Guest DEEP (GET ME OUT OF MY SKULL) Posted January 16, 2004 Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 But you wake up quite early, don't you? peepee, I'm not a drinking man so there is no need to stay in bed sleeping off drunks. I leave that to Dildies like CLIT "HOPTOAD" HOPSON and Conn (a linguist). The body is the temple of the Lord, I don't desecrate that temple. Besides, you can't make digit layin' on your ass...unless of course you're a chickie. DEEP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Groper Posted January 16, 2004 Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 My country 'tis of Thee (God, in case you weren't aware) Sweet land of LIBERTY Christiern, why do you squander your (inalienable) right to free speech on petulant BUSH BASHING? How about your considered thoughts on the sources and solutions of repression, brutality, poverty, ignorance and the other major ills BEYOND our borders? Go ahead--light a single candle... SGUD--Glad to make your acquaintance, and I'm sure your views on President Bush are significantly more tempered than those aforementioned. Thanks to Patricia (?), who brought up Patti Bown. I have her Columbia release CS 8208, "Patti Bown Plays Big Piano," which I shall now cue up for the first time in many years. GOD BLESS AMERICA! All Choked Up, The Groper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patricia Posted January 16, 2004 Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 (edited) Why did you put a question mark after my name?? Edited January 16, 2004 by patricia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pepe Posted January 16, 2004 Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 (edited) My country 'tis of Thee (God, in case you weren't aware) Sweet land of LIBERTY Christiern, why do you squander your (inalienable) right to free speech on petulant BUSH BASHING? How about your considered thoughts on the sources and solutions of repression, brutality, poverty, ignorance and the other major ills BEYOND our borders? Go ahead--light a single candle... The Groper Problem is that for many of us it looks like the US fight repression, brutality, poverty, ignorance only if the fight is good for US economy. There are some countries east of Iraq,Iran, Afghanistan and some countries in South America where he US has been quite reluctant - to put it mildly - to stand up for human rights and democracy. Edited January 16, 2004 by pepe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christiern Posted January 16, 2004 Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 DEEP wrote: "Christiern, why do you squander your (inalienable) right to free speech on petulant BUSH BASHING? How about your considered thoughts on the sources and solutions of repression, brutality, poverty, ignorance and the other major ills BEYOND our borders? Go ahead--light a single candle..." The supreme court has installed into the presidential office an incompetent who ran for the office but did not receive the majority of votes. This man, having surrounded himself with other incompetent (but more intelligent), agenda-driven people, and being to a large extent egged on by their self-serving motives, proceeded to throw us into a gratuitous invasion of Iraq. These people have the blood of innocents on their hands and they will stop at nothing to get what they want for themselves--not America, themselves--and if that requires breaking the laws that they are supposed to enforce, so be it. The ruthlessness with which these people proceed knows no bounds; they have no decency, no conscience, no scruples when it comes to outrageous exploitation of other peoples misery. The grabbed onto the 9/11 tragedy and pumped it for all they could wring out of it (an ongoing process), and this week they sent their warmongering titular head to lay a wreath at Martin Luther King's grave to justify expenses in connection with an election fund-raiser. As for the sources and solutions of "repression, brutality, poverty, ignorance and the other major ills beyond our borders," these Bush people are responsible for some of that, but they are working hard to fertilize the same litany of ills within our borders. It is for this reason that I think anyone who truly loves America, anyone who believes in true democracy and equality has an obligation to get these non-elected people out of power. Bush "bashing," as you call it, has become a prerequisite for a healthy America. It will take a long time to restore our tarnished image and heal the wounds afflicted by Bush and his group, but it has to start with his ouster--we must undo what Bush's supreme court did to us. As the Bush people chip away at it, I will continue to exercise my right to free speech. Part of that is to condemn Bush and his group for what they are doing, and I recommend that you step out of the ideological fog that engulfs you and give some "considered thought" to what I regard as your deeply misguided notion of patriotism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patricia Posted January 16, 2004 Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 (edited) My country 'tis of Thee (God, in case you weren't aware) Sweet land of LIBERTY Christiern, why do you squander your (inalienable) right to free speech on petulant BUSH BASHING? How about your considered thoughts on the sources and solutions of repression, brutality, poverty, ignorance and the other major ills BEYOND our borders? Go ahead--light a single candle... The Groper Problem is that for many of us it looks like the US fight repression, brutality, poverty, ignorance only if the fight is good for US economy. There are some countries east of Iraq,Iran, Afghanistan and some countries in South America where he US has been quite reluctant - to put it mildly - to stand up for human rights and democracy. Thank you pepe. I guess the child soldiers and the hacking and shooting to death of tens of thousands of people in Africa over the last decade don't fall into the catagory of compassionate conservatism. The feeling seems to be that people are a renewable resource, OIL isn't. As you say, there are no U.S. economic interests in Africa, so there is no humanitarian interest either. I did read about an offer of help for the deplorable situation regarding the horrible widespread AIDS problem. It seems to me that the last time the U.S. offered help was a while ago, when conditions were attached to help for African clinics in which aid would be witheld from those clinics which also dispensed abortion counselling. Are those conditions attached to this latest offer of help?? Edited January 16, 2004 by patricia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DEEP (GET ME OUT OF MY SKULL) Posted January 16, 2004 Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 Let me state this as eloquently and succinctly as possible to the man with the blinders on, CHRISTIERN: THE GROPER AND DEEP ARE NOT ONE IN THE SAME. If you don't believe it then check with Organissimo to see from where the ISPs emanate. CHRIST ALL MIGHTY, MAN...WAKE THE FUCK UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE. DEEP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christiern Posted January 16, 2004 Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 Sure fooled me! I stand corrected (I think). Coffee smells a bit warmed-over, however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DEEP (GET ME OUT OF MY SKULL) Posted January 16, 2004 Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 (edited) Sure fooled me! I stand corrected (I think). Coffee smells a bit warmed-over, however. I was warned about dual identitys from Organissimo when I was Wingy and DEEP. I was forced to choose between the two and I then I went exclusively with DEEP. I can read the rules of the board. I choose not to jeopardize my sanctuary on the CHRISTIERN, UNCLENCH YOUR KEESTER thread...DIG?? I know it may come as a shock to you but not everybody shares your views on Bush. I think that this will be quite evident come November. See you Monday night at Nola. Party starts a 6. I plan on arriving around 7. DEEP Edited January 16, 2004 by DEEP (GET ME OUT OF MY SKULL) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad Posted January 16, 2004 Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 But, the war against Germany started in 1939, not 1941 and Canada was there. The Americans didn't get involved in WW11, until the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbour. Canada was there Patty because England was there. Canada wasn't quite independent at the time. They had some degree of autonomy but not completely. Perhaps you could remind me of the details of the arrangement. I forgot the term used. Conn, Yes, Canada's constitution was held in England, by the British, although we didn't pay taxes to them. Our laws were based on English Common Law and still are. The "Speech from the Throne" was originally read by whoever the King or Queen was, but then was passed to our Attorney General, and is still read as a formality, at the opening of Paliament. Originally, our laws had to be approved by Britain, but they aren't any more. Pierre Trudeau, during his tenure, in the late 1960's, as Prime Minister, formally asked that our constitution be given to us, by England and it was. We had been independant of the British Empire for decades, for all intents and purposes. Our connection to the British is merely a cultural one, at best now. We are as independant as the U.S. is from Britain. However, during the early part of the twentieth century, we were part of the British Empire, and our army volunteered as a matter of course, as well as as a gesture of solidarity against a common enemy, Hitler. Oh, and GROPER, I don't hate Mr Bush. I simply thought, and still think that the war that Mr Bush has initiated was based on a series of deceptions and, although I don't hate him, I wonder how much of the intelligence he received was known, by him to be untrue. He may very well have been totally out of the loop. Of course, he doesn't, as far as I know, take the position that Truman took that "The Buck Stops Here" and if challenged will most likely point to underlings, who will fall on their swords, much as Reagan's underlings did, after the Iran/Contra affair. Wasn't the word Paul was looking for was "dominion"? Wasn't Canada then referred to as the Dominion of Canada or something like that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patricia Posted January 16, 2004 Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 (edited) But, the war against Germany started in 1939, not 1941 and Canada was there. The Americans didn't get involved in WW11, until the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbour. Canada was there Patty because England was there. Canada wasn't quite independent at the time. They had some degree of autonomy but not completely. Perhaps you could remind me of the details of the arrangement. I forgot the term used. Conn, Yes, Canada's constitution was held in England, by the British, although we didn't pay taxes to them. Our laws were based on English Common Law and still are. The "Speech from the Throne" was originally read by whoever the King or Queen was, but then was passed to our Attorney General, and is still read as a formality, at the opening of Paliament. Originally, our laws had to be approved by Britain, but they aren't any more. Pierre Trudeau, during his tenure, in the late 1960's, as Prime Minister, formally asked that our constitution be given to us, by England and it was. We had been independant of the British Empire for decades, for all intents and purposes. Our connection to the British is merely a cultural one, at best now. We are as independant as the U.S. is from Britain. However, during the early part of the twentieth century, we were part of the British Empire, and our army volunteered as a matter of course, as well as as a gesture of solidarity against a common enemy, Hitler. Oh, and GROPER, I don't hate Mr Bush. I simply thought, and still think that the war that Mr Bush has initiated was based on a series of deceptions and, although I don't hate him, I wonder how much of the intelligence he received was known, by him to be untrue. He may very well have been totally out of the loop. Of course, he doesn't, as far as I know, take the position that Truman took that "The Buck Stops Here" and if challenged will most likely point to underlings, who will fall on their swords, much as Reagan's underlings did, after the Iran/Contra affair. Wasn't the word Paul was looking for was "dominion"? Wasn't Canada then referred to as the Dominion of Canada or something like that? Yup. We were a Dominion and now, we're just Canada. Some thought that the formal, public assertion, by our re-claiming of our constitution from England was unnecessary, considering that we had been independant of Britain for a long time. But, Pierre Trudeau felt that we had to bring our constitution to Canada and did. The first visible sign of our independance, ceremonially, was the replacing of the Union Jack as our country's flag, with the red and white one, with which you are probably familiar. Lester Pearson, a previous PM was responsible for that. Apologies to our thread originator for veering so far afield. I'm sure that most of you don't really care about Canadian history, but, I was asked. If anything, it might help our neighbours to the south, if they just remembered that we are not just a tiny strip on the northernmost part of the map of the U.S. Canada is bigger than the continental U.S., although our entire population is about equal to two of your largest cities. Next.......... Edited January 17, 2004 by patricia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
connoisseur series500 Posted January 17, 2004 Report Share Posted January 17, 2004 Problem is that for many of us it looks like the US fight repression, brutality, poverty, ignorance only if the fight is good for US economy. Very true, and it should be that way. We've got people at home who need help too. Can't afford to be spilling dollars all around the world unless it helps our economy in some way. I certainly don't support spilling bucks abroad just to spread Democracy. No thanks!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
connoisseur series500 Posted January 17, 2004 Report Share Posted January 17, 2004 Sure fooled me! I stand corrected (I think). Coffee smells a bit warmed-over, however. Gotta admit, Chris, that I was thinking the same thing. I thought DEEP had mestasized into two the way that microscopic asexual organisms do. Huh, "asexual?" Scratch that! We know DEEP better than that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
connoisseur series500 Posted January 17, 2004 Report Share Posted January 17, 2004 But,Wasn't the word Paul was looking for was "dominion"? Wasn't Canada then referred to as the Dominion of Canada or something like that? Thanks Brad. That was it. I was hoping to get that term from our loveable and loquacious Patty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
connoisseur series500 Posted January 17, 2004 Report Share Posted January 17, 2004 I'm sure that most of you don't really care about Canadian history, but, I was asked. Might want to bring up the subject of Canadian History over to the insomniacs in the "What Time Do you go to bed" thread in the Misc. Non political forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patricia Posted January 17, 2004 Report Share Posted January 17, 2004 I'm sure that most of you don't really care about Canadian history, but, I was asked. Might want to bring up the subject of Canadian History over to the insomniacs in the "What Time Do you go to bed" thread in the Misc. Non political forum. Or not........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BERIGAN Posted January 17, 2004 Report Share Posted January 17, 2004 I don't know how cold it is where you are but it's 15 below where I am (in the USA) and my heat bill for December was $316.00. Now the fact of the matter is our country runs on oil. They got it, we need it. We could just forget about it and go back to being farmers with horse and buggys. If the economy of the USA failed how the fuck long do you think the do nothing, love-in Canucks would last?? The US is being very altruistic by letting the Sanchucks profit from their own resources. They're just too fucking stupid to even appreciate it. DEEP If living in the US gives you so much trouble, why not consider handing it over to the indians again? Geronimo for president! peepee, Your cognitive English comprehension needs a little work. Where does anything in the body of my message mention I'm having trouble living in the USA? Au contraire....I'm rich...I can afford my heat bills...I just want to be assured that the means needed to heat my home are available to me. GEORGE W. BUSH is providing me with that assurance. GOD BLESS GEORGE W. BUSH AND THESE UNITED STATES. FUCK THE MIDDLE EAST.....FEED'EM FISH!! DEEP Pork.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pepe Posted January 17, 2004 Report Share Posted January 17, 2004 Problem is that for many of us it looks like the US fight repression, brutality, poverty, ignorance only if the fight is good for US economy. Very true, and it should be that way. We've got people at home who need help too. Can't afford to be spilling dollars all around the world unless it helps our economy in some way. I certainly don't support spilling bucks abroad just to spread Democracy. No thanks!! Fair enough. I'm looking forward to Bushman telling the truth, though: Fuck democracy, we're only in it for the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DEEP (GET ME OUT OF MY SKULL) Posted January 17, 2004 Report Share Posted January 17, 2004 This is my response to all you, Weeds & Seeds Bush Bashers: Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say, What should be the reward of such sacrifices? Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship, and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude than the animating contest of freedom, - go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen! Now that is.... DEEP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patricia Posted January 17, 2004 Report Share Posted January 17, 2004 (edited) This is my response to all you, Weeds & Seeds Bush Bashers: Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say, What should be the reward of such sacrifices? Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship, and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude than the animating contest of freedom, - go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen! Now that is.... DEEP Wouldn't that Samuel Adams [who was a signator of the American Declaration of Independance] quote also apply to the citizens of a country, such as Iraq, which has been invaded and occupied by a foreign power?? The sentiment expressed by Mr Adams may also be applied to our own Native People, facing an invasion by the Europeans, three hundred years ago. There is a very disturbing book, which I read while I was still in school, called "Mangled Hands", by Neil Boyton, first published in 1926. It was the account of the pure-hearted Jesuit missionaries, who were subsequently tortured and finally killed by the Iroquois and the Huron tribes in New York and Eastern Canada. The European invasion of North America was not thought of by the native people as "liberation". Of course, the Europeans eventually stole the native people's land and relegated them to reservations, while they proceeded to exploit North America's natural resources, bringing the society in which we now live. The native people were shuttled to the sidelines and even now have not benefitted. On the contrary, they have suffered and continue to do so. They may have casinos and various other enterprises, but that took about three hundred years to come about. Do you think that the Iraqis are willing to wait three hundred years in order to be the masters of their own destiny, as the North American Indian has?? Edited January 17, 2004 by patricia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Groper Posted January 17, 2004 Report Share Posted January 17, 2004 Ah, such a stew of delicious issues...I see that my new friends are passionate and loquacious in their political views, so I'd better not slink off, though I don't have as much free time as some of you apparently do to rant and rave. And since this thread has some reference to "olive branch"(es), I am sucked in by my desire for peace, brotherhood and masochism. I see I am mistaken for Brother Deep by Brother Christiern, among one or more others--despite his protests. It's true, however, that I am a different, but also similar person. Deep shows me an admirable, if savage, view of our nation's essential interests. The Bush administration is protecting our legitimate (sovereign--making other nations' interests secondary) posture throughout the world. It's not always a neat and clean process, but we have no choice. The U.S. was thrust into a position of leadership by the cataclysmic historical forces of the 20th century AND our willingness to confront them. We also just happened to stumble upon the most productive economic system in human history, providing opportunities for a standard of living which continue to draw immigrants from all corners of the globe. (Is it too outrageous to suggest that we need to screen them?) The U.S. and its current administration need to apologize to NOBODY. Speaking of legitimacy, Christiern, Bush was elected under state and federal laws in effect at the time. The fact that the Supreme Court ruled narrowly in his favor only emphasizes the closeness of the election contest, Gore's and his supporters' lack of grace notwithstanding. Unfortunately, the suspicion and paranoia you exhibit is widespread and colors every negative perception of Bush's motives. We STILL enjoy a government of laws, not men. Sister Patricia, I used that question mark only because I couldn't remember for sure if you were the one who brought up Patti Bown. I'm really not very good on computers. In this case I couldn't refer back in the middle of typing my message. I also salute your earnest idealism, but doubt that the U. S. can ever afford to acquiesce to heckling from the sidelines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patricia Posted January 17, 2004 Report Share Posted January 17, 2004 (edited) I seek only to point out that it cannot be assumed that the rest of the world will welcome the opportunity to allow the West to exploit their countries' resources, thus supporting our way of life. They will resist, as we would resist, should the situation be the reverse and we were being invaded by a foreign power. So, to me, our thread originator's quoting Samuel Adams is valid, but not only in the way that it may be interpreted by those who support pre-emptive invasions on the strength of flawed intelligence. All countries are selfish about their autonomy. We are and so is Iraq. They will defend their turf and we should expect no less of them. They're glad that Saddam Hussein is gone, but they don't want their country to be stolen from them, their resources taken away, as payment for the invasion and themselves rendered powerless to determine their own destines. Courage and patriotism are not limited to the West. Edited January 17, 2004 by patricia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DEEP (GET ME OUT OF MY SKULL) Posted January 17, 2004 Report Share Posted January 17, 2004 Where I get a little hazy on the Adams quote being relative to the Iraqi situation is KUWAIT (remember them??). I don't remember the Colonies EVER invading England. If they did, I wish someone would tighten me on the particulars. DEEP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patricia Posted January 17, 2004 Report Share Posted January 17, 2004 (edited) Where I get a little hazy on the Adams quote being relative to the Iraqi situation is KUWAIT (remember them??). I don't remember the Colonies EVER invading England. If they did, I wish someone would tighten me on the particulars. DEEP And England was wrong too. Putting one's flag on a country symbolizes ownership, which is what England did all over the world. The colonies may not have invaded England, but there was plenty of resistance to their occupation, resulting in the English leaving India, Malaysia, Burma,............THE U.S. and the list goes on. Too late to do anything about that, but the Iraq situation is still ongoing and fluid. Samuel Adams was reminding us that we are obligated to resist tyranny. So, that sentiment would apply to any country and it's people. That's why it's a relevant comment on patriotism, no matter what country you live in. Edited January 18, 2004 by patricia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DEEP (GET ME OUT OF MY SKULL) Posted January 17, 2004 Report Share Posted January 17, 2004 Too late to do anything about that, but the Iraq situation is still ongoing and fluid. FUCK IRAQ !! FEED'EM BEEF (FROM CANADA).Shit, nobody else wants Canadian beef...they oughta just give it to the Iraqi Sandchucks. DEEP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts