Fucking Bullshit

catefrances

metsfan531941 wrote:

haha, i use a towlie for when i do that

such a considerate boy.

Gary Carter

catefrances wrote:

such a considerate boy.

yes iam. btw i love your sig, the first part of it

Jeanie

metsfan531941 wrote:

yes iam. btw i love your sig, the first part of it

In the interests of protecting the "integrity" of the thread and you from yourself metsfan531941 , somehow I have managed to find "and then there's the drunk thread" on AET. Perhaps it would be safer for you there fella?

catefrances

Jeanie wrote:

In the interests of protecting the "integrity" of the thread and you from yourself metsfan531941 , somehow I have managed to find "and then there's the drunk thread" on AET. Perhaps it would be safer for you there fella?

oh jeanie. let the boy bury himself.

catefrances

metsfan531941 wrote:

yes iam. btw i love your sig, the first part of it

ta.

Gary Carter

Jeanie wrote:

In the interests of protecting the "integrity" of the thread and you from yourself metsfan531941 , somehow I have managed to find "and then there's the drunk thread" on AET. Perhaps it would be safer for you there fella?

i could careless bout thread integrity, me and the thread starter sort of know each other.

Jeanie

metsfan531941 wrote:

i could careless bout thread integrity, me and the thread starter sort of know each other.

Just thought you might find it a better option. No biggy.

Gary Carter

Jeanie wrote:

Just thought you might find it a better option. No biggy.

sorry if that came off mean

Jeanie

metsfan531941 wrote:

sorry if that came off mean

I didn't read it that way mate. So no need to apologise to me.

It's all good here.

DinghyDog

-

jlew24asu

soulsinging wrote:

yeah. kinda how any woman wearing a short skirt deserves to be raped.

after all this time, I cant believe you would make such a stupid statement

Byrnzie

jlew24asu wrote:

well in this case I believe the reference to be true. prove me wrong. otherwise dont waste your time with useless comments. at least byzine was able to produce some evidence of his position


so america got what it deserved huh?

People often spell my name wrong Jlew, but 'byzine'? :eek:

Byrnzie

Purple Hawk wrote:

that pretty much sums up your point of view to me...let's just say we vehemently disagree on just about everything

as far as your 911 point...you're basically saying...U.S. foreign policy has been evil, and we have really pissed off some people, so these people acted on it...yet you are somehow not saying we got what we deserved? I'm not baiting you. I'm asking you to explain yourself. It sounds to me like you are saying like we got what we deserved, but don't have the guts to actually say it. That's understandable...liberalism is all about easy, emotional, catch phrase arguments rather than genuine debate

You reap what you sow.

Byrnzie

catefrances wrote:

hah! sure it was a random event for america. and i hope it is never repeated anywhere. but there are countries around the world that for them this 'random event' would seem par for the course.
i

So true!
It really fucking bothers me that every year now on July 7th in England people will be acting all melencholy and sanctimonious, whilst talking of the London terrorist attacks when 50 people were killed, whilst for Iraqi's, this shit has been happening EVERY FUCKING DAY for the past 4 years.
Can you imagine Iraq in the future having a remembrance day? They'd need to have one 365 days of the fucking year!

angelica

NCfan wrote:

angelica wrote:

I didn't say Osama was bad or not-bad. I really have no clue. And what I hear is so distorted that I don't trust anything but my own perceptions. And they are drawing a blank. Bush on the other hand, he's pretty obvious.

WOW, I thought more highly of you than this...

Tell me you've seen at least one of the videos of Osama preaching about Jihad and killing Infidels. Just google some stuff on him. It is all translated word for word from his mouth. There is not dispute these are his words, and there is no distortion of his goals. He says it in plain language.

NCfan wrote:

Preconceptions that you are intelegent enough to see through ALL the propaganda no matter who it supports or helps, and understand that Osama Bin Laden wants infidels who will not submit to his interpretation of Islam to die?
I mean he's said it over and over and over... it's no secret.

Okay, I'll throw that out...

It doesn't bother me to question things. But it is disturbing that somebody couldn't judge Osama Bin Laden based on his own words and/or deeds.

NCfan, truthfully, there are aspects of you that remind me very much of myself, particularly your conscientiousness and seeming well-intended nature. I truly believe you earnestly are seeking the best solutions. At the same time, there is one big difference between you and I: from what I've read of your posts, you are looking at events through an ethnocentric view. You are seeing everything through your American mind and your American culture. Therefore, the world events that you view, rather than view them as they are, you seem to see them through the American view, as interpreted through your own self.

I live, eat, breathe and sleep moving past my preconceptions and achieving actual understanding of what is happening. I accept nothing less than problem solving. And therefore, there is very, very little your government is doing that I can accept, because there is little to no real problem solving taking place. My focus is on a world-centric view--a global mindset. I am unwilling to pick sides, and accept one side as bad/wrong, and another as "right". This view is two-dimensional, unrealistic and fuels the problems we have going on worldwide. I've said this stuff to you before, so it should not surprise you.

Allow me to be clear--and in order for you to hear me, you will have to put aside your preconceptions of what you might want me to think and say. I have not committed to this stance here before, but here is what I think: Terrorism is ugly and brutal--and so is war. You've been accused of talking about these subjects as though you were playing a game of risk. And I've agreed with that interpration of you. AT THE SAME TIME, just like you will partake of strategic thinking, in order to utilise power and make things happen in the world, I UNDERSTAND terrorism and the purposes behind it. It is a strategy. And a very, very effective one. Just like you can be "objective" and play risk, so can others. In my mind it is what it is. Do you believe your strategies of destruction and killing are morally superior? I suspect so, hence you considering others "bad" and your own side "good". I don't follow the ethnocentric stance, however, and therefore cannot agree. Yes there are differences between terrorism and the ugly destruction your country acts out. However they are two sides of the same coin ultimately. In the heart of every man there are great heights of beauty, and there are great depths of ugliness. I happen to be empathic, like many others on this board, and I cannot help but understand "the other side".

angelica

NCfan wrote:

cutback wrote:

Nail, head, hit. W needs to keep people scared of something otherwise he loses power.

Try putting your blind hatred on the shelf for a second and think about what you just wrote.

If Bush were to catch or kill Osama, his approval rating would shoot up 20% over night.

As it stands, there is virtually no power he has left to lose.

Here is the commentary as it stood. To which I added:

angelica wrote:

In order to get the concept of Osama-as-boogie-man, you have to recognise it for what it is and how it's been manipulated in order to keep people playing along so far. It's not about hatred, it's about awareness.

For the record, I don't know whether Osama is being deliberately overlooked and let free or not. I have seen enough speeches, though, and I'm quite up on my communication skills that I can see that Osama has been painted as a boogie-man and that his image, and the prevalent Amerian idea of the "bad guy out there somewhere" is being manipulated. You may be correct if you believe Bush desperately wants to capture Osama. Even if that is the case, Osama being absent ALSO has value to Bush, which he has regularly exploited.

In my quote, I said "in order to get the concept of Osama-as-boogie-man you have to recognise it for what it is." Your response was: I don't believe Bush has been manipulating the people by creating Osama the boogie man." In my opinion, if you don't see the manipulation, you show that you cannot truly understand the concept of the manipulated boogie man. You show that you believe he is a real boogie man, which is the purpose of the ploy in the first place. Of course I see the real ways the man is dangerous, but I'm talking about the concept of his danger that is being reaffirmed and built to mythic proportions. If you understood this concept, you would see it. If you saw it, you would not believe it to be false, because you would recognise it before your own eyes.

jlew24asu

DinghyDog wrote:

modern wars make money for american companies. for global companies. end of story. that's is ALL what it is about. if you drill down deep enough that is what it comes down to.

that's the sad reality of it.

thanks for stopping by

soulsinging

jlew24asu wrote:

after all this time, I cant believe you would make such a stupid statement

what is so stupid about it? you're the one making the illogical assertion that thinking anyone who thinks 9/11 was not a big surprise also feels america deserved it. that's a ridiculous contention, as ridiculous as the short skirt-rape thing. the analogy works... perhaps it explains why one entity was targeted as opposed to another, but it by no means implies that said entity deserved the crime that followed. america did not deserve 9/11. but given some of its actions in the past, it is not exactly shocking that it happened. do you really have such trouble wrapping your simple-minded black and white worldview around this concept?

JamMastaE

9-11 was an inside job!!!


nuff said.

jlew24asu

JamMastaE wrote:

9-11 was an inside job!!!


nuff said.

who did it?