Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Compaq Presario for softsynth box. Good or bad?
| Compaq Presario for softsynth box. Good or bad? [message #55105] |
Thu, 30 June 2005 13:00  |
Tom Bruhl
Messages: 1368
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
;>
>>
>>My few is nail the fuckers when you can find them, and make life absolutely
miserable for those who are helping them.
But then you're making them mad and breeding millions more of them. The
answer to this may be exactly what GWB is wanting to do...........give the
people a say in their own lives. Of course, this pisses off the religious
zealots who want to keep the population in lockdown, the Sunni's in Iraq who
used to be in power in Iraq and now are not and the those who think we are
exporting democracy at the point of a gun because they don't like our
policies. Funny though, I sure don't see the general population of
Afghanistan clamoring for the return of the Taliban. I also don't see a mass
uprising in Iraq in favor of returning Sadaam to power.
"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote in message news:42d7acb1@linux...
>
> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:42d7521a$1@linux...
> >
> > Germaine (NOT "Jackson" lol) to your post:
> > For the record... I'm all for a peaceful solution; however (and
> > let's now bring this over to a personal level where more people
> > may be able to understand it rather than conceptualize it), if
> > it's apparent that the guy on the opposite side of the ring
> > from you does not want to take off his gloves, but would rather
> > beat the shit out of you until you are dead, you have EXACTLY
> > two choices:
> >
> > 1.) get beaten until you are dead.
> > 2.) beat the shit out of him until he is.
> >
> > What would you do?
> >
> > This is pretty fucking simple to me.
> >
> > Neil
> >
>
> I'm in total agreement here Neil the only problem with your scenario is,
> after you've done the first guy....there are 1000 more right behind him
and
> half of the paying audience who came to watch this smack down is booing
you
> cause they think you were a little hard on his sorry ass.
>
> This is a religious war being waged by ignorant extremists who for
whatever
> reason have decided we're the enemy and as we all know once you bring
> religion into the mix common sense and rational behavior go right out the
> window.
>
> My few is nail the fuckers when you can find them, and make life
absolutely
> miserable for those who are helping them.
>
> More shit has been done in the name of God and quite frankly I think she's
a
> tad pissed right about now.
>
>
>
> Don
>
>
> >
> > "W. Mark Wilson" <wmarkwilson@verizon.net> wrote:
> >>Randy Newman wrote a satire (tinyurl.com/d83pb) many years ago, the
> >>tagline
> >
> >>of which, best expresses my current view on the best solution to the
> >>unceasing problem of terrorism emanating from middle east command and
> >>means.... which is to say "most" terrorism.
> >>
> >>I really am there. This is THE one way to ratt out the enemy and
> >>simultaneously send the message to any further suiters: "Step right up
> > for
> >>your one-way bullet train to Allah, no purchase necessary, see fineprint
> > on
> >>tip of warhead for details."
> >>
> >>The thing that put me over the edge was the piece of human waste that
blew
> >
> >>up the little kids a couple of days ago while one of our guys was
handing
> >
> >>out candy to them.
> >>
> >>Anybody brave enough to say they think the same thing or have we all
cowed
> >
> >>down to international version of the old Rodney King mantra, "Can't we
all
> >
> >>just get long." Is there some plausible notion or a reason to believe
> >>that
> >
> >>eventually, if we just keep doing what we're doing, the extremist
> >>followers
> >
> >>of Bin ladin will just all of a sudden see it our way and fold up the
biz
> >
> >>and integrate into peaceful society???
> >>
> >>Dubya Mark Wilson
> >>
> >>"Neil" <OIUIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:42d6fc20$1@linux...
> >>>
> >>> In a nutshell...
> >>> I think if there's room & resources enough for both Israelis &
> >>> Palestinians in the region they want to live in, I think they
> >>> should quit fighting & come up with a plan. HOWEVER... this is
> >>> essentially a 3,000 year-old family feud we're looking at over
> >>> there, and my point of view may be a little too simplistic to
> >>> deal with the situation. I am not very familiar with the
> >>> condition of the agricultural situation there, but I understand
> >>> it's not the best in the world - in that case, both sides
> >>> should realize that there may not be enough resources in that
> >>> immediate area to provide for as many peple as want to live
> >>> there... that's a problem, because you can't import everything
> >>> food-wise. Israel is our ally, and we should stand by them, but
> >>> I also hold the position that some kind of solution could be
> >>> arrived at if both sides want peace more than war. OK, now
> >>> this is the part where you rebut & tell me what a narrow-minded
> >>> American I am, and how wrong my opinion is because you're
> >>> Eurosuperior to me and have a much better world view because
> >>> you read about cowboys & rodeos in Oklahoma & the drug problems
> >>> in Miami in Der Spiegel & had a US soldier live next door to
> >>> you & he was a dick, and of course, all Americans are exactly
> >>> like he was.
> >>>
> >>> BTW, the Israeli thing is VERY different than the situation we
> >>> face with radical Islam... they do NOT want peace more than
> >>> war, they only want to kill all the "infidels" and sing praise
> >>> & glory to their blood-soaked god Allah, while trying to knock
> >>> the rest of the world back into the 12th century, economically,
> >>> societally, and politically. So, knowing this, and seeing what
> >>> they've done beginning on 9/11 and continuing to this day, I
> >>> think a slightly "different" approach is what's called for.
> >>>
> >>> Neil
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>Derek, I appreciate your writings here. It saying much about where the
problems are in my thoughts too.
I think we Europeans knows that "being big" allways have made problems when
trying to be bigger than
big:-) Big with weapons in hands are often showing up these weapons as their
only "brain" when conflicts are coming.
Our worlds problems, that started the first worldwar, was already coming in
1864, when Bismarck made the big, German nation under the hegemony of
Preussen. It was the oldnordic traditions with the God Wotan (or Odin in
Norwegian) that then again was showing up in the people. It's showing well
in "To an unknown God" from 1864, from the pen of Nietzsche, one of the
greatest German philosopher and writers in those times. The feeling of being
big was setting the standard of human thinking hundred of years back in time
in those days, maybe thousands. So the next 50 years was showing up with
more and more problems, first of all in the southern region of Europe, in
Austria and Hungary, where their minorities was suppressed (as the german
minority in Austria, after the first worldwars ending, where Hitler was born
and grown up, knowing the suppression on his own body). So the fatal shot in
Sarajevo from a Serbian, that killed the Habsburger prince 28. June 1914,
was just the drop that started it all in "old" modern times.
I'm seeing exactly the same pattern in American behavings in our modern
times as it was before the first world war. American sivilians generally
don't know what a war is on their own body without their own civil war that
was overupheating from the south with South Carolina in front, when Abraham
Lincoln was being President in 1860. The American nation was splitted in two
in those days with 11 states in the southern part and the rest in the
norhern part, as far as I can remember in my readings about America. But I
think most of the Americans are knowing these badly story very well.
As far as I can understand in readings and seeing, the human feelings
haven't changed much since then in north and south, after observe what's
happening in the last two president votings.
As Dejj wrote about the observations to the indians, I can see a nation of
different nations that really have big problems with trusting each other
after a long history-background. from their real homecountries that they
have travelled from. So maybe it's really understandable with their "shoot
first, then ask" menthality that's often showing up. The real American are
nearly nonexistencional(what a word, I don't know if it's correct written at
all) in America, as far as I can understand but I'm seeing Dejj have learned
to do some observations from them about the "new" Americans, that's just
seems to be German, French, Scandinavian etc. etc.
So, as far as I can understand, the only real Americans are the indians.
Hmm, I'm thinking too much when doing too much observations, it can be
dangerous when thinking so much too much:-) But never mind, I have had my
life, but our children and grandchildren shall take over the heredity and
environment from us in the coming world. So I mean it's well worth to do
something for them too, so maybe they can have real trust to other nations
too, for a better future.
Erling
derek" <derekvonkrogh@gmx.net> skrev i en meddelelse
news:42d758ac$1@linux...
>
> "DC" <dcicchetti@urs2.net> wrote:
>>So, do you think that Rabin had any more hope of success with these
>>people than did Clinton or anyone else?
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Compaq Presario for softsynth box. Good or bad? [message #55107 is a reply to message #55105] |
Thu, 30 June 2005 15:02  |
Tom Bruhl
Messages: 1368
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
br />
>
>
> so, yes, i do acknowledge that both roads can lead to success.
> do you? it appears you dont, so whos the dogmatic type here?
>
>
>>No it doesn't, or it would have worked with Hussein, Kim Il Sung,
>>Hitler and the Branch Davidians. You are not allowing for insanity
>>and evil in the world and you are assuming that a rational person's
>>version of a more attractive situation will always be accepted.
>
>
> from a palaestinian point of view, israel is the aggressor
> that took their land. they dont have the military power,
> so they go the terror route. being the frakkingeuropacifistidiotdude that
> i am, i despise that
> just as much, so id prefer it if you dont switch between
> calling me a blind pacifist one moment and then a guy
> that doesnt criticize palaestina (and thus somewhat supports the use of
> terror),
> whatever fits the best.
>
> from their point of view, theyre actually doing exactly
> the same thing - use brute force. they dont have planes,
> so they use suicide bombers. if you were on their side,
> its what you would recommend. and if the enemy threatened to
> use more power, youd recommend that the enemy gets a
> demonstration of your force.
>
> somewhere in there lies a fundamental, unsolvable problem.
> throw in a ticking clock (islamic countries getting the bomb
> sooner or later, whether you want it or not),
> and look again at the one guy that at the very least came
> close to peace down there - ooooh it was that deescalation
> dude. what a coincidence.
>
> im not saying its the ultimate solution. i find pretending
> to have absolute solutions (a very popular practice here,
> or so it seems) rather silly. im trying to have a civiliced
> discussion about the possible different paths to a solution,
> if there is one at all. i can ackownledge and talk about
> both approaches, you seem to struggle with that part
> and fall back into europe-is-so-whatever rants, which,
> btw, are no better than george-bush-is-pure-evil bullshit.
> its kindergarden. no thanks.
>
>
>
>>And what could you possibly dislike about the present Israeli
>>leadership? Draggin settlers out by the scruff of the neck,
>>responding to the worst terrorism with measured and rational
>>responses, and showing great restraint.
>
>
> yeah, as i said, they went back to 0, so i completely
> agree with you.
>
>
>
>> See, this is the problem
>>with europe. In your arrogance, because of living in a land that
>>cannot envision war,
>
>
> blah...
>
>
>
>> you assume all violence is failure
>
>
> i repeatedly said the exact opposite but nevermind. rant on.
>
>
>
>> and that
>>there must be a way to negotiate and finess this stuff.
>>Suppose there isn't?
>
>
> i did. its why im interested in this discussion.
> a childish "i know 100% percent im right" attitude
> isnt exactly helping, but at least in parts your
> post gets over the standard stereotype attitude. it seems to
> help that i repeatedly write about the things i dont
> think, even though it doesnt fit into your arrogant euro pacifist drawer:
>
>
> - i acknowledge the use of force as concept to end a conflict.
> it often is the most peaceful way to go.
> - i acknowledge the use of force as concept to end a conflict.
> it often is the most peaceful way to go.
> - i acknowledge the use of force as concept to end a conflict.
> it often is the most peaceful way to go.
> - i acknowledge the use of force as concept to end a conflict.
> it often is the most peaceful way to go.
>
> - i dont blindly believe that everything on this world can be
> negotiated
> - i dont blindly believe that everything on this world can be
> negotiated
> - i dont blindly believe that everything on this world can be
> negotiated
> - i dont blindly believe that everything on this world can be
> negotiated
>
> - im not here because of some anti-US agenda. i have family
> in the US, have been there many times and like it here.
> im only interested in a civiliced discussion about the
> several approaches (yes i dare to believe there are several
> approaches, because of the fact that theres a not too bad
> track record of deescalation in history)
> - im not here because of some anti-US agenda. i have family
> in the US, have been there many times and like it here.
> im only interested in a civiliced discussion about the
> several approaches (yes i dare to believe there are several
> approaches, because of the fact that theres a not too bad
> track record of deescalation in history)
> - im not here because of some anti-US agenda. i have family
> in the US, have been there many times and like it here.
> im only interested in a civiliced discussion about the
> several approaches (yes i dare to believe there are several
> approaches, because of the fact that theres a not too bad
> track record of deescalation in history)
>
>
>
>> You haven't convinced me that Rabin could
>>have pulled it off.
>
>
> i didnt expect to. heck, i dont know it myself.
>
>
>>Here's how the palestinians could have peace in a week:
>>
>>Go Ghandi on them. Sit down, inb the streets, renounce violence forever.
>>Ask the world for justice. They would get their demands in a week
>>or less, and if israel didn't like it, the american people would force it
>>on them by witholding any more aid.
>
>
> yes. too bad it wouldnt work because their religious
> fanatic idiots. theres a reason why i talked so much
> about the good timing of rabin. you gotta force religious
> idiots into their own good. too bad the timing wasnt quite
> right and a handful of steps at a time was still to
> extreme of a dialog for some extremist idiots. it
> wasnt even an islamic extremist idiot but a jewish one
> who ultimatively destroyed it all - but it could very
> well have been one.
>
>
>> Why do you euros never demand a DAMN THING from the
>>arabs and the palestinians, you hypocritical, arrogant fools?
>
>
> oh we never demand a damn thing from the arabs?
> thats funny. usually, especially where i live, its a tradition
> to not ask anything from israel (obvious reason being
> germanys history, were simply in no position to ask *anything*
> from them). maybe you should study the people you want
> to call hypocritical arrogant fools a little more before
> you go ahead with it.
>
> but ive had enough of the stereotype discussion. suit yourself
> and bathe in your stupid clichees if it makes you feel
> any better.
>
>
>>Why do you not rise up in horror and demand that these acts stop?
>>Answer this one Derek, if you can.
>
>
> oh, we do. we do. you just dont notice, cause you only
> notice what fits into the dumb black and white picture you
> have of us.
>
>
>>Instead you speak of "root causes" and criticize Bush. It's wrong, and
>>foolish.
>
>
> i dont know what a "root cause" is. i know i definetly
> didnt come here to criticize bush. i think i said so about
> a dozen times.
>
>
>
>>I cannot support the euro position on this, because I NEVER hear
>>any demands for change, or criticism of moslems coming from
>>europe. Just of the jews and america. Until I see otherwise,
>>we must stay the course.
>
>
> see, one problem is that i can watch almost all US TV stations
> and buy, read and understand almost all US press. so i can
> regularly get an idea about whats going on in the US, and
> germans usually are very interested in that, cause, despite
> the current arguments, germany still looks up to the US.
> its a bit like with an older brother you currently dont talk
> much to, even though most germans probably would have a
> problem in admitting that.
>
> on the other hand, i can tell from all the BS here that most
> of you people have not the slightest idea about whats
> going in germany. you talk about us not criticizing
> muslims and not asking anything from those countries,
> yet just as we speak theres an election campaign with
> a debate about how to deal with turkey, and also
> how to deal with potential islamists in our country,
> with our current minister of internal security and
> the guy who wants his post totally going berserk and
> extremely to the right. and if theres a classic
> debate in germany if ive ever seen one, its the debate
> about whether its good that its a principal no-no to
> openly criticize anything thats even remotely related
> to anything jewish. there are extremists that have a problem
> with that (they call it a sick case of non-judmentalism...sounds
> familiar), i personally think its only adequate and should
> stay so for at least another 50 years.
>
> so i dont really know what to reply to such accusations.
> its so completely unreal, i dont know where to start.
>
>
>>See, any response to terrorism besides negotiation is either
>>"muscle flexing" or "cowboys" or "macho".
>
>
> muscle flexing is what i called it, getting bored by the
> "politics of force" terms i used the entire force.
> "cowboys" and "macho" is yet another projection of yours.
>
>
>> And you cannot
>>see how america might see europe as so arrogant and sefl-absorbed
>>that your views are not important to us?
>
>
> thats a bit besides the point because im sure that
> our views are not important to you either way. i do
> get an idea about how these stereotypes come up and
> especially, how they nicely grow, completely undisturbed
> by anything that resembles reality. you know squat about
> my country, period. its ridiculous. yet you believe
> you can judge my country, where i, who probably knows a
> couple hundred times more about YOUR country, make it
> a point to repeatedly stress how i do NOT want or feel
> entitled to judge or criticize it. its quite absurd, really.
>
>
>>I am not evening saying that war is the only answer, just that if
>>you have an ideology that precludes it, and you see it always as a
>>failure
>
>
> you know what, do me a favour here: please come up with
> the quote where i said that i always see it as a failure.
> either that or maybe you might want to actually stop it
> and apologize. its really getting boring to repeat
> and
> repeat and repeat and repeat it, with no effect.
> i have the feeling youre not talking to me but to
> some imaginary "The Europe Dude" that you made up for
> yourself to argue against.
>
>
>
>> do not expect us to listen since you care more for your
>>ideology than you apparently care for our lives.
>
>
> i do care only about the lives. at several points i
> pointed out how i believe we all want the same (among
> other things i mentioned this as reason why i dont belong
> to the george-bush-is-evil-group). i do find the
> ideal way to this common goal open for debate.
> you obviously disagree on this one. its a little weird
> why you would enter a debate about it anyway then. is it
> just to spank my ideologic european ass?
>
>
>>"Peace process" what a f**king joke that term is. It is the words
>>that ideologues use to comfort themselves in the face of not only
>>failure, but the continuing loss of innocent lives.
>
>
> its a term rabin, a man that i admire, used himself,
> so ill leave the name calling to you. one could argue
> that the times where the terror was at an all time low
> saved lots of lives, but whatever.
>
>
>
>>Tell you what. You tell me that you would take a knife, and jam it
>>in the back of the next ghoul with a bomb, and you say thanks
>>to the soldiers who have saved so many lives, and we'll talk about
>>"peace processes".
>
>
> heres some more for you so that you can get a picture
> thats more accurate than what you currently believe to
> be the typical euro or wh
|
|
|
|
| Re: Compaq Presario for softsynth box. Good or bad? [message #55108 is a reply to message #55107] |
Thu, 30 June 2005 19:42 |
Pete Ruthenburg
Messages: 127
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
atever. i beg you, please READ
> what i say now:
>
> oh yes, as things are, i would stab a knife in that guys back.
> its what the current situation asks for.
>
> read it? ok, so i can get a little more into detail:
>
> but it doesnt end there. i just stabbed the guy in the back.
> what about the next guy? and the one after him? whats the
> best way to avoid a neverending "guys with bombs" supply.
> are there, god forbid, several possible approaches? is
> it worth a discussion? cause, it would be unfair to
> the soldiers to make them do this all the time while
> we dont do anything for it to ever change.
>
>
>
>
>> Until you allow for the full range of responses,
>>you are acting as an advocate for them.
>
>
> theres someone not ready for the "full range of responses"
> here, but it aint me.
>
>
>>So, if you could get a "peace process" going while he was at the
>>peak of his powers, it might have succeeded? What? Until when,
>>the following thursday?
>
>
> in the right tempo to draw all religious fanatic idiots
> on all sides (repeat: ALL sides. that includes the moslems!
> do you hear me!) with them.
>
>
>>His greed and corruption would have
>>eventually toppled him and your peace process.
>
>
> youre confusing things here, its what actually got him
> to participate. and boy did it help him. it turned him
> from an internationally sought after outlaw into
> a somewhat respected politician, probably making him
> richer than he ever dreamt of in the process. you tell
> me that guy wanted to go back into tunnel system terrorist
> mode? never. man is too selfish and greedy for that.
>
>
>>Do you really believe that hamas and hizbullah would not have
>>formed if Arafat had made a deal with Rabin??
>
>
> they had already formed. the difference was, arafat had them
> under control and as long as he came home with results
> from the peace process, he had the people in his back.
>
>
>
>>And why are they able to do this? Is it not the actions of the
>>palestinians and the arabs?
>
>
> why yes of course it is (see above).
>
>
>> An american
>>president who did not force them to accept peace in this scenario
>>would be voted out or even impeached.
>
>
> this is not where the conflict lies. the conflict, unfortunately,
> lies in the religious aspects. i for one am pretty sure
> that there would have been some sort of agreement
> down there long ago, if only all this shitty land and
> these shitty cities werent as "sacred" as they supposedly are.
> as i said i dont have the ultimate solution. i just dont
> believe you have it either, and comparing the track
> record or the different approaches down there, im inclined
> to believe that the brute force method, which worked other
> times, doesnt seem to work this time.
>
> and that is an important discussion because it also
> is a discussion about "how do you fight a fundamentalist
> that doesnt fear death", about "is there a way to
> get along with the islam", about "how do you go to
> war with something as abstract as terror". yes, i do believe
> this is the most important conflict to be solved and that
> it could serve as role model for the same conflict were
> having (or going to have) on a much bigger global scale.
>
> im worried about that. no wait, im sitting on my euro
> ass waiting for everything to explode first, and then
> ill think about it, cause thats how we arrogant euro
> assholes are? right?
>
> ...
>
>
>>You criticize Bush, but he blasts Israel every single time they
>>respond to terrorism as we have. What hypocrisy!
>
>
> yeah, it would be if i would criticize bush for not criticizing
> israel. of course i nowhere said that. again, youre kindly
> invited to come up with a quote.
>
> or wait, maybe you misunderstood this one:
>
>> the US dont reign over israel - theyll
>>>do what THEY think is best for them.
>
>
> with "they" i of course mean israel. my very point was
> that bush can criticize them all he wants (and he does),
> but they dont respond much to that, and thats i sad irony
> that so much of the arabic hatred towards israel comes
> from the overestimated power the US supposedly has on
> israel.
>
>
>>So we eliminate leaders that sponsor terrorism, and provide hiding
>>places for them, we kill them, without mercy, wherever we can find,
>>them, and we spread modernity and democracy, and we stay at
>>it until we win.
>
>
> yes thats your approach. it sometimes worked in the
> past, sometimes it didnt. just like deescalation.
> theres no perfect solution that automatically is the
> best solution at all times.
>
>
>> I believe this is the only solution and that negotiation
>>is impossible with islamofascists.
>
>
> and i say youre focusing on the wrong thing, this is just not
> enough. getting rid of islamofascists (or fascists of
> any kind, for that matter) is one thing. brute force seems
> the best way for that. trying to avoid that such fascists
> gain power on a regular basis in the future is, imo, the maybe
> even more important goal. diplomacy, holding oneself to
> the high standards we used to at least pretend to have, that
> kind of stuff seems like the more promising way to go for
> that (unless you want to tell me that you believe that the
> very concept of diplomacy is at fault).
>
> the problem is that solution nr.1 is the direct opposite
> of solution number nr.2. theres room for improvement here.
> at least thats what i think, when i look at israel, or,
> to use another example for a change, afghanistan, where
> my selfish country does the dirty laundry for you without
> you noticing because its not in the news.
>
>
>>And what do you offer in place of this accursed religion?
>>Darwin? Pacifism? An enlightened social contract between
>>free moral people? Think these things will sell to the islamofascists?
>>Me neither. These are weak ideas and subject to the opinions of whoever
>>offers them.
>>Meaningless phrases full of intent, signifying nothing.
>
>
> just like institutionalized religion, really. only difference
> being that is has a much cleaner historical track record.
> but im not about to even start hoping that there will be
> a significant change here anytime soon, cause im not
> religious about that either. this is a change that comes
> over time, separation of religion and politics...
> it seemed to get better in the second half of the
> last century. currently it seems to get worse again.
> oh well.
>
>
>
>>Perhaps they do not serve God at all. Perhaps at minimum they
>>have perverted Islam? Your hatred of religion will not offer an
>>alternative.
>
>
> no hatred. a very cynical distance though, yes, definetly.
> i did say a few words about personal belief on the one
> hand on huge monotheistic religious institutions on the other hand and
> whether
> the latter is any good for this planet.
> you can go back and read it if youre interested, but i guess
> for now its enough. and now ill go to bed. all that
> non-non-judgementalism has make me tired. maybe i secrectly am a
> politically correct euro hypocrite after all, but im
> doing my best ;-)This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------000202090307070204020708
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I don't know if you cats have seen this but it's pretty humourous so
here ya go....
jef
Last Updated: April 5, 1994
The Book of Creation
Chapter 1
1
In the beginning God created Dates.
2
And the date was Monday, July 4, 4004 BC.
3
And God said, let there be light; and there was light. And when
there was Light, God saw the Date, that it was Monday, and he got
down to work; for verily, he had a Big Job to do.
4
And God made pottery shards and Silurian mollusks and pre-Cambrian
limestone strata; and flints and Jurassic Mastodon tusks and
Picanthopus erectus skulls and Cretaceous placentals made he; and
those cave paintings at Lasceaux. And that was that, for the first
Work Day.
5
And God saw that he had made many wondrous things, but that he had
not wherein to put it all. And God said, Let the heavens be divided
from the earth; and let us bury all of these Things which we have
made in the earth; but not too deep.
6
And God buried all the Things which he had made, and that was that.
7
And the morning and the evening and the overtime were Tuesday.
8
And God said, Let there be water; and let the dry land appear; and
that was that.
9
And God called the dry land Real Estate; and the water called he the
Sea. And in the land and beneath it put he crude oil, grades one
through six; and natural gas put he thereunder, and prehistoric
carboniferous forests yielding anthracite and other ligneous matter;
and all these called he Resources; and he made them Abundant.
10
And likewise all that was in the sea, even unto two hundred miles
from the dry land, called he resources; all that was therein, like
manganese nodules, for instance.
11
And the morning unto the evening had been a long day; which he
called Wednesday.
12
And God said, Let the earth bring forth abundantly every moving
creature I can think of, with or without backbones, with or without
wings or feet, or fins or claws, vestigial limbs and all, right now;
and let each one be of a separate species. For lo, I can make
whatsoever I like, whensoever I like.
13
And the earth brought forth abundantly all creatures, great and
small, with and without backbones, with and without wings and feet
and fins and claws, vestigial limbs and all, from bugs to
brontosauruses.
14
But God blessed them all, saying, Be fruitful and multiply and
Evolve Not.
15
And God looked upon the species he hath made, and saw that the earth
was exceedingly crowded, and he said unto them, Let each species
compete for what it needed; for Healthy Competition is My Law. And
the species competeth amongst themselves, the cattle and the
creeping things; and some madeth it and some didn't; and the dogs
ate the dinosaurs and God was pleased.
16
And God took the bones from the dinosaurs, and caused them to appear
mighty old; and cast he them about the land and the sea. And he took
every tiny creature that had not madeth it, and caused them to
become fossils; and cast he them about likewise.
17
And just to put matters beyond the valley of the shadow of a doubt
God created carbon dating. And this is the origin of species.
18
And in the Evening of the day which was Thursday, God saw that he
had put in another good day's work.
19
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness,
which is tall and well-formed and pale of hue: and let us also make
monkeys, which resembleth us not in any wise, but are short and
ill-formed and hairy. And God added, Let man have dominion over the
monkeys and the fowl of the air and every speices, endangered or
otherwise.
20
So God created Man in His own image; tall and well-formed and pale
of hue created He him, and nothing at all like the monkeys.
21
And God said, Behold I have given you every herb bearing seed, which
is upon the face of the earth. But ye shalt not smoketh it, lest it
giveth you ideas.
22
And to every beast of the earth and every fowl of the air I have
given also every green herb, and to them it shall be for meat. But
they shall be for you. And the Lord God your Host suggesteth that
the flesh of cattle goeth well with that of the fin and the claw;
thus shall Surf be wedded unto Turf.
23
And God saw everything he had made, and he saw that it was very
|
|
|
|
| Re: Compaq Presario for softsynth box. Good or bad? [message #55109 is a reply to message #55108] |
Thu, 30 June 2005 21:32 |
Tom Bruhl
Messages: 1368
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
/>
good; and God said, It just goes to show Me what the private sector
can accomplish. With a lot of fool regulations this could have taken
billions of years.
24
And the evening of the fifth day, which had been the roughest day
yet, God said, Thank me it's Friday. And God made the weekend.
Chapter 2
1
Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all in five days,
and all less than six thousand years ago; and if thou believest it
not, in a sling shalt thou find thy hindermost quarters
2
Likewise God took the dust of the ground, and the slime of the Sea
and the scum of the earth and formed Man therefrom; and breathed the
breath of life right in his face. And he became Free to Choose.
3
And God made a Marketplace eastward of Eden, in which the man was
free to play. And this was the Free Play of the Marketplace.
4
And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow four trees: the Tree
of Life, and the Liberty Tree, and the Pursuit of Happiness Tree,
and the Tree of the Knowledge of Sex.
5
And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, This is my Law, which is
called the Law of Supply and Demand. Investeth thou in the trees of
Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, and thou shalt make for
thyself a fortune. For what fruit thou eatest not, that thou mayest
sell, and with the seeds thereof expand thy operations.
6
But the fruit of the tree of the Knowledge of Sex, thou mayest no
eat; nor mayest thou invest therein, nor profit thereby nor expand
its operations; for that is a mighty waste of seed.
7
And the man was exceeding glad. But he asked the LORD God: Who then
shall labor in this Marketplace? For I am no management, being tall
and well-formed and pale of hue?
8
And the LORD God said unto himself, Verily, this kid hath the
potential which is Executive.
9
And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field
and every fowl of the air, and brought them unto Adam to labor for
him. And they labored for peanuts.
10
Then Adam was again exceeding glad. But he spake once more unto the
LORD God, saying, Lo, I am free to play in the Marketplace of the
LORD, and have cheap labor in plenty; but to whom shall I sell my
surplus fruit and realize a fortune thereby?
11
And the LORD God said unto himself, Verily, this is an Live One.
12
And he caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam and he took from him
one of his ribs, which was an spare rib.
13
And the spare rib which the LORD God had taken from the man, made he
woman. And he brought her unto the man, saying:
14
This is Woman and she shall purchase your fruit; and ye shall
realize a fortune thereby. For Man produceth and Woman consumeth,
wherefore she shall be called the consumer.
15
And they were both decently clad, the Man and the Woman, from the
neck even unto the ankles, so they were not ashamed.
Chapter 3
1
Now the snake in the grass was more permissive than any beast of the
field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Why
has thou accepted this lowly and submissive role? For art thou not
human, even as the man is human?
2
And the woman said unto the snake in the grass, the LORD God hath
ordained that I am placed under the man, and must do whatsoever he
telleth me to do; for is he not the Man?
3
But the snake in the grass laughed an cunning laugh, and said unto
the woman, Is it not right and just that thou shouldst fulfill thy
potential? For art thou not comely in thy flesh, even as the man is
comely in his flesh?
4
And the woman said, Nay, I know not, for hath not the LORD God clad
us decently, from the neck even unto the ankles; and forbidden that
we eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Sex?
5
But the snake in the grass said unto the woman, whispering even into
her very ear, saying, Whatsoever feeleth good, do thou it; and
believeth thou me, it feeleth good.
6
And when the woman saw the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of
Sex, that it was firm and plump and juicy, she plucked thereof, and
sank her teeth therein, and gave also to her husband, and he
likewise sank his teeth therein.
7
And the eyes of both of them were opened, and they saw that they
were not naked.
8
And the woman lossened then Adam's uppermost garment, and he
likewise loosened hers; and she loosened his nethermost garment, and
the man then loosened her nethermost garment; until they were out of
their garments both, and likewise of their minds.
9
And, lo!, they did dance upon the grass of the ground, and they did
rock backward, and roll forward continually;
10
And as they did rock and roll, the serpent that was cunning did play
upon a stringed instrument of music, and did smite his tail upon the
ground in an hypnotic rhythm, and he did sing in a voice that was
like unto four voices: She loveth you, yea, yea, yea.
11
And they did both twist and shout, and fall into a frenzy, both the
man and the woman, and lay themselves upon the ground, and commit
there abominations.
12
And when they were spent from their abominations, they did take the
herb bearing seed, and did roll it and smoke it; and lo! it gaveth
them ideas, even as the LORD God had said; and they were like to
commit new abominations.
13
Now the LORD God was walking in the garden in the cool of the day,
with his dog; and as Adam and his wife were beginning these new
abominations, the LORD God did stub the toe of his foot upon their
hindermost quarters.
14
And the LORD God waxed wroth, and said unto Adam, Wherefore art thou
naked? And what is that thou smokest? And why art thou not at thy
work? For have I not said that it is the man's part to produce, and
the part of the woman to consume whatever he produceth?
15
And Adam and his wife did look upon one another, and did giggle.
16
Whereupon the LORD God waxed exceeding wroth, and he said, Hast thou
eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldst not eat?
17
And the man said, The woman whom you gavest to be with me made me do
it.
18
And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou has
done? And the woman said, The snake in the grass made me do it.
19
And the snake in the grass said, The devil made me do it.
20
And the LORD God said unto the snake in the grass, Thou art an
permissive beast; wherefore art thou cursed to crawl upon they
belly, and be made into belts and boots and handbags hereafter.
21
Unto the woman He said, Since thou has harkened unto the snake in
the grass which is broad-of-mind and permissive; henceforth let it
be thy lot to be confused and scattered in thy brains, and to be
plagued by demons who shall tempt thee to become that which thou
canst not be: such as an warrior, or an extinguisher of fires, or an
operator of heavy machinery.
22
And since thou has put aside the decent clothing wherein I clad
thee, here after no garment shall satisfy thee, and thou shalt be
overcome by longings to change thy raiment every spring and fall.
23
And above all this, since thou hast desired to tast of the fruit of
the Tree of the Knowledge of Sex, now let thy very body be a curse
unto thee. From generation unto generation, men shalt whistle and
hoot after thee as thou passest; yea, and women also.
24
And unto Adam he said, Woe unto thee who hast harkened not to the
voice of the LORD thy God, but rather to her who is thy inferior;
for thou wast free to choose. Now shalt thou be banished from the
Marketplace and the Free Play thereof; neither shalt thou pluck the
fruit from the Trees of Life and Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
25
In the sweat of they face shalt thou earn thy bread, and bankruptcy
shall be thy lot; and upon thy back, as a burden unto thee, thou
shalt bear Big Government; for thou has sinned.
26
And the LORD God said unto the man, Behold, thy knowledge of sex
shall be as a curse upon thee and they generations; and thy loins
shall be a trial to thee.
27
For whensoever thou goest into a public place, then shall thy member
rise up; when thou sitteth to eat and drink among they fellows,
likewise shall it rise up; yea, even when thou standeth before the
people to preach unto them in my name, shall it rise up, and be a
scandal unto thee, and make an unseemly lump in thy garments; yet
when thou goest into thy wife shall thy member wither, and rise up not.
28
And then the LORD God was silent, and waxed sad, and made as if to
leave them there. But he turned and spoke softly unto Adam and his
wife Eve, saying, Knowest thou something? Mine only hope is this:
That someday, ye have children who do unto you the way ye have done
unto Me.
-- Tony Hendra & Sean Kelly
Andrew Tong <http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/%7Ewerdna/autobio.html>,
<http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/%7Ewerdna/autobio.html>werdna@ugcs.caltech.edu
<http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/%7Ewerdna/>
------------------------------------------------------------ ------------
HTML
<http://info.cern.ch/hypertext/WWW/MarkUp/MarkUp.html>
Created: March 29, 1994
rick wrote:
>with all the vitriolic comments from both sides of an argument, is it
>any wonder we all will eventually resort to extreme measures. i'll be
>the first to publicly admit that i would if given the chance, shoot
>any christian / muslim, (or what ever religion they are) who will
>threaten me because they'll never be satisfied that i have not met
>their idea of the righteousness. really, is it just me, or are
>criminals, criminals...unless in their mind their interpretation of
>god is on their side is the right one to have? you know, god is a
>great moral idea, that is until you throw people into the
>equation...then it sucks because we suck...always have, always will.
>
>as an ex carpenter i still have access to wood, nails and other
>stuff...go for it.
>
>;o)
>
>
--------------000202090307070204020708
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
I don't know if you cats have seen this but it's pretty humourous so
here ya go....<br>
<br>
jef<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<i>Last Updated: April 5, 1994</i>
<h1>The Book of Creation</h1>
<h2>Chapter 1</h2>
<dt>1</dt>
<dd> In the beginning God created Dates. </dd>
<dt>2</dt>
<dd> And the date <i>was</i> Monday, July 4, 4004 BC. </dd>
<dt>3</dt>
<dd> And God said, let there be light; and there was light. And
<i>when</i> there was Light, God saw the Date, <i>that</i> it was
Monday, and he <i>got</i> down to work; for verily, he had a Big Job
<i>to do</i>. </dd
|
|
|
|
| Re: Compaq Presario for softsynth box. Good or bad? [message #55118 is a reply to message #55109] |
Fri, 01 July 2005 08:36 |
Tony Benson
Messages: 453
Registered: June 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
<i>there</i>. But he turned and spoke softly
<i>unto</i> Adam and his wife Eve, saying, Knowest thou
<i>something</i>? Mine <i>only</i> hope is this: That someday, ye
have children who do <i>unto</i> you the way ye have done <i>unto</i>
Me.
<p>-- Tony Hendra & Sean Kelly </p>
<p> <author><b><a
href="http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/%7Ewerdna/autobio.html">Andrew Tong</a></b></author><a
href="http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/%7Ewerdna/autobio.html">, </a><a
href="http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/%7Ewerdna/"><i>werdna@ugcs.caltech.edu</i></a>
</p>
<hr>
<h5><a href="http://info.cern.ch/hypertext/WWW/MarkUp/MarkUp.html">HTML</a>
Created: March 29, 1994<br>
</h5>
</dd>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
rick wrote:<br>
<blockquote cite="midl97bd1l0kvm5lb0rt53r23v0t4m3l59p1k@4ax.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">with all the vitriolic comments from both sides of an argument, is it
any wonder we all will eventually resort to extreme measures. i'll be
the first to publicly admit that i would if given the chance, shoot
any christian / muslim, (or what ever religion they are) who will
threaten me because they'll never be satisfied that i have not met
their idea of the righteousness. really, is it just me, or are
criminals, criminals...unless in their mind their interpretation of
god is on their side is the right one to have? you know, god is a
great moral idea, that is until you throw people into the
equation...then it sucks because we suck...always have, always will.
as an ex carpenter i still have access to wood, nails and other
stuff...go for it.
;o)
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>
--------------000202090307070204020708--.....uh, didn't you guys bomb the be-jeeziz out of the Garden of Eden
recently?
8 )
justcron wrote:
>We've eaten from the Tree of Knowledge and now we're using the Knowledge to
>create Nuclear Weapons and inject human stem cells into monkeys. It will
>be no surprise when we get kicked out of our Garden of Eden by God or
>Nature.
>
>
>
>News flash... already kicked out.
"justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote in message
news:42d6eab0@linux...
> We've eaten from the Tree of Knowledge and now we're using the Knowledge
> to create Nuclear Weapons and inject human stem cells into monkeys. It
> will be no surprise when we get kicked out of our Garden of Eden by God or
> Nature.
>Dude, Im drawaing a parallel between the Garden of Eden and Earth...
or are you just heckling again
"Mark McCurdy" <gmmccurdy@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:42d7c93c$1@linux...
> News flash... already kicked out.
>
>
> "justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote in message
> news:42d6eab0@linux...
>> We've eaten from the Tree of Knowledge and now we're using the Knowledge
>> to create Nuclear Weapons and inject human stem cells into monkeys. It
>> will be no surprise when we get kicked out of our Garden of Eden by God
>> or Nature.
>>
>
>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Compaq Presario for softsynth box. Good or bad? [message #55120 is a reply to message #55118] |
Fri, 01 July 2005 08:38 |
Tom Bruhl
Messages: 1368
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
oreign Invaders! Fuck me, how dumb do you have to be
not to get this not-to-fucking-subtle point? If the shoe were on the
other foot you would react no differently.
One of you nazis, don't remember who, said in another thread that they
thought it was "them" who were doing the bombing, not "us". Just as a
reminder, the US has been bombing Iraq into a god-forsaken moonscape
since '89. Over 500,000 children have died since then as a direct
consequence of US military, oh-so-compassionate, action.
And please knock it off with the old "well they bombed NYC so we're
retaliating." chestnut. If you take the time to read the statements of
Bin Laden you will see that he's not a nut at all. The reasons he gives
for his actions are clearly backed up by all objective histories of the
conflict in this region, A conflict that does not, as someone here
falsely assumed, go back millenia. PS, it wasn't Iraq that did the
bombing, Saddam had nothing to do with it.
The Arabs and the Jews were living peacefully side-by-side well into the
20th century. This is fully backed up by historians, check it for
yourself. It wasn't untill the US decided to create a client state in
'48 that trouble began. Hey, stoopid, how would you feel if China
decided it was going to give Native Americans an offical homeland and
they decided to hack off a piece of New York or California and kick the
citizens out, putting the Natives in charge of the state and relocating
you "terrorists" to camps in outlying regions. It's pretty fucking
obvious why the Palistinians are upset.
And as for Iraq, only the dumbest of the dumb are still parroting the
solidly discredited lies the were conjured up by the US gov't to justify
this invasion. The historical fact is that the US and it's allies have
been meddling in this region since the 1800's in order to capture the
oil supplies.
See where I'm going with this yet? If you substiute terms you'll see
quite clearly that they can do no differently, just as you would do no
differently in their situation. A small, defencless nation, Iraq must do
what it can to get the US out of their country. Yet you continue to cast
their self-deffence as terrorism. Shame on you psychpaths.
So, should we continue to speak dispicably, idioticly, inhumanly and
pathologically of increasing and sustaining human carnage and
suffering, as you have proposed? Or is this type of thinking actually
the fuel that fires these war crimes.
.....just a little something to thing about.....
jk
Mr Simplicity wrote:
>>My few is nail the fuckers when you can find them, and make life absolutely
>>
>>
>miserable for those who are helping them.
>
>But then you're making them mad and breeding millions more of them. The
>answer to this may be exactly what GWB is wanting to do...........give the
>people a say in their own lives. Of course, this pisses off the religious
>zealots who want to keep the population in lockdown, the Sunni's in Iraq who
>used to be in power in Iraq and now are not and the those who think we are
>exporting democracy at the point of a gun because they don't like our
>policies. Funny though, I sure don't see the general population of
>Afghanistan clamoring for the return of the Taliban. I also don't see a mass
>uprising in Iraq in favor of returning Sadaam to power.
>
>"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote in message news:42d7acb1@linux...
>
>
>>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:42d7521a$1@linux...
>>
>>
>>>Germaine (NOT "Jackson" lol) to your post:
>>>For the record... I'm all for a peaceful solution; however (and
>>>let's now bring this over to a personal level where more people
>>>may be able to understand it rather than conceptualize it), if
>>>it's apparent that the guy on the opposite side of the ring
>>>from you does not want to take off his gloves, but would rather
>>>beat the shit out of you until you are dead, you have EXACTLY
>>>two choices:
>>>
>>>1.) get beaten until you are dead.
>>>2.) beat the shit out of him until he is.
>>>
>>>What would you do?
>>>
>>>This is pretty fucking simple to me.
>>>
>>>Neil
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>I'm in total agreement here Neil the only problem with your scenario is,
>>after you've done the first guy....there are 1000 more right behind him
>>
>>
>and
>
>
>>half of the paying audience who came to watch this smack down is booing
>>
>>
>you
>
>
>>cause they think you were a little hard on his sorry ass.
>>
>>This is a religious war being waged by ignorant extremists who for
>>
>>
>whatever
>
>
>>reason have decided we're the enemy and as we all know once you bring
>>religion into the mix common sense and rational behavior go right out the
>>window.
>>
>>My few is nail the fuckers when you can find them, and make life
>>
>>
>absolutely
>
>
>>miserable for those who are helping them.
>>
>>More shit has been done in the name of God and quite frankly I think she's
>>
>>
>a
>
>
>>tad pissed right about now.
>>
>>
>>
>>Don
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>"W. Mark Wilson" <wmarkwilson@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Randy Newman wrote a satire (tinyurl.com/d83pb) many years ago, the
>>>>tagline
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>of which, best expresses my current view on the best solution to the
>>>>unceasing problem of terrorism emanating from middle east command and
>>>>means.... which is to say "most" terrorism.
>>>>
>>>>I really am there. This is THE one way to ratt out the enemy and
>>>>simultaneously send the message to any further suiters: "Step right up
>>>>
>>>>
>>>for
>>>
>>>
>>>>your one-way bullet train to Allah, no purchase necessary, see fineprint
>>>>
>>>>
>>>on
>>>
>>>
>>>>tip of warhead for details."
>>>>
>>>>The thing that put me over the edge was the piece of human waste that
>>>>
>>>>
>blew
>
>
>>>>up the little kids a couple of days ago while one of our guys was
>>>>
>>>>
>handing
>
>
>>>>out candy to them.
>>>>
>>>>Anybody brave enough to say they think the same thing or have we all
>>>>
>>>>
>cowed
>
>
>>>>down to international version of the old Rodney King mantra, "Can't we
>>>>
>>>>
>all
>
>
>>>>just get long." Is there some plausible notion or a reason to believe
>>>>that
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>eventually, if we just keep doing what we're doing, the extremist
>>>>followers
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>of Bin ladin will just all of a sudden see it our way and fold up the
>>>>
>>>>
>biz
>
>
>>>>and integrate into peaceful society???
>>>>
>>>>Dubya Mark Wilson
>>>>
>>>>"Neil" <OIUIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:42d6fc20$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>In a nutshell...
>>>>>I think if there's room & resources enough for both Israelis &
>>>>>Palestinians in the region they want to live in, I think they
>>>>>should quit fighting & come up with a plan. HOWEVER... this is
>>>>>essentially a 3,000 year-old family feud we're looking at over
>>>>>there, and my point of view may be a little too simplistic to
>>>>>deal with the situation. I am not very familiar with the
>>>>>condition of the agricultural situation there, but I understand
>>>>>it's not the best in the world - in that case, both sides
>>>>>should realize that there may not be enough resources in that
>>>>>immediate area to provide for as many peple as want to live
>>>>>there... that's a problem, because you can't import everything
>>>>>food-wise. Israel is our ally, and we should stand by them, but
>>>>>I also hold the position that some kind of solution could be
>>>>>arrived at if both sides want peace more than war. OK, now
>>>>>this is the part where you rebut & tell me what a narrow-minded
>>>>>American I am, and how wrong my opinion is because you're
>>>>>Eurosuperior to me and have a much better world view because
>>>>>you read about cowboys & rodeos in Oklahoma & the drug problems
>>>>>in Miami in Der Spiegel & had a US soldier live next door to
>>>>>you & he was a dick, and of course, all Americans are exactly
>>>>>like he was.
>>>>>
>>>>>BTW, the Israeli thing is VERY different than the situation we
>>>>>face with radical Islam... they do NOT want peace more than
>>>>>war, they only want to kill all the "infidels" and sing praise
>>>>>& glory to their blood-soaked god Allah, while trying to knock
>>>>>the rest of the world back into the 12th century, economically,
>>>>>societally, and politically. So, knowing this, and seeing what
>>>>>they've done beginning on 9/11 and continuing to this day, I
>>>>>think a slightly "different" approach is what's called for.
>>>>>
>>>>>Neil
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
--------------040208050705000808030808
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
my friends you are surely missing the point.<br>
<br>
The idea that you should keep killing "them" before they kill you is is
pretty sociopathic I think. Please remember a few important things
about the "war".<br>
<br>
Let's start with "them". The dehumanizing of others is an important
diagnostic point in the evalutation of pathological personality
disorders. Underlying this is the idea that one is not harming a
"person" but a "thing" or "non-person". It allows the ego to remain
intact while performing otherwise unthinkable actions. <br>
<br>
But who are "them"?. For the most part they are normal, everyday
famillies like yours and mine. Shop keepers, TV reparimen, gas station
attendants, secretaries....who only want to live freely, in peace,
raising their famillies and living their lives. "They" are not, for the
most part, combatants. Or they weren't before the US got their.<br>
<br>
The US has done more harm in this region, to the people and their
country, than Saddam ever could have. The US, in it's quest for
middle-east domination vis-a-vis their oil supply, has turned a
thriving people (albeit with nasty leadership) into an empoverished,
toxic waistland.<br>
<br>
And for you who can't see the forest for the trees, let me make the
fairly-fucking-clear observation that if you have a natural resourse
that someone else wants and they decide to come and get it from you by
force (the Chinese could do this) You will be labeled "insurgents" and
you wives and children will suddenly become "enemy combatants". Oh,
what, if someone invades you you're gonna sit on your fat ass and let
them take you home? No, you are gonna fight them off, you nasty
terrorist scum...or so you would be labeled in the media of the nation
invading you. (quite likely in the name of God)<br>
<br>
Wake up you collective heads of knuckle. What the hell do you think's
going on over there? It's people deffending their land, their homes and
their lives from - Foreign Invaders! Fuck me, how dumb do you have to
be not to get this not-to-fucking-subtle point? If the shoe were on the
other foot you would react no differently.<br>
<br>
One of you nazis, don't remember who, said in another thread that they
thought it was "them" who were doing the bombing, not "us". Just as a
reminder, the US has been bombing Iraq into a god-forsaken moonscape
since '89. Over 500,000 children have died since then as a direct
consequence of US military, oh-so-compassionate, action.<br>
<br>
And please knock it off with the old "well they bombed NYC so we're
retaliating." chestnut. If you take the time to read the statements of
Bin Laden you will see that he's not a nut at all. The reasons he gives
for his actions are clearly backed up by all objective histories of the
conflict in this region, A conflict that does not, as someone here
falsely assumed, go back millenia. PS, it wasn't Iraq that did the
bombing, Saddam had nothing to do with it.<br>
<br>
The Arabs and the Jews were living peacefully side-by-side well into
the 20th century. This is fully backed up by historians, check it for
yourself. It wasn't untill the US decided to create a client state in
'48 that trouble began. Hey, stoopid, how would you feel if China
decided it was going to give Native Americans an offical homeland and
they decided to hack off a piece of New York or California and kick the
citizens out, putting the Natives in charge of the state and relocating
you "terrorists&q
|
|
|
|
| Re: Compaq Presario for softsynth box. Good or bad? [message #55130 is a reply to message #55120] |
Fri, 01 July 2005 11:57 |
rick
Messages: 1976
Registered: February 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
/>
arrived at if both sides want peace more than war. OK, now
this is the part where you rebut & tell me what a narrow-minded
American I am, and how wrong my opinion is because you're
Eurosuperior to me and have a much better world view because
you read about cowboys & rodeos in Oklahoma & the drug problems
in Miami in Der Spiegel & had a US soldier live next door to
you & he was a dick, and of course, all Americans are exactly
like he was.
BTW, the Israeli thing is VERY different than the situation we
face with radical Islam... they do NOT want peace more than
war, they only want to kill all the "infidels" and sing praise
& glory to their blood-soaked god Allah, while trying to knock
the rest of the world back into the 12th century, economically,
societally, and politically. So, knowing this, and seeing what
they've done beginning on 9/11 and continuing to this day, I
think a slightly "different" approach is what's called for.
Neil
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>
--------------040208050705000808030808--as far as I can understand but I'm seeing Dejj have learned
> to do some observations from them about the "new" Americans, that's just
> seems to be German, French, Scandinavian etc. etc.
Erling,
The *only* reason tht I posted all this stuff was that I was trying to make
two points that I don't think I made.
The first one was to try to give some small background of my life that was
relative to the idea that I had a lot invested in my hopes of how I thought
the world could be and so did these folks from Europe and all over the world
really, though most of them were from Europe and the US.
The second point was that I was absolutely floored when these things were
being observed and shown to me by people who were about as familiar with
Europeans and Americans as beings from another planet. I didn't like hearing
this. It certainly didn't fit my picture of how the world should be and what
is really scary about it it that no one but the Indians even recognized what
was going on.
I'm nothing special. Everyone has their own reasons for believing what they
believe. My post was well meant, but in retrospect, it seems sort of silly
to me and I shouldn't have even wasted my time or anyone else's time on
this.
Regards,
Deej
"erlilo" <erlilo@online.no> wrote in message news:42d7c519@linux...
> Derek, I appreciate your writings here. It saying much about where the
> problems are in my thoughts too.
>
> I think we Europeans knows that "being big" allways have made problems
when
> trying to be bigger than
> big:-) Big with weapons in hands are often showing up these weapons as
their
> only "brain" when conflicts are coming.
>
> Our worlds problems, that started the first worldwar, was already coming
in
> 1864, when Bismarck made the big, German nation under the hegemony of
> Preussen. It was the oldnordic traditions with the God Wotan (or Odin in
> Norwegian) that then again was showing up in the people. It's showing well
> in "To an unknown God" from 1864, from the pen of Nietzsche, one of the
> greatest German philosopher and writers in those times. The feeling of
being
> big was setting the standard of human thinking hundred of years back in
time
> in those days, maybe thousands. So the next 50 years was showing up with
> more and more problems, first of all in the southern region of Europe, in
> Austria and Hungary, where their minorities was suppressed (as the german
> minority in Austria, after the first worldwars ending, where Hitler was
born
> and grown up, knowing the suppression on his own body). So the fatal shot
in
> Sarajevo from a Serbian, that killed the Habsburger prince 28. June 1914,
> was just the drop that started it all in "old" modern times.
> I'm seeing exactly the same pattern in American behavings in our modern
> times as it was before the first world war. American sivilians generally
> don't know what a war is on their own body without their own civil war
that
> was overupheating from the south with South Carolina in front, when
Abraham
> Lincoln was being President in 1860. The American nation was splitted in
two
> in those days with 11 states in the southern part and the rest in the
> norhern part, as far as I can remember in my readings about America. But I
> think most of the Americans are knowing these badly story very well.
> As far as I can understand in readings and seeing, the human feelings
> haven't changed much since then in north and south, after observe what's
> happening in the last two president votings.
> As Dejj wrote about the observations to the indians, I can see a nation of
> different nations that really have big problems with trusting each other
> after a long histor
|
|
|
|
| Re: Compaq Presario for softsynth box. Good or bad? [message #55132 is a reply to message #55130] |
Fri, 01 July 2005 12:26 |
AlexPlasko
Messages: 211
Registered: September 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
point of view, israel is the aggressor
> > that took their land. they dont have the military power,
> > so they go the terror route. being the frakkingeuropacifistidiotdude
that
> > i am, i despise that
> > just as much, so id prefer it if you dont switch between
> > calling me a blind pacifist one moment and then a guy
> > that doesnt criticize palaestina (and thus somewhat supports the use of
> > terror),
> > whatever fits the best.
> >
> > from their point of view, theyre actually doing exactly
> > the same thing - use brute force. they dont have planes,
> > so they use suicide bombers. if you were on their side,
> > its what you would recommend. and if the enemy threatened to
> > use more power, youd recommend that the enemy gets a
> > demonstration of your force.
> >
> > somewhere in there lies a fundamental, unsolvable problem.
> > throw in a ticking clock (islamic countries getting the bomb
> > sooner or later, whether you want it or not),
> > and look again at the one guy that at the very least came
> > close to peace down there - ooooh it was that deescalation
> > dude. what a coincidence.
> >
> > im not saying its the ultimate solution. i find pretending
> > to have absolute solutions (a very popular practice here,
> > or so it seems) rather silly. im trying to have a civiliced
> > discussion about the possible different paths to a solution,
> > if there is one at all. i can ackownledge and talk about
> > both approaches, you seem to struggle with that part
> > and fall back into europe-is-so-whatever rants, which,
> > btw, are no better than george-bush-is-pure-evil bullshit.
> > its kindergarden. no thanks.
> >
> >
> >
> >>And what could you possibly dislike about the present Israeli
> >>leadership? Draggin settlers out by the scruff of the neck,
> >>responding to the worst terrorism with measured and rational
> >>responses, and showing great restraint.
> >
> >
> > yeah, as i said, they went back to 0, so i completely
> > agree with you.
> >
> >
> >
> >> See, this is the problem
> >>with europe. In your arrogance, because of living in a land that
> >>cannot envision war,
> >
> >
> > blah...
> >
> >
> >
> >> you assume all violence is failure
> >
> >
> > i repeatedly said the exact opposite but nevermind. rant on.
> >
> >
> >
> >> and that
> >>there must be a way to negotiate and finess this stuff.
> >>Suppose there isn't?
> >
> >
> > i did. its why im interested in this discussion.
> > a childish "i know 100% percent im right" attitude
> > isnt exactly helping, but at least in parts your
> > post gets over the standard stereotype attitude. it seems to
> > help that i repeatedly write about the things i dont
> > think, even though it doesnt fit into your arrogant euro pacifist
drawer:
> >
> >
> > - i acknowledge the use of force as concept to end a conflict.
> > it often is the most peaceful way to go.
> > - i acknowledge the use of force as concept to end a conflict.
> > it often is the most peaceful way to go.
> > - i acknowledge the use of force as concept to end a conflict.
> > it often is the most peaceful way to go.
> > - i acknowledge the use of force as concept to end a conflict.
> > it often is the most peaceful way to go.
> >
> > - i dont blindly believe that everything on this world can be
> > negotiated
> > - i dont blindly believe that everything on this world can be
> > negotiated
> > - i dont blindly believe that everything on this world can be
> > negotiated
> > - i dont blindly believe that everything on this world can be
> > negotiated
> >
> > - im not here because of some anti-US agenda. i have family
> > in the US, have been there many times and like it here.
> > im only interested in a civiliced discussion about the
> > several approaches (yes i dare to believe there are several
> > approaches, because of the fact that theres a not too bad
> > track record of deescalation in history)
> > - im not here because of some anti-US agenda. i have family
> > in the US, have been there many times and like it here.
> > im only interested in a civiliced discussion about the
> > several approaches (yes i dare to believe there are several
> > approaches, because of the fact that theres a not too bad
> > track record of deescalation in history)
> > - im not here because of some anti-US agenda. i have family
> > in the US, have been there many times and like it here.
> > im only interested in a civiliced discussion about the
> > several approaches (yes i dare to believe there are several
> > approaches, because of the fact that theres a not too bad
> > track record of deescalation in history)
> >
> >
> >
> >> You haven't convinced me that Rabin could
> >>have pulled it off.
> >
> >
> > i didnt expect to. heck, i dont know it myself.
> >
> >
> >>Here's how the palestinians could have peace in a week:
> >>
> >>Go Ghandi on them. Sit down, inb the streets, renounce violence
forever.
> >>Ask the world for justice. They would get their demands in a week
> >>or less, and if israel didn't like it, the american people would force
it
> >>on them by witholding any more aid.
> >
> >
> > yes. too bad it wouldnt work because their religious
> > fanatic idiots. theres a reason why i talked so much
> > about the good timing of rabin. you gotta force religious
> > idiots into their own good. too bad the timing wasnt quite
> > right and a handful of steps at a time was still to
> > extreme of a dial
|
|
|
|
| Re: Compaq Presario for softsynth box. Good or bad? [message #55166 is a reply to message #55132] |
Sat, 02 July 2005 06:38 |
Chris Ludwig
Messages: 868
Registered: May 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
lapse.mpg
>
>
>I really appreciate everyone talking about this...
>First, let me say that, you acting superior while posting a
pack of lies is bad enough, but, your calling people names is
unacceptable.
"Jef Knight" <"Jef Knight"> wrote:
>The idea that you should keep killing "them" before they kill you is is
>pretty sociopathic I think.
Thanks for the analysis. Sure it isn't bipolar, or perhaps paranoid
schizophrenic, or maybe just ADD?
Them is the enemy, not the shopkeepers. The suicide bombers,
the foreign terrorists, the state sponsors of terrorism. They are
knowable, and they are killable.
>Please remember a few important things about
>the "war".
Oh, this will be good. I know it will be real informed with "so"
"many" "ironic" "quotes"....
>Let's start with "them". The dehumanizing of others is an important
>diagnostic point in the evalutation of pathological personality
>disorders. Underlying this is the idea that one is not harming a
>"person" but a "thing" or "non-person". It allows the ego to remain
>intact while performing otherwise unthinkable actions.
You obviously do not know any soldiers. Despite understanding
that the ghouls must be killed, and understanding that they are
indeed, ghouls, our soldiers pay a terrible price for doing the
unthinkable, precisely because they are not able to completely
depersonalize them. Only to have you call them pathological...
Pathetic. And of course, the actions of the ghouls are not
pathogical in Jef-land at all, They are understandable, maybe even
noble! Maybe they are even like the minutmen!
>But who are "them"?. For the most part they are normal, everyday
>famillies like yours and mine. Shop keepers, TV reparimen, gas station
>attendants, secretaries....who only want to live freely, in peace,
BWAA HAHH AHHA HHHHAAAA!
Oh that's good. Do you screenwrite for Michael Moore?
They are foreigners who come into places like Fallujah and kill
anyone who looks like they may desire freedom, take over the
neighborhood, and rule by terror. Iraqis are even rising up and
killing them now. They are also diehard baathists who want a
return to the good ole days of rape rooms and plastic shredders.
>The US has done more harm in this region, to the people and their
>country, than Saddam ever could have.
BULLSHIT. I guess you forgot about the entire familes, little
kids and all, buried in the 300,000 person mass graves.
I get it, you are a Saddam supporter. Ok, at least we know where
you are coming from now. When you tell egregious lies like the
one above, you lose all credibility.
>The US, in it's quest for
>middle-east domination vis-a-vis their oil supply, has turned a thriving
>people (albeit with nasty leadership) into an empoverished, toxic
>waistland.
This is so stupid and dishonest it isn't even worth rebutting.
It's too easy. OIl? We didn't steal their oil in 91 and we are not
doing so now. Liar.
>And for you who can't see the forest for the trees, let me make the
>fairly-fucking-clear observation that if you have a natural resourse
>that someone else wants and they decide to come and get it from you by
>force (the Chinese could do this) You will be labeled "insurgents" and
>you wives and children will suddenly become "enemy combatants".
Well, it seems that "foreigners" and "former baathists" otherwise
known as "corrupt" "murdering" "shitheads" who want to keep
the old regime in place, might qualify as "insurgents", especially
since they prefer the regime of the old murdering, raping, corrupt
leader to actual democracy.
Jef, you have very little ethics do you?
>Wake up you collective heads of knuckle. What the hell do you think's
>going on over there? It's people deffending their land, their homes and
>their lives from - Foreign Invaders! Fuck me, how dumb do you have to be
>not to get this not-to-fucking-subtle point? If the shoe were on the
>other foot you would react no differently.
Unfortunately it's all "not so fucking subtle" lies. The folks with the
homes, with the families and shops and businesses all had purple
fingers a few months ago, and have more character than "you"
will ever "dream" of having.
>One of you nazis, don't remember who, said in another thread that they
>thought it was "them" who were doing the bombing, not "us". Just as a
>reminder, the US has been bombing Iraq into a god-forsaken moonscape
>since '89. Over 500,000 children have died since then as a direct
>consequence of US military, oh-so-compassionate, action.
More lies. Those deaths are a result of your friend Saddam using
oil-for-food money to build palaces instead of food for his own
people. His trial is about to start, why don't you watch it and weep.
>And please knock it off with the old "well they bombed NYC so we're
>retaliating." chestnut. If you take the time to read the statements of
>Bin Laden you will see that he's not a nut at all.
Why am I not surprised that you like him as much as you like Saddam?
>The Arabs and the Jews were living peacefully side-by-side well into the
>20th century. This is fully backed up by historians, check it for
>yourself. It wasn't untill the US decided to create a client state in
>'48 that trouble began. Hey, stoopid, how would you feel if China
>decided it was going to give Native Americans an offical homeland and
>they decided to hack off a piece of New York or California and kick the
This is as inaccurate as it is simple minded.
>See where I'm going with this yet?
Yeah, stright to lefty-lobotomy land. And you are calling others idiots
and psychopaths... Amazing.
I am not going to respond in kind.
BTW, I do not support the use of nuclear arms in this war at this
point. Should your prediction about creating millions of new
terrorists by our actions come true, all bets are off. We will live
in freedom, not under the mullahs.
The funny thing is that in your future, you get killed anyway, for
some obscure offense against the koran, just like Theo Van Gogh
did.
You really ought to apologize to the group for the names you have
called people.
DC..........not partisan at all. This would imply something totally different
to my dislike of Dan Rather and Michael Moore......because they represent
themselves to be unbiased documentarians and they aren't. Plain and simple.
As much of a whacko as I think he is, if some edtorial commentator (which is
what Rather became before leaving in disgrace) came out with a photo op of
Ted Kennedy taking a roadside sobriety test, I'd doubt that too because I'd
have to consider the source before all else.
This is ample reason for me to dismiss the credibility of Rather/CBS. I
will, however, backtrack a bit here and admit that my first assumption was
that this story *originated* with CBS/Rather. If so, then I'll not remove
the plate of crow fro
|
|
|
|
| Re: Compaq Presario for softsynth box. Good or bad? [message #55167 is a reply to message #55109] |
Sat, 02 July 2005 06:39 |
Chris Ludwig
Messages: 868
Registered: May 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
m the oven. If not, then I'll might put it on the table
and take a bite. Where did this story originate?
Regards,
DJ
"justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote in message
news:42d804a6@linux...
> referring to the gratuitous partisan comments...
>
> "Mr Simplicity" <animix_spamless_@animas.net> wrote in message
> news:42d80477@linux...
> > I'm assuming you are referring to my post as being typical of something.
> > Perhaps you consider the reason for it as being a typical reaction to a
> > typical spin.
> >
> >
> > "justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote in message
> > news:42d803a0$1@linux...
> >>
> >> "Mr Simplicity" <animix_spamless_@animas.net> wrote in message
> >> news:42d80363@linux...
> >> > I've witnessed building demolitions. That does look familiar, but
> >> > you're
> >> > just seeing one side of the very top floors. It's a pretty big
stretch
> > to
> >> > think that what this is showing is caused by any particular means of
> >> > structural failure. It's obviously a fialure. I didn't see this thing
> > and
> >> > hadn't heard of Dan Rather postulating this as a theory, but knowing
> >> > the
> >> > *Rather agenda*, it would not surprise me. I'm surprised CBS didn't
> >> > have
> >> > Michael Moore as co-anchor.
> >>
> >> heh heh... so typical.
> >>
> >> > "justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote in message
> >> > news:42d7fe1e$1@linux...
> >> >> Anyway, I appreciate you following up on the conversation.
> >> >>
> >> >> I dont think there was pods on the planes, or bombs or remote
control
> > or
> >> > any
> >> >> of that crap. I just think theres some type of coverup and the
only
> >> >> smoking gun is WTC7, and the insider trading.
> >> >>
> >> >> Here's a better video of it:
> >> >>
http://www.911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos/docs/wtc7_col lapse2.mpg
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Who knows, maybe I'm wrong, but I dont really see too much
structural
> >> > damage
> >> >> to the facade.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>"Mr Simplicity" <animix_spamless_@animas.net> wrote in message
news:42d808c6@linux...
> .........not partisan at all. This would imply something totally different
> to my dislike of Dan Rather and Michael Moore......because they represent
> themselves to be unbiased documentarians and they aren't. Plain and
> simple.
Fair enough if thats what you believe. I mean personally I watched Bowling
for Columbine and I thought it was incredibly balanced.
> As much of a whacko as I think he is, if some edtorial commentator (which
> is
> what Rather became before leaving in disgrace) came out with a photo op of
> Ted Kennedy taking a roadside sobriety test, I'd doubt that too because
> I'd
> have to consider the source before all else.
I honestly never followed Dan Rather enough to notice his bias. It's
annoying as hell that all 'journalists' spin the story their own way.
> This is ample reason for me to dismiss the credibility of Rather/CBS. I
> will, however, backtrack a bit here and admit that my first assumption was
> that this story *originated* with CBS/Rather. If so, then I'll not remove
> the plate of crow from the oven. If not, then I'll might put it on the
> table
> and take a bite. Where did this story originate?
thats a difficult question to answer. Rather's only involvement was doing
the news that day and commenting "That looks like what we've all seen when a
building is destroyed by well placed dynamite" a simple observation, one
which I have shared, and one which you are willing to dismiss due to the
source.
It's typical to shoot the messenger when they dont agree with you.Hmmmm..........OK..........NPR has some credibility with me.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Compaq Presario for softsynth box. Good or bad? [message #55171 is a reply to message #55166] |
Sat, 02 July 2005 09:00 |
erlilo
Messages: 405
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
a
>terrorist incident. FEMA's report states that the cause of building's
>collapse was fires. Presumably FEMA and the insurance company would be
>interested in knowing if the building was instead demolished by the FDNY.
>Moreover, the logistics of rigging a skyscraper for demolition in the space
>of a few hours would be daunting to say the least, particularly given that
>demolition teams would have to work around fires and smoke.
>
>A third explanation is less obvious but makes sense of the non-sequiturs
in
>the above explanations: perhaps Silverstein's statement was calculated to
>confuse the issue of what actually happened to Building 7. By suggesting
>that it was demolished by the FDNY as a safety measure, it provides an
>alternative to the only logical explanation -- that it was rigged for
>demolition before the attack. The absurdity of the FDNY implementing a plan
>to "pull" Building 7 on the afternoon of 9/11/01 will escape most people,
>who neither grasp the technical complexity of engineering the controlled
>demolition of a skyscraper, nor its contradiction with FEMA's account of
the
>collapse, nor the thorough illlegality of such an operation. Thus the idea
>that officials decided to "pull" Building 7 after the attack serves as a
>distraction from the inescapable logic that the building's demolition was
>planned in advance of the attack, and was therefore part of an inside job
to
>destroy the entire WTC complex.
>
>"justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote in message
news:42d809cb$1@linux...
> It's typical to shoot the messenger when they dont agree with you.
btw... sorry I meant that 'you' as plural, in general... not specifically to
u deej."DC" <dcicchetti@urs2.net> wrote in message news:42d80a04$1@linux...
>
> All of this is addressed in the PM article. Read it.
I have read it and it says nothing about Silverstein's admission to pulling
the building...
Or am I missing something?
I know that what I just posted did start to expand into other conspiracies,
but I'm specifically interested in pulling WTC7. If that turns out to be
valid, then we can explore the additional issues. If we can find a WTC7
photo showing enough damage to bring down the building, I'll drop the whole
thing.and one which you are willing to dismiss due to the
> source.
>
> It's typical to shoot the messenger when they dont agree with you.
>
When the messenger is a questionable source, yes, I'll admit that I
sometimes shoot first and ask questions later.
I think this has something to do with the *life's too short* feeling I've
got after watching Rather for way too many years.
Gulty as charged.
"justcron" <justcron@hydrorecords.compound> wrote in message
news:42d809cb$1@linux...
>
> "Mr Simplicity" <animix_spamless_@animas.net> wrote in message
> news:42d808c6@linux...
> > .........not partisan at all. This would imply something totally
different
> > to my dislike of Dan Rather and Michael Moore......because they
represent
> > themselves to be unbiased documentarians and they aren't. Plain and
> > simple.
>
> Fair enough if thats what you believe. I mean personally I watched
Bowling
> for Columbine and I thought it was incredibly balanced.
>
> > As much of a whacko as I think he is, if some edtorial commentator
(which
> > is
> > what Rather became before leaving in disgrace) came out with a photo op
of
> > Ted Kennedy taking a roadside sobriety test, I'd doubt that too because
> > I'd
> > have to consider the source before all else.
>
> I honestly never followed Dan Rather enough to notice his bias. It's
> annoying as hell that all 'journalists' spin the story their own way.
>
> > This is ample reason for me to dismiss the credibility of Rather/CBS. I
> > will, however, backtrack a bit here and admit that my first assumption
was
> > that this story *originated* with CBS/Rather. If so, then I'll not
remove
> > the plate of crow from the oven. If not, then I'll might put it on the
> > table
> > and take a bite. Where did this story originate?
>
> thats a difficult question to answer. Rather's only involvement was doing
> the news that day and commenting "That looks like what we've all seen when
a
> building is destroyed by well placed dynamite" a simple observation,
one
> which I have shared, and one which you are willing to dismiss due to the
> source.
>
> It's typical to shoot the messenger when they dont agree with you.
>
>"DC" <dcicchetti@urs2.net> wrote in message news:42d80a04$1@linux...
>
> All of this is addressed in the PM article. Read it.
PM: Many conspiracy theorists point to FEMA's preliminary report, which said
there was relatively light damage to WTC 7 prior to its collapse. With the
benefit of more time and resources, NIST researchers now support the working
hypothesis that WTC 7 was far more compromised by falling debris than the
FEMA report indicated. "The most important thing we found was that there
was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7," NIST's
Sunder tells PM. "On about a third of the face to the center and to the
bottom--approximately 10 stories--about 25 percent of the depth of the
building was scooped out." NIST also discovered previously undocumented
damage to WTC 7's upper stories and its southwest corner.
Response: Where are the photos that prove 25% of Building 7 was scooped out?
The photos published in reports, and those available on me Internet do not
show anything other than trivial damage, such as some broken windows.
Tom Franklin, a professional photographer for a New Jersey newspaper,
traveled quickly to the World Trade Center to get photographs. According to
his own report, he was standing in front of Building 7 at about 4 p.m.. He
took lots of photos, but where are his photos of Building 7? Why would he
ignore a skyscraper with 25% of its first 10 floors scooped out?
-----------
PM: NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe
structural damage contributed to the collapse, though assigning the exact
proportion requires more research.
Response: Where is evidence that there was an intense fire in Building 7?
The photos taken in the afternoon do not show intense fires. Just because a
few investigators believe something, that does not make it true. They need
evidence to support their beliefs.
-----------
PM: Second, a fifth-floor fire burned for up to 7 hours. "There was no
firefighting in WTC 7," Sunder says. Investigators believe the fire was fed
by tanks of diesel fuel that many tenants used to run emergency generators.
Most tanks throughout the building were fairly small, but a generator on the
fifth floor was connected to a large tank in the basement via a pressurized
line. Says Sunder: "Our current working hypothesis is that this pressurized
line was supplying fuel [to the fire] for a long period of time."
Response: How can a fire burn for seven hours without spreading to other
offices or other floors? Perhaps some diesel fuel was dripping from a supply
pipe. Since the fire was small, and since the building had a steel frame
with concrete floors, the fire could not travel to other offices. So how
could such an insignificant fire bring down an entire skyscraper?none of these are my words... just a published 'debunking' of the popular
mechanics article:
> PM: Many conspiracy theorists point to FEMA's preliminary report, which
> said there was relatively light damage to WTC 7 prior to its collapse.
> With
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon Aug 10 07:18:15 PDT 2026
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02655 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
