more power to both of them. I'm tired of hearing about "Christmas parade" being changed to another name. Sadly, Christmas is incredibly secular; however, being so secular means that it doesn't promote any religion any more.

GXB - <Okay, if Bush is spreading democracy as you say he is, then when will it be Saudi Arabia's turn?> That's a legitimate question. If the US is going to start freeing countries from dictatorships, I'd like to see a published list stating the order of where we plan on going. <As for those of you who want religion mixed with government, why the fuck don't you just move to Saudi Arabia where religion is the ultimate law?> I don't see the US heading towards a theocracy anytime soon nor do I advocate having a theocracy. The problem I have is how the ACLU - Anti Christian Liberty Union - conviently only targets Christianity and not other religions.

Dezi - <But these morons in Martinsville think that the Govt. SHOULD adopt a state religion, should make Christianity the law, to hell with what anyone else thinks.> I'm against that. I don't see the problem with hanging the ten commandments in a courtroom and if a judge wanted to hang some other (non-Christian) rules of law in his courtroom, I have no problem; on the other hand, doing so would expose the hypocrisy of many Christian organizations because invariable some would fight against that. <So, more take overs. Or, wait a minute... Hybrid Cars! Yes HYBRID CARS.> I want to know when I can buy a solar-powered car for around the same price as a regular car. I don't care if the 1st models start off costing around a hundred thousand dollars.

Speaking of innovations for cars, if there isn't, why isn't a there some gages on cars to display tire pressure? Also, why not put a small air compressor pump on a car with a small point of hose so that you could air your tires up wherever you are?

Whitborne - <All this is going to do is make everyone scared of recieving medical attention for fear their records will get subpoenaed while the government goes on its anti-choice crusade.> Just to muddy up the waters, all the people who are pro-choice have already been born. How many of them would have liked it if their mother decided to kill them before they were born?
DPH
AR, USA
Sunday, March 21, 2004 06:45:15 PM
IP: 67.14.195.23

Greg B: Who said I wanted religion involved with government? Didn't I say I couldn't care less if the damn Ten Commandments were posted or not? That applies to any other so-called 'religious doctrines' that just happen to be (for the most part) a code of conduct any decent person will try to abide by. I don't give a shit if it's Buddhist teachings, Confucianist, Taoist, Islamic, Hindu...it doesn't fucking matter! With the exception of the God-related directives, they're a code of conduct and nothing more.

(But conversely, if you want to dump religion from government, then we need to ditch Francis Scott Key's "The Star-Spangled Banner" as our national anthem--the last verse has a lyric that goes "Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation.")

Whitbourne: Why the hell should the international community have shit to say in the rebuilding of Iraq? The 'international community' is and has been involved in the Kosovo mess since Clinton got the ball rolling back in the mid-90s. What other countries has the 'international community' successfully rebuilt? Germany? <Derisive snicker> They're STILL recovering from the effects of 40 years of Communism and the problems associated with the reunification.

Also, if the evidence about WMDs was lacking...why did the UN spend a decade passing resolution after resolution ordering Saddam to disarm? That's what I want to know. If he had disarmed to everybody's satisfaction, why the fuck did the sanctions continue? Why did Hans Blix and company continue to toddle around the country? Please explain that one for me.

Also, another question: Clinton and his cronies discussed (and, if I what I read is correct) supported an agenda of regime change in Iraq. If this had happened under Gore's watch and we had invaded, would you still hate it, or is your hatred of this war an extension of your hatred of Bush? Just wondering.

Partial-birth abortion: So, who's heard about the woman being charged with murder for not having a C-section done and having one of her twins stillborn? She's been charged with either murder or manslaughter, I forget which. Anyway, does anyone here think it's slightly hypocritical? It was only a fetus, after all, just like the fetuses aborted in any abortion procedure.
Caboose - [caboose@wctc.net]
WI, USA
Sunday, March 21, 2004 04:03:09 PM
IP: 198.150.95.126

Welcome to Ashcroft's America.
Dezi
Sunday, March 21, 2004 02:50:41 PM
IP: 68.58.158.101

Dezi> I've heard the Rumsfeld news. That other link is just...wow. What a blatant violation of patient privacy. It's as though the government WANTS women to go to back alleys to avoid paper trails. The argument that the names can be deleted is just ignorant. All this is going to do is make everyone scared of recieving medical attention for fear their records will get subpoenaed while the government goes on its anti-choice crusade.
This government needs to be removed. Now.
Whitbourne
Sunday, March 21, 2004 02:47:33 PM
IP: 156.34.87.138

Hellcat:<I'll cut out the mush since I know Dezi will complain ;) > Hah. Thanks. :)

Question: You sound like a high school cheerleader. "Gimme a G! Gimme a W! Gimme a B! Gooooo Bush! Why do the cheerleaders so greatly support the team, even though the team sucks? Yeah.
<UN is incompetent.> It might have been, but the individuals they sent in weren't.
<There was plenty of evidence. > So good at one liners. Prove it.
<Then why the protests before the war against no involvement in iraq? > And why were those people ridiculed from the top, and some rounded up for "rioting"?
<They died to ensure that the iraqis would be free of Hussein and of tyranny. > That's like being a medical organ donor and winding up being sold off piece by piece for voo doo rituals.
<when we had the power to make it right for those people? > But hey, who gives a fuck about Haiti or Liberia. Hell, Liberia kinda gives off the impression of looking up to us, since they were founded by people from America, and named their capital after one of our presidents.
<or the people who had been brainwashed by their propaganda> Or the people of free thought that just saw their brother get blown away in a "checkpoint" for looking crosseyed. We've screwed up there, and a lot of public sentiment is gone.
<Anything less here would mean that those who died to free Iraq died for nothing. > Stuff is different between the two. Times are different, technology is different and administrations and practices of foot dragging are different. I'll not except these as a valid comparision.
Oh yeah, and:
<Perhaps because he thinks it's a waste of our time and of our tax dollars? > Like the Clinton investigation wasn't? 66 Billion, that's only about 20 Billion short of what he wanted from Congress to fund this installment of the war.
<Better later than never they say. > Under those same rules, I cry IMPEACHMENT!

Vinnie: And I bet your pom-pon waving makes for a funny site as well.
<we'll definitely need to increase our sources of oil in other countries> So, more take overs. Or, wait a minute... Hybrid Cars! Yes HYBRID CARS.

Whitbourne:<but that's just me> Me too.
<and only "changed his ways" after 9/11.> Have you heard the latest Rumsfeld gaff? Click my name for it.
<the fact remains that Bush and Blair LIED to start the war.> And, maybe should be, oh I don't know, Impeached? Thoroughly investigated by an independent council he can't touch at least.

Oh and this little tidbit really is pissing me off:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/03/20/abortion.lawsuit.ap/index.html

ok housecleaning time!
Dezi - [<-clickie for rummy]
Sunday, March 21, 2004 10:43:43 AM
IP: 68.58.158.101

Hi all, I had a great weekend but now i'm so tired. Last Friday I talked to Green baron and Dezi on MSN. Three-way! (heehee) It was fun and worth staying up for. :)

Anyways then the next day I did chores...CHORES! me of all people...but i was so happy I actually did my physio for an hour and a half on my own (anyone who knows me I try to AVOID that crap). My feet and knees hurt like hell but I don't care. Some pain wouldn't get me crying. *babbles* Yeah the reason i was happy is because Green Baron surprised me again. *kiss*

I'll cut out the mush since I know Dezi will complain ;)

Dezi: I added you on my MSN. I was about to add you but you beat me to it. Now you can try to woo me with REM. ;)

Kjay, I have to ask. Glad you're getting better, but in your mind, is physical therapy 'fun'? Did they get you on that huge ball just to humilate you as you bounce up and down and up and down again. again and again...

*ahems* Yeah I'm avid hater of physio. haha.

About all this political talk, I just nod and listen here. It's too early on a Sunday to think. I ranted enough so I'll be quiet Mind my mis-spelling. My brain's half-asleep. Mm sleep... *falls asleep*
Sleepy Hellcat
Sunday, March 21, 2004 08:50:25 AM
IP: 205.251.135.66

Vinnie> What's ridiculous about demonstarting for what you believe in? It strikes me that it's more ridiculous to sit smugly in a computer chair chortling about it on the Internet, but that's just me. :-)
A lot of people seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of the truth about United Nations. Quite simply, THE UNITED NATIONS IS MADE UP OF ITS MEMBER COUNTRIES. That means that when you blame "The UN" for something (or laud it, to be fair) then what you're actually doing is blaming the individual countries that make it up. And quite often, the countries (such as the States) are fine with that, because the UN makes a fine scapegoat for the problems they bring to the table. If you want a functioning UN, then the countries have to be willing to work within its framework. Blaming the UN for being indecisive is pointless, because what you should be doing is blaming the constituent nations that create the deadlocks. That's the way the organization is set up.
Question> George Bush is a hypocrite. He was elect...er, appointed on a platform of isolationism, and only "changed his ways" after 9/11. Immediately after the attacks, people in his cabinet were pushing for an attack on Iraq as "retribution" for 9/11 (check the recent reports on Rumsfeld's comments, especially.) Bush screwed up in Afgnahistan yet claims it to be a victory, he struts around on aircraft carriers claiming "Mission Accomplished" while peopl are dying still in Iraq, and oh yeah, there's that claim about the weapons of mass destruction that were the CAUSE OF THE WAR yet have remained unfound, yet suddenly, somehow it's about freeing a people, which it was NOT as this time last year. That's hypocrisy.
The people on the streets have a problem with leaders lying to start wars, and are acting directly to voice that displeasure. That's democracy.
Your comments on the United Nations show that you, too, suffer from the same misinterpretation as everyone else. And whether or not the UN dropped the ball, the fact remains that Bush and Blair LIED to start the war. Period. The "evidence" was shown to be doctored, spun, selective at best...and that's just the stuff that wasn't copied from a graduate thesis on the Internet, spelling mistakes and all.
<The oil in Iraq couldn't pay off a fraction of the bill for the war> Perhaps, but the administration of the profits by a puppe...I mean "friendly" Iraq government would be worth it. Nevermind the investment opportunities for companies like Dick Cheney's Halliburton, at least when it's not providing substandard, unsanitary food to American soldiers.
<Nothing? They died to ensure that the iraqis would be free of Hussein and of tyranny>
They died to get rid of the weapons of mass destruction. You know, the ones that were there? The ones that could be launched against targets in Europe in 45 minutes? Oh, yeah, that's right, they aren't there, so Bush is spinning the war to make it a "battle for democracy". I like how in Florida yesterday he barely mentioned the weapons, considering that was WHY HE WENT TO WAR in the first place.
<So you think it's right to stand by and do nothing and allow Hussein to continue in his plans when we had the power to make it right for those people?>
If that's what you're going to do, then say that's what the wars about. Don't do what Bush did and lie about non-existent weapons of mass destruction. Tell the flipping truth. I would think that's a prerequisite when you want to go to war to bring truth and freedom to a people. Democracy can't work if it's built on a lie.
I will agree that the States needs to help rebuild the society - after all, they helped wreck it - but it should be under international leadership, not American. The way tjhings stand now is open to abuses from American corporations. Or aren;t people noticing that the state services are being privatized and sold off instead of given to the Governing Council to administer? But nevermind that - we've brought the Iraqi's freedom!
Now they just have to pay for it.
Whitbourne
Sunday, March 21, 2004 08:01:37 AM
IP: 156.34.49.150

Caboose:<As to the protesting of the war, I think it's stupid.> You got that right. I just have to laugh whenever I see those war protesters making fools of themselves outside the Post Office here every Saturday morning with their U.N. flags. How ridicules!

Greg Bishansky:<When is it Saudi Arabia's turn.> Well it'll have to be after Iraq and Afganistan have been rebuilt and we'll definitely need to increase our sources of oil in other countries first to replace what we will lose if/when we ever go to war with the Saudi Arabia.
Vinnie - [tpeano29@hotmail.com]
Marquette, Michigan, USA
Sunday, March 21, 2004 03:52:23 AM
IP: 66.103.227.129

QUESTION> Okay, if Bush is spreading democracy as you say he is, then when will it be Saudi Arabia's turn?

Of all the countries in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia has always been the worst. Their government is just as fanatical as the Taliban ever was, and they sponsor terrorism. Osama bin Laden is a Saudi, all the hi-jackers on 9/11 were Saudis. Everything Saddam did to his own people, the Saudis do and worse.

They're the most powerful country in the region, take them down and replace them with a democratic government, and it will spread faster, and you'll get many terrorist cells also.

So, I ask again, if all Bush wants is to spread democracy, when are we going to take out the kings of religious terror and fanatic governments? When is it Saudi Arabia's turn.

I myself would enlist if we were to go to into Saudi Arabia. The Saudi royals are some of the most evil men on the planet, and I'd love to personally put a bullet between at least one of their eyes. I'm sure many others feel the same. So, why aren't we?
Greg Bishansky
Sunday, March 21, 2004 02:57:17 AM
IP: 216.179.4.248

Whitbourne> I think you've the two articles mixed up. What George Bush is doing is promoting democracy while the demonstrations are nothing short of hyporcrisy especially many of the European nations whose exploitaton of Africa and Asia are infamous.

Kjay> Congrats for getting out.



The UN security council is ridden with corruption especially seeing how the French and Russians stood to gain from there being no war.

< If these "weapons" existed, the UN would of been in Iraq doing inspections and taking pictures for evidance.>

UN is incompetent. Just recently we've been shown evidence of them fouling up the investigation of the air plane crash that helped cause the genocides in Rwanda.

< There
was no evidance given to prove that Saddam had these weapons. >

There was plenty of evidence.

<Bush knew that after 9/11 people were angery and
upset so they wouldn't question him. >

Then why the protests before the war against no involvement in iraq?

<After months and months of searching bin ladin couldn't be found. What better a scapegoat than saddam? The main reason bush wanted to go over there was for the oil.>

The oil in Iraq couldn't pay off a fraction of the bill for the war.

<And all of these soldiers had to die for nothing. >

Nothing? They died to ensure that the iraqis would be free of Hussein and of tyranny.

<This is why alot of countries hate the US because we get involved in stuff that don't concern us. >

So you think it's right to stand by and do nothing and allow Hussein to continue in his plans when we had the power to make it right for those people?

<Sometimes I think it's good to help other countries but if they don't want us there we shouldn't be there.>

Who decides that? The rulers like Hussein or the people who had been brainwashed by their propaganda?

< I'm glad that Saddam was caught because
a lot of innocent people were suffering under his rule anyway. But it was the timing of the attack that made me angry. >

Better later than never they say.

<Now that saddam is gone, we should help Iraq get back on their feet, give them their own goverment and get out. We shouldn't stay there no longer than 2 years. The longer we stay the more soilders are going to die because eventually we will start to wear out our welcome. That's all I have to say for now. >

We spent seven years to repair japan. Anything less here would mean that those who died to free Iraq died for nothing. The fact of the matter is that we've to stay longer for the country to become stable and to stand on its two feet.
Question
Sunday, March 21, 2004 02:22:41 AM
IP: 69.44.73.131

Fire Storm> <>: And yet I seem to remember you don't use sacks.
<<Let's try it both ways>>: Always take an opportunity to have more meat.
<<They were advertising the remake of Battlestar Galactica... which sucked>>: Ah. Don't remember that scene, but I was talking about Moby Dick's Starbuck.
<<FISH!>>: Fish is not a real meat, and is therefore inferior.
<<We will enslave the native people to pump the oil>>: But we'd still have to go through the tundra to enslave them, and the managers we leave behind wouldn't be so happy about it either.
<>: I've never really felt like getting any others.
<>: And experimentation is too dangerous.

Kaioto> <<It is not itself a virus or anything physical - merely a state of being>>: Hence why the joke works on another level.

Dezi> <<isn't there an amendment saying (ok I don't know the correct wording) that the govt. can make no religion the official one?>>: I seem to remember that at the time they were more worried about religions controlling the government than the government imposing religion on the people. Or maybe I do have that backwards. Let's hear it for not bothering to research.
<<My email is linked, in case you don't want to broadcast it>>: You know it's much easier to just put it in the email form slot, and the lack of a mailto: probably dosen't make it much safer since spammers probably look for something just in the form of foo@bar.baz .

Na zdorov'ya
Gside - [gside@comcast.net]
Fair Haven, NJ
Sunday, March 21, 2004 01:30:30 AM
IP: 68.37.159.199

DEZI> Yep, the Supreme Court interpreted that as "Separation of Church and State", and I for one couldn't be happier.

As for those of you who want religion mixed with government, why the fuck don't you just move to Saudi Arabia where religion is the ultimate law? Wait, I know why. You don't want to be ruled by a belief system that is not your own, am I right? Well guess what, that's exactly how us non-Christians feel.
Greg Bishansky
Sunday, March 21, 2004 01:10:24 AM
IP: 216.179.4.248

Sorry for a second post, but I feel a bit of need to clarify here (besides, its technically tomorrow).

DPH (or his hologram):<In essence, that law says Congress can neither force people to attend any religious services (that would be establishing a state religion) nor make any religion illegal. > Right. Exactly. But these morons in Martinsville think that the Govt. SHOULD adopt a state religion, should make Christianity the law, to hell with what anyone else thinks. And, yeah, we just talked about that Native American church thing, with the peyote business, in my ethics class. No probs. there.

Caboose:<Separation of church and state doesn't exist in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. The government is only prevented from establishing any religion as the official state religion, like Rome did with Christianity centuries ago, or what Henry the Eighth did in England when he formed the Anglican Church. > Right. Got that. And I have a vague memory of the Seperation of Church & State thing being like a judicial law (the judge decides, kinda like Roe v. Wade), my vague memory is of a teacher telling me that... dunno, someone can back that up?

But still the best way to keep out an "official state church" is to keep all church (including Christianity here, or Islam elsewhere) out of the govt. all together.

<And, quite frankly, if you're opposed to religion in the laws, then we'd better strike the laws against murder, theft, obstruction of justice, and perjury because (and please don't deny this, because the Founding Fathers were Christian and inundated by Christian ideals for their entire lives) they have their foundation in the Bible. The Ten Commandments, for example, and other places> Those are also basic society laws. Like self-preservation laws, in just about every culture on earth. Don't kill someone cause revenge will be had on you. Don't steal their stuff, or your stuff might get stolen. Those are common sense, no shit laws. Lying destroys the fabric of trust in a culture, any culture, heathen or otherwise. ... Obstruction of justice? Are you lumping that in with lying? But as for "You shall have no other gods but me" or Do not take my name in vain"? This group of rallyers want the whole boat, not just 7 out of ten. Justify those.
As for the Founding Fathers being Christian: Yeah, they were, they were also Children of the Age of Enlightenment. Religion started to mean a bit less at that time, thank god. Reason was kicking in. Consequences were being examined. Of course they allowed freedom of religion.
<so it's kind of hard to argue that we're establishing Christianity as the state religion when the same things can be found in Judaism, > But it all goes toward interpretation. I see a bunch of hick right wing Bible-thumpers "hollering" about God's Law, and, if their wishes come to pass, who do they think will have won? They will. And they can interpret that no other gods thing as: Jews don't dig Jesus, Christians believe Jesus is part of the trinity, part of the one God. If you don't believe in a part of God, you must not believe in the REAL God, so therefore, you must be believing in some other "God" and are breaking the First Law (I mean, Commandment). Ok, a bit of slippery slope, but not too far fetched. I bet the Founding Fathers would have visualized it. Maybe that's why they didn't make the Bill of Rights the Commandments.
<honestly don't see how posting some nice guidlines for how people should live constitutes establishing an official state religion, nor do I care.> It's the intention behind it. If posting the guidlines is a way of rectifying what you believe is a decrepid society on the fringe of all moral chaos, only to be saved by turning the the ONE God, and only that god, then thats messed up. If establishing those guidlines so that you don't have all chaos breaking loose, and a certain degree of trust and comfort insured (cause with out that we have no society) then thats ok.
<everybody ignores in life anyway. > Except the Indiana dipshits that are bent on righting a wrong and horrible world.

As for the war:<We're in, everybody knows that 95% of America and 99.999% of the rest of the world hates what's going on in Iraq, but we're going to be there until the job's done or the next president decides to pull the plug,> Yeah, but we don't have to be quiet and happy about it. Complacency can breed abuse.

KJay: Congrats on being home. Glad you're better.:)
<They should just post "the commandments" without no religous over tones.> Or maybe just the laws.
<The longer we stay the more soilders are going to die because eventually we will start to wear out our welcome> I pretty much agree with all else you said, except, I think we wore out our welcome before we even got there.

Ok I'm hungry.
Dezi
Sunday, March 21, 2004 01:02:43 AM
IP: 68.58.158.101

I'm finally out of the hospital! My hyperthyroidism was that bad. I had to stay in the hospital for almost a month because the doctors were afraid that I'll have a "Thyroid storm" Which could end up with me having a heart attack. Well I'm out now. I still can't drive. I have to go to physical therpy because my crazy thyroid left me with muscle weakness.
<Does a quick room scan>Since this is mostly a christian based country sometimes people like to impose their beliefs on others who are different, which is not right. This is why we have seperation of church and state. Now the 10 commandments make sense. Almost all faiths believe that you shouldn't steal, kill, bear false witnesses ect.
Instead of posting "the ten commandments" They should just post "the commandments" without no religous over tones. Religious leaders shouldn't claim that their faith is better than anybody else, and that if you don't follow our "Religion" you will go to hell ect. That's how so many
other cultures were "forced" to convert to another "faith"
(which I will not name).
<The War>As a solider in the army myself, I think the war is a mixed blessing. When 9/11 happened I was very supportive of bush sending the army to find ben ladin. But
when suddenly bush turned to saddam and said he had "weapons of massive destruction". I didn't believe him one bit. First of all why wait until after 9/11? If saddam had these weapons why was the UN against Bush's actions? If these "weapons" existed, the UN would of been in Iraq doing inspections and taking pictures for evidance. There
was no evidance given to prove that Saddam had these weapons. Bush knew that after 9/11 people were angery and
upset so they wouldn't question him. After months and months of searching bin ladin couldn't be found. What better a scapegoat than saddam? The main reason bush wanted to go over there was for the oil. And all of these soldiers had to die for nothing. This is why alot of countries hate the US because we get involved in stuff that don't concern us. Sometimes I think it's good to help other countries but if they don't want us there we shouldn't be there. I'm glad that Saddam was caught because
a lot of innocent people were suffering under his rule anyway. But it was the timing of the attack that made me angry. Now that saddam is gone, we should help Iraq get back on their feet, give them their own goverment and get out. We shouldn't stay there no longer than 2 years. The longer we stay the more soilders are going to die because eventually we will start to wear out our welcome. That's all I have to say for now.
kjay - [korimia.j.hall@us.army.mil]
fort bliss, tx, USA
Sunday, March 21, 2004 12:52:32 AM
IP: 172.143.104.78

**in anger, dph starts to post an immediate response to Tharos, but dph's hologram shoves him out of the way**

Tharos - <These people get to me. I had an English teacher that tried to say that separation of church and state isn't in the Constitution. It fueled all my friends. I had the same response you did: "Doesn't 'The government shall make no law respecting one religion over any other' amount to separation of church and state?" Don't these same people always glorify America for its freedom of religion?> 1st, you're lucky I shoved dph out of the way. Your statement makes him pretty mad because he considers your interpretion to be . . . as far off as the East is from the West. You need to read the 1st amendment for yourself. The exact words of the 1st amendment concerning religion are the following:

Congress shall pass no law establishing a religion or prohibiting the free excercise thereof.

DPH thinks that's pretty self-explanatory and comes nowhere close to even implying separation of church and state. In essence, that law says Congress can neither force people to attend any religious services (that would be establishing a state religion) nor make any religion illegal.
dph's hologram
AR, USA
Sunday, March 21, 2004 12:35:45 AM
IP: 67.14.195.14

Kaioto: I see your chem teacher gave you the same lesson in high school that mine did. ;) But it's dihydrogen monoxide, not dihydrogen oxide. You know how picky those chemists are. :)

Tharos and Dezi: Separation of church and state doesn't exist in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. The government is only prevented from establishing any religion as the official state religion, like Rome did with Christianity centuries ago, or what Henry the Eighth did in England when he formed the Anglican Church.

And, quite frankly, if you're opposed to religion in the laws, then we'd better strike the laws against murder, theft, obstruction of justice, and perjury because (and please don't deny this, because the Founding Fathers were Christian and inundated by Christian ideals for their entire lives) they have their foundation in the Bible. The Ten Commandments, for example, and other places.

(Actually, to be really REALLY picky, the Ten Commandments are found in the Jewish Torah, so it's kind of hard to argue that we're establishing Christianity as the state religion when the same things can be found in Judaism, don't you think?)

I honestly don't see how posting some nice guidlines for how people should live constitutes establishing an official state religion, nor do I care. We can be squabbling over more important matters than some couple thousand-year-old phrases that most everybody ignores in life anyway.

As to the protesting of the war, I think it's stupid. We're in, everybody knows that 95% of America and 99.999% of the rest of the world hates what's going on in Iraq, but we're going to be there until the job's done or the next president decides to pull the plug, whichever comes first. I personally hope we're there until the job is done because, as you said, Dezi, it's our mess and we need to clean it up. If Bosnia-Herzegovina is any indication of the UN's ability to put the pieces of a country back together (as Kerry apparently wants) well...let's just say I'm not optimistic about their chances in Iraq.
Caboose - [caboose@wctc.net]
WI, USA
Sunday, March 21, 2004 12:27:46 AM
IP: 209.94.184.128

Dezi: Ooooh man. These people get to me. I had an English teacher that tried to say that separation of church and state isn't in the Constitution. It fueled all my friends. I had the same response you did: "Doesn't 'The government shall make no law respecting one religion over any other' amount to separation of church and state?" Don't these same people always glorify America for its freedom of religion? I guess that's only when they want to rip on the Mideast.
Tharos
Saturday, March 20, 2004 11:49:00 PM
IP: 69.40.136.38

Oh god these idiots are at it again.
A bunch of dipshits (sorry, but I'm in strong reaction mode) in Martinsville, Indiana (about 40 mi. south of Indy)held a rally today to support that moron judge in Alabama (a little late aren't they? Oh wait, the weather had to clear up. *rolls eyes*) They are proclaiming that the Ten Commandments need to be the foundation for American law. They dragged out a styrofoam version of the tablets, and a mike and amp, made a bunch of Jesus Loves Me signs, and propped themselves up in a busy section of town and "hollered" for awhile. Tried to get all fire and brimstone about it too. Good god, I wished an airplane had flown over head and dropped one of those blue toilet rock things on them. Yeah, that would have been great!
I mean, c'mon. "You shall have no other gods before me" made into law. Sounds like a bunch of people get screwed on that. "You shall not take my name in vain." At this point in the post, I'm gonna be doing like 5 years, hard time. They can have their religion, they can "holler" about it all they want. They can even fool themselves into thinking they are changing the world (one man said something about his grand kids being proud of him one day for all this. *sigh*) But they can be damned if they try to make their beliefs into law and impose them on me. Religion is religion, and those who wish to partake can. But religion should stay out of the government. One guy yelled about that the phrase "separation of church and state" never really appears in the Constitution. Well yeah, but isn't there an amendment saying (ok I don't know the correct wording) that the govt. can make no religion the official one? And by imposing the Ten Commandments into law, that would violate that ammendment. I so can't wait till I move outta here. This head-up-butt hypocrisy is sickening. They bless you with their mouths, and pledge to pray for you, and say with their eyes, 'you're gonna go to hell you sinner, 'cause you ain't one of us!'
They can all rot.
*OK so there's my little change of subject from the war debate.
Oh yeah, and Green Baron: Looks like rallying in Indiana is showing a raise in popularity since the KKK days. There was also a antiwar protest for the anniversary downtown today. That _and_ a religious nut rally. What a "busy" day. (And a mere dozen were at the antiwar rally).

I don't really feel like scrolling through _alot_ of stuff written right now, but to whoever said that the war was over, and that it was stupid to be antiwar now, when there wasn't a war (or something like that, I don't remember), I bet my dad would argue with you in a second. Just because the buffoon-in-chief went all hot shots on an aircraft carrier, and declared an end to major combat actions, doesn't mean the war was over. It just meant we took all the towns worth taking. The war's still on, whether we like it or not, and I think it's still ok to protest. (Not that we should just up and leave, I mean, I hope that our mothers taught us well to clean up our own messes, but we can make our ill will about it known).

In other news, I'd like to happily declare than I am now an Indy CBS-affiliate lacky! I got the internship!
I also found out I won an award at the Indiana Collegiate Press Association newspaper contest for either News Photo, or Editorial Cartoon (or both) but I won't know for which until the April 3rd Awards Ceremony. Yea!
Heh, someone at work suggested I quit dissing on Indiana so much for all the opportunities and such I have gotten here. I said, hmm, maybe it's just cause I work hard and try to be really good at what I do... Yeah, I like that one better.

Hellcat: What was your MSN name thing to add to my list? I didn't get it down last nite, sorry. My email is linked, in case you don't want to broadcast it. :)

Ok I think that is all. My apt. needs cleaning.
Dezi - [<-Me!]
Saturday, March 20, 2004 11:29:43 PM
IP: 68.58.158.101

Hm, interesting.

This is almost as much fun as watching folks get environmentalists to sign petitions to ban dihydrogen-oxide because it is a toxic chemic that can kill you if it is inhaled and we store large quantities of it in schools and residential areas.

A few thoughts:

Lytani >>

<< The Aids virus is the fully-blown form of HIV >>

You're just wrong there.

HIV = Human Immunodeficiency Virus

AIDS = Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome

A virus is a dangerous bunch of protein whose state as a life-form is debatable. AIDS is the state of having your immune system cell counts reduced to the point where a relatively weak opportunistic infection can kill you.

AIDS is a state that is caused by HIV. It is not itself a virus or anything physical - merely a state of being.

This Iraq debate again >>

Bah, way too much emotionalist, conspiracy theorist propaganda in here. Tin-foil hats all around. I love how people like to cite editorialists and activists as sources, as if they'd give the same credibility to any other bunch of back-scratching crony yes-men engaging in rampant group-think.

The rise of the Baathist, pan-arabic movement in Iraq started back in the 1960s and 1970s, when Bakr was still a check on Saddam's power. By 1980, Bakr was sick and dying and Saddam slid right into the role of supreme dictator for life and started declaring war on everything that moved.

Iraq drew a lot of support for its military development from a broad base in the West. Iran pulled support from North Korea, China, Syria, Lebanon, and even covert arms transactions with the United States.

Iraq drew its support for military build up from a broad base of western backers. The Russians and French supplied most of Saddam's hardware directly and indirectly from the 1970s until 2003.

His poisonous gas chemical weapons certainly could have been home-grown, since they were practically World War I technology and the rumors of their existance had been flying around since the mid-60s.

"The UN report provides only negative evidence of the origin of the mustard gas sample. The absence in the sample analysed in Sweden and Switzerland of polysulphides and of more than a trace of sulphur indicates that it is not of past US-government manufacture, for all US mustard was made by the Levinstein process from ethylene and mixed sulphur chlorides. That process is also said to have been the one used by the USSR. From similar reasoning, British-made mustard, too, can probably be ruled out, even though substantial stocks were once held at British depots in the Middle East."

http://projects.sipri.se/cbw/research/factsheet-1984.html

Fingers were pointed at Brazil, France, the Soviet Union, and even Britain for supplying Hussein with his chemical weapons, though a lot of evidence indicates that the bulk of his weapons were home-grown during the late 70s.

Honestly, it doesn't take all that much to make chemical weapons. The trickiest part is keeping the workers from dying. In Hussein's case, that isn't really a big deal. He was big on killing his own people.

I honestly believe the only thing keeping Saddam from cranking out more WMDs both before and after he expelled the UN weapons inspectors was rampant corruption and embesselment within his own government. He paid people to make them, and then those people embesseled the money and made false reports to him, duping Hussein and just about everyone who was spying on Hussein.

It certainly wasn't any lack of motive, technology, or resources that kept Hussein from making more mustard gas and tabun. Heck, we couldn't even keep random terrorist in Iraq from making Ricin.

Lain: << bush had plans to invade afganistan a few months after september of 2001 anyways. why? because the bribes for the taliban werent going over so well and they werent letting them build the pipeline. >>

That's an interesting conspiracy theory. I've heard some wonderful ones in my day. An internal memo along the lines of "Hey, Donny, these guys are late on their payments, go bust their kneecaps. Signed - Georgy" would be about right.

Tin-foil hats aside, NATO powers have had plans to invade half the hot-spots in the world for the last 20-30 years. Crap, Hollywood had plans on a covert military invasion of Afghanistan in 1988. It was called "Rambo III."

Heck, we've got plans to invade North Korea too - just none of them are particularly good considering they all involve watching Seoul go up like tinder.

Ultimately, when you get down to it, Iraq has been a death-filled, war-torn shit-hole for the last 30-odd years. When there wasn't civil war and genocide, there was war with Iran or Kuwait. When there wasn't war, Clinton was bombing them every other day. Now they whole place has finally been invade and being rebuilt from the ground up.

Good idea? Bad idea? I think only time will tell. We'll look back 10 years from now and either see a developing nation with less rampant bloodshed and political violence, or we'll see more of the same sad story of the last 3 decades.

As for the Election >

John Kerry is one of my U.S. Senators. He possibly shames me more than Ted Kennedy. At least Teddy gets drunk enough to actually - believe - some of the crap he says. Kerry had the audacity to talk big about poverty during a reelection campaign right up until the point where it was revealed that he'd made ZERO dollars in personal charitable donations on his own for the last few years. Managed to find time to marry the heiress of the Heinz ketchup fortune though.

That pretty much epitomizes Kerry for me, having lived under him for so many years - nice smile, talks a good game, but he's just another stuffed shirt trying to acrue as much power, money, and influence as possible by playing the Big Government game.

I know him too well to consciously vote him as the Anti-Bush, because I know he'd turn around and do everything Bush did in a heartbeat if he felt it would profit him politically.

Kaioto - [kaioto@yahoo.com]
Boston, MA, USA
Saturday, March 20, 2004 08:01:14 PM
IP: 66.30.158.19

Damien: <Cause GWB thinks canada is already part of the states?
don't tell him the truth>
Blame Canada!
<sorry, I usually say Barbeque sause but was ranting at the time, but most people didn't notice the content, only tyhe message.>
Yeah, but the devil is in the details.
<|/\| |-| \|/ |\|07 ?>
D00d! 4 $h@m3! 1F j00 |\|33|} 2 @x3, d3N J00 N0 n33|) 2 |<n0\/\/!!!!111!!one!!!

Gside: <Be silend, you midwest heathen.?
I am PROUD to be a Midwesterner!
<And as long as you cover all your mistakes, that's the important thing.>
I covered enough of the mistakes, so that's good enough.
<Are the different meats totally mixed together, or do they make separate shells? And the latter might make an interesting style of meatloaf.>
Hmm... Not sure. Let's try it both ways!
<Can't say that I have. Is it good?>
Not really. They were advertising the remake of Battlestar Galactica... which sucked.
<Sure, so why is it you salivate at the oddities section of the deli? >
YES!... NO!... Maybe?... FISH!
<That'd be too easy.>
But fun AND educational!
<Too much tundra.>
We will enslave the native people to pump the oil, and we will use THEM as a garbage dump instead of them dumping their trash here!
<Well Imzadi is the only Trek novel I've read, so I knew all about it when he came in.>
Ah. I haven't read the novels... and I am pretty happy that I haven't. Too many.
<From the Jargon File>
That's good! Still, I am doubtful of any benefits the Big Room has.

Vinnie: <That's simple! It's because thenthe country would have every EnvironMENTAL Activists you can think of protesting the destruction of Canada's wild life>
Then we say that the Canadians are killing their wildlife! THAT is a reason to invade! Then, while we are "protecting wildlife," who's to complain if we secretly put in a few oil derricks? I mean, if we properly control the media, the public will never know.
<Such people would be to much trouble just for convenience.>
They can be dealt with.

Quote of the day:
I like my women like I like my coffee: Ground, steamed, and creamed.
Then the rest can fertilize my roses
Fire Storm
Saturday, March 20, 2004 06:57:18 PM
IP: 65.114.91.3

That is what hypocrisy looks like.
Whitbourne
Saturday, March 20, 2004 06:31:08 PM
IP: 156.34.94.28

This is what democracy looks like.
Whitbourne
Saturday, March 20, 2004 06:27:31 PM
IP: 156.34.94.28

Damien: << Some quasi-witty flame baiting drivel of a response >
Some Response with an insult to a north american leader.

2 can play this game
Needless echo
Saturday, March 20, 2004 04:12:37 PM
IP: 209.73.164.50

139 days left until The Gathering 2004 in Montreal, Quebec!
Patrick
Saturday, March 20, 2004 08:06:26 AM
IP: 65.43.150.4

In the name of all that is offensive and indecent, click on my name to see who is backing Ralph Nader...I figured they'd have endorsed Dennis Kucinich, myself.

Warning: This may be unsuitable for people Krista's age...you have been warned.
ghost of Reverend Attila - [<--clickie]
Saturday, March 20, 2004 04:34:53 AM
IP: 220.73.165.203

Fire Storm:<So why don't we invade Canada for it's oil then?> That's simple! It's because thenthe country would have every EnvironMENTAL Activists you can think of protesting the destruction of Canada's wild life. Such people would be to much trouble just for convenience.
Vinnie - [tpeano29@hotmail.com]
Marquette, Michigan, USA
Saturday, March 20, 2004 02:43:03 AM
IP: 216.234.123.118

DPH> <<Wasn't the original colony founded by . . . the Puritans>>: I seem to remember that the first settlement was Roanoke in Virginia (before their run in with Croatoan), but the first actual colony might have been Puritans.
<<He lied about a lot of stuff, why not lie to accomplish good?>>: It's worse lying to other countries than just to voters.
<<the primary election is also the time to elect non-partisan judges>>: You don't have to vote for every office, do you? Just vote on the local stuff and ignore the party politics.

Gunjack> <<If it weren't so darn interesting, maybe we wouldn't talk about it so much>>: I'm not sure if it's interesting, just that people have so much already invested in their beliefs.
<<We ARE going to be doing body casting sometime soon, though>>: Going to make blow up dolls so you can pretend you're in a foursome with your twins? Or are you just doing pieces so she has a familiar way to keep herself entertained when you're gone, and you can use her breasts when you cross dress?
<<MEAT GOOD!>>: Very good. Remind me why I'm catholic and can't have any on recent fridays? Oh right, my parents. Reminder to self: be employed and moved out by next lent.
<<Ouch>>: If you're perverted and bored, I'd recommend looking it up. I know there are highlights of it at Ecchi Attack.

Lain> <<but not unsweetened cocoa powder>>: As I said before, but sorry, I was lazy in my descriptions. I was thinking something more like Quick or Swiss Miss powder, but I don't like using brand names (and I was being too lazy for a longer name). Besides, chocolate syrup is to plain.

Patrick> <<Allez-vous au le Gathering>>: "Au" is a contraction of "�" and "le", so "au le" is redundant.

Fire Storm> <<It's POP, dang nabbit!>>: Be silend, you midwest heathen.
<<The paint looks good though>>: And as long as you cover all your mistakes, that's the important thing.
<<ground chicken mixed stuffed into ground turkey stuffed into ground duck>>: Are the different meats totally mixed together, or do they make separate shells? And the latter might make an interesting style of meatloaf.
<<Did you see that Sci-Fi channel special that had him in a Starbucks?>>: Can't say that I have. Is it good?
<<Brains! Er... um... nope. Never>>: Sure, so why is it you salivate at the oddities section of the deli?
<<Out of a cannon>>: That'd be too easy.
<<So why don't we invade Canada for it's oil then?>>: Too much tundra.
<<found it really weird when Imzadi was mentioned>>: Well Imzadi is the only Trek novel I've read, so I knew all about it when he came in.
<<Outside? Daylight? Now you're just making words up>>: From the Jargon File: "Big Room: n. (Also `Big Blue Room') The extremely large room with the blue ceiling and intensely bright light (during the day) or black ceiling with lots of tiny night-lights (during the night) found outside all computer installations. "He can't come to the phone right now, he's somewhere out in the Big Room.""

Brutis> <>: Don't save the CR, you can always get that back. Save your post. Unless you're trying to beat Traveller at breaking the room.

Na zdorov'ya.
Gside - [gside@comcast.net]
Fair Haven, NJ
Saturday, March 20, 2004 01:00:03 AM
IP: 68.37.159.199

hey you people are all nuts for putting so much into the board (no offense to the room and sorry if i did offend)
to: Na zdorov'ya.
Gside - i did try to text and save but the file is too big
wow i can get more from here than cnn.

Brutis - [creature_of_the_night_20042004@yahoo.com]
Hammond, Louisiana, Usa
Friday, March 19, 2004 11:04:09 PM
IP: 209.205.160.5

1st: thanks for calming down!

annie: your psycic

Firestorm: <<So why don't we invade Canada for it's oil then? >> Cause GWB thinks canada is already part of the states?
don't tell him the truth

<<Tartar sauce on a rabbit? Ew... >> sorry, I usually say Barbeque sause but was ranting at the time, but most people didn't notice the content, only tyhe message.

<<D00d! d0 |\|0T u$3 l33t 1n \/@1N! >>
|/\| |-| \|/ |\|07 ?

Question: <<quote some thing you've said>>
Some quasi-witty flame baiting drivel of a response
(sorry dude i'm too tired today to come up with a specific bit of anything)
Damien
Friday, March 19, 2004 09:59:39 PM
IP: 207.6.149.113

Gunjack: <...I have a better one, involving a gaurdsman in basic and three drill instructors, but I'm not sure if I can tell it here without busting the content rules.>
Well then, e-mail it!
<...Though, they DO have cheap soda...>
It's POP, dang nabbit! ;)

Gside: <How good are you at taping the drywall joins?>
Eh, ok I guess. My corners suck but my straight seams came out pretty good. I improved as I went along, so the next time will be ok. The paint looks good though.
<Unless they're likely to visit you with implements of destruction. Because that'd just be more work for you killing them.>
But that's the fun kind of work
<People should use meat grinders more.>
Definitely. Mmm... ground chicken mixed stuffed into ground turkey stuffed into ground duck
<The first mate of the Pequod or the coffee shop?>
COFFEE! Did you see that Sci-Fi channel special that had him in a Starbucks?
<Except for the occaisonal craving for headcheese.>
Brains! Er... um... nope. Never.
<They should fire their marketing people.>
Out of a cannon!
<mean, "Always Rutgers, Always Coca Cola", a phrase I know well from my time in marching band.>
Yeah. I forgot what I was going to originally say, but what I was going to say was so damn close to that, so I put it in.

Damien: <DON'T PUT MAKEUP ON THAT RABBIT! PUT TARTAR SAUCE!>
Tartar sauce on a rabbit? Ew...
<Look up the facts before making up conspicicies, here's one for you.. Why did the US declare Iraqies Blowing up Iraqi Oil wells>
Because we took over that country, so that oil is OURS.
<Canada has like 20 - 30% of the worlds resources and about 0.5% Of its population. The more you know ;)>
So why don't we invade Canada for it's oil then?

Green Baron: <Did you eat extra babies on Monday :)>
Only 1 baby, since babies aren't considered animals according to PETA. BUT, since it was the child of a PETA member, it all worked out in the end.
<hippies for dinner!!! After a thorough boiling of course>
Much better as a roast or a stew, IMHO

Greg: <since we're Americans, I guess that means we're not allowed to insult leaders of other countries, right?>
Hell, half the fun of being American is we don't have to give a flying f#$% what anyone else thinks and we can make fun of whoever we want!
<But since you say you support EVERYTHING he does. Then you obviousy support drunk driving, football hooliganism and stealing Christmas wreaths too>
What's wrong with football hooliganism?

Ed: <Woah. The guy can't handle a pretzel in his mouth and you're trusting him with your ::offending word removed and replaced with Naughty Bits::? You're a braver man than I am...>
LOL!!!!

Patrick: <Japan attacked U.S. soil on December 7, 1941>
Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't it only U.S. soil because it was a military base, since Hawaii wasn't made into a state until the 1950s?

Lynati: <Wow, you used 1337-sp34|< !! I suddenly have so much respect for you and your opinions!!!11>
D00d! d0 |\|0T u$3 l33t 1n \/@1N!

If violence is so bad, then why does it feel so GOOD?

Saw Star Trek: Nemesis the other day and found it really weird when Imzadi was mentioned.

#80921 +(439)- [X]
TwilightKnight: all i do is wait for Desert crisis 1.5 and play counter-strike all day
Dr SpaZZo: Heh.
Dr SpaZZo: Which, by definition, means I have more of a life than you
Dr SpaZZo: Pity
TwilightKnight: well i was making out with a girl today
Dr SpaZZo: Liar
Dr SpaZZo: Theres no such thing as a "girl"
TwilightKnight: yes it is true!
TwilightKnight: they arent the tales and ledgends we thought them to be
TwilightKnight: they exist and live on the outside!
TwilightKnight: In the daylight!
Dr SpaZZo: Outside? Daylight? Now you're just making words up.
Fire Storm
Friday, March 19, 2004 08:12:48 PM
IP: 65.114.91.3

You know, I've only seen about 30 seconds of TGC. I was probably only 12 when they (TGC) first came out and although the were obviously gargoyles, the whole feel was wrong and I turned it off without giving it a second thought. It's funny now that my hunch was right.
Annie
ID
Friday, March 19, 2004 02:58:37 PM
IP: 206.80.126.5

k, I'll stop, But I did try,
and just like free speech, i have the right wo whine until it annoys the real admins enough to boot me, but i'm too lazy to work that hard.
They SKIPPED DEadly force? NOOOOOOOO!
Damien
Friday, March 19, 2004 12:02:37 PM
IP: 207.6.149.113

Greetings all... a note in passing:

<places a Moonman with a black band around it on the mantle...>

Today, one of the founding VJ and one of the Originals of Music TeleVision has died of a heart attack. For those of us of the old school that remember the first years of MTV, raise a glass please...

J. J. Jackson, dead at 62. May he rest in peace.

Maintain and Check Six...

Stephen R. Sobotka Jr.
Tampa, FL, USA
Friday, March 19, 2004 11:59:57 AM
IP: 24.164.32.253

Patrick> <<<-- Allez-vous au le Gathering!>> This is North America, learn ze language ;)
Triumph the Insult Dog
yeah its Reverend Attila being a jerk really
Friday, March 19, 2004 10:25:12 AM
IP: 218.145.25.115

140 days left until The Gathering 2004 in Montreal, Quebec!

No heavy-duty political discourse planned, but I know you all will want to be there anyway. ;)

Patrick - [<-- Allez-vous au le Gathering!]
Friday, March 19, 2004 06:55:07 AM
IP: 65.43.150.4

DPH:<Congrats. I saw every episode of TGC once, but it was so horrible that I vowed never again to see them again.>I find that watching TGC with the sound turned off is much more better and easier to view. That way you can use your imagination and still see the Gargoyles.

Vinnie - [tpeano29@hotmail.com]
Marquette, MI, USA
Friday, March 19, 2004 04:18:22 AM
IP: 216.234.125.73

lain<how do you know? you have to test a theory to know the outcome. >

Testing it wouldn't be worth the price. I mean you have to move all those israelis and our military forces there, many of them who have sweated and bled for that place.



How do you know? Many of them are under his banner because they are directionless and unemployed young men who chose violence over trying to help their world. If anything if there is no bin laden then they'll fellow somebody else that'll give their aggression a direction.

<you mean, closer to you like canada is closer to you? >

Yes except they'll listen to us without the influence of the Germans and French. The Canadians are probably distrustful of us seeing how we're stronger and everything.

<you expect me to believe that when an administration changes, all people in government office lose their jobs and are replaced by new people? please.. >

All the major movers and shakers no doubt lose their jobs whenever there's a change.

<also, you might want to take note of the fact that there is *still* no proof that bin laden attacked the WTC.>

What about that video of his that we found?

<the pipeline is for piping oil THROUGH afganistan, not from. afganistan wouldnt be *selling* the oil or making a profit from it. they get nothing - well, except rental charges, i suppose. hardly a serious source of income though. >

What other sources of legitimate income do they have? Certainly not tourism? Farming perhaps, but thats mostly dedicated to the drug trade i heard isn't it? The pipeline and its creation will help in the end bring in more foreign investment.

<however, youre being very sneaky and trying to change the subject. if bush has nothing to hide, why is he against an independent investigation? >

Perhaps because he thinks it's a waste of our time and of our tax dollars? Perhaps because it's just going to humiliate the CIA more and drag their reputable name through the mud again. Either way I think Bush knows best and we should trust him on this issue.

<sure, maybe it wouldnt work but... since nobodys actually tried that, i cant see how you could substantiate the claim that it wouldnt work. >

Possibly because any good act we do would still be seen under tinted glasses by them. They'd think we'd have some ulterior motive for everyone of our actions either good or bad. There's no way reasoning with those people.

<thats a little simplistic. if there had been no cold war and america hadnt installed and supported hussein in a place where there was a lot of oil, THEN you might be able to say he wouldnt have "become wealthy enough to become a threat." also, maybe he might have been somewhat less threatening if the US hadnt equipped him with huge stockpiles of weapons? whoops.. >

In the end if there was no oil we wouldn't have nearly as much interest in the region as we do now. With the discovery of oil there came the wealth, military power and misguided US support.

<lots of people make lots of plans. i think the argument is that he wasnt a threat because he had absolutely no means to impliment any of his plans. >

So we keep him bottled there forever? It isn't going to happen. If he dies his sons would replace him and they no doubt have similar grand plans. Besides bottling him there allows him to terrorize his people and allows many more to die under the sanctions.

<but also, there are more ways of "going after" someone than using military force. bush hasnt done ANYTHING against the saudis.>

Doing anything aggressive would nevertheless provoke the anger of the house of saud and the people there. In the end not a good choice since we have a base there and we depende on their oil.

<ah, there we go, thats an actual reason. so you admit its all about oil then..? >

I'm admitting that it's a disruption to our supplies and would no doubt disrupt our economy and military, which in the end would hamper us. Basically taking out the Saudis would weaken us in the short term.

<not as bad? sure they are. not as powerful? give me a break, saddam had about as much power as a toothless, arthritic llama >

Hussein also had a growing sympathy among arabs and a very large cash base and countries willing to speak on his behalf while N. Korea had none of these things and even China was somewhat leary of Il.

Lynati<1.) Uh, we're nearly a week into this argument, it's not early at all, and the insults started DAYS ago.

2.) Point of fact:...�so, it's not an insult if it's about people who
you think deserve it, then? >

I'm referring to direct presonal attacks against the posters themselves. The closest I've done is writing that he has his head in the sand.

<So far, I've had three other people (only 2 of which were close acquaintances of mine) pop up on IM to share a laugh over that line. So that makes it 5 : 1 in favor of that being a humorous statement, too bad I can't claim credit for it. >

If they also share your similar political views then it's most likely them showing party solidarity.

<So, he's pummeling you with an AIDs-soaked chicken, but you contract HIV>

You mean AIDS virus soaked rubber chicken don't you? Don't think you can soak something in AIDS, but certainly in AIDS virus.

<But with you, there is actually someone who understands less about the reality of the situation than I do. Way to bulk up my ego, Question! >

LOL ;) . My pleasure keep up the good work :).

<Wow, you used 1337-sp34|< !! I suddenly have so much respect for you and your opinions!!!11 >

Actually thats what we heathens call a typo.:)

DPH<More political wisdom: Did you know that US Senators and Representatives don't actually read the bills they vote 99% of the time? They rely on their staff to read through the bills and information learned from their collagues to decide how to vote on a bill. >

Unfortunate, but true, but thats only because they're busy busy men&women with very little time. Perhaps if they had something like a time turner or a phoenix gate. :)
Question
Friday, March 19, 2004 04:05:18 AM
IP: 69.44.73.131

Lain - <(just kidding, i assume you meant "TGC" instead of "TGS", so i still love you..) > Sometimes my fingers and my brain just don't communicate. In this case, you're very right. I meant TGC and TGS instead. <dishonesty is a requirement for those in politics, regardless of nationality or position.> So there are classes where you learn how to tell one audience one truth, tell another another audience that the previous truth was lie, and not get caught?

Z - <*Continues to lurk while the self-proclaimed political deities (not in so many words) of the CR invariably continue to rant and distort everything that their adversaries write* > I didn't realize I was a political deity.

Gunjack - <See, I'm not entirely sure if we EVER get a choice. The puppet on the Right versus the Puppet on the left, y'know?> It's a complex decision: Either vote for which side either least antagonizes you or vote for which side whose motives you trust the most. <I've seen enough evidence in the last year to prove to me that this country is going to Hell right quick, and the people have less than zero say in the matter.> I disagree. One side will take you there faster while the other side will complain that their candidate isn't doing enough to reverse the trend. *stops and reconsiders* Both sides would say that.

True or False: If both political parties agree on something, then it is probably true.

More political wisdom: Did you know that US Senators and Representatives don't actually read the bills they vote 99% of the time? They rely on their staff to read through the bills and information learned from their collagues to decide how to vote on a bill. Consequently, I don't believe there is such a thing as a legislative bill that is either completely good or completely bad except for the most simple of bills.

Lain - <impressive :) > Given human nature, I think pure conservatism (government leaves businesses completely alone) and pure liberalism (government tells businesses how to conduct their business down to the smallest detail) are both wrong. The problem with pure conservatism is there are business owners who could care less about employee safety and taking care of the environment. The problem with pure liberalism is the people just craze power. Neither one is right.

http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html - Simple quiz to determine where you fit on the political spectrum

Damien - <JUST DROP IT. YOU ARE NOT GOING TO CHANGE SOMEONES MIND BY YELLING, OR BEATING THEM OVER THE HEAD WITH YOUR OPINION! QUESTION HAS HIS OPINION, EUTHINASIA HAS A SIMILAR, GB, LAIN, AND ABOUT 16 OTHER PEOPLE ALL HAVE THEIR OWN OPINIONS BUT NITPICKING EVERYSINGLE DETAIL ABOUT
WHO FARTED WHEN AND WHERE IS JUST GETTING ON MY NERVES.> Hey, you're the one who's yelling. In fact, I enjoy this exchange of ideas. It looks like my idea of calling "Youth N Asia" "Euthansia" is catching on. P.S. Stop trying to act like an admin. Until things get out of control, we don't need anybody complaining.
DPH - [<--Click here to join a group working on a gargoyles card game]
AR, USA
Friday, March 19, 2004 03:35:48 AM
IP: 67.14.195.43

Tsk Tsk -- they skipped Deadly Force on toon disney... It would have come on at 11:30 -- no reason for them to not show it -- sigh... Really must have confused first time viewers to see elisa on crutches...

silvadel
Friday, March 19, 2004 03:17:07 AM
IP: 24.225.220.194

damien>> oh, alright. for my end, ill stop. *just* for you. youre right and i do have better things to be doing...
:)
lain
Friday, March 19, 2004 03:12:14 AM
IP: 4.7.35.8

I just noticed how appropriat the pic is for my post,
the expression says it all
Damien
Friday, March 19, 2004 03:07:15 AM
IP: 209.121.87.149

DPH: Congrats. I saw every episode of TGS once
really? do you have a Good imagination?

and please I haven't listed anything about the white house, thats someone else that listed the 3 things not me. (and i'm 90% sure i'm the only damien

DAMMIT NO MORE FISKING!
i have no power to stop it but:
JUST DROP IT. YOU ARE NOT GOING TO CHANGE SOMEONES MIND BY YELLING, OR BEATING THEM OVER THE HEAD WITH YOUR OPINION!
QUESTION HAS HIS OPINION, EUTHINASIA HAS A SIMILAR, GB, LAIN, AND ABOUT 16 OTHER PEOPLE ALL HAVE THEIR OWN OPINIONS BUT NITPICKING EVERYSINGLE DETAIL ABOUT WHO FARTED WHEN AND WHERE IS JUST GETTING ON MY NERVES. <sound fades as he wanders off still ranting>

<slowly gets louder as he gets closer> ALRIGHT?
but this post isn't going to change anything.
Night!

Damien
Friday, March 19, 2004 03:06:24 AM
IP: 209.121.87.149

[Using personal insults so early in the game. ]
1.) Uh, we�re nearly a week into this argument, it�s not early at all, and the insults started DAYS ago.

2.) Point of fact:

[Please don't lump me in with those fools .]
[The rest are like jackals ]
[despite their pathetic intervention]
[The man is a freaking fanatic]
[the coward's choice]
[regimes of ignorance]

�so, it�s not an insult if it�s about people who you think deserve it, then?

[I've seen their pov and I prefer mine instead.]

[You are not funny at all. If you're trying to pass this off as humor then you've something else coming.]
This wasn�t my joke, but I wouldn�t have posted it if I didn�t think it was funny. So far, I�ve had three other people (only 2 of which were close acquaintances of mine) pop up on IM to share a laugh over that line.
So that makes it 5 : 1 in favor of that being a humorous statement, too bad I can�t claim credit for it.

[AIDS is something you acquire after you get HIV. ]
The Aids virus is the fully-blown form of HIV. He�s skipping the mild form and hitting you with the full shot. So, he�s pummeling you with an AIDs-soaked chicken, but you contract HIV. His terminology was correct, but it�s nice to see you know from medical trivia as well as political. It makes me feel so much better about myself, and I thank you for that. Most of the people in this room know what they are talking about, so usually I feel muchly intimidated by the political conversations that take place here from time to time. But with you, there is actually someone who understands less about the reality of the situation than I do. Way to bulk up my ego, Question! Thanks!

[palestinian sucid3 bombers]
Wow, you used 1337-sp34|< !! I suddenly have so much respect for you and your opinions!!!11

Lynati
Friday, March 19, 2004 02:45:56 AM
IP: 66.142.53.125

question>> <<Using personal insults so early in the game. :) >>
early? wtf, how long have we been having this debate? we should be threatening to poke each others eyeballs out by now... ;)
<<Getting Israel and us out of the Middle East is a pipe dream for him>>
well yes, it is.
<<He's just a fanatic and he won't be satisfied even if we and israelis leave>>
how do you know? you have to test a theory to know the outcome. i have no idea if hed be satisfied or not - or even if he was, if the rest of his followers would be.
<<No doubt he'll believe he has won and start a jihad against the world like his hero muhammed>>
huh?
<<His whole little crusade is an act of impulse. The man is a freaking fanatic end of the discussion>>
i think you misunderstand the term "impulse".
an impulse is "OMG! i have to buy that really overpriced garden ornament because it would look just daaaarling in my yard" not "i need to sit down with a bunch of by buddies and plan, over the course of a number of years and spending GOD knows how much money, the precise destruction of a historical american landmark."
and also, yes he is a fanatic, but im not sure if he freaks.. o.O or were you meaning he IS a freak..?
(come on now, laugh, im trying to inject some humour here..)
<<And that makes him better how?>>
oh, i never said it makes him BETTER.. cause it doesnt.
<<the fact that Robertson wanted a nuke to go off in washington dc just proves it>>
he did? yikes!
<<If they were closer to us then they wouldn't have bought Chiarc and Schroeder's garbage>>
you mean, closer to you like canada is closer to you? o.O
<<Different administration and different time>>
you expect me to believe that when an administration changes, all people in government office lose their jobs and are replaced by new people? please..
<<Your argument might work if not for the fact that James Baker is no longer part of the president's cabinet>>
yes, but the people who gave him that idea are, no doubt, still holding their jobs and able to pass it on.
<<We didn't invade afghanistan for the oil>>
yes, you did.
<<We invaded because of the Taliban who supported Bin laden and who destroyed the WTC>>
bush had plans to invade afganistan a few months after september of 2001 anyways. why? because the bribes for the taliban werent going over so well and they werent letting them build the pipeline.
also, you might want to take note of the fact that there is *still* no proof that bin laden attacked the WTC. check out FBI director muellers statement where he says there is "no legal proof to prove the identities of the suicidal hijackers" (the "proof to prove" is original too, but there you have it). if we dont know who the hijackers were, and at least 6 of them are still alive and one died before the sept 11 attacks (and they were victims of identity theft)... how do we know who was on the planes? answer: we dont. which is why i think an investigation would be nice..
<<The bases being near the oil pipeline is just convenient and would better help protect one of afghanistans few sources of income once it's built>>
the pipeline is for piping oil THROUGH afganistan, not from. afganistan wouldnt be *selling* the oil or making a profit from it. they get nothing - well, except rental charges, i suppose. hardly a serious source of income though.
<<The rest of your post however borders on fiction and seems to have been copied and pasted from one webstie>>
ah, so western newspapers print fiction? and here i went and specifically picked western sources. *sigh* some people are so hard to please...
if youd like links to all of those articles, id be happy to provide. i have them all (and lots more) stored on my HD - im starting a scrapbook :)
<>
speaking of twisting words...
i didnt say he did that either, now did i? :)
however, youre being very sneaky and trying to change the subject. if bush has nothing to hide, why is he against an independent investigation?
<>
sure, maybe it wouldnt work but... since nobodys actually tried that, i cant see how you could substantiate the claim that it wouldnt work.
<<If there was no oil then Hussein wouldn't have become this powerful and wealthy enough to become a threat>>
thats a little simplistic. if there had been no cold war and america hadnt installed and supported hussein in a place where there was a lot of oil, THEN you might be able to say he wouldnt have "become wealthy enough to become a threat." also, maybe he might have been somewhat less threatening if the US hadnt equipped him with huge stockpiles of weapons? whoops..
<<The man had plans to become the next saladin of the middle east>>
lots of people make lots of plans. i think the argument is that he wasnt a threat because he had absolutely no means to impliment any of his plans.
<<because people would be screaming at us saying we're trying to gain control of the oil>>
so? that doesnt seem to be stopping you from doing it it now - people are making that complaint anyways so why would you care?
<<the arabs would be united against us since Saudi Arabia has Mecca and Medina>>
arent they already pretty united..? i guess they could be more so. but also, there are more ways of "going after" someone than using military force. bush hasnt done ANYTHING against the saudis.
<<it'd disrupt the world's oil supply including ours and piss off a whole bunch of more countries that an attack on Iraq wouldn't>>
ah, there we go, thats an actual reason. so you admit its all about oil then..?
<<Besides Seoul is mighty close to the dmz so if war breaks out then you betcha that Seoul is going to suffer heavy casualties>>
well heck man, war is war, innocent people die :P
<<Except none of them are as powerful and as bad as Hussein>>
not as bad? sure they are. not as powerful? give me a break, saddam had about as much power as a toothless, arthritic llama :P
hee, now THATS a funny mental picture...

dph>> <<Probably to make another deal>>
yes. coincidentally, in fact, for more oil.
<<Also, the fact that Bush has followed through on a threat also gives him credibility>>
not really. the fact that he waffled around and kept changing the criteria sort-of destroys that.
<<Now if Bush says that he will make war with you if you don't change your ways, you will believe the threat is credible>>
again not really. if he says he will make war with you if you dont change your ways and you happen to have a lot of oil in your country, its a credible threat for sure tho.
<<That's because I'm not completely conservative>>
impressive :)
<<I'm beginning to believe that *dishonesty* is requirement for being president of the US>>
not quite. dishonesty is a requirement for those in politics, regardless of nationality or position. its not like US leaders are uniquely corrupt - you shouldnt trust any of them ;)
<<Congrats. I saw every episode of TGS once, but it was so horrible that I vowed never again to see them again>>
:O how RUDE! were going to fire you IMMEDIATELY, you JERK!!!!!!!!!
(just kidding, i assume you meant "TGC" instead of "TGS", so i still love you..)
;)

v <<Lain and I, we just want to get out of here before something real bad goes down>>
yes honey, but i dont think canada is far enough away...
<<Haven't tried that>>
dont. chocolate, maybe, but not unsweetened cocoa powder, yeich..
<<We ARE going to be doing body casting sometime soon, though... Oooo, the posabilities...>>
no bronze castings for you, bad gunjack, BAD!
<<MEAT GOOD!>>
youre in the meatrix, neo..

z <<*Continues to lurk while the self-proclaimed political deities (not in so many words) of the CR invariably continue to rant and distort everything that their adversaries write*>>
oh come on now, i try not to be THAT bad. ;)
ill stop if itll make you feel better..
.. also possibly because i spend all day writing posts in here instead of doing my writing for TGS... o.O
oopsie..

lain
Friday, March 19, 2004 02:34:24 AM
IP: 4.7.35.8

Yay, I've finally got my first fanfiction going.

Anyone interested can take a look, the first to chapters are kinda crap, but chapter three is coming.

Here's the address,
http://www.fanfiction.net/read.php?storyid=1757312
Ray
Friday, March 19, 2004 02:29:28 AM
IP: 81.62.182.57

Politics, politics, politics. If it weren't so darn interesting, maybe we wouldn't talk about it so much...

Short replies.

Gside><<Coating yourself with cocoa powder might not be a bad idea as a way to get Lain to feel more amorous.>>
Haven't tried that. We ARE going to be doing body casting sometime soon, though... Oooo, the posabilities...
<<Though I pity the Jew, Muslim, or member of any other religion that tries to take away my bacon (or Taylor's ham).>>
MEAT GOOD!
<<Quite strange, and the image of GWB raping Asuka while giving the audience the finger doesn't hurt either.>>
Ouch.

Jaden><<I try to care, I really do, but I'm just so worn out. I know it sounds corny but I really think that we should all be trying to work together instead of just trying to expand our own power base. We are so filled with hatred and greed; not to mention that we are totally into ourselves. People are dying all over the world, but as long as we're ok then it becomes easier to ignore.>>
*Pops a lighter*
...Word, 'mano.

Whit - I'm liking you more and more for some reason. 8 P
<<My crack about Republican bigots was ill-advised, and I apologize.>>
Eh, forget it. It's funny how many of those old fartbags flatulate on about "family values" and "integrity"... And then cheat on their fourth wife with their secretary.
Just remember, there's a difference between true morality and the hypocrisy they model on C-Span.
<> Still mulling this one over. See, I'm not entirely sure if we EVER get a choice. The puppet on the Right versus the Puppet on the left, y'know? I've seen enough evidence in the last year to prove to me that this country is going to Hell right quick, and the people have less than zero say in the matter.

Lain and I, we just want to get out of here before something real bad goes down.

Book for this week: "Black Hawk Down: A Story of Modern War".

Want to know what's happening in Iraq right now? Get this book. Before you open it, read the glowing praise on the back cover from all the military guys. How it's so authentic, and meticulously researched and such.

In particular, check out the part where Crew Chief Dowdy screams the names of his fallen comrades as he pours minigun fire into crowds of dubiously-armed Somalis. Or when Ma-Duece gunner Othic returns fire at a militiaman, mowing down a "small crowd of Sammies". Or when Nelson blows away children with his M-60. Read where the Somalis talk about the social meeting that the Rangers broke up with twelve TOW missles and 20mm cannon fire, killing 70+ men, women, and children, before sending in the troopers to arrest the survivors. Or how the somali shopkeeper watches as his entire block is raked with minigun fire, and he looks over and sees the top of his baby brother's head missing.

Funny how none of that made it into the movie. I guess the Army PR guys who looked over the script for "accuracy" decided that there was a little too much moral ambiguity. Wouldn't want the viewers to get confused about who the bad guys were, after all. So hey, since we're lending you all these neat military toys, mr Scott, sir, maybe you wouldn't mind if we made a few cuts here and there? For realism's sake, of course.

Twelve US soldiers lost their lives during the battle of the Mog. Five hundred Somalis were killed, and a thousand wounded; judging from the reports of the soldiers, a bare fraction of that number were armed. Most of those are atributable to the Troops' indiscriminate use of automatic weapons fire in dense urban areas.

To my knowledge, our government and military have made no attempt to keep track of the civilian colateral damage racked up by our "war on terror". According to the last estimates I heard, the number is upwards of Eighteen THOUSAND dead and wounded.

Eighteen thousand.

We had a customer at work the other day who has a son over there. Salesman Al was telling him how great the war was, how it was going so well... The guy told Al that the boys over there are eighteen, nineteen years old, and how his son's buddies boast about how many Iraqis they've fragged. He tells Al, "they're turning those boys into killers."

And they are.

But we're bringing them freedom. Why are they so ungrateful?
Gunjack "Smash the Fiddle" Valentine
Friday, March 19, 2004 02:25:35 AM
IP: 4.7.36.9

*Continues to lurk while the self-proclaimed political deities (not in so many words) of the CR invariably continue to rant and distort everything that their adversaries write*

V - <Video - available at www.machall.com>

Quite entertaining I must say. I would consider going into politics, but I don't think I would enjoy looking like a saint amongst such a vast crowd of liars and spin doctors.

Peace
Z
Friday, March 19, 2004 01:05:04 AM
IP: 67.65.155.119

Whitbourne - <Damien: Your three points.> Umm. Those were *my* 3 points.

Lain - <i agree with that, also. my only real problem here is that if "regime change" and the overthrowing of a murderous tyrant was the original goal of the invasion, why was it not presented as such? . . . also, if the original case was for turfing out a bad guy, why is bush making dirty deals with other, equally bad guys - without batting an eye? > Probably to make another deal. Stabilizing Iraq gets him a foothold in the Middle East so that he can try to help solve the Israel problem. Also, the fact that Bush has followed through on a threat also gives him credibility. Now if Bush says that he will make war with you if you don't change your ways, you will believe the threat is credible. <we agree on something? quick, mark it down somewhere!> That's because I'm not completely conservative.

Ghost of Rev Attilla - <the most evil/liberal state in the union: Massachusetts.> Wasn't the original colony founded by . . . the Puritans who were fundamental Christians?

Also, practical reality: Since the US has troops in both Afganistan and Iraq, it does not have the capacity to go after another country *without* significantly enlarging the current size of the US military.

GXB - <If you're referring to the infamous story about Sudan saying they had Osama and were ready to give him to Clinton that conservatives like to toss around, you're forgetting the other half. The half where Sudan wanted sanctions against their country dropped in exchange. And we all know that Sudan sponsers terrorism.> I never heard that half of the story. On the other hand, I don't see why Clinton couldn't have captured Bin Ladden and then that broke his promise to Sudan. He lied about a lot of stuff, why not lie to accomplish good?

I'm beginning to believe that *dishonesty* is requirement for being president of the US.

Damien - <<if the democrats win the white house, the US troops are going to be pulled out of Iraq asap> Not nessarily.> What rock have you been living under? The Democrats want the troops out of Iraq *yesterday*. <That's one possibility, though it could very well happen even if the GOP wins. Or it could be civil war. Or it could be fine. Or Iran could take the opportunity to invade. Or...or...or. That's the definition of unstable - no one knows.> If the Democrats win and then pull the troops out of Iraq, Iraq gets a new dictator. If the GOP wins, those things could still happen but if the Democrats win, bad things are guaranteed to happen in Iraq. <the US is screwed no matter who gets elected. Neither of the "big" candidates looks
like a prize.> Sadly, you're right.

Bud-Clare - <What's the point of being anti-war after the damn war is over? Grr.> I don't know. But they are.

If a dictatorship results from the US withdrawing its troops from Iraq, all these people who died in the war and afterwards will have died for nothing. Those people who are dying are dying to give the Iraqi people a chance at self-government. What a noble cause.

Youth N Asia - <Ah good. Throwing your authority around against someone who you disagree with politically.> Let's see. More people than just you disagree with GXB politically and he hasn't threatened them. Why I don't spell your name the way I think it is pronounced: Euthansia.

Krista - Everything? Even Rush Limbaugh doesn't.

Euthansia - <My point is that those who feel that Bush is significantly corrupt are for the most part incorrect and ignoring the fact that our leaders in America are generally among the least corrupt world leaders on the planet. All politicians have some sort of skeleton in our closet, but our leaders are, in general, equitable human beings.> But I argue that being less corrupt is still wrong. The bar should be pretty high to the point of not being corrupt at all. Yes, I know that probably disqualifies *stops to count* all the recent US presidents.

Green Baron - < In the 19th cnetury we were condmened for isolationism, and I suspect if we strat focusing inwards we'll probably get criticized for that, too.> They're no pleasing some people. If we don't act, we're damned; if we do act, we're damned. <Also I think Kerry may move to the center now that he has the Democratic nomination sewn up.> The problem with that is Kerry has a long voting record. Every vote he's cast/not cast is public record. If he changes his mind from something he voted for/against, it costs Kerry credibility. In essence, I can sum up the Democrat's reason for voting for Kerry: they want somebody to defeat George W Bush. That's been what Kerry has been defined as.

Damien - <wow, while looking through tv tome i suddenly realized, I HAVE NEVER SEEN THE GOLIATH CHRONICALS! I suddenly feel so clean...> Congrats. I saw every episode of TGS once, but it was so horrible that I vowed never again to see them again.

Gside - <Everyone should ignore primaries, they're only party tools.> In Arkansas, the primary election is also the time to elect non-partisan judges.

Question - <If there was no oil then Hussein wouldn't have become this powerful and wealthy enough to become a threat.> that's very true.

Nothing like political discussion to jumpstart the TGS CR.
DPH
AR, USA
Friday, March 19, 2004 12:52:15 AM
IP: 67.14.195.30

Reverand Attila<Some hippies had called Kerry a �baby-killer� when he returned from Vietnam, but, in reality, he wussed out and ran away when caught in a baby knife fight.>

How surpising considering the man has a bronze and silver star for valor.

<If you are in the military and Kerry drops by your place, hide your medals. Apparently he likes to throw other people's medals. >

This is a load of crock. Those medals he threw were his own. Everything else in your article ranges from half-truths to fabrications. Please try and get some real mud before attackin kerry.

Whitbourne<<Question> You need to read more. You and Youth'N'Asia, whether you're the same person or not, both seem to suffer from the alarmingly common condition of American Sequestration Syndrome, or ASS for short.>

Using personal insults so early in the game. :)

<Those affected tend to not understand that other countries have different viewpoints, goals, and expectations than yours,>

Does destruction of our way of life even count as a goal?

< and that what your country does may not be seen in the same light in other places. Patients are usually treated with hefty doses of exposure to other points of view. >

I've seen their pov and I prefer mine instead.

<In other words, stop parroting the White House line.>

Why don't you stop using generalizations and sterotypes instead?

<You see the Spanish election as a capitulation to terror.
Someone in Madrid may see it as a potent reminder to the former government that they lie and cover things up at their electoral peril. >

And the terrorists might see it as a success in their never ending Jihad...

<It really is disgusting how America trumpets democracy for the whole world over, but as soon as a country like Spain exercises it, Washington gets mad to the point where Republican Speaker Dennis Hastert (or whatever his name is) is criticizing the Spanish people for daring to make a choice in their own election. It really doesn't speak well for the commitment of this administration to democracy.>

He has a right to criticize when they made a mistake and taken the coward's choice by bowing to the terrorist's wishes.

< Right now, talking to you is like talking to a bright young man who's been locked in a box all his life. Get out and see more and come back when you're ready to accept that there is more than the FOX News spin on things. >

See you are sterotyping right now. I don't even watch Fox News for christ's sakes.

<Everyone needs vto change. It might as well start with us. If America wants to bring democracy and freedom to the world, it had better start leading by example.>

I don't think that'd work. The terrorists would still strike against us. Unfortunately we've to resort to force in this situation. :(

lain<actually, no. thats what people SAY about bin laden, when he cant defend himself, but if you actually listen to any of his statements or interviews fully youll find that isnt what HE says. bin ladens biggest goal is to get the "west" (US included... before it was the USSR he wanted to boot) out of his back yard (the middle east). now granted, since israel gets so much support from the US, he wants them out of his back yard, too>

Getting Israel and us out of the Middle East is a pipe dream for him. He's just a fanatic and he won't be satisfied even if we and israelis leave. No doubt he'll believe he has won and start a jihad against the world like his hero muhammed.

< the reasons he thinks of the US as "the great satan" are the same reasons the vast majority of the right wing in america thinks the country is bad - the acceptance of pornography, homosexuality, absence of religion in education, etc. he doesnt "hate our freedoms" like so many people ive heard say he does - >

And that makes him better how? All it does is make Falwell, Robertson and the rest of those religious christian zealots look worse and the fact that Robertson wanted a nuke to go off in washington dc just proves it.

<he hates our freedoms to do immoral things with our lives, and he especially hates it when he sees such "imoralities" invading HIS back yard. thats the thing most people seem to miss about the man - hes not stupid. he might be wrongheaded and dangerous and fanatical... but he does think things through and doesnt act on impulse. >

His whole little crusade is an act of impulse. The man is a freaking fanatic end of the discussion.

I want to see him hanged and quartered and his body stuffed in a pig skinned sack so that he can't go to Allah and his seven virgins in heaven.

<well, duh. its called "the government going "boogaboogabooga!" and people buying it. and again, youll notice that the majority of britains population does not support blair on his stance regarding the US and iraq - so if they lose the election... well... they were unpopular in the first place. >

thats because the majority of the brits are being influenced by their european and especially french neights across the channel. If they were closer to us then they wouldn't have bought Chiarc and Schroeder's garbage.

<well, since US military and government documents released in the spring of 2001 claim they were seeking to legitimize the use of military force in the pursuit of oil, one might draw that conclusion, yes..>

That was during and after the oil embargo. Different administration and different time.

<one might also consider that former US secretary of state james baker wrote a government report specifically stating that iraq needed to be overthrown in order that the US could control its oil. (sunday herald 10/5/02). what other conclusion CAN you draw from that? o.O >

Your argument might work if not for the fact that James Baker is no longer part of the president's cabinet.

<then there is the suspicious relationship between the oil company UNOCAL, former UNOCAL-employee-now-president hamid karzi and the oil fields of tengiz.. and how coincidental it is that the US bases in afganistan seem to line up perfectly with the proposed oil pipeline through the country? (chicago tribune, 3/18/02) i dunno, you tell me. >

So? This is ludicrous. We didn't invade afghanistan for the oil. We invaded because of the Taliban who supported Bin laden and who destroyed the WTC.

The bases being near the oil pipeline is just convenient and would better help protect one of afghanistans few sources of income once it's built.

The rest of your post however borders on fiction and seems to have been copied and pasted from one webstie. I truly doubt Bush sacrificed those thousands of people just for a war in Iraq. Furthermore you have to understand that there were no doubt problems in communication due to the fact that it was just around nine months in his administration when we were attacked and the various departments and their heads no doubt probably hadn't adapted to the administration yet.

Greg Bishansky><That and the marriage amendment, and don't give me that it needs to be pushed through Congress and ratified shit, he still said it. And yeah, those fucking faith based initiatives, no way are my tax dollars going to anyone who wears a cross, Star of David, or Cresent Moon. None of them. I don't like organized religion. >

At least it's better than that waste of money we call medicare and social security. Letting these charities handle it imo works much better.

<Oh, Bush kept playing the 9/11 card to justify it as well. There is no link between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, and there never was. In fact, Osama bin Laden hated Saddam Hussein. Thought he was too secular and wanted to nail him too. Read a book why don't you.>

However there is a link between hussein and terrorists and this is a war against terrorism. The man is known to have funded the palestinian sucid3 bombers and has given refuge to them including one known ship hijacker who killed an american citizen.

<Not a straw man, Bush is responsible for everything he says. I don't care if it's pandering, it's not a straw man. >

Reread the constitution. No way is an amendment like that going to pass the House and Senate and get a majority among the states. It's never going to happen.

<And yes, Muslims are being demonized, maybe Bush himself isn't publically stating it, but John Ashcroft has had many Arabs arrested and detained without being charged. >

Well thats Ashcroft's fault not Bush's. Besides the Administration is more inclined towards helping seeing how they liberated Iraq from Hussein and going after terrorists in general who are giving Arabs a bad name.



If there was no oil then Hussein wouldn't have become this powerful and wealthy enough to become a threat.

<But really, he was no threat to us.>

Yes he was. The man had plans to become the next saladin of the middle east.

<Saudi Arabia on the other hand, they're the Kings of Islamic Terrorism, why don't we invade Saudi Arabia? >

-because people would be screaming at us saying we're trying to gain control of the oil

-the arabs would be united against us since Saudi Arabia has Mecca and Medina

-it'd disrupt the world's oil supply including ours and piss off a whole bunch of more countries that an attack on Iraq wouldn't

<Or any of these other countries. Uzbekistan, North Korea which was actually threatening us with nukes,>

Ever tried looking at the stats for the N. Korean army?

Besides Seoul is mighty close to the dmz so if war breaks out then you betcha that Seoul is going to suffer heavy casualties.

< countless African and Central American countries. Saddam Hussein was a very bad guy, no one is questioning that, and I'm happy to see him gone. But there are so many worse people who we're not even breathing on. >

Except none of them are as powerful and as bad as Hussein.
Question
Friday, March 19, 2004 12:27:21 AM
IP: 69.44.73.131

Lynati> <<getting an eyeball out of its socket intact is a lot more work>>: Okay, I'm curious.

Green Baron> <<Islamic Zionist Organization of Nunavut>>: They couldn't put Zionist in front and really confuse people?

Bud Clare> <<Hot chocolate or cocoa? I don't think that unsweetened cocoa would go over real well>>: No, but Hot chocolate powder doesn't have the same ring, and just saying hot chocolate implies scalding liquid, which wouldn't be good.

Hellcat> <<keep a can of raid for the marxist feminists>>: After surviving Rutgers, specifically proximity to Douglas, I think I can deal with feminists well enough.

Na zdorov'ya.
Gside - [gside@comcast.net]
Fair Haven, NJ
Friday, March 19, 2004 12:23:20 AM
IP: 68.37.159.199

v>> i guess he forgot the memory hole doesnt exist yet, poor guy..
lain
Thursday, March 18, 2004 11:47:48 PM
IP: 4.7.35.8

Real post for later. For now, a little something that makes me nostalgic for the days when we used to catch Clinton with his pants down like this...

****Start Transcript****

SCHIEFFER: Well, let me just ask you this. If they did not have these weapons of mass destruction, though, granted all of that is true, why then did they pose an immediate threat to us, to this country?

Sec. RUMSFELD: Well, you're the--you and a few other critics are the only people I've heard use the phrase `immediate threat.' I didn't. The president didn't. And it's become kind of folklore that that's--that's what's happened. The president went...

SCHIEFFER: You're saying that nobody in the administration said that.

Sec. RUMSFELD: I--I can't speak for nobody--everybody in the administration and say nobody said that.

SCHIEFFER: Vice president didn't say that? The...

Sec. RUMSFELD: Not--if--if you have any citations, I'd like to see 'em.

Mr. FRIEDMAN: We have one here. It says `some have argued that the nu'--this is you speaking--`that the nuclear threat from Iraq is not imminent, that Saddam is at least five to seven years away from having nuclear weapons. I would not be so certain.'

Sec. RUMSFELD: And--and...

Mr. FRIEDMAN: It was close to imminent.

Sec. RUMSFELD: Well, I've--I've tried to be precise, and I've tried to be accurate. I'm s-- suppose I've...

Mr. FRIEDMAN: `No terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world and the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq.'

Sec. RUMSFELD: Mm-hmm. It--my view of--of the situation was that he--he had--we--we believe, the best intelligence that we had and other countries had and that--that we believed
and we still do not know--we will know. David Kay said we're about 85 percent there. I don't know if that's the right percentage. But the Iraqi Survey Group--we've got 1,200 people out there looking. It's a country the size of California. He could have hidden his--enough chemical or biol--enough biological weapons in the hole that--that we found Saddam Hussein in to kill tens of thousands of people. So--so it's not as though we have certainty today.
****End Transcript****
The above is from "Face the Nation", CBS News, Sunday, March 14, 2004

Transcript -http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/face_031404.pdf

Video - available at www.machall.com. Check the newspost at the bottom of the page. Rumy's stammer after that second hit is really sommat to see.
V
Thursday, March 18, 2004 11:44:06 PM
IP: 4.7.36.9

youth n asia>> maaan that blue is dark.. *squints* dont i remember you posting in here before?
<<Congratulations, you�ve had to go back two hundred years??
you have to be fair and take into account the fact that america is *really big* and protected by *two* (also really big) oceans... and that the two bordering countries are not exactly hostile. it would be *really* difficult to stage an all-out attack on america on its own soil.
<<Silly me, I thought it was because he�s a religious zealot who�s sole goals in life are to see Islamic fundamentalism as the dominant religious / political philosophy in the world, the Jewish race wiped off the face of the planet, and all of those who support Israel (as in us, the Great Satan) demolished>>
actually, no. thats what people SAY about bin laden, when he cant defend himself, but if you actually listen to any of his statements or interviews fully youll find that isnt what HE says. bin ladens biggest goal is to get the "west" (US included... before it was the USSR he wanted to boot) out of his back yard (the middle east). now granted, since israel gets so much support from the US, he wants them out of his back yard, too. the reasons he thinks of the US as "the great satan" are the same reasons the vast majority of the right wing in america thinks the country is bad - the acceptance of pornography, homosexuality, absence of religion in education, etc. he doesnt "hate our freedoms" like so many people ive heard say he does - he hates our freedoms to do immoral things with our lives, and he especially hates it when he sees such "imoralities" invading HIS back yard. thats the thing most people seem to miss about the man - hes not stupid. he might be wrongheaded and dangerous and fanatical... but he does think things through and doesnt act on impulse.
<<Bush isn�t even half as corrupt as 98% of all European leaders>>
id argue that doesnt mean we should just forgive him, just because hes "not as bad" as someone else. i think we should hold everyone equally responsible or their own failures. pick the plank out of your own eye first and all.
<<And I�d love for someone to actually offer proof of this. They haven�t yet. Because it doesn�t exist>>
well, that depends on your standard of proof. is your standard of proof that bush is a scumwad the same as your standard for believing clinton was? (mine sure is, i dunno about yours though). if all you will accept is the guy coming out and saying "i am a big fat liar" then no, it will probably never be proven. but if we take the same standard for bush as for clinton, ie he says something (like, for instance "i have not had sexual relations with that woman" or "saddam has weapons of mass destruction and we know exactly where they all are, heres some pictures to prove it") and it proven false? well? thats when its called a lie. when the "solid british evidence" bush cited to prove iraq had WMD is exposed as 10-year-old data posted by a graduate student on the internet.. what more do you want? a congressional report just came out and said bush and his 4 top advisors made a total of 237 misleading public statements about the threat posed by iraq. if you dont want to call them lies, you still have to admit they were gross and misrepresentations of the truth.
<<Interesting, but ultimately, utterly ridiculous.>>
ill agree with you on that one, pretty daft :P
<<When Spain was attacked, they responded by eliminating their own government>>
well, "changed *to* a government that reflected the wants of the people more than the previous one" is slightly different from "eliminating"... wouldnt you say? in any case, nobody knows how the election would have gone anyways - anzars party was ahead, true, but only by 5 points. when its that close, its "too close to call". the other guy might have won anyways. now, if polls had showd anzar had 90% support, and then all of a sudden he got flushed, i could see your point - but as it stands, i dont see much ground for either side to argue from.
<<If they didn�t before, they do now. Watch and see what happens, especially since it�s being reported now that an attack on Britain is �inevitable.�>>
well, duh. its called "the government going "boogaboogabooga!" and people buying it. and again, youll notice that the majority of britains population does not support blair on his stance regarding the US and iraq - so if they lose the election... well... they were unpopular in the first place.
<<It�s that fact that the majority of their hatred of him is entirely irrational and that they are incapable of seeing that they�re only following the same ridiculous pattern of behavior that conservatives employed against Clinton>>
i agree with that in principle - hatred of anyone is pretty irrational. i hope, however, that you would allow rational disagreement?
aw man, you had to go post again :P
<<In what way? Faith based initiatives?>>
i detest these also.
<<I really hope liberals aren�t going to continue down this road, because it�s incredibly silly, seeing as the last president didn�t exactly serve his country in the military�.it didn�t matter then, people don�t care now>>
of all the things people could be nailing bush for, they pick this to cause a big stir over? ill agree, it is pretty dumb.
<<You probably believe the war was all about oil, don�t you?>>
...im gonna cite sources for these..
well, since US military and government documents released in the spring of 2001 claim they were seeking to legitimize the use of military force in the pursuit of oil, one might draw that conclusion, yes... especially since one of the articles advocates presidential subterfuge in the promotion of conflict and "explicitly urge[s] painting over the US' actual reasons for warfare as a necessity for mobilizing public support for a conflict.." (sydney morning herald, 12/26/02). one might also consider that former US secretary of state james baker wrote a government report specifically stating that iraq needed to be overthrown in order that the US could control its oil. (sunday herald 10/5/02). what other conclusion CAN you draw from that? o.O
then there is the suspicious relationship between the oil company UNOCAL, former UNOCAL-employee-now-president hamid karzi and the oil fields of tengiz.. and how coincidental it is that the US bases in afganistan seem to line up perfectly with the proposed oil pipeline through the country? (chicago tribune, 3/18/02) i dunno, you tell me.
<<Don�t even try this BS. Clinton had a 101 opportunities to get Bin Laden but he didn�t. Why? Because his administration, like the current one pre 9/11, thought it very inconceivable that Al-Qaeda could pull off such an attack>>
actually, thats not quite true. fact is there werent "101" chances, there were *three* occasions between 1998 and 2000 when spies in afghanistan reportd bin ladens exact location. each of those times, the president (clinton) *approved an attack*. also, each of those times, it was the the *CIA director* who said the information wasnt reliable enough and the attack couldnt go forward. who is this CIA director and why has he not been fired for really sucking at his job? o.O
<<There was chatter that they wanted to pull something off using planes, but that information wasn�t exactly widely circulated by the intelligence agencies � just part of our overall gross intelligence failures>>
no, thats a lie. there were many, many direct warnings from many intelligence services all over the world (including mi6 (at least twice), mosaad, german, russian, jordanian, egyptian AND afgani (taliban) intelligence... and of course from within US intelligence) warning of an iminent attack. not only an attack, but specifically one using airplanes as "bombs" and crashing them into NY. the FBI in minnesota had moussaoui in custody and their director claims he was trying to stop him from "taking control of a plane and fly[ing] it into the WTC." (senate intelligence committee (hill #2), 10/17/02). they were then chastized by both FBI and CIA HQ for notifying them and trying to pursue their investigation (wtf mates?). then theres the little bit about the 24-26 of october in 2000, when the pentagon carried out a "detailed" emergency drill based on the crashing of a hijacked airliner into the building (Military District of Washington News Service, 11/3/00)... but of course, the US government denies having ever envisioned such a thing (AP, 5/18/02).. which is discounted again by a startlingly bizzare coincidence regarding yet another drill set for 9am on september 11th at the national reconnaissance office in which an aircraft would crash into one of its buildings near washington, dc (AP, 8/22/02). this is completely excluding the even MORE bizzare case of the US navy intellegience guy who was arrested in canada, wrote down every detail of the 9/11 attacks (weeks before they happened) and put them in a sealed envolope and handed them to his warden. they opened it a few days after 9/11 and were shocked, and called an inquiry which caught the navy in a direct lie when they claimed theyd never heard of the man. this is all canadian public record, you can look it up. if some joe schmo intelligence agent knew that many details about the attacks, you cant convince me that the rest of the agency was oblivious...
id ALSO like to know why john ashcroft stopped flying on commercial airliners on 26 july 2001 and what "security concerns" he knew about that werent communicated to the rest of the country (CBS, 7/26/01) why US intelligence agencies were told to "back off" investigating bin laden, al-qaeda and the saudi royal families connections to terrorism shortly after the 2000 elections (BBC 11/6/01) and why obstructions to his investigations into al-qaeda were so bad that they forced top counter-terrorism expert john o'neill to quit the FBI on august 22, 2001 (New Yorker, 1/14/02). (sadly for him, he got a job the next day as head of security at the WTC and died on sept 11.) and id ALSO like to know why "a group of top pentagon officials suddenly canceled travel plans for the next morning [11 sept], apparently because of security concerns.." (newsweek, 9/24/01). if the security concerns were so bad that their trips needed to be cancelled to save their butts, why werent they bad enough to tell everyone else about?
the white house has *ADMITTED* that bush was specifically warned about bin Ladens plans for hijacking commercial aircraft and wanting to attack the US in august of 2001 (new york times, 5/16/02, washington post, 5/16/02, guardian, 5/19/02)
if something funky wasnt going on, please tell me why bush would be opposed to establishing a special, independent commission to probe how his government dealt with terror warnings before 11 sept? (CBS, 5/23/02). if he had nothing to hide...? if he hadnt been shockingly neglegent...? if he wasnt worried it might make him look, dare i say, complicit..? o.O
<<Trying to blame this solely on Bush is moronic>>
indeed. but blaming bush for not responding quickly enough and possibly preventing many of those deaths is not moronic.

ed>> <<My address is 10 Downing Street, London, United Kingdom>>
oh youre so bad, i love it!! ;)

dph>> <<Regardless of why the US went to war with Iraq, the fact is the US government overthrew the government and created the situation in Iraq. Since the US overthrew the government in Iraq, it is the responsibility of the US to stay in Iraq until the situation is stable>>
i do agree with that.
<<Also, Lain has told me very politely that, during the Clinton presidency, it was easier to count the number of days that the US didn't bomb Iraq. Which is better: continous bombing a country or going to war to effect regime change against said country?>>
i agree with that, also. my only real problem here is that if "regime change" and the overthrowing of a murderous tyrant was the original goal of the invasion, why was it not presented as such? i might have actually supported it.. also, if the original case was for turfing out a bad guy, why is bush making dirty deals with other, equally bad guys - without batting an eye? thats where it starts to fall apart for me. if he was consistent and followed through on what he claimed to believe in, my problems with him would be vastly reduced.
<<George W Bush is way too pro-business for my liking>>
*faints*
<<Side note: I come really close to being a socialist when it comes to jobs and wages>>
*faints again*
we agree on something? quick, mark it down somewhere!

lynati>> <<art is haaaaard>>
lol!
yes, yes it is.

damien>> <<ok BACK to the topic of gargoyles and the TGS>>
nice try, too bad it didnt work ;)

krista>> <<ok, then, in that case, I'm allowed to say that you're an idiot. I completely support George W. Bush in everything he does>>
oh, sweet idealism, how i miss thee...
dont worry, youre young yet - theres still plenty of time to put your trusting innocence through the meat-grinder :P
<<Man, I missed the first posts. I tried, but my lap top didn't let me. So...>>
theres always next week.. :)

tharos>> <<And yeah, Kerry's hair is going to get him the Presidency>>
yeah. and thats really sad :P
lain
Thursday, March 18, 2004 11:26:11 PM
IP: 4.7.35.8

One thing I forgot to say about the moose thing. The people are protestign a bit and keep on feeding it regardless of what the wildlife guy wants to do - in his words, "put it down" which means shoot the damn bitch so i can eat it!" haha

Attila, haha those blogs are very funny. :)

About Charles Dickons....don't get me started. I can work up a debate about him and turn feminist...possibly marxist feminist...that can be VERY ugly. REAL ugly. :P
Hellcat
Thursday, March 18, 2004 10:51:45 PM
IP: 205.251.135.66

<<* Some hippies had called Kerry a �baby-killer� when he returned from Vietnam, but, in reality, he wussed out and ran away when caught in a baby knife fight. >>
Now THAT'S what I call, "Entertaining in a sick way." It's one of those things you're ashamed to laugh about, because it brings up the whole "baby-killer" thing... but you laugh all the same.
And yeah, Kerry's hair is going to get him the Presidency. I won't profess to know a whole lot about the candidates for this election. But I know America, and most of the public doesn't know anything either, so they'll make a choice based on the fact that Kerry really has a "Presidential" kind of look. lol... That's my prediction. Ya gotta admit, there are enough dumb people out there for it to happen.
Tharos - [r_u_ready3@hotmail.com]
Thursday, March 18, 2004 10:44:50 PM
IP: 69.40.138.180

Hi everyone, it's late and i'm tired haha.
No comments on currents posts. I'm not that political so I'll bring up something off topic

A few days ago, NL moose has been decline a bit in some areas of the province. Yes we got them byes up them ways shootn' moose illegally. haha Anyways, they did CBC (gotta love them) did a extensive boring bit on moose in nfld.Then tonight, some commnunity (i forget the name) found a female moose outside their town fatiqued and faminished. She had no energy to move so the people started to feed her, naming her Paula.

2 things wrong with this picture:
1. It's moose hunting season. Them byes are with their rifles now and their fave winchesters. That means, dad'll get bottled moose from patients of his. MMMMMMMMMM. *drools*
But anyways It's the season to be eaten fa la la la la la la

2.If it was a bull moose, they'd shoot it on the spot. I guess they wanted to keep the marxist feminists happy...whereever they are.

That's my two bit off the wall topic for tonight. So uh night and keep a can of raid for the marxist feminists. They like to come when you're sleeping! *whispers* me knows...

(Note: the author of this post claims temporary insanity)
Hellcat
Thursday, March 18, 2004 10:43:29 PM
IP: 205.251.135.66

Now, as GB ha gotten Kerry hatred out of his system, I'll bash him in fun ways..courtesy of Frank J of IMAO":

Know Thy Enemy: John Kerry
Since it looks like John Kerry has a lock on the Democrat nomination, being the uber-partisan I am (hell, I'd vote for a retarded mule if it had an 'R' next to its name and said it would cut my taxes) I've set my crack research staff out to find the dirt on the haughty, French-looking Senator who - by the way - served in Vietnam. Here's what they got:

FUN FACTS ABOUT JOHN KERRY

* In his campaign, Kerry is planning on relying on his wife's ketchup money. That's a lot like blood money, but more tomato based.

* Kerry has enough botulism in his face to wipe out a small African village.

* Kerry wants people to know that he is a friend of the common man... he just doesn't want to talk to any of them, see any of them, have any in his country club, or even be near any of them unless they have lots of special interest campaign contributions.

* John Kerry's hair is the source of his important lookingness. If you shaved off his hair, he would no longer look important.

* Like George Bush, John Kerry was a member of the secret Skull and Bones society at Yale. They will actually determine who will be president, and this whole election is just for our entertainment.

* The Vietnam war was going great and was extremely popular in the U.S.... until Kerry joined in.

* Sometimes Kerry has simultaneous flashbacks to fighting in Vietnam and being a Vietnam War protestor, causing him to spit on himself.

* Kerry knows for a fact from Vietnam that eating the heart of your defeated enemy will not gain you his non-French-lookingness.

* Some hippies had called Kerry a �baby-killer� when he returned from Vietnam, but, in reality, he wussed out and ran away when caught in a baby knife fight.

* Though he likes to tout his Vietnam record now (he was in Vietnam, you know), he was also involved in the same protest group as Jane "Why in God's Name Wasn't She Hung as a Traitor" Fonda.

* Jane Fonda was married to Ted Turner who is a total jackass. That has nothing to do with John Kerry, but it's worth saying.

* If you are in the military and Kerry drops by your place, hide your medals. Apparently he likes to throw other people's medals.

* Senator John Kerry has a more liberal voting record than Senator Ted Kennedy, which people used to think was scientifically impossible since the way to judge how liberal one's voting record is was to see how close it is to Ted Kennedy's.

* Wait, who was I zinging there? John Kerry or Ted Kennedy? Hell, they both deserve it.

* John Kerry is so liberal...

How liberal is he?

He's so liberal, that he thinks minors should be able to get abortions without even their own consent.

* In a fight between John Kerry and Aquaman, I'm not sure who'd win, but the battle would involve a lot of effeminate slapping.

* Some say Kerry looks like Lurch from the Addams Family, but that's not fair; Lurch is not French.

* Kerry comes from the most evil/liberal state in the union: Massachusetts. Some say Hitler was born there.

* According to sources, Kerry's name rhymes with "fairy". I'm not saying to call him John "Fairy"; I'm just putting that information out there.

* Kucinich rhymes with spinach... but I'm not sure what to do with that.

* Oh, wait:

Vote for Dennis Kucinich
'Cause he eats his spinach.
He's Kucinich the crazy man. (toot) (toot)

* Back to John Kerry, according to lots of anecdotal information, he loves to play the "Do you know who I am?" card. If he does that to you, the best response is to say, "Yeah, you're the guy I'm going to punch in the nads," and then punch him in the nads. If he complains, hey, he asked.

* The last guy from Massachusetts who ran against a George Bush for the presidency of the United States lost. That's precedent for you!

And now to offend even more people, I have a pic created when Mel Gibson announced he won't be able to support George W Bush.

http://www.allahpundit.com/archives/000420.html

and in the same note, Allah Pundit has hope for Howard Dean.

http://www.allahpundit.com/archives/000350.html

Allah and Frank J are probably the two funniest bloggers in the internet :)

ghost of Reverend Attila
Montreal, Quebec, Canuckistan
Thursday, March 18, 2004 10:15:46 PM
IP: 218.145.25.83

From "The Guardian", March 16, 2004

TV news reports in America that showed President George Bush getting a standing ovation from potential voters have been exposed as fake, it has emerged.
The US government admitted it paid actors to pose as journalists in video news releases sent to TV stations intending to convey support for new laws about health benefits.
Investigators are examining the film segments, in which actors pretending to be journalists praise the benefits of the new law passed last year by President Bush, to see if they could be construed as propaganda.
Two of the films are signed off by "Karen Ryan", who was an actor hired to read a script prepared by the government, according to production company Home Front Communications.
Another video, intended for Hispanic viewers, shows a government official being interviewed in Spanish by a actor posing as a reporter with the name "Alberto Garcia".
One segment shows a pharmacist telling an elderly customer the new law "helps you better afford your medications".
"It sounds like a good idea," the customer says, to which the pharmacist replies, "A very good idea."
And in some scenes President Bush is shown receiving a standing ovation from a crowd cheering him as he signed the Medicare law, which is designed to help elderly people with prescriptions.
The government also prepared scripts to be used by news anchors. "In December, President Bush signed into law the first-ever prescription drug benefit for people with Medicare," the script reads.
"Since then, there have been a lot of questions about how the law will help older Americans and people with disabilities. Reporter Karen Ryan helps sort through the details." The "reporter" then explains the benefits of the new law.
Lawyers from the investigative arm of Congress discovered the tapes as part of an investigation into federal money that was used to publicise the new law.
They will be keen to ascertain whether the government might have misled viewers by failing to reveal the source of the videos, which were broadcast in Oklahoma, Louisiana and other states.
"Video news releases" of this sort have been used in the US since the 1980s, but the way they blur the lines between news and advertising troubles many media experts and campaigners.
The government defended the videos, which Democrats described as "disturbing". "The use of video news releases is a common, routine practice in government and the private sector," a health department spokesman told the New York Times.

Whitbourne
Thursday, March 18, 2004 06:55:06 PM
IP: 156.34.84.87

Damn, I type a long post and look what I miss.
Greg Bishansky
Thursday, March 18, 2004 05:26:50 PM
IP: 216.179.3.53

QUEST... er "YOUTH N ASIA"

Okay, let's talk straw man arguments...

<<Ah good. Throwing your authority around against someone who you disagree with politically.>>

Like this one. If that were the case, you can bet your not so sweet ass that there are several people who would have been banned long ago. 'Cept they don't post flame bait.

<<People like you keep complaining about it, and yet all of those civil liberties you claim are being taken away are�.well, pretty much still there. I haven�t seen anything in the news where a single court in the entire nation has overturned the Patriot Act, which I�m sure they WOULD have by now, if it was as truly awful as you say it is.>>

Because it could happen, and no offense but I don't think the FBI or anyone has the right to come into my house when I'm not home and snoop around without a warrant, tap my phones without a warrant, and detain me without being charged. I don't know, just call me old fashioned. The potential for abuse is definetly there.

"Those who trade their freedom for security deserve neither freedom nor security."

<<In what way? Faith based initiatives?>>

That and the marriage amendment, and don't give me that it needs to be pushed through Congress and ratified shit, he still said it. And yeah, those fucking faith based initiatives, no way are my tax dollars going to anyone who wears a cross, Star of David, or Cresent Moon. None of them. I don't like organized religion.

<<What liberals are so pissed about is that they can�t prove this. Because the evidence doesn�t substantiate that claim.>>

Oh, Bush kept playing the 9/11 card to justify it as well. There is no link between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, and there never was. In fact, Osama bin Laden hated Saddam Hussein. Thought he was too secular and wanted to nail him too. Read a book why don't you.

<<You�re privy to top-secret intelligence information that indicates that each and every one of them were terrorists / part of the 9/11 plot?>>

When you're conducting a murder investigation, usually the family and friends of the suspect are questioned and interrogated. Happens all the time. Over three thousand people are murdered, a suspect is named, and the only family members we have access to are allowed to step on a plane on a day when no one else can fly and leave the country without being questioned by the FBI or CIA... and they were pissed. Why? What was Bush so afraid of?

<<Straw man. Already covered in my previous post.>>

Not a straw man, Bush is responsible for everything he says. I don't care if it's pandering, it's not a straw man.

<<If he�s said anything bad about Muslim fundamentalists, it�s because they�re the type of religious zealots that � oh well, you�d be bitching about, were they Christian>>

Trust me, I bitch about fundamentalists from every religion, I don't like religion. I think it is a crutch and used as an excuse for more atrocities than can be counted.

But I believe in the Constution and the right to practice religion as you see fit, despite whether or not I agree with it. Since you played the Persecuted Christian card, I'll say that if an amendment came up making Christianity illegal, I would oppose it.

And yes, Muslims are being demonized, maybe Bush himself isn't publically stating it, but John Ashcroft has had many Arabs arrested and detained without being charged.

<<Good lord, there�s no hope for you. You probably believe the war was all about oil, don�t you?>>

I guarantee you that if there was no oil there, Saddam Hussein would still be in power. But really, he was no threat to us. Saudi Arabia on the other hand, they're the Kings of Islamic Terrorism, why don't we invade Saudi Arabia?

Or any of these other countries. Uzbekistan, North Korea which was actually threatening us with nukes, countless African and Central American countries. Saddam Hussein was a very bad guy, no one is questioning that, and I'm happy to see him gone. But there are so many worse people who we're not even breathing on.

<<Don�t even try this BS. Clinton had a 101 opportunities to get Bin Laden but he didn�t. Why?>>

If you're referring to the infamous story about Sudan saying they had Osama and were ready to give him to Clinton that conservatives like to toss around, you're forgetting the other half. The half where Sudan wanted sanctions against their country dropped in exchange. And we all know that Sudan sponsers terrorism.

But aside from that, you scored one, on this point I will concede, as the Al Qaeda threat is a lot of people's fault. Not just Bush's.
Greg Bishansky
Thursday, March 18, 2004 05:26:18 PM
IP: 216.179.3.53

darn IE
damien
Thursday, March 18, 2004 05:13:36 PM
IP: 207.6.149.113

<<buffalo wing>> buffalo has a different opinion? NOOOO

<<Damien: Your three points.
<1)if the democrats win the white house, the US troops are going to be pulled out of Iraq asap> Not necessarily.
<2)at best, it will be a while before the situation in Iraq is stabilized even after a new government is formed> Agreed.
<3)the UN has already withdrawn from Iraq because of the instability in Iraq> The UN has indicated a willingness to return, however, and Bush has already come groveling for assistance a few times. <Conclusion: in this election, voting for the democratic candidate for president is the same as voting to put a dictatorship back in Iraq because that's what will happen if the US troops pull out before the country is stabilized.> That's one possibility, though it could very well happen even if the GOP wins. Or it could be civil war. Or it could be fine. Or Iran could take the opportunity to invade. Or...or...or. That's the definition of unstable - no one knows. Voting Democrat probably won't change the chaos all that much, I think. >>
Wrong guy, Don't want to look to see who it was but,
Just like i thought for the 2000 election... the US is screwed no matter who gets elected. Neither of the "big" candidates looks like a prize. (from 2000 it was between a moron and an Idiot) and now its between the Moron you know and the Moron Incumbant.

and now a point that truely can be debated...
What difference can an inch make?

What difference does an inch make? It can be the difference between winning and losing, between winning and setting a world record, it is the difference between pocket sized and unwieldy, but most of all, it is the difference between an ooh and an ahh.

Damien
Thursday, March 18, 2004 05:13:03 PM
IP: 209.73.164.50

<<buffalo wing>> buffalo has a different opinion? NOOOO

<<Damien: Your three points.
<1)if the democrats win the white house, the US troops are going to be pulled out of Iraq asap> Not necessarily.
<2)at best, it will be a while before the situation in Iraq is stabilized even after a new government is formed> Agreed.
<3)the UN has already withdrawn from Iraq because of the instability in Iraq> The UN has indicated a willingness to return, however, and Bush has already come groveling for assistance a few times.
<Conclusion: in this election, voting for the democratic candidate for president is the same as voting to put a dictatorship back in Iraq because that's what will happen if the US troops pull out before the country is stabilized.> That's one possibility, though it could very well happen even if the GOP wins. Or it could be civil war. Or it could be fine. Or Iran could take the opportunity to invade. Or...or...or. That's the definition of unstable - no one knows. Voting Democrat probably won't change the chaos all that much, I think. >> Wrong guy, Don't want to look to see who it was but,
Just like i thought for the 2000 election... the US is screwed no matter who gets elected. Neither of the "big" candidates looks like a prize. (from 2000 it was between a moron and an Idiot) and now its between the Moron you know and the Moron Incumbant.

and now a point that truely can be debated...
What difference can an inch make?

What difference does an inch make? It can be the difference between winning and losing, between winning and setting a world record, it is the difference between pocket sized and unwieldy, but most of all, it is the difference between an ooh and an ahh.

Damien
Thursday, March 18, 2004 05:12:12 PM
IP: 209.73.164.50

Damien: Claw's not known for speaking but there's always the bloopers reel.

Green Baron: You think Kerry will get in? Hmm. I'd have thought if Bush is seen as the populist he's really in trouble, but it may be different in the states where I always got the impression he was well-liked. Yeah, Rice always seemed pretty decent, although apparently short on experience. I think you need an Iron Lady really. Or we do. Someone to say "don't go wobbly now, George." ;)

Yes, the notion of Charles Kennedy is spine-chillingly abhorrent. But it's not like the LibDems have a hope in hell of getting in unless Labour run scared and switch the election system to PR.

The House of Commons has very strict rules on being rude. You can do it, but it's all got to be coded. But PMQs are great.

And yeah, I usually read the Telegraph. Love the columnists -- particularly Boris Johnson, Alice Thompson, Janet Daley and Tom Utley. Tom Utley's "A Father Writes" column is fun too. The cartoons Matt and Alex are frequently hilarious. Although it is self-confessedly biased, it's also usually quite fair: it gave Labour MP Sion Simon a regular column until he decided to focus on being a Labour MP. Besides, the Times is too light-weight, the Independent is too lefty, the Guardian is too creepy, the Sun is too trashy, the Mail is too tribal and the less said about the Mirror the better.

Greg: Honestly, I get where you're coming from with your list of Bush sins (and goodness knows I could produce a list of Labour crimes as long as your arm), but I don't think most of them are quite as shocking as you seem to think they are. I mean they seem like you'd expect a bunch of cack-ups from a political leader of four years. I know the Major years had sleaze concerns, early Blair years the worry was stealth taxes and corruption. Kerry tried to dodge the draft too, he just wasn't as successful at it. I dunno. Maybe I'm just jaded by the shadow of EU Bolshevism.
Ed
Thursday, March 18, 2004 05:06:21 PM
IP: 131.111.8.97

Ed> <<But as long as the EU is dismantled, I don't really mind.>>
I think that I should be Queen of Switzerland. Cheese and chocolate...yum.
_________________
Gside> <<Sure it wasn't in his basement, with the head centered on a vinyl record of a one hit wonder he produced?>>
*cheers inappropriately*

<<Coating yourself with cocoa powder might not be a bad idea as a way to get Lain to feel more amorous.>>
Hot chocolate or cocoa? I don't think that unsweetened cocoa would go over real well.
_______________
DPH> <<And if he changes his mind about removing those troops, he loses his Democratic base, because most of the anti-war people are Democrats.>>
What's the point of being anti-war after the damn war is over? Grr.
_______________
Youth N Aisia> <<So, we should adopt the same doctrine of appeasement with regards to terrorism that is currently so en vogue in Europe?>>
...You didn't read a word I said, did you?

<<Yeah, I do so love that �If we�re nice to them, they�ll kill us last� philosophy.>>
Not as much as I love people who try to put words in my mouth, I bet.

<<Bush knows this, which is why he can support the amendment � it pleases his base, and he knows that he�ll never have to deal with repercussions for endorsing it as it will never, ever, become reality.>>
And that makes him less sleazy how, exactly?

<<Which what I fear Kerry will do should he gain office.>>
Has it occurred to you that other people have fears of what Bush will do if re-elected? Or do only your fears matter?

<<With regards to the irrational hatred, thank you for making my point for me.>>
Really? How? Please enlighten me, O Wise *cough* One.

Funny... I can remember getting into arguments with you years ago. If you're going to change your name, you should try changing it to something _new_.
Bud-Clare
Thursday, March 18, 2004 05:00:12 PM
IP: 66.67.201.63

Okay, there's way too many posts here to respond to every one in detail without starting my own webpage. I'll pcik out a few people who've posted things with points I want to address. First of all; this is great. I love being able to debate this stuff with people who have, for the most part, similar interest and knowledge of the issues.
So...
V> My crack about Republican bigots was ill-advised, and I apologize. You're right; the issue can (and should) be debated without throwing bigot around, though I personally think that opposing SSM walks a thin line between disagreement and discrimination. Still, I shouldn't have mouthed off, and so I apologize. Cheers.
Bud-Clare> I think that partisan politics is crap, but if you absolutely can't force yourself to vote for one of the two establishment parties, then by all means, find an alternative. I want Bush unemployed as much as anyone, but if voting for Kerry puts you off, then it's better to find an alternative than to abstain entirely.
Question> You need to read more. You and Youth'N'Asia, whether you're the same person or not, both seem to suffer from the alarmingly common condition of American Sequestration Syndrome, or ASS for short. This is a common illness with variants in every country. Those affected tend to not understand that other countries have different viewpoints, goals, and expectations than yours, and that what your country does may not be seen in the same light in other places. Patients are usually treated with hefty doses of exposure to other points of view.
In other words, stop parroting the White House line. It might play well in Boise, but in the real world, there's more than one interpretation of the same event. You see the Spanish election as a capitulation to terror. Someone in Madrid may see it as a potent reminder to the former government that they lie and cover things up at their electoral peril.
It really is disgusting how America trumpets democracy for the whole world over, but as soon as a country like Spain exercises it, Washington gets mad to the point where Republican Speaker Dennis Hastert (or whatever his name is) is criticizing the Spanish people for daring to make a choice in their own election. It really doesn't speak well for the commitment of this administration to democracy. As in so much, Bush says one thing and vaguely wants another.
Question, I suggest, in the kindest possible way, that you start doing some more reading on foreign affairs, from all points of view. Left wing, right wing, both wing, buffalo wing, whatever. You need to see how the world works. Right now, talking to you is like talking to a bright young man who's been locked in a box all his life. Get out and see more and come back when you're ready to accept that there is more than the FOX News spin on things. You one sentence in your reply to Dezi says it all: "I think their actions and attitudes need changing first." Everyone needs vto change. It might as well start with us. If America wants to bring democracy and freedom to the world, it had better start leading by example.
Green Baron> You're my favourite conservative. :-) Seriously, it's a pleasure talking to you, and I'd love to have you and Hellcat over for coffee or something if you ever come through. I'd go through and respond to all of your points if I could, but it's really only one that sticks out, and that's that it would be an unmitigated disaster to have economists run the show. Seriously; a country is more than its economy, and governments often have to deal with intangibles that can't be accounted for in any budget. I'm sure many economists would make great politicians, but not all of them, and to have the country run by someone solely because they have a grasp of economics...well, cost-efficiency might be good thing, but I don't believe it's the only thing. Governments are not businesses and should not be businesses. They're US, running our affairs, repesenting ourselves. Good government isn't necessarily the most efficient.
Interesting note: the Nobel Prize for Economics is not a Nobel Prize. It's awarded "in honour of" Nobel by a group of economists, but Nobel never set aside money for an Economics prize when he set up the prizes.
Damien: Your three points.
<1)if the democrats win the white house, the US troops are going to be pulled out of Iraq asap> Not necessarily.
<2)at best, it will be a while before the situation in Iraq is stabilized even after a new government is formed> Agreed.
<3)the UN has already withdrawn from Iraq because of the instability in Iraq> The UN has indicated a willingness to return, however, and Bush has already come groveling for assistance a few times.
<Conclusion: in this election, voting for the democratic candidate for president is the same as voting to put a dictatorship back in Iraq because that's what will happen if the US troops pull out before the country is stabilized.> That's one possibility, though it could very well happen even if the GOP wins. Or it could be civil war. Or it could be fine. Or Iran could take the opportunity to invade. Or...or...or. That's the definition of unstable - no one knows. Voting Democrat probably won't change the chaos all that much, I think.
Youth'N'Asia> Deep breath. DEEEEEP breath...okay...think happy thoughts...and calm. Calm. There are ways to present an argument without being a condescending jerk. First of all, I advise you to consider the possibility that there are other viewpoints besides yours, as well. Most everyone else who debates anything starts from the position that they could be wrong. You sound pretty sure of yourself, which means that you're either completely wrong or you're completely uninterested in having an actual conversation or hearing other points of view. I strongly suggest you simmer down. When you're ready to be civil, you might get people responding to your posts.
Jaden> I like your analogy, and I like your quote.

Whitbourne
Thursday, March 18, 2004 04:59:23 PM
IP: 156.34.84.185

[[And as an administrator of this comment room I'm allowed to ban you for posting a flame. Just to let you know. ]]

Ah good. Throwing your authority around against someone who you disagree with politically.

[[<>

So what you mean to say, you support the gutting of the Constitution with Nazi-esque tripe like the Patriot Act. ]]

People like you keep complaining about it, and yet all of those civil liberties you claim are being taken away are�.well, pretty much still there. I haven�t seen anything in the news where a single court in the entire nation has overturned the Patriot Act, which I�m sure they WOULD have by now, if it was as truly awful as you say it is.

[[The tearing down the walls of church and state. ]]

In what way? Faith based initiatives?

[[Lying to go to war. ]]

What liberals are so pissed about is that they can�t prove this. Because the evidence doesn�t substantiate that claim.

Again, let�s all ignore the fact that every nation on earth stated that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.

[[Going AWOL from his own National Guard duty (which he had his daddy put him in to avoid the draft making him a draft dodger). ]]

He served his time there.

I really hope liberals aren�t going to continue down this road, because it�s incredibly silly, seeing as the last president didn�t exactly serve his country in the military�.it didn�t matter then, people don�t care now.

[[Allowing everybody in the country who's name was bin Laden to leave right after 9/11 without so much as a question. ]]

You�re privy to top-secret intelligence information that indicates that each and every one of them were terrorists / part of the 9/11 plot?

[[The marriage amendment. ]]

Straw man. Already covered in my previous post.

[[Demonizing an entire religious/ethnic group. ]]

Who? Muslim FUNDAMENTALISTS?

Bush hasn�t said a single negative word about ordinary Muslims.

If he�s said anything bad about Muslim fundamentalists, it�s because they�re the type of religious zealots that � oh well, you�d be bitching about, were they Christian.

[[Destroying the American Middle Class with his tax breaks to the super rich. ]]

Good lord, there�s no hope for you. You probably believe the war was all about oil, don�t you?

[[Blacking out pages and pages from the 9/11 report about Saudi Arabia. ]]

Well, you scored one point. On this one I will concede.

[[Ignoring the Al Qaeda threat up until 9/11 when the previous administration had a plan to deal with them that they presented to the Bush regime but the very wise Condoleeza Rice said "China was the bigger threat"]]

Don�t even try this BS. Clinton had a 101 opportunities to get Bin Laden but he didn�t. Why? Because his administration, like the current one pre 9/11, thought it very inconceivable that Al-Qaeda could pull off such an attack. There was chatter that they wanted to pull something off using planes, but that information wasn�t exactly widely circulated by the intelligence agencies � just part of our overall gross intelligence failures. Trying to blame this solely on Bush is moronic.

Everyone can believe I�m the Question if they like � but I am not him (her?). I've lurked around for a few weeks, I merely haven't posted anything until recently.

Youth N Asia
Thursday, March 18, 2004 04:41:49 PM
IP: 38.118.3.41

Krista:<>

*sees Krista playing Solitaire in a separate window staring blankly at the Queen of Hearts she just drew.*

(Heheh, I wonder how many will get the reference. ;-)
Leo
Thursday, March 18, 2004 04:36:58 PM
IP: 68.231.241.236

re: Euthinasia and Question,
the wierd thing is i've found at least 3 IP addresses for them, and Youth has 2 of them
Btw if you wonder why Ip may be different, I'm using a trick i learned a long time ago to see if it still redirects my IP
Damien
Thursday, March 18, 2004 04:21:36 PM
IP: 209.73.164.50

KRISTA> <<ok, then, in that case, I'm allowed to say that you're an idiot.>>

To quote Greg Weisman "You must have taken logic in school."

And as an administrator of this comment room I'm allowed to ban you for posting a flame. Just to let you know.

<>

So what you mean to say, you support the gutting of the Constitution with Nazi-esque tripe like the Patriot Act.
The tearing down the walls of church and state.
Lying to go to war.
Going AWOL from his own National Guard duty (which he had his daddy put him in to avoid the draft making him a draft dodger).
Allowing everybody in the country who's name was bin Laden to leave right after 9/11 without so much as a question.
The marriage amendment.
Demonizing an entire religious/ethnic group.
Destroying the American Middle Class with his tax breaks to the super rich.
Blacking out pages and pages from the 9/11 report about Saudi Arabia.
Ignoring the Al Qaeda threat up until 9/11 when the previous administration had a plan to deal with them that they presented to the Bush regime but the very wise Condoleeza Rice said "China was the bigger threat"

I could go on and on and on.

But since you say you support EVERYTHING he does. Then you obviousy support drunk driving, football hooliganism and stealing Christmas wreaths too
Greg Bishansky
Thursday, March 18, 2004 04:09:17 PM
IP: 216.179.3.53

(Sorry I posted that just now, I haven't been in here for a few days.)
Krista
Thursday, March 18, 2004 03:34:11 PM
IP: 66.218.241.64

Greg:<in that case, i'm allowed to say that George W. Bush...>
ok, then, in that case, I'm allowed to say that you're an idiot. I completely support George W. Bush in everything he does.

Patrick: Thank ya lots for saying that. Saved me the trouble :)

My IP is different cause I'm at my sister's house in Arizona, instead of at home at my nice computer in Denton, Texas. So...

Man, I missed the first posts. I tried, but my lap top didn't let me. So...
I claim this post in the name of Brooklyn! And if this let me do smiley central, there would be a small heart by the name Brooklyn!
*walks out daydreaming, I mean, nightdreaming of Brooklyn*
Krista
Mesa, AZ, USA
Thursday, March 18, 2004 03:29:53 PM
IP: 66.218.241.64

[["Youth N Asia" we know that's you. ]]

I'm many things, but "The Question" is not one of them.
Youth N Asia
Thursday, March 18, 2004 01:54:01 PM
IP: 38.118.3.41

Trust Todd to be all historically accurate and take the fun out of it ... ;)

Fire Storm > sorry, no can do; I was lucky to get one submission done in time for the Phoenix Gate antho. I am supposed to have my next novel's first draft done by Easter, and it's going to be close! Besides, methinks Christi's got it covered (my guess for the two world tour characters -- those scientist people who were also in the one about the Scrolls of Merlin)
Christine
Thursday, March 18, 2004 12:39:24 PM
IP: 208.187.159.84

GB> <<Question is not a conservative, liberal, libertarian, vegetarian, green, or a member of the Islamic Zionist Organization of Nunavut..I think he jsut likes to beat dead horses and talk about anything. Maybe he's someone who left the fandom years ago out of anger and is back for spite, or he's a key player in the drug cartel run by the Vatican, Queen Elizabeth II, Haliburton, and Tota Fina Elf.>>

No, Question is an imbecile who's been trolling in this fandom for years, and he's done it under several aliases. Anonynmous, Peter Mason, Galvatron, Tryglicerine, the Squiggly One, etc, etc. He's the one who originally FUBARed ASK GREG.

The really funny part is that he thinks he's fooling people with his aliases, and he really isn't.

"Youth N Asia" we know that's you.
Greg Bishansky
Thursday, March 18, 2004 12:04:22 PM
IP: 216.179.3.53

[[You know, the jokes about Steve Irwin helped me to finally be able to articulate my feelings about Bush. Yes, if there's an angry, vemonous snake loose in someone's house, someone's got to do something about it. That doesn't mean that it's necessary (or a good idea) to poke the snake with a stick to make it even angrier and then get in its face. It's not even _just_ the poking snakes with sticks that bothers me, since it's remotely possible that it might help in some way... It's the total obliviousness to the possible danger that worries me. And the grinning. Eek. ]]

So, we should adopt the same doctrine of appeasement with regards to terrorism that is currently so en vogue in Europe?

Yeah, I do so love that �If we�re nice to them, they�ll kill us last� philosophy.

[[(Of course, this only applies to foreign policy. Don't even get me started on constitutional amendments and such... *clutches head in pain*) ]]

I assume you�re discussing the gay marriage ban, which has to be one of the biggest straw men that�s come down the political pike in a good long time.

Bush and Kerry have virtually the SAME position upon the issue of gay marriage. Most liberals point to the Bush support of a gay marriage amendment as some sort of defining factor, but it�s all hogwash. Anyone who has a basic understanding of constitutional law knows that proposed amendments must be approved by both houses of Congress and ratified by two-thirds of all the States (roughly 37 of the 50) before it becomes part of the Constitution. Do you REALLY think that any gay marriage amendment will pass through that sort of crucible? It won�t. Bush knows this, which is why he can support the amendment � it pleases his base, and he knows that he�ll never have to deal with repercussions for endorsing it as it will never, ever, become reality.

[[Youth N Asia> <<Bush isn�t even half as corrupt as 98% of all European leaders.>>
...and? Exactly what point are you trying to make? That Bush is the lesser evil? Or that we ought to invade Europe? ]]

A) My point is that those who feel that Bush is significantly corrupt are for the most part incorrect and ignoring the fact that our leaders in America are generally among the least corrupt world leaders on the planet. All politicians have some sort of skeleton in our closet, but our leaders are, in general, equitable human beings. We�re not exactly like Russia here, where when one of the presidential candidates disappears for a week, fingers automatically start pointing at the current leadership as having something to do with it.

B) We shouldn�t invade Europe. But we shouldn�t capitulate to them to curry their favor again. Which what I fear Kerry will do should he gain office.

[[<<It�s that fact that the majority of their hatred of him is entirely irrational>>
...It must be nice to be omniscient. Why waste time and effort finding out why people actually dislike a person when you can just jump to conclusions and assume you know everything? ]]

With regards to the irrational hatred, thank you for making my point for me.

Youth N Asia
Thursday, March 18, 2004 10:27:03 AM
IP: 38.118.3.41

It's still frigging cold here. It would have been a beautiful day but the wind ruind it. Now I'm babbling....what else is new?

Not a lot of posts today. I guess people are scared to post due to Question getting fisked like an article in the Guardian, but I have a theory...Question is not a conservative, liberal, libertarian, vegetarian, green, or a member of the Islamic Zionist Organization of Nunavut..I think he jsut likes to beat dead horses and talk about anything. Maybe he's someone who left the fandom years ago out of anger and is back for spite, or he's a key player in the drug cartel run by the Vatican, Queen Elizabeth II, Haliburton, and Tota Fina Elf. :)

And yes I am pulling stuff out of my ass, but I'm washing it first.

Jaden> <<You're mid-tour was denied because of you're NCO going on leave? What like of unit is that? I went on leave the same time my plt sgt. was gone. As for November, hell, I'm voting for Kerry because if nothing else the idea of four more years of Bush makes me ill.>>

Well you're voting against Bush and not for Kerry, so I can respect that ;) Of course you do realize that if Bush has a remote chance of winning California in which your vote for Kerry is critical, he'll have a lot more electoral votes than last time.

As for the leave situation, there would be no porblem if my Platoon Sergeant or Chief of MilPay was going on leave. In the Processing Section of Bravo Det, 176th Finance, there will be four people in August, and one will be a Katusa soldier. The Katusa program is great, but as you may remember form Katusas in your unit, they have a lot to do with the ROK Army so they are only available 60% of the time, so when I would go on leave with my NCO, one soldier would be left to do all the work. Yeah it sucks, but I understand the reasoning...but I as far as I am concerned my unit can suck Kennedys.

<<
"This boy is ignorance. This girl is want. Beware them both, and all of their degree, but most of all beware this boy, for on his brow I see that written which is Doom, unless the writing be erased. Deny it."

Who said this? It's an easy one.>>

The Ghost of Christmas Present in the roiginal novel by Charles Dickens and a few movie versions.

Speaking of Dickens, I learned that the character of Fagin was Jewish. I wonder how much more anti-semitic propaganda is in British literature, or Euoepan literature in general prior to WWII. Shakespeare and Marlowe I know about, and Ivanhoe has anti-semitic overtones back then, too. I guess it's a good thing that we can't catch those referenes today.

<<I don't think that we should the "world leader" anymore. We've gotten so use to being the calvary, riding in to save the day, that we've become some kind of invasive parent. We can't just do things our own way anymore, we need to group up and become a team player.>> I see your point, and while I am hawkish, I don't like that the US subsidizes much of teh military budget for the Developed World. Ameria's GDP is about 12 trillion dollars, so we will be a major player in the world, regardless. In the 19th cnetury we were condmened for isolationism, and I suspect if we strat focusing inwards we'll probably get criticized for that, too. I agree we need to be more humble, but what kind of team are you suggesting?

I do see your point, though, about how many other wealthy nations see us as teh Cavalry so they put what they should on defense into social programs, and I do admit that some areas we have military in aren't really needed there, and may do more good defending our borders. I also think we should allow soldiers from smaller nations in the Coalition a chance to train with us on American soil and after some English language training , get to work with us in our bases and posts in the states.

Ed> <<Kerry comes across as a much worse option for America from where I'm sitting.>> I see that, just from his voting record as a Senator, though as a President, he may be different. Maybe he'll surprise us and take Bush's toughness, but be more genteel about it....if he does this, I'll be impressed, but I won't hold my breath either. I do find the race an odd flip flop of the 92 election where Bush Sr. is the patrician figure and Clinton the populist, while younger Bush has a more populist image and Kerry very much the patrician.

In any event, I hope to see Condoleeza Rice kick Kerry out of Office in 2008. For she is a genius and brilliant with foreign policy. She needs a running mate like Guiliani who is a wiz on domestic issues....now that is a good ticket, plus she'll be a lot more humble than Bush and if she has an iron fist, she'll use a velvet glove, plus she also has a mature beauty to her, but that isn't too relevant, though it could help her.

<<As for Livingstone, the sad thing is, this opinion probably gets him more votes. :( >> I notice. Plus I had a thought of something that would really scare you: PM Charles Kennedy.

<<Hey, you cheater... you just dug out an old argument summary and reused it. ;)>> I thought she jsut copied a British Parliament debate...it's funny that insulting someone in Congress can get a Congressman banned for teh day...this is why C-Span coverage of British Parliament i sso much fun to watch. I'd love to hear someone in the Senate called Ted Kennedy a fat drunken waste of human flesh or tell Trent Lott to stuff it, or to call Daschle a weenie.

<<My address is 10 Downing Street, London, United Kingdom.>> And some shortbread coverd with ebola to George Galloway in Scotland :)

<<Yeah, I've heard of Fisk. Don't know if I've ever read any articles of his. Not exactly a big reader of 'The Independent' (which is anything but independent).>>

What do you think of the Spectator and the Telegraph aka Torygraph. I like them, but I know they are biased...just biased in my favor :)

Youth N. Asia> <<It�s that fact that the majority of their hatred of him is entirely irrational and that they are incapable of seeing that they�re only following the same ridiculous pattern of behavior that conservatives employed against Clinton.>> I know. I now regret a lot of my Clinton hatred, plus I realize I was worng to oppose Bosnia in 1993, primarily due to what I see against Bush. Hindisgt is always 20/20. I also will probably ease up on Kerry hatred as I think I have gotten a lot out of my system, so I will now just make fun of him as I did enjoy making fun of President Clinton and her husband too :)

and I make fun of Bush too.

Tharos> <<If that's not a politically motivated, reasonless act of war, I dunno what is!>> Our involvement in WWI, due to the Lusitania..I mean the Germans said they weren't safe and we were supplying their enemy with weapons...that one we had coming..adn we shoudl have sided with the Kaiser in the first place. Then Germany would have kept a Kaiser and Hitler would just be some artist getting NEA grants.

DPH> <<if the democrats win the white house, the US troops are going to be pulled out of Iraq asap>> I imagien the Republicans will keep control of Congress (or else I will defiitely look for jobs in Edmonton) and the Senate is likely to favor Republicans which can count on Democrats like Nelson of Nebraska and Lieberman to give them an occasional boost. Also I think Kerry may move to the center now that he has the Democratic nomination sewn up...though if that Botox affected his brain, he may propose a Dept of Peace and make Kucinish his running mate.

Damien><<Uhh BTW it's 912DAYS FROM Septemer 11, 2001 to march 11 2004, this was a leap year remember...>> You're right. I'll have to be more careful in the future abot some stuff.

<<the pathetic candidate, who's only claim of availability is that she runs a company, that it turns out was awned by DADDY!>> Well, I do deserve points for knowing about her..I hope. And what do you think of Gordon Campbell? I know he's a Liberal, but he strikes me as a Blue one.

<<Remember the CIA trained Bin Laden, and then they abandoned him on a mission. thats why he hates the US so. >>
Well, I doubt that is his sole motivator. That was foolish of teh CIA agent. He shoudl ahve made cetain Bin Laden was dead, preferrbaly coverd in pig grease.

Whitbourne> Feel free to respond. I may disagree with you 90% of teh time, but I do like ya..I hope you feel teh same way.

Todd Jensen> 13th century..my mistake. Still, if a Mongol Empire encomapsed all of Europe, Asia, and Africa just think of teh advancements. Industrial Revolution in the 16th century, religiosu tolerance in medieval Europe, printing press in the 14th century, disocver of teh New World in 1412 maybe, and capitalism founded in 1530 instead of 200 years later by Adam Smith.

More to follow tommorrow.

Green Baron - [greenbaron@hotmail.com]
Camp Humphreys, Korea
Thursday, March 18, 2004 09:07:27 AM
IP: 220.73.165.139

Spike > Mwahaha! Looks like my work here is done, by crikey! ;)

Silvadel > It would be hard to edit them out when Demona and Puck are standing on them in "The Mirror."

Lynati > I won't even ask.

141 days left until The Gathering 2004 in Montreal, Quebec!
Patrick
Thursday, March 18, 2004 06:49:09 AM
IP: 65.43.150.4

Actually, unless Demona's also a passenger on the Phoenix Gate ride alongside Irwin, she couldn't appear in that St. Patrick story anyway; St. Patrick's missionary work in Ireland was during the 5th century, and Demona wouldn't be hatched for another five centuries.
Todd Jensen
St. Louis, MO
Thursday, March 18, 2004 06:41:09 AM
IP: 171.75.194.33

wow, while looking through tv tome i suddenly realized, I HAVE NEVER SEEN THE GOLIATH CHRONICALS! I suddenly feel so clean...

Damien
Thursday, March 18, 2004 03:13:06 AM
IP: 207.6.149.113

Was watching Gargoyles tonight and saw the twin towers... Was actually kind of impressed that they didnt edit them out... Far too often I see that kind of revision done to tv shows/movies.
silvadel
Thursday, March 18, 2004 02:31:45 AM
IP: 24.225.220.194

You know, I thought before that peeling a layer of rubber off of a head was difficult, but maaan, getting an eyeball out of its socket intact is a lot more work.

art is haaaaard.
Lynati
Thursday, March 18, 2004 02:07:11 AM
IP: 64.219.129.107

I took a propane torch to some sugar coated bananas today. Not too bad, but the melted sugar wasn't as thick as I'd hoped.

Gunjack> <<These suicides included one case where a man was found decapitated in his car>>: Sure it wasn't in his basement, with the head centered on a vinyl record of a one hit wonder he produced? Or am I thinking of the Long Dark Teatime of the Soul again?
<<Powder Coat>>: Coating yourself with cocoa powder might not be a bad idea as a way to get Lain to feel more amorous.
<<sin, and then SINGLING IT OUT FOR LEGAL PUNISHMENT is wrong>>: There are enough sins that are also illegeal that many people don't feel bad about making the jump to saying all sins should be illegeal. Though I pity the Jew, Muslim, or member of any other religion that tries to take away my bacon (or Taylor's ham).

Damien> <<No MORE GREEN, ITS MY PRECIOUS COLOR>>: Many people have had green before you. Especially the Baron during Ordinary Time.

Dezi> <<do you know for a _fact_ if those really are his true intentions?>>: Doesn't bother me if foreign policy isn't primarially based on that, as long as it's mixed in somewhere.

Question> <<the proper terminology I believe is HIV>>: But it doesn't sound as funny.

Green Baron> <<calling Kim Jong Il Elvis and Chavez a pendajo is not too original>>: If you want originality, you're going to have to do very, very well if you want to beat the Kim Jong Il Evangelion doujinshi. Quite strange, and the image of GWB raping Asuka while giving the audience the finger doesn't hurt either.
<<A nation ruled by Economists.....I like it!>>: You'd never get it past all the tree huggers.

Ed> <<Not much wit needed>>: But if you get the timing right, it might just work very well.

Jaden> <<when I imagine American society as a person, I see an adolescent>>: Well, we pretty much are, compared to the other hemisphere.
<<The spotlight is on us>>: And it'll be pretty hard to take it off, as we pretty much made the spotlight, what with Hollywood and all. If only there was more scenic variety in Jersey, we could have been the center of the industry.

Bud Clare> <<this is why I refuse to join a party>>: Everyone should ignore primaries, they're only party tools.
<<Dickens makes my brain go numb. (Did that sound odd?)>>: Nope, I don't really like Dickens either.

Spike> <<no Demona but it will feature two characters once seen on the World Tour>>: My bet is on the Guatemalans.

Na zdorov'ya.
Gside - [gside@comcast.net]
Fair Haven, NJ
Thursday, March 18, 2004 01:02:55 AM
IP: 68.37.159.199

Bud-Clare - <Seriously? Have they actually said that? See, this is why I refuse to join a party... They're _all_ crazy.> I believe that he has said it. And if he changes his mind about removing those troops, he loses his Democratic base, because most of the anti-war people are Democrats. <I'd be delighted if we could toss out both candidates and start fresh with some new ones. This is just an ugly election.> Is there a good choice if you have to choose between evils? That's how I viewed the presidential candidates for the past few years.

George W Bush is way too pro-business for my liking.

Yes, we have a serious problem with jobs being shipped overseas; I don't think neither party has a good solution. Oh yea, in case people have forgotten, the **Democratic** President Clinton signed NAFTA. The real problem is compared to 3rd world countries, wages paid in the US are very high. Greedy companies want to move their factories to places where they can pay the cheapest wages. Really, it's that simple; I'm not advocating cutting wages as a solution to this problem.

[Side note: I come really close to being a socialist when it comes to jobs and wages - minimum wage jobs should be reserved for college kids and high school kids - people who don't and shouldn't be supporting a family. The problem is greedy employeers don't want to pay people what they're really worth. I would be in favor of splitting minimum wage into 2 categories: skilled labor and unskilled labor. The current minimum wage stays the same for unskilled labor and a higher rate gets set for skilled labor. I'm not interested in a debate on how to define 'skilled' labor.]

DPH
AR, USA
Thursday, March 18, 2004 12:24:49 AM
IP: 67.14.195.4

Christine: Well, how about YOU write the Demona/Steve Irwin fic then?

But that doesn't solve the picture thing... Too bad I am a thinker and not a do-er...
FIre Storm
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 11:33:14 PM
IP: 68.73.58.60

Firestorm>> Heh... done. I've already have another artist doing a pic for it after revealing a small portion of the outline.

Christine>> Nope, sorry, no Demona but it will feature two characters once seen on the World Tour.

Patrick>> Be afraid, be VERY afraid.... *cackles like a madwoman and starts writing*
Spike
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 11:26:06 PM
IP: 209.30.64.219

Spike: I don't care if there IS a limit, we NEED that story with a pic!
Fire Storm
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 10:12:42 PM
IP: 68.73.53.49

Spike > It should have Demona in it ...

"Crikey! She's a beaut! Let's go in close and have a better look."

"Stay away from me, human!"

"An' she's fiesty, too! Now, better be careful here, because the bite of one of _these_ babies --"
Christine - [christine@sabledrake.com]
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 09:18:14 PM
IP: 208.187.15.163

Spike > No limit. The more entries, the merrier. :)
Patrick
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 09:08:52 PM
IP: 65.43.150.4

Spike > I don't see why not... but I'll check and find out for sure.
Patrick
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 08:51:50 PM
IP: 65.43.150.4

ok BACK to the topic of gargoyles and the TGS, Does claw ever speak in TGS? I know he's able to from one of the stories i read, (he doesn't speak from guilt) but did any author take advantage of that fact?
thanks!
Damien
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 08:36:54 PM
IP: 207.6.149.113

Patrick>> Well, I've already submitted one story with illo -- am I allowed two story entries?

Spike
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 08:24:38 PM
IP: 209.30.64.219

Spike > Go on... write it! I triple dog dare ya! ;)

War of 1812? Don't they teach 20th century history in the schools anymore? Japan attacked U.S. soil on December 7, 1941. It was the straw on the camel's back that finally pulled into a little skirmish known as World War II. Of course, within four years we had made them regret it.

Patrick
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 07:41:22 PM
IP: 65.43.150.4

Bud-Clare: America should absolutely invade Europe! Start with Belgium and Luxembourg for the EU stuff then move onto France and Germany. Oh and Northern Ireland, that'll teach 'em. But as long as the EU is dismantled, I don't really mind. Though if the price is right, selling Scotland and Wales might be an idea...
Ed
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 06:27:15 PM
IP: 131.111.8.103

You know, the jokes about Steve Irwin helped me to finally be able to articulate my feelings about Bush. Yes, if there's an angry, vemonous snake loose in someone's house, someone's got to do something about it. That doesn't mean that it's necessary (or a good idea) to poke the snake with a stick to make it even angrier and then get in its face. It's not even _just_ the poking snakes with sticks that bothers me, since it's remotely possible that it might help in some way... It's the total obliviousness to the possible danger that worries me. And the grinning. Eek.

Bush is Steve Irwin. And possibily Hagrid. Poor Hagrid. (I adore Hagrid, but I certainly wouldn't want him running the country. 'Course, there aren't many people that I _would_ want as president...)

(Of course, this only applies to foreign policy. Don't even get me started on constitutional amendments and such... *clutches head in pain*)
______________________
Youth N Asia> <<Bush isn�t even half as corrupt as 98% of all European leaders.>>
...and? Exactly what point are you trying to make? That Bush is the lesser evil? Or that we ought to invade Europe?

<<It�s that fact that the majority of their hatred of him is entirely irrational>>
...It must be nice to be omniscient. Why waste time and effort finding out why people actually dislike a person when you can just jump to conclusions and assume you know everything?
_______________________
DPH> <<if the democrats win the white house, the US troops are going to be pulled out of Iraq asap>>
Seriously? Have they actually said that? See, this is why I refuse to join a party... They're _all_ crazy. *grumbles about politicians*
________________________
Damien> <<Remember the CIA trained Bin Laden, and then they abandoned him on a mission. thats why he hates the US so.>>
We should lock him in a room with the CIA person who was responsible, and let them kill each other. Problem solved.
________________________
Thomas> <<You want me to support someone other than bozo or botox. You should be delighted a known conservative is not backing Bush.>>
I'd be delighted if we could toss out both candidates and start fresh with some new ones. This is just an ugly election.
________________________
Question> <<No nation state dares attack the United States on its soil.>>
That's the problem. We can do anything to anyone, and there's nothing anyone can do to stop us. Hence the god complex.
_________________________
Jaden> <<No joke there.>>
No, it was a joke. Hamlet. :P

<<Who said this? It's an easy one.>>
The Ghost of Christmas Past, I'm guessing. Not sure though, since Dickens makes my brain go numb. (Did that sound odd?)
Bud-Clare
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 06:07:13 PM
IP: 66.67.201.63

You know I've been getting kind of tired of all the politics and problems going on in this world. People either loving the U.S. or hating it; acts of terrorism; the EU wanting to become as powerful as the US. I try to care, I really do, but I'm just so worn out. I know it sounds corny but I really think that we should all be trying to work together instead of just trying to expand our own power base. We are so filled with hatred and greed; not to mention that we are totally into ourselves. People are dying all over the world, but as long as we're ok then it becomes easier to ignore.

As for the US specifically, well it's kind of funny but when I imagine American society as a person, I see an adolescent walking around with a mirror in one hand, constantly himself out. It's like we think that the world revolves around us. The spotlight is on us and we're constantly being judged by the rest of the world so we have to be the popular ones; we have to stand out from the rest and lead the way. I find it hard to believe that the entire world has nothing better to do than to wonder about what the United States is doing. I don't think that we should the "world leader" anymore. We've gotten so use to being the calvary, riding in to save the day, that we've become some kind of invasive parent. We can't just do things our own way anymore, we need to group up and become a team player. Take more of an advisary role if anything. If things continue this way, I may just have to find some nice, laid back country and stick my fingers in my ears and go LALALALALALALALALALALALALALALA until it's over (I wish).

Bud-clare <words> No joke there. Wow.

Green Baron- You're mid-tour was denied because of you're NCO going on leave? What like of unit is that? I went on leave the same time my plt sgt. was gone. As for November, hell, I'm voting for Kerry because if nothing else the idea of four more years of Bush makes me ill.

Well just one more thing and I'm off.

"This boy is ignorance. This girl is want. Beware them both, and all of their degree, but most of all beware this boy, for on his brow I see that written which is Doom, unless the writing be erased. Deny it."

Who said this? It's an easy one.

Later.
Jaden - [jaden1444@aol.com]
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 05:11:00 PM
IP: 4.33.186.127

[[question: <<No nation state dares attack the United States on its soil>> War of 1812 anyone? You lost!
and I aintgiving you anymore Argument material ]]

Congratulations, you�ve had to go back two hundred years to find the last time any nation has ever really got the better of us on our own soil.

[[Hmm last word on this US war debate (NOTE: LAST WORD, lets kill it now before it gets killed by the CR moderators)
Remember the CIA trained Bin Laden, and then they abandoned him on a mission. thats why he hates the US so. ]]

Silly me, I thought it was because he�s a religious zealot who�s sole goals in life are to see Islamic fundamentalism as the dominant religious / political philosophy in the world, the Jewish race wiped off the face of the planet, and all of those who support Israel (as in us, the Great Satan) demolished.

But no, I�m SURE you�re right, and I�m not.

[[Regardless of why the US went to war with Iraq, the fact is the US government overthrew the government and created the situation in Iraq. Since the US overthrew the government in Iraq, it is the responsibility of the US to stay in Iraq until the situation is stable.]]

Exactly so.

Anyone calling for immediate end to the U.S. occupation � even withdrawal by, say, the end of the year � is just painfully ignorant to the point where I would find such individuals inherently dangerous.

An American presence in Iraq will be necessary probably for the next half decade or so, perhaps longer, as we�re the only force that capable (or willing � unless you actually think the U.N. cares) of providing anything resembling security to them at this point.

[[So we can invade any country that's run by a bad man? Are we going to invade ourselves next? ]]

Bush isn�t even half as corrupt as 98% of all European leaders.

[[Uh, non-issue? The man lied to start an aggressive war. That is a WAR CRIME. It doesn't matter what Chirac, Schroeder, Putin, or anyone else thought of it in that estimation. Bush lied to start a war]]

And I�d love for someone to actually offer proof of this.

They haven�t yet.

Because it doesn�t exist.

You�re also conveniently ignoring that EVERY SINGLE GOVERNMENT that has an intelligence service � AS WELL AS the United Nations � said that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. EVERY. SINGLE. ONE. Even France, and they were as in bed with Saddam as a country could be. It was never an issue of whether he had them or not, it was an issue of �well, let�s let the weapons inspectors disarm him rather than disarm him by force.�

[[Interesting theory i heard advanced today; the Socialist win may be as much a blow to al-Qaeda as Bush. Some believe that bin Laden's goal is to provoke a clash between the cultures to "prove" that his toxic brand of Islam must fight against the West. If that's true (which no one knows, it must be said) then his interest is in promoting harder-line governments to take harsh stands against terrorism, because that will inevitably lead to antagonism against Muslims which he can then use to recruit more followers. As such, had the PP won and cracked down and supported the occupation even more fervently, then bin Laden would have more ammunition to promote his brand of hatred. It's a theory, true, but I think it's just as valid as the right-wing consensus that the Socialist win is a capitulation to terror. Bin Laden may have backfired as badly as Bush and Aznar.]]

Interesting, but ultimately, utterly ridiculous.

The doctrine of appeasement that infests most of Europe will, in the end, help Al-Qaeda and groups like it far more than a hardline government would.

[[And the american's burn everyone i dont like is Not fundamentalist?]]

No.

And you claiming it is brings me right back to �some people are so ignorant they�re dangerous.�

[[Besides, what do you think democracy is? The people voted and made their choice. It's just not a choice you agree with, and so you choose to spin it by calling it "caving in to terror".]]

Because they did.

A viewer on CNN summed it up best: when America was attacked, they responded by eliminating two tyrannical regimes. When Spain was attacked, they responded by eliminating their own government.

[[No one forced anyone into the ballot box. That's just silly. And I hardly think that the terrorists had the specific goal of getting one party in power.]]

If they didn�t before, they do now. Watch and see what happens, especially since it�s being reported now that an attack on Britain is �inevitable.�

[[Please don't insult our president]]

It�s not the fact that they insult the president that disturbs me.

It�s that fact that the majority of their hatred of him is entirely irrational and that they are incapable of seeing that they�re only following the same ridiculous pattern of behavior that conservatives employed against Clinton.

Youth N Asia
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 03:51:59 PM
IP: 164.82.144.3

Greg: Heh, thanks. Though actually, I'd agree with Josh, I don't think it really deserves a place on a list of funniest quotes. There's something about GWB... criticising him comes as second nature to so many people. I don't think it's a politics thing since people did it before he was President. I guess it's just that his various (supposed) muh-stakes make him an easy target. But I always feel a bit guilty about making a Bush joke. In terms of comedy it's the next step up from walking into a room and going "bum! Hee hee hee!" Not much wit needed. Although I couldn't resist with your comment. Even though reading it back now it's pretty icky really. Glad it made you laugh though.

Whitbourne: Your UK analogy is flawed. Labour do something horribly wrong *every* week. :)

Lain: Hey, you cheater... you just dug out an old argument summary and reused it. ;)

Dezi: If you're sending out colds I'll have one. My address is 10 Downing Street, London, United Kingdom.

Green Baron: Actually, I don't really have an opinion on Bush one way or another. I think a lot of people rant about him out of habit because it's just easier to do that than to try and work out what he's doing. Kerry comes across as a much worse option for America from where I'm sitting. The world, too, actually. As for Livingstone, the sad thing is, this opinion probably gets him more votes. :( Yeah, I've heard of Fisk. Don't know if I've ever read any articles of his. Not exactly a big reader of 'The Independent' (which is anything but independent).
Ed
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 03:43:05 PM
IP: 131.111.8.96

<<Also, Lain has told me very politely that, during the Clinton presidency, it was easier to count the number of days that the US didn't bomb Iraq. Which is better: continous bombing a country or going to war to effect regime change against said country?>>
Good point, and it's something people seem to forget when they get to ripping on Bush (not that I like him too much, but people are just plain unfair sometimes). I remember when the UN inspectors were getting kicked out of Iraqi weapons labs and bunkers left and right... Clinton did nothing. He was pressured by everyone, but wouldn't let it happen. Then he got in trouble for perjury, and all the Republicans were drooling to get him impeached. The DAY BEFORE his impeachment trial, we up and bombed the shit out of Baghdad... even though the situation with the inspectors had calmed down for months. If that's not a politically motivated, reasonless act of war, I dunno what is!

Man... I told myself I wasn't going to get involved in this. D'oh!
Tharous - [r_u_ready3@hotmail.com]
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 03:09:15 PM
IP: 69.40.142.156

Patrick>> Oh, dear.... a Steve Irwin/Phoenix Gate story might be too demented even for me.... *L*
Spike
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 03:06:11 PM
IP: 209.30.64.219

Damien - <Hmm last word on this US war debate> But you're not an admin and I haven't spoken yet.

3 points as I understand them (if I'm wrong on any of these, let me know):
1)if the democrats win the white house, the US troops are going to be pulled out of Iraq asap
2)at best, it will be a while before the situation in Iraq is stabilized even after a new government is formed
3)the UN has already withdrawn from Iraq because of the instability in Iraq

Conclusion: in this election, voting for the democratic candidate for president is the same as voting to put a dictatorship back in Iraq because that's what will happen if the US troops pull out before the country is stabilized.

Regardless of why the US went to war with Iraq, the fact is the US government overthrew the government and created the situation in Iraq. Since the US overthrew the government in Iraq, it is the responsibility of the US to stay in Iraq until the situation is stable.

In addition, yes, there should be an investigation into the intelligence that led to the war to Iraq to determine if anything was politically motivated. Just as a reminder, though, during the Clinton presidency, a policy supporting regime change was voted on by Congress.

Also, Lain has told me very politely that, during the Clinton presidency, it was easier to count the number of days that the US didn't bomb Iraq. Which is better: continous bombing a country or going to war to effect regime change against said country?

Question - You're hurting the cause more than you're helping it.
DPH
AR, USA
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 12:33:06 PM
IP: 161.31.104.141

Spike > Why don't you write that one? I'm inelligble to participate, since I'm on the con staff. Otherwise, I'd do it. ;)
Patrick
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 12:31:39 PM
IP: 66.93.14.153

Uhh BTW it's 912DAYS FROM Septemer 11, 2001 to march 11 2004,
this was a leap year remember...
Damien
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 11:57:48 AM
IP: 209.121.87.149

question: <<No nation state dares attack the United States on its soil>> War of 1812 anyone? You lost!
and I aintgiving you anymore Argument material

Green Baron <<how many Americans know who Belinda Stronach is>> the pathetic candidate, who's only claim of availability is that she runs a company, that it turns out was awned by DADDY!

Hmm last word on this US war debate (NOTE: LAST WORD, lets kill it now before it gets killed by the CR moderators)
Remember the CIA trained Bin Laden, and then they abandoned him on a mission. thats why he hates the US so.
Damien
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 11:47:54 AM
IP: 209.121.87.149

Todd>> Spoilsport.
*pinches him 'cause he's not posting in green*
Spike
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 10:02:18 AM
IP: 209.30.64.219

GREEN BARON - Actually, the Mongol invasion of eastern Europe took place in the 13th century rather than the 10th.

Re St. Patrick's Day: Ireland has actually never had any snakes in it. I suspect that the story about St. Patrick driving them out originated through symbolism, the snake representing paganism.
Todd Jensen
St. Louis, MO
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 08:29:52 AM
IP: 171.75.244.85

Patrick>> Today we celebrate the fellow who had the forethought do expel the snakes from Ireland, thereby keeping the island free forever of Steve Irwin. So have a happy St. Patrick's Day! >>

Are you sure that Steve Irwin didn't get ahold of the Phoenix Gate, was transported to medieval Ireland, disguise himself as an Irish monk and get rid of the snakes himself? *visualizes St. Patrick catching snakes and saying "Oh, he's naughty one, he is! Off the island with you!"*

Hmmm.... now there's a twisted entry for your Phoenix Gate anthology..... *L*
Spike
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 08:03:23 AM
IP: 209.30.64.219

Greetings to a day that is less than perfect. Damned cold snap in the air, as the last few days were so nice. I hope it warms up again, soon.

Now, first thing is first. Fisking is something used by bloggers, especially certain right-wing bloggers that I love to read, and it extends to some liberal bloggers that I enjoy reaidng as well :)

The term was named after Robert Fisk, Idiotarian Journalist for The UK Independent (I imagine Ed may knwo of him). Back in 2001 he wen to an Afghan refugee camp and he was beaten up by the people there. He later said that they were justified to beat him up, because he was a Westerner and they needed to express their anger. Some right-wing blgger pasted his artcile to tehri site and proceeded to respond to the comments in a snarky way....this became known as fisking. What you need to fisk is to take soemone's comments and respond in a way that basically tears his words apart. Also, right-wing sources can be fisked as easily as left-wing ones. One blogger known as Cato the Youngest is a well-known fisker, and even has a fun way of fisking articles.

Greg X> <<Well, as an American, all I have to say is that George W. Bush can suck my cock!>> Well, I admit if I was gay, I'd find him kind of cute, but you can get better than that. My Senator, Mary Landrieu aka the dumb blonde whore probably gives much better head than W, and she's a lot better looking than your blonde Senator...actually she is fairly attractive.

<<since we're Americans, I guess that means we're not allowed to insult leaders of other countries, right?>> To guote Tony Montana: f*ck that!!!! I'll have to insult some foreign leaders, just because you suggested that ;)

Now, I must find new material as calling Kim Jong Il Elvis and Chavez a pendajo is not too original. I coudl do bettr with some research :)

Ed> Well, you gotta admit that if Ken Livingstone doesn't like Bush, that is one point in W's favor :) BTW, you've heard of Robert Fisk, right?

Vinnie> <> What do you suggest? I like the idea of a coup d'etat taking over and someone liek Alan Greenspan or Milton Freidman ruling the country for a few years :) A nation ruled by Economists.....I like it!!!!

<<It' probably not real hair anyway>> Plus we shoudl blow up Kerry. His face is a weapon of mass destruction, when you consider all the bio agents in it :)

Greg X> <<See, this is exactly why I would make a bad parent, I do not agree with the whole "Do as I say, not as I do" sentiment, but I know I'd do it anyway.>> well hypicorsiy is part of human nature as self-righteousness is a quality of anyone out to tell the truth.

Whitbourne> <<hope that the insults are coupled with a cogent criticism of policy, but by all means, knock yourself out.>> Well, I have tow ait until he does something in Office. As of right now he is taking two sides on every issue, and the other Massachusettes Senator is a favorite verbal whipping boy of mine. There was an RP in the CR long ago where Ted Kennedy made a pass at Demona :)

<<Is it? I've never heard it in that context. "Neo-con" refers to "neo-conservative" up here - someone who follows the Bush doctrine of social conservatism and regime-change by force. It's a very didactic world view; us, the good guys, vs. them, the bad guys.>> Well, I don't know about the social coservative angle, but they are hawkish. Brief history:

Neo-cobservatives are intellectual ex-liberals who joined the conservative side about 30 years ago. Many of them are Jewish, so some people do use the term neo-con as a hidden way to say k*ke. Now, not all are Jewish. Stephen Schwartz who was a one-time Marxist and now a neo-conservative is a Muslim who converted in Bosnia. Of ocurse, all conservatives are lumped in as neo-conservative, because they support the war. Paul Wolfowitz is one as is Richard Perle, but I don't think it would apply to Donald Rumsfeld or Dick Cheney, or Condoleeza Rice, though she was a Democrat until Jimmy Carter became President.

Leo Strauss is considered teh father of teh movement,a nd I have soem fo his books and will read one right after I finish Atlas Shrugged, so I will decide how much it applies to me. Also, neo-conservatives have a lot of liberal heroes like FDR (America's first Emperor), as well as Harry Truman and John F Kennedy. In a way, Reagan could be considered a neo-conservative as he is an ex-Democrat, though one could debate how liberal he was, and his conversion was in the 1950s, not the 70s, plus he's not an intellectual but an Economist.

<<Why don't you like altruism, by the way?>> It's a by-product of 17 years of Catholic education, and a mother who imposed it on me. I find that people who are publicly altruistic are very slef-righteous and have an agenda, unless they're missionaries, though I've read soem stuff by Christopher Hitchens that totally trashes Mother Teresa.

<<And why do the ends supposedly justify the means? That's a pretty rotten way to set policy.>> Well, I must admit that I am a fan of Machiavelli, though it's mainly my love of his cynical humour. I find that the end result will justify and/or damn the means. When Bush chose not to dispose of Sadaam in 1991, he may have meant well, but history will damn him for it. Neville Chamberlain's desire fo peace in our time was well-meaning and he had a larger majority in Parliament than Tony Blair enjoys, but the end result is how we judge him.

<<If the ends truly justified the means, then there's nothing stopping me from forcing everyone to get rid of their cars because the exhaust pollutes the air. The ends (clean air) would justify the means (forcing people to junk their vehicles). It might be attarctive, but that's no how democracy worked.>> Screw Democracy. I wanna see you pull it off :) I imagine you've ehard of limousine liberals...well I'm a mass transit conservtive. So how is the transit system in Halifax? BTW, I may be in Halifax Airport in June if you have some time to kill. I also plan to visit Halifax with Hellcat in the near future. Hopefully you and Stormy can meet with us.

<<And Clinton blew as a President, no pun intended. He got by on a slicker populism than Bush, and many of his initiatives were simply Republican with a good ole boy spin.>> Well, he was the first Democrat to serve two full terms since Emperor Franklin I and his approach as Republian-lite was sucessful. I really hated him when he was in power, but looking at some of the anti-Bush sentiment, my own opinions on Clinton have softened, though I stil think he's a hillbilly.

<<(Just out of shameful admission, I don't know much about the German elections)>> I get a lot of my information from blogs and I've felt the need to be mor einformed on international politics. In fact, Canadian politics have become a new interest of mine, as how many Americans know who Belinda Stronach is, or find that picture of Jack Layton in a bus window amusing?

<<There are other parties than the Democrats and the Republicans. Do some research; find someone else to support. Democracy's biggest enemies are apathy and cynicism, not tyranny and dictatorship.>> I only like democracy because it is the most conducive to a free market and infringing on liberty not only wastes tax dollars, but hurts the Economy of a nation. I'll relay a comment by Frederik Hayek about democracy in my next post.

I voted for John McCain in 2000, and I was gonna vote for Bush (well against Gore to be more honest) in November but he came out for Meicare coverage fo prescription drugs), so I decided to go with my heart and vote for Harry Browne, the Libertarian. As a fiscal conservtive, I feel abandoned by Bush and I like Kerry less, so I'm voting for the Libertarian this time. The only thing I don't like about their party is their isolationist foreign policy, but I look at their reasoning and can agree with the points they make.

<<as surprised as you are, but Mr. Newsom ran on a Republican ticket. Also, I suspect you'vce heard of the Log Cabin Republicans, but perhaps you want to check them out. Not every Republican is a homophobic bigot. Just the ones with the microphones.>> I don't know which ones are bigots and which ones are simply stuck in an old mindset. Also, accusations of bigotry are used as a form of McCarthyism today, not that I'm accusing you of that. I'd attribute this view to the fact that many peopel associate homosexual with left-wing Democrats, though Bush receievd 25% of the homosexual vote in 2000, and there are plenty of homosexuals who would probably join the GOP once it puts on a muzzle on a couple of fanatics who are part of a dying mentality.

I am familiar with the Log Cabin Club and if I ran for Office outside the South, I'd court their endorsement. John McCain was endorsed by them in 1998. Even the late Barry Goldwater a conservative icon was pro-gay and fully supported homosexuals serving in the military, as they do in Israel.

One of my absolute favorites bloggers is Andrew Sullivan, a right-wing homosexual, and former editor of the New Republic. He is essentially a Libertarian with a hawkish view of foreign policy, and I share a lot of his views, but he expresses them so much better than I can. He also manages to make about 80 grand a year in pay pal donations on his blog which is impressive, but he's the third most read blogger in the internet.

<<Make-work projects for the Pentagon?>> Well, a fun term is police action, which Kerry says we shoudl treat the War on Terror as...and Vietnam was also classified as a police action, which John Kerry served in if you didn't know that ;)

<<If they do, then it should be their choice. Not Bush's.>> I'd agree, and only Chavez has made such accusations...well so has Castro, but they just want to make noise.

<<Some believe that bin Laden's goal is to provoke a clash between the cultures to "prove" that his toxic brand of Islam must fight against the West.>> Interesting theory, but I don't agree. I see him as wanting to show the wet as wak. When America fled form Somalia with its tail between its legs, that showed his point. The blast was 911 days after 9/11, so the election may not have been a factor, but then again it may have been. I imagine Spain is also a target due to the fact that it was part of the Caliphate and bin Laden's followers have yet to get over the Crusades, so Andalusia is on their minds. I imagine Rome and Vienna will also be targets in the future.

Hellcat> <<Maybe we get together again, we schemeon how to kill the dog without mom having to know until it�s too late�.Yessssssss�.*steeples fingers* muhahaha>> I figure Emily will take care of Martha ;)

Damien> BC does have a lot of oil and Alberta has a lot, too.

Gunjack> Using an article by Pat Buchanan is not the best wya to win an argument. Couldn't you find a better pundit than someone who is genuinely anti-semitic, a racist, and America Firster, anti-trade, isolationist? Pat Buchanan is merely David Duke-lite and he wrote a book about hwy we shoudl have stayed out of WWII.

Now, I know you are better than Pat Buchanan, ever if you are blond-haired, blue-eyed Nordic looking fellow ;)

<<PEACE!>> I think of pece and I see mass graves. And a decade of America passively murdering Iraqis.

Bud-Clare> <<In this election? Are you crazy?>> You want me to support someone other than bozo or botox. You should be delighted a known conservative is not backing Bush.

Lain> <<"holy crap youre totally wrong!"
"no way, im right and youre totally wrong!!"
"nuh uh, youre totally wrong and plus, you smell!"
"i smell?! what?!!? how DARE you!! YOU smell worse than me! plus, your president can suck my [EDIT]"
"what the HELL are you talking about!? how totally RUDE!"
"and plus, you cant even SMELL, this is a COMPUTER screen!!!!"
"thats too much logic for me and plus, i can too smell, im extra-special!"
"you are not"
"am not"
"ok, prove it!"
"no, youre a nazi so i dont have to, nyah!!" >>

Isn't that how a debate in Canadian Parliament goes :)

Dezi> I was concerned about the Sears Tower as well on 9/11. I do imagine that in late October, something may happen. Of ocurse now it may not as we may think it will...or some unafiliated crew like Malvo may do something. I guess we need a perfect combination of vigilance and ease.

<<sorry to dredge up last week's stuff, but I feel I must now, since I am kinda in cahoots with CBS). >> So you in the same company as Dan Rather...who'd have thought?

<<So did JFK. Besides, alot of not so good men are in power. Sometimes, just sometimes, its not our place to overthrow the world and then remold it to fit our purposes. Especially since we have short attention spans.>> But the status quo is aslo bad, and I think its good to shake up the status quo. The world needs to be turned upside down about every generation. America hasn't had a shakeup and we could use something to gut our rotetd infrastructure. Rome had to face the Huns and 10th century Europe almsot faced the Mongols (actually things may beb betetr if teh Mongols conquered Europe), but we get a bunch of anti-capitalist theocrats, but with less charm than Jesuits.

<<GB? Care to way in on the state of the Balkans? And the places of turmoil in Africa, and Cent. America are just really F-up places to begin with.>> The UN has the potential to do a lot of good, but it's a bureaurcacy with Libya in charge of Human Rights and is essentially interested in the status quo. Kofi Anan downplayed Rwanda, and Clinton (as much as I hate to admit it) took the initiative in the Balkans which was a good thing...there I admit it, he did some good things, but Bob Dole helped him with Bosnia and Kosovo. I did read that a UN run orphanage would not let an Americna couple adopt an Albnaian orphan due to some red tape crap, but that could be more the fault of that social worker, and I rank social workers slightly below trial lawyers.

<<Reagan: I think he knew what he was doing, at least part of the time. Contra, that he did.>> I wonder how much he did. He did some excellent things like ending the Cold War, which shook up a status quo arrangement in the military and academia. He did soem bad things in foreign policy, too, but he was a lot better than Jimmy Carter a brain dead old fart who really belongs in a looney bin.

<<One of the duties for a good leader is to not do anything that will set a bad precedent (like, I dunno, say Preemptive Strike).>> Sometimes that is good. The US was worng to stay out of WWII and Pearl Harbour at least got us into it...as a whole I thought a sneak attack was dirty, but I bear no ill will about pearl Harbor. If anything I want to thank them for giving us a much needed ass kicking for being selfish isolationists back then.

Josh> <<if you say "no its not" or "yes I'm right" one more time without providing evidence to back up your statement, I'm going to track down your IP and beat you to death with a rubber chicken. Soaked in AIDS.>> That is vintage SJ :)

Question> Calling Kin Jong Il Fat Bastard is wrong. Kim Jong Il shoudl be called Elvis, Michael Moore is Fat Bastard :)

Patrick <<Faith and begora! There be 142 days left until The Gathering 2004 in Montreal, Quebec, lads and laddies!>>

and I can't make it this year, either :(

Green Baron - [greenbaron@hotmail.com]
Camp Humphreys, Korea
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 07:44:43 AM
IP: 220.73.165.139

Faith and begora! There be 142 days left until The Gathering 2004 in Montreal, Quebec, lads and laddies!

:: passes out bowls of Lucky Charms ::

Today we celebrate the fellow who had the forethought do expel the snakes from Ireland, thereby keeping the island free forever of Steve Irwin. So have a happy St. Patrick's Day!
Patrick
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 06:51:02 AM
IP: 65.43.150.4

Dezi<GB? Care to way in on the state of the Balkans? And the places of turmoil in Africa, and Cent. America are just really F-up places to begin with. >

I'm talking about the genocides happening in the balkans and in africa. Plus those nations in Africa where the UN intervened are still in deep shit despite their pathetic intervention like in the instance where a whole Pakistani peacekeeping force got captured.

<Let us all hope that another country's leader decides to make war on the USA (for his own reasons of course) and lies to his people to get them going along with it, then attacks us, heck, maybe near your hometown, so you can see the danger in such an arrogant statement.>

No nation state dares attack the United States on its soil. If it happens then they'll meet the fate of Afghanistan and Iraq.

If we're considered a world leader then why is it that all the other nations are dragging their feet in helping us with Iraq. Only a minority are giving us any aid and they're our usual allies. The rest are like jackals waiting for us to throw them a few bones.

<Rumsfield isn't president, but man does he have his death grip around the tie of the man that is. >

But it's GWB who calls the shots not Rumsfield.

<Reagan: I think he knew what he was doing, at least part of the time. Contra, that he did. >

Either way it's in the past. We were buddies with Hussein because of Iran and it was a mistake. The fact that Bush bothered to rectify it just shows what a great president he is.

<So did JFK. Besides, alot of not so good men are in power. Sometimes, just sometimes, its not our place to overthrow the world and then remold it to fit our purposes. Especially since we have short attention spans. >

If we have the power then we should try at least to stop these people from exploiting and killing their own people with minimal justification.

<God help us if you ever rule a country. And, that statement justifies the Clinton scandal too: He lied, and probably freed many "lives" with Monica under his desk. >

What lives?

<like our attitudes and actions aren't helping that at all?>

I think their actions and attitudes need changing first. Anything so fundamentalist like it needs to be gotten rid of especially since it has the Saud's support.

<Yet they still put the ones out in Persian Gulf I. >

It took months to put those out. So yes they are difficult to put ut.

<Then aren't they again harming themselves, and not us? (Besides of course our thinly veiled oil interest) >

They're harming their own people still and thats not exactly a good thing.

Josh<Question: if you say "no its not" or "yes I'm right" one more time without providing evidence to back up your statement, I'm going to track down your IP and beat you to death with a rubber chicken. Soaked in AIDS. >

the proper terminology I believe is HIV. :)

AIDS is something you acquire after you get HIV. :)

<The rest of you: give it up. You're not going to convince Q that he's an idiot. >

Why are you resorting to such unnecessary namecalling? :(

Bud-Clare<So we can invade any country that's run by a bad man? Are we going to invade ourselves next? >

Sure as soon as we depose of all those corrupt nations in africa and in parts of asia.

Bush is so far very far down on my list of corrupt rulers. Kim Jong Il, the House of Saud, the Baaths in Syria, the guy in power in Turkmenistan and the various African and Cen American dictators are all worse than Bush.
Question
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 04:08:45 AM
IP: 69.44.73.131

Whitbourne:<Bush is the one who has to take responsibility. He made the claims, he's the one on whom the responsibility falls. If his intelligence was bad, then he owes it to come out and say that his agencies and his staff screwed up, not to try and spin the war into an adventure in accidental altruism.> If only the world worked like that, but unfortunately then Bush would have even more problems on his hands.

Dezi:<So why then, is Bush dragging his feet on anything that they might have done wrong?>That's politics for you!

Vinnie - [tpeano29@hotmail.com]
Marquette, Michigan, USA
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 03:29:23 AM
IP: 216.234.100.102

Lain: You forgot "Are to times infinity!" "Am not times infinity plus one!"

Question: if you say "no its not" or "yes I'm right" one more time without providing evidence to back up your statement, I'm going to track down your IP and beat you to death with a rubber chicken. Soaked in AIDS.

The rest of you: give it up. You're not going to convince Q that he's an idiot.
Josh
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 03:22:02 AM
IP: 64.170.153.0

Question> <<If by "playing god" you mean wishing for a better life for those oppressed then no.>>
...right. That's just what I meant.

<<Please don't lump me in with those fools.>>
Which fools would you like to be lumped in with?

<<Chavez isn't a good man either. He maintains relations with Castro of all people.>>
So we can invade any country that's run by a bad man? Are we going to invade ourselves next?
Bud-Clare
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 03:20:29 AM
IP: 66.67.201.63

Wooo. Ok. It's 2 am, I need to wake up at 7 and I took benadryl. For some reason, instead of being out cold, I'm wide awake. Tommorow is just gonna suck.
I got a call today from the local CBS station. Thursday, I get a tour of the station, which is basically like an interview for the internship. Yea!
BTW, the Garden of the Gods in Co. Springs is quite possibly one of the most beautiful places on earth. And it clears your head really good, that is, until you come down with a nice little lung-wrenching cold.

Question:<You are not funny at all.> I thought it was funny. :)
<If by "playing god" you mean wishing for a better life for those oppressed then no.> And do you know for a _fact_ if those really are his true intentions? Could be, he's just playing us all...
< the terrorists are without reason. If they were going to commit such a horrendous act then no doubt the involvement wouldn't have mattered.> I'm gonna disagree on the without reason part. I think they have reason. It could be flawed or not well thought out, or just plain stupid, but a reason is a reason. Heck, my dog has reason: "I reason that if I get into this trash can, something that smells good will be available for me to eat. Plus Dezi left me while she went to school, so this is a nice little revenge." And yes, she did it twice today, when there was the exact same trash in it as before. It was a total act of revenge.
<UN the chaos in Africa, the Balkans and Central America is just examples on why the UN is a pos. > GB? Care to way in on the state of the Balkans? And the places of turmoil in Africa, and Cent. America are just really F-up places to begin with.
<Blair is responsible for this "horrible act" however the pm of Spain is not responsible for the bombing. > But the masses tend to want to place blame somewhere, and, since they haven't officially declared whodunit (especially by election day) the masses blamed the guy that was supposed to keep them "safe." Plus people tend to judge not on hard facts, but on the image of it all. Hence, Bill Clinton's little problem. They couldn't get him, he was too popular, so they dug trenches to dredge up crap.
<Again so what?> Let us all hope that another country's leader decides to make war on the USA (for his own reasons of course) and lies to his people to get them going along with it, then attacks us, heck, maybe near your hometown, so you can see the danger in such an arrogant statement. The USA is considered a world leader for a reason, and part that goes with that is that other countries tend to look up to us (in a way). One of the duties for a good leader is to not do anything that will set a bad precedent (like, I dunno, say Preemptive Strike).
<Rumsefield isn't our president and Reagan was basically a senile fool during his tenure in the white house that left everything in the hand of his advisors. If anything this is George W. Bush we are talking about not his father or Reagan who both made their mistakes. > Rumsfield isn't president, but man does he have his death grip around the tie of the man that is. Reagan: I think he knew what he was doing, at least part of the time. Contra, that he did.
GWB: Looks to me like that once his party made a comeback after those oh so horrible and hedonistic Clinton years, he took the appropriate steps to pick up right where Daddy and Co. left off. Including planning a war well before 9/11 and just waiting for a "reason".
<So what? > Again, cue the country leader that hates us, to attack us, somewhere near your hometown....
<Chavez isn't a good man either. He maintains relations with Castro of all people. > So did JFK. Besides, alot of not so good men are in power. Sometimes, just sometimes, its not our place to overthrow the world and then remold it to fit our purposes. Especially since we have short attention spans.
<One lie to save and free so many lives in my opinion justifies it. > God help us if you ever rule a country. And, that statement justifies the Clinton scandal too: He lied, and probably freed many "lives" with Monica under his desk.
<Doesn't seem like it imo> Read something. Anything. Say something pertaining to the news. A recent issue of the Time had a neat little colorful map for you to reference as well.
<A state despite its many republican governors is still known for its liberalism.> Holy Sh!t! You mean the two can co-exist?
<Saudis being fed the fundamentalist shit by the religious leaders year by year thus creating more bin Laden wannabes for America > And like our attitudes and actions aren't helping that at all?
<Sorry, but war is a necessity since these men continue to test the limits of man's inhumanity. > Then at least GWB could have been honest about it.
<Because they do and because the world isn't a fair place where ideals can win out in the end. > Where was that attack at? You know, the ones that seem to follow such arrogant statements...
<Oil well fires are hard to put out > Yet they still put the ones out in Persian Gulf I.
<generally bad seeing how they usually have a large source of oil to live on so they could be there indefinitely and pollute the country when we finish taking it. > Then aren't they again harming themselves, and not us? (Besides of course our thinly veiled oil interest)

Damien:<No MORE GREEN
ITS MY PRECIOUS COLOR!> Perhaps a nice shade of blue for you then. You could match it to Lex. :)

Vinnie:<Most people believed that Sadam had them and not just conservatives people> And most people (about 2/3's last numbers I saw) believe that Saddam was the mastermind of 9/11, so there goes that point.
<A leader is only as good as their information sources> So why then, is Bush dragging his feet on anything that they might have done wrong?

Damien:<Bush is a Retard, Duh! > Rock on!
<And the american's burn everyone i dont like is Not fundamentalist? > And lets not go near the Religious Right.

Attila:<My money is on Chicago> A scary day, that one. We all thought the one that crashed in PA was headed for either the Sears or the Merchandise Mart (which, btw, is home to the school I was attending at the time). It would have been a genius plan to blow up the trains at that time, because _everyone_ was on them, leaving the downtown. Of course my window faced south of the lakeshore (I lived a little north of downtown) and I kept looking out the window waiting for something to take the Sears. The Sears is for sale now, did you hear? You should by it and turn it into a little kitty love grotto.
<Hippy nature walks....hippies for dinner!!! After a thorough boiling of course :) > Hmmm. Maybe thats how I got sick....

Whitbourne:<If Spain wants tohand its troops over to the command of the Rolling Stones, that's too bad for the States.> Ha! That's funny..
<Because Bush just can't say "no" when Karl shows up with a pretty ad?> A pretty ad with sparkly things? Probably not.

Bud Clare:<All right, back _away_ from the puppies...> Dottie-dog! Go back up Bud Clare!

Question:<Then you deny the mass murders committed by the Iraqis under Hussein or that the Taliban turned their nation into a backwards religious state? Or that democratic governments are being set up in both countries. > Yes, because we all know that Greg is a big stinky ostrich. ;) (just kidding greg....)

Gunjack: (sorry to dredge up last week's stuff, but I feel I must now, since I am kinda in cahoots with CBS).
<and the media, collectively, are responsible for making it possible by burying warcrimes in "patriotism" and spinning calculated deciet into "national security". > Or, they are reporting to us what they are _told_ and denied access to many other point turning elements, like say the Dover body bags.
<if you hear it on the news, it's almost definately not true. Reporters lie; that is their job. > Uh, no. That's that Jayson dude from the NY Times job.
<Appologies to anyone who is related to a reporter. It's not your fault, but you should probably wash. > Damn, what should I do then? I'm not a reporter, but a photog, but I still tell a story. One day, you will see what I see through my lens. And, after I am finished recording everything, it is my job to take that massive story and chop it down into a two minute story to fit attention spans. I'll agree on the politians, but, you know, we have to tell you what the politians say. You guys get to decide if they are just spewing. I will admit, I do think the media were a bit cowed this time around, especially with the tactics of the Bushies during press conferences. They know who they can "trust" so they call on those reporters. Damn Fox News! Bah they are a joke! <-random rant.

Ok its 3 am. Do I sleep or just watch TV for four hours and then get ready at 7.....Choices one must make.

EW Snot! Anybody want a cold? I'll sneeze into an envelope and mail it! Free Shipping!

Dezi
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 02:58:48 AM
IP: 68.58.158.101

brutis>> <<one favor to ask... my comp has been on the fritz so i havent been able to read the last posts as they came out so i was wondering if somone can sum up the last few posts becauase i dont want to read and have my comp crap out in the middle of a post .. thanks in advance if anyone does this>>
well, OK, here goes:
*ahem*

"holy crap youre totally wrong!"
"no way, im right and youre totally wrong!!"
"nuh uh, youre totally wrong and plus, you smell!"
"i smell?! what?!!? how DARE you!! YOU smell worse than me! plus, your president can suck my [EDIT]"
"what the HELL are you talking about!? how totally RUDE!"
"and plus, you cant even SMELL, this is a COMPUTER screen!!!!"
"thats too much logic for me and plus, i can too smell, im extra-special!"
"you are not"
"am not"
"ok, prove it!"
"no, youre a nazi so i dont have to, nyah!!"

.. oh wait, we havent quite gotten to that last part yet... give us 'till the end of tomorrow..
lain
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 02:24:25 AM
IP: 4.7.35.8

Lynati<hey, Question, what are you smoking and where can I get some? Not that I smoke, I just want to analyze it. >

I'd work on the troll baiting if I were. :)

<and a friend of mine was wondering just now- is there some sort of hazing ritual required for inductees to the right wing that they have to have a lobotomy, or is it optional? >

You are not funny at all. If you're trying to pass this off as humor then you've something else coming.

Bud-Clare<No. Do you deny that Bush likes to play god? >

If by "playing god" you mean wishing for a better life for those oppressed then no.

Whitbourne<So? Canadians were angry with Brian Mulroney about jacking up taxes back in 1993 and voted him out. New Brunswickers were mad about auto insurance last year and almost voted Bernard Lord out. Those examples pale next to the horror of Madrid, but elections are won and lost on single issues, sometimes. And why wouldn't they be angry about the war? Why wouldn't they have a right to be angry about the war? Do their opinions not count just because the result is something you're not happy with>

Blaming the war for the bombing is ludicrous because as you said so eloquently the terrorists are without reason. If they were going to commit such a horrendous act then no doubt the involvement wouldn't have mattered.

<That seems pretty reasonable to me, your Limbaugh/Coulter-esque comments on the usefulness of the UN aside. Whether you like it or not, it's their decision. >

Please don't lump me in with those fools.

And as for the UN the chaos in Africa, the Balkans and Central America is just examples on why the UN is a pos.

<No one forced anyone into the ballot box. That's just silly. >

No it's not. :)

<And I hardly think that the terrorists had the specific goal of getting one party in power. If it was connected to Iraq, then the goal was to scare them into immediate withdrawal. The Socialist leader has always said that June 30 was the deadline; do you think that the bomber's "master plan" was to get someone in power who would wait three months to do what they allegedly wanted? Frankly I'm surprised that you aren't flat out saying that you think the socialists planted the bomb or that they're working with al-Qaeda. That's typical rhetoric for when one side wins that the other doesn't like. >

Then why have the bombing so close to election day or in Spain of all countries, there are a host of other countries that supported us with troops?

And no I don't think the election of the socialists was the intended effect, but rather the ouster of Aznar's party, which I meant to say. Either way their plan succeeded.

<Uh, no. What you're saying is that once one result is forecast while a campaign is still going on, that's the end. People have no right to change their minds once circumstances change. If, say, everyone in Britain was going to vote Labour until one week before the election, and then word got leaked that Tony Blair had done something horrible and everyone ended up voting Conservative, then according to your logic, Labour should have won because they were going to win and damnit, changing their minds is tampering with the votes.
I don't think you actually know what democracy is. I really don't. >

Your analogy is flawed. Blair is responsible for this "horrible act" however the pm of Spain is not responsible for the bombing. If the pm of Spain was responsible for some horrible act before election day then yes I'd say vote him out, but he isn't responsible. Terrorists killed those people and instead of voting for the guy who actually showed backbone they voted in a bunch of fools.

<Uh, non-issue? The man lied to start an aggressive war. That is a WAR CRIME. It doesn't matter what Chirac, Schroeder, Putin, or anyone else thought of it in that estimation. Bush lied to start a war.>

Again so what? It's a step below using certifiably retarded excuses to start a war like so many world leader, but again it's a non-issue.

<That's not a non-issue, my friend, no matter how you try to spin it. And we know that Chirac and friends aren't blameless. Neither was Rumsfeld for that nice little picture of shaking hands with Saddam back in the eighties, or Reagan for supplying the components for weapons of mass destruction to Iraq when they were fighting Iran. Oh, silly me. Was I not supposed to mention that? >

Rumsefield isn't our president and Reagan was basically a senile fool during his tenure in the white house that left everything in the hand of his advisors. If anything this is George W. Bush we are talking about not his father or Reagan who both made their mistakes.

<Uh...what? Can you back that assertion up, please?>

Yes

< If you're talking about volunteer organizations trying to get food and medicine into Iraq, maybe, but if you're talking about the government, then WTF are you talking about? >

I'm talking about powerful private invdividuals within Canada.

<How do the ends justify the means? You might well say that we should drop nuclear bombs on North Korea. We'd murder millions of people, but hey, at least they'd not be developing the same weapons that we have. >

Have you seen the conditions of what the country is in? Dropping a bomb on the capital to get rid of that fat bastard would be enough justification seeing how mostly party functionaries and the heads of NK live there.

<And yes, yes, yes, we KNOW Saddam was a terrible man, that he did horrific things, and nobody's sad to see him go. Our problem is that Bush lied to get rid of him. >

So what?

<He's set a bad precedent. He could lie about Venezuela and decdie to get rid of their government just because he dislikes Hugo Chavez.>

Chavez isn't a good man either. He maintains relations with Castro of all people.

<The details are Saddam Hussein's little dictatorship are horrific, but that does't change that Bush lied. Just because things are "better" there now (and that depends on who you talk to, I'm afraid) that doesn't excuse the lie. >

Yes it does. One lie to save and free so many lives in my opinion justifies it.

<And yeah, there's a democracy there, but it's faltering. Badly. And only in Kabul. Elsewhere the Taliban and the warlords are pretty much in control again. Whoops. >

Doesn't seem like it imo. Country is in a difficult spot, but it's better off now and has a fighting chance for democracy.

<Gavin Newsom, the mayor of San Francisco, is a Republican mayor in a state, California, with a Republican governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger. >

A state despite its many republican governors is still known for its liberalism.

<But it doesn't have a comparable photo opoortunity as the
WTC site. Tell you what, if Bush announces his candidacy somewhere in New York like, say, Coney Island, then I'll believe you. If he announces it at the WTC site then you have to give me twenty dollars>

Sure. I doubt he's going to announce it at ground 0. Probably somewhere us major.

<War without end, amen. >

So you'd rather have the Saudis being fed the fundamentalist shit by the religious leaders year by year thus creating more bin Laden wannabes for America and the free world and you'd rather have the fat bastard in N. Korea continually putting his people in concentration camps, starving the others and brainwashing the survivors?

Sorry, but war is a necessity since these men continue to test the limits of man's inhumanity.

<Why don't you like altruism, by the way?>

He's no doubt an ayn rand groupie. Probably thinks all altruists are like Toohey, sinister with their agendas to turn humanity into mediocrity.

<And why do the ends supposedly justify the means>

Because they do and because the world isn't a fair place where ideals can win out in the end.

Green Baron<OK, what are those? As for pre-built concetration cams, why bother when you can make Gulags in Alaska...and I'd support such things an Alaska as an alternative to capital punishment, plus we can replace executions with "accidents" ;) >

I thought you were against my dumping of people in Antarctica plan? Why are you supporting Gulags in Alaska? There's still pristine environment there that could be spoiled by gulags.

Damien<Right! and we were paying 2x as much per litre (per gallon if you want to understand) for gas at the pumps as our american counterparts for the "L" of it.
Look up the facts before making up conspicicies, here's one for you.. >

I did actually :)

<Why did the US declare Iraqies Blowing up Iraqi Oil wells, a "TERRORIST ACTION AGAINST THE US?" >

Oil well fires are hard to put out and generally bad seeing how they usually have a large source of oil to live on so they could be there indefinitely and pollute the country when we finish taking it.
Question
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 01:44:35 AM
IP: 69.44.73.131

Whitbourne> <<Do some research; find someone else to support.>>
In this election? Are you crazy?

Hellcat> <<Whoa...the board�s smoking!>>
And it's underage, so it had better cut it out right now.
Bud-Clare
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 12:49:25 AM
IP: 66.67.201.63

No MORE GREEN
ITS MY PRECIOUS COLOR!
IT CAME TO US ON OUR BIRTHDAY!
MINE!
Damien
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 12:18:43 AM
IP: 209.121.87.149

Whit><<Not every Republican is a homophobic bigot. Just the ones with the microphones.>> Dagnabbit man, I was having such a good time watching ye lay out the truth, and then ye have to go and do that. 8 P

Opposing Gay Marriage on moral grounds is not wrong.
Opposing Gay Marriage on moral grounds WHEN YOU HAVE NO MORAL GROUNDS is wrong.

Claiming that homosexuality is a sin is not wrong.
Claiming that homosexuality is a sin, and then SINGLING IT OUT FOR LEGAL PUNISHMENT is wrong.

Sinners are supposed to be convicted in their hearts, not in the courtroom.

We never did get to finish this one last time, did we? I'm at yer disposal...
Otherwise, i will resume my voyueristic enjoyment in your walloping of conservative blather.

PEACE!
V - [< stands for vindictive]
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 12:10:15 AM
IP: 4.7.36.9

Whit><<Is it?>> No, it isn't. That is a lie, and a stupid lie too.

You've got the definition of Neo-con pretty much right, except for one factor: the movement has little to do with Bush. The Neo-Con movement is more accurately typefied by commentators such as the incandescently shrill Ann Coulter. Neo-cons claim that the core of their philosophy is a stand against terrorism. In fact, their actual foundation is support of Isreal, no matter what. Therefore, by extension, the Neo-cons are honorary "semites", and anyone who disagrees with them hates jews. Betcha had no idea that was your motivation, eh Whit? You dirty Hitler you.

And now, an essay by, of all people, Pat Buchanan, explaining more fully how this all works.
http://www.amconmag.com/3_1_04/cover.html
V - [Neo-Cons?]
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 11:45:51 PM
IP: 4.7.36.9

Green Baron><<OK, what are those?>> The visible parts of two probable conspiracies, both connected to Clinton. I tossed them in for bipartisan appeal.

Red Dragon was, I believe, the name of a BATF sting operation targeting a Chinese arms dealer. The dealer in question claimed to have access to a chinese state arsenal, and was initially offering mil-spec AKs, which he suggested they might sell to street gangs and other criminals. After a few meets, he upped his offer to include grenades, surface-to-air missles, and man-pack anti-tank weapons. As the agents were preparing to close the deal and bring the whole network down, Clinton had one of his "coffees" with his chinese backers, and the next day the details of the operation were leaked to the press. By the time the Federales rolled in, all they found were the small fry.

Arkanicide dates back to Clinton's reign as governer of Arkansas. During his tenure, there were a number of suspicious deaths in the state, many of them apparently politically motivated, which were ruled "suicides" by a coroner that he had appointed. These suicides included one case where a man was found decapitated in his car, and another where the "suicide" involved multiple gunshot wounds to the head, with no gun left at the scene.

And with that bit of obscure trivia, I return you to Whit's excellent thrashing.

DAMN THE MAN!!!
Gunjack "Powder Coat" Valentine
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 11:35:39 PM
IP: 4.7.36.9

whitborne: <<Damien: Just out of interest's sake, it's a not-very-well-known fact that Canada is one of the largest suppliers of energy, including oil and natural gas, to the United States. The more you know. >> I know, BC has more oil than any country in the middle east, we just dont drill for it (what a waste)
Canada has like 20 - 30% of the worlds resources and about 0.5% Of its population. The more you know ;)
Damien
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 11:34:16 PM
IP: 209.121.87.149

Josh> <<I'm keeping a list>>: Of quotes in general, or do you have another one for just CR quotes?

Lain> <<you should have said "wang"... its MUCH classier>>: And there are a whole mess of fun ones. I tend to lean towards Mr. Happy.

Whitbourne> <<every university student needs to spend some time shouting on the street>>: I tended towards the bizarre. Like homonecropyrobestialiacophobia.

Brutis> <>: Just compose your post in a text editor, saving often.

Na zdorov'ya.
Gside - [gside@comcast.net]
Fair Haven, NJ
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 11:33:03 PM
IP: 68.37.159.199

i agree with hellcat the board is smoking today

one favor to ask... my comp has been on the fritz so i havent been able to read the last posts as they came out so i was wondering if somone can sum up the last few posts becauase i dont want to read and have my comp crap out in the middle of a post .. thanks in advance if anyone does this
Brutis (Thomas Guillot) - [creature_of_the_night_20042004]
hammond, louisiana, usa
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 11:17:48 PM
IP: 209.205.160.254

Whoa�the board�s smoking!

GreenBaron

Hellcat> Meat is good. You can always cook Martha and just tell your mom you felt like having a Korean delicacy :)

*laughs* I am quite tempted now since a 3 pound dog is really useless�Maybe we get together again, we schemeon how to kill the dog without mom having to know until it�s too late�.Yessssssss�.*steeples fingers* muhahaha

Fisk to my recollection is running about, or frisking someone. Right?

Well chosen word for the hot debate!

Hellcat
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 09:38:28 PM
IP: 205.251.135.66

I'm studying for my immunology exam when I make this post, so if I start babbling on about thymic education and RAG recombination enzymes, please excuse me. :-p

Language: There's so many more creative ways to curse, anyway. :-)

Vinnie: Bush is the one who has to take responsibility. He made the claims, he's the one on whom the responsibility falls. If his intelligence was bad, then he owes it to come out and say that his agencies and his staff screwed up, not to try and spin the war into an adventure in accidental altruism.

Damien: Just out of interest's sake, it's a not-very-well-known fact that Canada is one of the largest suppliers of energy, including oil and natural gas, to the United States. The more you know.

Interesting theory i heard advanced today; the Socialist win may be as much a blow to al-Qaeda as Bush. Some believe that bin Laden's goal is to provoke a clash between the cultures to "prove" that his toxic brand of Islam must fight against the West. If that's true (which no one knows, it must be said) then his interest is in promoting harder-line governments to take harsh stands against terrorism, because that will inevitably lead to antagonism against Muslims which he can then use to recruit more followers. As such, had the PP won and cracked down and supported the occupation even more fervently, then bin Laden would have more ammunition to promote his brand of hatred. It's a theory, true, but I think it's just as valid as the right-wing consensus that the Socialist win is a capitulation to terror. Bin Laden may have backfired as badly as Bush and Aznar.

Green Baron: What is fisking, by the way?
<Now, as for insulting the President, I'll be laying on nasty comments extra thick for Kerry.> Insulting a president/head-of-state is a time-honoured tradition. I'd hope that the insults are coupled with a cogent criticism of policy, but by all means, knock yourself out. I don't much care for Kerry either, if it makes you feel better. I think the States needed Howard Dean, John McCain, Ralph Nader or someone very much like them. What could have been...
<Why shout it on a street? Makes you look like a wild and crazy activist ;)> I think every university student needs to spend some time shouting on the street. We had some favourites. "Hell no, we won't go, we won't fight for Texaco" will always be a favourite. :-)
<As you don't liek French bashing, "neo-con" is used as an anti-semitic slur.> Is it? I've never heard it in that context. "Neo-con" refers to "neo-conservative" up here - someone who follows the Bush doctrine of social conservatism and regime-change by force. It's a very didactic world view; us, the good guys, vs. them, the bad guys.
Why don't you like altruism, by the way? And why do the ends supposedly justify the means? That's a pretty rotten way to set policy. If the ends truly justified the means, then there's nothing stopping me from forcing everyone to get rid of their cars because the exhaust pollutes the air. The ends (clean air) would justify the means (forcing people to junk their vehicles). It might be attarctive, but that's no how democracy worked. And Clinton blew as a President, no pun intended. He got by on a slicker populism than Bush, and many of his initiatives were simply Republican with a good ole boy spin.
(Just out of shameful admission, I don't know much about the German elections)
<The big loser in November will be America. I'm not voting for either of them.> There are other parties than the Democrats and the Republicans. Do some research; find someone else to support. Democracy's biggest enemies are apathy and cynicism, not tyranny and dictatorship.
<Wait, you're kidding right??? San Francisco got a Republican mayor who will crack down on bums and support gay marriage? That makes me feel good. Thanks.> I'm as surprised as you are, but Mr. Newsom ran on a Republican ticket. Also, I suspect you'vce heard of the Log Cabin Republicans, but perhaps you want to check them out. Not every Republican is a homophobic bigot. Just the ones with the microphones.
<Well, I'm afraid so, but we can call it something other than war.> Make-work projects for the Pentagon?
<The guy is a pendajo, but hopefully the people will remove him.> If they do, then it should be their choice. Not Bush's.

Whitbourne
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 08:09:26 PM
IP: 156.34.51.221

patrick>> <<Believe me, I'm the last person who wants to sound like a prude... but that language was totally inappropriate for this message board>>
i agree

greg b>> you should have said "wang"... its MUCH classier.. ;)
lain
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 07:35:26 PM
IP: 4.7.35.8

PATRICK> Yeah, you're right. This CR has rules against that, and event though we rarely enforce them, they are in place and we shouldn't be breaking them too badly.

See, this is exactly why I would make a bad parent, I do not agree with the whole "Do as I say, not as I do" sentiment, but I know I'd do it anyway.

So yeah, I'll try to keep a better watch on my language in here. But Ed's response is still going on the list!

On an unrelated note, I'm watching a "Law & Order" re-run on TNT, and am I the only one who thinks that Angie Harmon is really hot? I wish she was still on the show.
Greg Bishansky
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 07:30:29 PM
IP: 216.179.4.168

Greg > I suggest you step back and minute and look at that comment you made, imagine it was posted by anyone else, and think about what you, as an admin, would have to say about it.

Believe me, I'm the last person who wants to sound like a prude... but that language was totally inappropriate for this message board.
Patrick
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 07:12:42 PM
IP: 65.43.150.4

JOSH> Share that list some time please.
Greg Bishansky
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 05:53:15 PM
IP: 216.179.4.168

Greg: I'm keeping a list. But that didn't make it.
Josh
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 05:38:47 PM
IP: 64.170.153.0

Whitbourne:<the fact that he lied to the world and then takes the cowardly way out and spins it afterward to make it sound like a push for democracy instead of a search for WMD negates his good intentions.> Who says Bush lied about WMD's? Most people believed that Sadam had them and not just conservatives people. The Iraq War (while it should have happened years ago during the first War) was a monumental failure of intelligence agencies. A leader is only as good as their information sources!<So? Canadians were angry with Brian Mulroney about jacking up taxes back in 1993 and voted him out. New Brunswickers were mad about auto insurance last year and almost voted Bernard Lord out.>Yes, but Canadians are more fickle about such things.LOL(:

Green Baron:<actually I'll wonder if his hair stays perfect as he is blown up :)>It' probably not real hair anyway. <Let's be honest. The big loser in November will be America. I'm not voting for either of them.> I agree America will definitely lose in November, but that's no reason not to at least try to do something.
Vinnie - [tpeano29@hotmail.com]
Marquette, Michigan, USA
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 04:59:48 PM
IP: 216.234.99.253

ed: ohh nice one,

Damien
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 04:47:13 PM
IP: 207.6.149.113

ED> LOL, I just know that's going to go on the list of memorable CR quotes.

Is anyone keeping a list btw? Maybe we should.
Greg Bishansky
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 03:33:46 PM
IP: 216.179.4.168

Sigh... I forgot how fast this room moves when it builds up a head of steam. I was going to make some thoughtful responses but now it comes down to it I can't be bothered to read everything again. ;)

Greg: Woah. The guy can't handle a pretzel in his mouth and you're trusting him with your cock? You're a braver man than I am...
Ed
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 02:34:43 PM
IP: 131.111.8.103

QUESTION> <<Please don't insult our president>>

Okay, then if we're going to go by standards like that, since we're Americans, I guess that means we're not allowed to insult leaders of other countries, right? I'm just taking your opinion to it's logical conclusion.

Well, as an American, all I have to say is that George W. Bush can suck my cock!
Greg Bishansky
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 01:45:11 PM
IP: 216.179.4.168

Gside: Mmmm Glaze <drools>

Green baron: Fisk?

question :
<Please don't insult our president>
Bush is a Retard, Duh!
<besides Hussein was paying off Canadians with oil for their help while sanctions were still in existant in Iraq.>
Right! and we were paying 2x as much per litre (per gallon if you want to understand) for gas at the pumps as our american counterparts for the "L" of it.
Look up the facts before making up conspicicies, here's one for you.. Why did the US declare Iraqies Blowing up Iraqi Oil wells, a "TERRORIST ACTION AGAINST THE US?"

<There might be chaos in Iraq now, but at least it's better than Saddam's regime. > Really? while i'll admit Sadamm was no prize, at least there was water and police...
which the us seems to have figures isn't their problem


And the american's burn everyone i dont like is Not fundamentalist?

Damien
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 12:54:03 PM
IP: 207.6.149.113

Hey Moochie, if it's any consolation, I agree with you. Must be a Texan perspective.
Aaron - [JCarnage@Yahoo.com]
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 10:36:17 AM
IP: 66.139.49.253

Now for Reason #1487 why I am not re-enlisting (Reason #1332 involves John F*cking Kerry as President and as a soldier, I cannot unleash full venom on a Commader-In-Chief): My leave for August to go to Le Gathering in August has been denied, since my NCO will be taking leave at the same time. Now, how many unit functions will I attend voluntarily....ZERO!!!!

Of course, I still have a four year Reserve requirement, and hopefully the Kerry Administration won't have us in blue helmets if we get deployed...but at least I may able to get grad school covered (some resevre units offer free tuition up to $250.00 a credit hour) and use the GI Bill...granted the patriotic feelings I had when I enlisted are gone, but I am a mercenary at heart.

Lynati> << there some sort of hazing ritual required for inductees to the right wing that they have to have a lobotomy, or is it optional?>> Not as big as the lobotomy required for leftists and altruists.

Question> I look at soem of the comments and while I agree with some of your sentiment, you're not helping your case.

<<I'd say their heads were too clouded by the tragedy for them to think straight on the issue. IMO they should have postponed the election, but then the socialists wouldn't have been able to exploit it for political gain.>> That is a good point, but if elections are at a fixed date, well you gotta have them, then. I am more curious about Zeppo's Coalition, since the pinko Party didn't win a majority. Aznar was also wrong to try an dlink it to ETA, when more and more evidence pointed to Al Qaeda and that group is resentful about losing Spain back in the day. I also wonder if ETA and Al Qaeda are not tied togetehr. I have heard the IRA has ties to them or one of their affiliates.

<<Nothing less than tampering of the vote by terrorists.>> And guess who is next. I wonder how they'll do it in the states, and if we can catch it or not. My money is on Chicago, if they want to repeat the Madrid Train bombings.

<<Please don't insult our president besides Hussein was paying off Canadians with oil for their help while sanctions were still in existant in Iraq.>> I don't know about Hussein bribing Canada. Chirac yes, Galloway yes, McDermott of Washington State.....yes and at a cheap price, but I don't know about Canada. Now, as for insulting the President, I'll be laying on nasty comments extra thick for Kerry, and if say Airforce One blows up shortly after hsi Inauguration, I will not be shedding any tears...actually I'll wonder if his hair stays perfect as he is blown up :)

Yggdrasil> If Darth Crouton's Finance Minister wasn't involved in such a scandal, it shows he was doing a poor job. Still, Martin seems ok, though I also like Stronach, but like John McCain, the best person doesn't always get picked.

Whitbourne> <<To coin a phrase I've shouted on many a street - "This is what democracy looks like".>> Why shout it on a street? Makes you look like a wild and crazy activist ;)

<<Is democracy only valid if the result matches what Bush, Aznar and the neo-cons want?>> As you don't liek French bashing, "neo-con" is used as an anti-semitic slur.

<<Besides, what do you think democracy is? The people voted and made their choice. It's just not a choice you agree with, and so you choose to spin it by calling it "caving in to terror". >> Well, it does set a bad precedent, but at leats the pinko Party didn't get a majority, and some of the stuff I read about Zeppo swos he's not as bad as I thought at first.

<<and I highly doubt that a "good ole' boy" like Bush would do anything out of the goodness of his heart>> Well, no one in Office would....granted Danny Millions donates his Premier salary to charity, but maybe the reaosn aren't too altruistic..which is fine as I don't like altruism.

<<The ends do not justify the means>> They do, but it didn't work for Bush....Clinton was far more adept, and when I think about the upcoming Kerry Presidency, Clinton doesn't seem so bad, plus Fat Bastard Michael Moore criticizes him, so that raises my opinion of him :)

<<Afghanistan's fledling democracy is in serious trouble and the Taliban has been resurging>> Well, Afghanistan will take a long time to fix. It's a pity the King wasn't restored. He'd be a good force for unity.

<<I'm just celebrating democracy in action.>> But you do enjoy this election more than seeing the SDP get its ass handed to them in Germany and Sheiskopf Schroeder resigning from the SDP.

<<If you want to see exploitation of tragedy to promote agendas, check out Bush's campaign ads. Check out the Republican National Congress meeting in New York City for all the photo ops from the WTC site they can manage. It swings both ways.>> I'll agree with you and soem of the groups protesting the ads are backed by Teresa Heinz-Kerry's foundation. Let's be honest. The big loser in November will be America. I'm not voting for either of them.

I also guess you can see the Popular Party in Spain isn't that popular any more.

Hellcat> Meat is good. You can always cook Martha and just tell your mom you felt like having a Korean delicacy :)

Damien> There's a Canadian blogger called the Meatriarchy and his motto is: If you're not supposed to eat animals, then why are they made of meat? :)

http://meatriarchy.blogspot.com/

Dezi> Hippy nature walks....hippies for dinner!!! After a thorough boiling of course :)

Firestorm> Did you eat extra babies on Monday :)

Gside> <<Just think about what would happen to diplomacy if everyone smelled.>> They could meet in Paris, then, so no one could tell the smell was coming from them :)

Whitbourne> <<this might be a potent message for Bush and his junta>> I want a real junta...Alan Greenspan can run the nation and gut scared cows that politicians are too frightened to touch, like Scoial Security.

I imagine America may havebad leadership for awhile. The baby boomers are probably the worst genertaion in American history and they're in charge now.

Gunjack> Hopefully you don't find me a war criminal, too. I'll agree that those events are horrible and thsoe soldiers and their families should be punished Iraqi style.

However after seeing what was uncoverd in Iraq, I can never support a peace movement ever again. To quote Orwell, war is an evil thing, and often the lesser evil.

<<That's most likely because all the other places that had what you needed were driven out of business. >> You mena they couldn't compete. The only reason I'd shop at a plce with a higher price is if its in walking distance, and if I can take a bus to Walmart, I will. I did in Germany :)

<<Operation Red Dragon, and Arkanicide>> OK, what are those? As for pre-built concetration cams, why bother when you can make Gulags in Alaska...and I'd support such things an Alaska as an alternative to capital punishment, plus we can replace executions with "accidents" ;)

<> Well, the other chocie was Al Gore. And now our other choice is an even bigger liar who takes any and every position available. I wish Jesse Ventura would run.

Lain> <<first, people need to take a step back, realize that the chances of them being affected in ANY way are extremely miniscule (when compared to bathtub drowning or, hell, drunk driving) secondly, after realizing that, they should not be afraid, because at that point,the terrorist has won.>> When I went to Istanbul, peopel cautioned me against it out of fear, but I had a great time and I had a godo friend there who kept me safe. I don't think we should be afraid. When the WTC is rebuilt, I will go to it and go to the top. Now, we should be aware and try not to make ourselves targets, but some third world savage could release a nerve agent during Mardi Gras and kill 200,000 people, but that won't stop Mardi Gras.

<<no. they human beings with a great deal of power over other human beings, which makes them different, and suspect.>> That applies to Noam Chomsky as much as George W Bush, too.

<<im hearing a lot about the bombing having a "moroccan" connection, but im not sure how much sense that makes, either.>> well Morrocco and Algeria are clsoest to Spain and both are having trouble with fundamentalists.

<> well it won't help him, and let's see what Kerry does with all that power. At least you don't fall for the line about him being better.

<<and where do these "democratic underground" people hang out? ive heard of "free republic" but not the other, they sound like fun :D>>

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/

and here is something that is fun, too: http://www.buttafly.com/bush/

Whitbourne> <<Gavin Newsom, the mayor of San Francisco, is a Republican mayor>> Wait, you're kidding right??? San Francisco got a Republican mayor who will crack down on bums and support gay marriage? That makes me feel good. Thanks.

<<War without end, amen.>> Well, I'm afraid so, but we can call it something other than war.

<<He could lie about Venezuela and decdie to get rid of their government just because he dislikes Hugo Chavez.>> The guy is a pendajo, but hopefully the people will remove him. Hopefully it will involve honey and red ants :)

BTW, Question and Whitbourne, when I see your posts and resposnes, it looks more like a continuous fisking :)

TGS, where posters fisk each other :)
Green Baron - [greenbaron@hotmail.com]
Camp Humphreys, Korea
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 08:01:56 AM
IP: 220.73.165.75

We interrupt this heavy political debate to remind you that there are now 143 days left until The Gathering 2004 in Montreal, Quebec! Are YOU registered yet?
Patrick
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 06:54:02 AM
IP: 65.43.150.4

Question <They were also angry with him about the involvement in Iraq which they claimed caused the attaack.>

So? Canadians were angry with Brian Mulroney about jacking up taxes back in 1993 and voted him out. New Brunswickers were mad about auto insurance last year and almost voted Bernard Lord out. Those examples pale next to the horror of Madrid, but elections are won and lost on single issues, sometimes. And why wouldn't they be angry about the war? Why wouldn't they have a right to be angry about the war? Do their opinions not count just because the result is something you're not happy with?

<which is basically saying that they're going to leave. No sane president would hand Iraq over to the UN seeing its shitty record all over the world.>

Nice way to dress hyperbole into your analysis. And regardless, that's the point of free will. If Spain wants to withdraw its troops, thats too bad for the States. If Spain wants tohand its troops over to the command of the Rolling Stones, that's too bad for the States. The new president has said that he'll wait until the deadline AGREED by the the States to hand over the control if Iraq to Iraqis, and if there's no change in the situation, he'll withdraw. That seems pretty reasonable to me, your Limbaugh/Coulter-esque comments on the usefulness of the UN aside. Whether you like it or not, it's their decision.

<They were forced to make that choice due to the bombing with no doubt the election of the socialists as the intended effect by the bombers. If you don't see this as subversion of democracy then you have your head in the sand.>

No one forced anyone into the ballot box. That's just silly. And I hardly think that the terrorists had the specific goal of getting one party in power. If it was connected to Iraq, then the goal was to scare them into immediate withdrawal. The Socialist leader has always said that June 30 was the deadline; do you think that the bomber's "master plan" was to get someone in power who would wait three months to do what they allegedly wanted? Frankly I'm surprised that you aren't flat out saying that you think the socialists planted the bomb or that they're working with al-Qaeda. That's typical rhetoric for when one side wins that the other doesn't like.

<I'd say their heads were too clouded by the tragedy for them to think straight on the issue. IMO they should have postponed the election, but then the socialists wouldn't have been able to exploit it for political gain.>

Uh, no. The Popular Party chose not to delay the election, and the reason they got turfed was because Spaniards got mad that the Popular Party was exploiting the attack for political gain. That's why the PP was "sure" it was ETA. That's why the PP spent the last three days campaigning to say that only they could prevent attacks like that. People didn't buy it, and they voted them out. End of story.

<It's democracy. People were going to chose populists then after the bombing they switched horses. Nothing less than tampering of the vote by terrorists.>

Uh, no. What you're saying is that once one result is forecast while a campaign is still going on, that's the end. People have no right to change their minds once circumstances change. If, say, everyone in Britain was going to vote Labour until one week before the election, and then word got leaked that Tony Blair had done something horrible and everyone ended up voting Conservative, then according to your logic, Labour should have won because they were going to win and damnit, changing their minds is tampering with the votes.
I don't think you actually know what democracy is. I really don't.

<So? You realize the other half of the UN and its members that opposed the war stood to gain from having Hussein in power and that the Chirac government were being bribed by the iraqis. In the end Bush is no better or worse than all the others so stop fussing about the non-issue here.>

Uh, non-issue? The man lied to start an aggressive war. That is a WAR CRIME. It doesn't matter what Chirac, Schroeder, Putin, or anyone else thought of it in that estimation. Bush lied to start a war. That's not a non-issue, my friend, no matter how you try to spin it. And we know that Chirac and friends aren't blameless. Neither was Rumsfeld for that nice little picture of shaking hands with Saddam back in the eighties, or Reagan for supplying the components for weapons of mass destruction to Iraq when they were fighting Iran. Oh, silly me. Was I not supposed to mention that?

<Please don't insult our president besides Hussein was paying off Canadians with oil for their help while sanctions were still in existant in Iraq.>

Uh...what? Can you back that assertion up, please? If you're talking about volunteer organizations trying to get food and medicine into Iraq, maybe, but if you're talking about the government, then WTF are you talking about?
Insult George Bush? I'd never do that. He does quite well on his own. ;-)

<Actually they do and you'd say so too if you were living in Hussein's little "republic" where his personnel tortured and killed almost anyone aligned against him that they could get their hands on. There might be chaos in Iraq now, but at least it's better than Saddam's regime.>

How do the ends justify the means? You might well say that we should drop nuclear bombs on North Korea. We'd murder millions of people, but hey, at least they'd not be developing the same weapons that we have.
And yes, yes, yes, we KNOW Saddam was a terrible man, that he did horrific things, and nobody's sad to see him go. Our problem is that Bush lied to get rid of him. He's set a bad precedent. He could lie about Venezuela and decdie to get rid of their government just because he dislikes Hugo Chavez. The details are Saddam Hussein's little dictatorship are horrific, but that does't change that Bush lied. Just because things are "better" there now (and that depends on who you talk to, I'm afraid) that doesn't excuse the lie.

<So there's still a democracy there. Better than Taliban or do you want those straight thinking men back?>

Because I disagree with you, that means I want the Taliban back? Uh...what?
And yeah, there's a democracy there, but it's faltering. Badly. And only in Kabul. Elsewhere the Taliban and the warlords are pretty much in control again. Whoops.

<Oh please. You do realize that there are a variety of reasons that they are meeting in NYC(republican mayor in a state with a republic governor) besides the photo op.>

Gavin Newsom, the mayor of San Francisco, is a Republican mayor in a state, California, with a Republican governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger. But it doesn't have a comparable photo opoortunity as the WTC site. Tell you what, if Bush announces his candidacy somewhere in New York like, say, Coney Island, then I'll believe you. If he announces it at the WTC site then you have to give me twenty dollars.

<As for the commercials we can lay all the blame on Karl Rowe.>

Because Bush just can't say "no" when Karl shows up with a pretty ad? Who's insulting Bush now?

<Then you deny the mass murders committed by the Iraqis under Hussein or that the Taliban turned their nation into a backwards religious state? Or that democratic governments are being set up in both countries.>

To disagree is not to deny. I really don't think you understand what "deny" means, either.

<I hope so. Wahhabism is just one more form of fundamentalism that needs to be gotten rid of though I doubt it's going to happen seeing how a war with the Sauds would just disrupt our oil supply and right now our main concern aside from the MidEast is in Korea.>

War without end, amen.

Whitbourne
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 06:33:41 AM
IP: 142.177.155.29

lain> <<in any case, i thought it would be worth mentioning in case, you know, they should happen to find such things right before the election...>>
This would be funny if it weren't entirely possible.
__________________
Question> <<Please don't insult our president>>
...why not?

<<Then you deny the mass murders committed by the Iraqis under Hussein or that the Taliban turned their nation into a backwards religious state?>>
No. Do you deny that Bush likes to play god?
___________________
Lynati> <<*goes to look for cute fluffy puppies to attack*>>
All right, back _away_ from the puppies...
Bud-Clare
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 01:58:03 AM
IP: 66.67.201.63

hey, Question, what are you smoking and where can I get some? Not that I smoke, I just want to analyze it.

and a friend of mine was wondering just now- is there some sort of hazing ritual required for inductees to the right wing that they have to have a lobotomy, or is it optional?

mm, gotta love that PMS. *goes to look for cute fluffy puppies to attack*
Lynati
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 01:50:06 AM
IP: 66.142.238.106

--- --- --- --- TOON DISNEY GARGOYLE RESET --- --- --- ---

Yep they showed awakening 1 and 2 today....

This has been a public service message for people who were ignoring it because it was in goliath saga episodes...
silvadel
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 12:24:00 AM
IP: 24.225.220.194

Spacebabie&> <<who was 6 again?>>: The real question is does number 7 count?

Damien> <<DON'T PUT MAKEUP ON THAT RABBIT! PUT TARTAR SAUCE>>: Tartar sauce on a mammal? I thought it was for fish. Now, I'd be all for a nice demi-glaze.

Na zdorov'ya.
Gside - [gside@comcast.net]
Fair Haven, NJ
Monday, March 15, 2004 11:47:16 PM
IP: 68.37.159.199

Whitbourne<Uh, no. Exit poll after exit poll showed that people were angry with Aznar's party for lying and spinning the terrorist attacks and that this was the reason that they showed up in greater numbers to vote.>

They were also angry with him about the involvement in Iraq which they claimed caused the attaack.

<If this were about capitulation then the Spaniards would be demanding that the tropps leave Iraq now, but their new president has said that the troops will remain unless the U.. doesn't hand over control to the UN by June 30th.>

which is basically saying that they're going to leave. No sane president would hand Iraq over to the UN seeing its shitty record all over the world.

<Again, no. The polls din't change until Aznar and the PP started trying to spin the attacks to their platform. Would the Spaniards be that afraid to vote in socialists AFTER showing up in crowd of millions of people throughout Spain to commemorate their dead?

Besides, what do you think democracy is? The people voted and made their choice. It's just not a choice you agree with, and so you choose to spin it by calling it "caving in to terror". >

They were forced to make that choice due to the bombing with no doubt the election of the socialists as the intended effect by the bombers. If you don't see this as subversion of democracy then you have your head in the sand.

<That's democracy. Whether or not the PP "deserved" to be voted out, they were. The people spoke. Are their votes suddenly invalid because of a tragic event three days before? >

I'd say their heads were too clouded by the tragedy for them to think straight on the issue. IMO they should have postponed the election, but then the socialists wouldn't have been able to exploit it for political gain.

<So...democracy only works if it gives the results that you want? There;s a word for that, but it ain't democracy. If it is, then it's already been subverted, with or without terrorism. >

It's democracy. People were going to chose populists then after the bombing they switched horses. Nothing less than tampering of the vote by terrorists.

<Bush lied to do it. No matter how "noble" his goals are>

So? You realize the other half of the UN and its members that opposed the war stood to gain from having Hussein in power and that the Chirac government were being bribed by the iraqis. In the end Bush is no better or worse than all the others so stop fussing about the non-issue here.

< - and I highly doubt that a "good ole' boy" like Bush would do anything out of the goodness of his heart, at least where oil stocks are concerned>

Please don't insult our president besides Hussein was paying off Canadians with oil for their help while sanctions were still in existant in Iraq.

< - the fact that he lied to the world and then takes the cowardly way out and spins it afterward to make it sound like a push for democracy instead of a search for WMD negates his good intentions. The ends do not justify the means.>

Actually they do and you'd say so too if you were living in Hussein's little "republic" where his personnel tortured and killed almost anyone aligned against him that they could get their hands on. There might be chaos in Iraq now, but at least it's better than Saddam's regime.

< And the ends weren't even met that well. Afghanistan's fledling democracy is in serious trouble and the Taliban has been resurging. Whoops. >

So there's still a democracy there. Better than Taliban or do you want those straight thinking men back?

<I'm just celebrating democracy in action. If you want to see exploitation of tragedy to promote agendas, check out Bush's campaign ads. Check out the Republican National Congress meeting in New York City for all the photo ops from the WTC site they can manage. It swings both ways.>

Oh please. You do realize that there are a variety of reasons that they are meeting in NYC(republican mayor in a state with a republic governor) besides the photo op. As for the commercials we can lay all the blame on Karl Rowe.

Greg Bishansky<Yes, and Bush is also riding with Santa Claus in his sleigh to finally bring them their first X-Mas presents, while the people dance happy in the streets while the leprachauns shower them with gold and the Easter Bunny passes out the eggs. >

Then you deny the mass murders committed by the Iraqis under Hussein or that the Taliban turned their nation into a backwards religious state? Or that democratic governments are being set up in both countries.

<And, by Jove they'll do the same thing in Saudi Arabia next year! >

I hope so. Wahhabism is just one more form of fundamentalism that needs to be gotten rid of though I doubt it's going to happen seeing how a war with the Sauds would just disrupt our oil supply and right now our main concern aside from the MidEast is in Korea.
Question
Monday, March 15, 2004 10:56:56 PM
IP: 69.44.73.131

Greetings;

Gathering Biology Talk: To everyone who is interested in speaking at the biology talk I need you to do the following.

1. Register for the Gathering

2. Please E-mail me so that I can get an as to how many people want to talk. Once I get a list together we can also start talking about the format and content.

3. Are there any restrictions on when this talk can be (will everyone be there from the beginning of the convention to the end).

Whitbourne: What do you mean that George W. was not acting out of the goodness of his heart when he went to war with Iraq? Next you'll be trying to tell me that Paul Martin really knew nothin about the sponsorship scandal.
Yggdrasil - [eng050599@hotmail.com]
Ontario, Canada
Monday, March 15, 2004 05:52:13 PM
IP: 66.185.84.203

Question> "This has nothing to do with the war in Iraq. This is people's fear taking over directly after a tragedy of immense proportions and their hope in trying to avert it by giving in to the terrorist's whims."

Uh, no. Exit poll after exit poll showed that people were angry with Aznar's party for lying and spinning the terrorist attacks and that this was the reason that they showed up in greater numbers to vote. The same number of people who voted for the PP showed up this time; it's just that many people were angered with Aznar's spin and punished that spin at the polls. If this were about capitulation then the Spaniards would be demanding that the tropps leave Iraq now, but their new president has said that the troops will remain unless the U.. doesn't hand over control to the UN by June 30th. That's not capitulation; that's forcing Bush to stick with his promise. To coin a phrase I've shouted on many a street - "This is what democracy looks like". Is democracy only valid if the result matches what Bush, Aznar and the neo-cons want?

"This is nothing short of the terrorists swaying the electorate by randomly killing a few of them. This doesn't bode well at all for democracy. The guys successor would have been in office if the bombing didn't happen."

Again, no. The polls din't change until Aznar and the PP started trying to spin the attacks to their platform. Would the Spaniards be that afraid to vote in socialists AFTER showing up in crowd of millions of people throughout Spain to commemorate their dead?
Besides, what do you think democracy is? The people voted and made their choice. It's just not a choice you agree with, and so you choose to spin it by calling it "caving in to terror".

"Still doesn't make it right or wrong or why he deserved to be voted out of office. "

That's democracy. Whether or not the PP "deserved" to be voted out, they were. The people spoke. Are their votes suddenly invalid because of a tragic event three days before?
"The only message here is the subversion of democracy by the terrorists."

So...democracy only works if it gives the results that you want? There;s a word for that, but it ain't democracy. If it is, then it's already been subverted, with or without terrorism.

"Subversion of democracy? Thats what the terrorists did. Bush so far has helped foster democracy both in Afghanistan and Iraq by overthrowing regimes of ignorance and blood."

Bush lied to do it. No matter how "noble" his goals are - and I highly doubt that a "good ole' boy" like Bush would do anything out of the goodness of his heart, at least where oil stocks are concerned - the fact that he lied to the world and then takes the cowardly way out and spins it afterward to make it sound like a push for democracy instead of a search for WMD negates his good intentions. The ends do not justify the means. And the ends weren't even met that well. Afghanistan's fledling democracy is in serious trouble and the Taliban has been resurging. Whoops.

"It's also tragic that some people are using this tragedy to promote their anti-bush agendas"

I'm just celebrating democracy in action. If you want to see exploitation of tragedy to promote agendas, check out Bush's campaign ads. Check out the Republican National Congress meeting in New York City for all the photo ops from the WTC site they can manage. It swings both ways.
Whitbourne
Monday, March 15, 2004 03:08:22 PM
IP: 156.34.81.80

QUESTION> <<Bush so far has helped foster democracy both in Afghanistan and Iraq by overthrowing regimes of ignorance and blood.>>

Yes, and Bush is also riding with Santa Claus in his sleigh to finally bring them their first X-Mas presents, while the people dance happy in the streets while the leprachauns shower them with gold and the Easter Bunny passes out the eggs.

And, by Jove they'll do the same thing in Saudi Arabia next year!
Greg Bishansky
Monday, March 15, 2004 01:22:22 PM
IP: 216.179.4.129

Lucky number 3 Green Baron? Aw *kiss*
Whoohoo I'm lucky #13th post too!

I actually ate a lot meat today! I'm damn proud and it's just half a day gone. The cows, the moose, any bird is not safe from me! MUHAHAHA!! I still have a PETA to hunt down. Hmm...

Dammien, you're too funny. Tartar sauce. haha!

Oy. I'm hyper! *drinks more coffee*

Hellcat
Monday, March 15, 2004 12:27:48 PM
IP: 205.251.135.66

And I shall claim the -1 and the 12th spot, for being the last to post to the old board!

Green baron> Why would eating an animal upset PETA? I'm a member of People for the Eating of Tasty Animals, and this we advocate eating animals at least once a day.
DON'T PUT MAKEUP ON THAT RABBIT! PUT TARTAR SAUCE!
nuff said

Damien
Monday, March 15, 2004 12:13:45 PM
IP: 207.6.149.113

I am not a number -- I am a free man...

Oops -- missed the top 10...

BTW 3/4 of awakening was also very nice...
silvadel
Monday, March 15, 2004 11:47:43 AM
IP: 24.225.220.194

Top 10, #10
DPH
AR, USA
Monday, March 15, 2004 10:57:35 AM
IP: 161.31.104.156

Heh 9iner! who was 6 again? >:)
Spacebabie&Revel
Monday, March 15, 2004 10:37:00 AM
IP: 4.72.102.1

Number 8.
Off to Plastics Heaven.
Gunjack "Hungry Man" Valentine
Monday, March 15, 2004 09:36:08 AM
IP: 4.7.36.9

::lands on Bud-Clare's head::

I claim number seven and today's word is dhimmitude.
ghost of Reverend Attila
Monday, March 15, 2004 07:47:25 AM
IP: 220.73.165.203

Number six picks up sticks!
Spike
Monday, March 15, 2004 07:26:15 AM
IP: 209.30.64.219

5 for pretty rocks and mountains and happy hippy nature stuff. Yes, I'm back and exhausted.
Dezi
Monday, March 15, 2004 07:08:15 AM
IP: 68.58.158.101

Number four, in the name of people who love to count!

144! 144 days left until The Gathering 2004 in Montreal, Quebec! Mwah-ha-ha! :: thunder and lightening ::
Patrick
Monday, March 15, 2004 06:52:04 AM
IP: 65.43.150.4

I claim Number 3 in the name of International Eat an Animal for PETA day and in the name of the Golden Khan, and of course my beloved Hellcat ::kisses::
Green Baron - [greenbaron@hotmail.com]
Camp Humphreys, Korea
Monday, March 15, 2004 06:25:30 AM
IP: 220.73.165.203

you still were the second to post, it doesn't matter if you were intentionally space-grabbing or not, you are still #2.

wereas, since I already posted once in the ten, this post doesn't count as three.

and if you didn't want any boogers, you shouldn't keep asking for them everytime you see me on IM. ; )
Lynati
Monday, March 15, 2004 04:17:48 AM
IP: 64.216.143.207

NOT #2

eeeeew, boogers? yick!!!!

(i dont count as #2 since i wiped the room... i just had to comment about the boogers..)
lain
Monday, March 15, 2004 04:15:54 AM
IP: 4.7.35.8

I claim this spot in the name of lain, CR wiper extraordinaire.

*smooches and boogers*
hee!
Lynati
Monday, March 15, 2004 04:14:14 AM
IP: 64.216.143.207