Afghanistan


sorabji.com: What is your definition of hell?: Afghanistan
THIS IS A READ-ONLY ARCHIVE FROM THE SORABJI.COM MESSAGE BOARDS (1995-2016).

By patrick on Monday, February 11, 2002 - 12:22 pm:

    I just read this.

    Im sick.


    Here's your war on terrorism trace, where ever you are.

    I caught a bit of Platoon over the weekend. The part where they torch a village, rape the women and beat the men.

    Nothing changes.


By Antigone on Monday, February 11, 2002 - 02:04 pm:

    Sure things change.

    They released those detained. They didn't kill them. They didn't torch the whole village. They didn't rape the women. The CIA has admitted it was a mistake. It's not being covered up as much as it would have been before, like in Vietnam when a whole country was bombed without the knowledge or consent of the American people.

    Nothing has changed? Feh...


By patrick on Monday, February 11, 2002 - 02:24 pm:

    ok so yeah they only torched two bldgs with rockets and gunfire, i suppose thats better than the whole town. some of the dead appeared to have been shot from behind. i suppose a few broken ribs, a broken nose is a lot better than death. A kinder gentler Special Forces.

    The CIA admitted it, the Pentagon hasnt.

    We have consent in Afghanistan?


By Cat on Monday, February 11, 2002 - 03:16 pm:

    Patrick, may I gently remind you that this is all happening in the country that you so strenously argued was more peaceful than it has been for 20 years.

    Welcome to the light.


By patrick on Monday, February 11, 2002 - 03:37 pm:

    im noting one incident here.

    regardless

    is it not a safe assumption that without the taliban in power repressing the people, the near virtual halt of US bombing, and full scale civil war almost brought to a standstill (aside from pockets of warlords going at it), how is it NOT more peaceful? Im not saying all is well, but without N.Alliance/Taliban shelling each other on a daily basis with tanks and guns surely its more quiet now.

    You don't think the daily death and injury toll has been cut now that the wide-scale civil war is all but ceased?




By patrick on Monday, February 11, 2002 - 03:40 pm:

    and sugarlips, i knew damn well you were going to remark as you did..so this time, do me a favor, instead of just saying just short of "nuh uhhh you're wrong" enlighten me ok?


By Cat on Monday, February 11, 2002 - 03:54 pm:

    I tried to enlighten you, lovepuppy. Oh did I try. Across two threads and numerous posts. I practically engraved it on my naked breasts and waved them in your face.

    But I understand the media there has been very "ra ra" about the Afghanistan situtation. Even the liberal media.


By patrick on Monday, February 11, 2002 - 04:09 pm:

    i don't recally you citing any specifcs.

    yes the media here couldnt be more asleep at the wheel. Dissent is virtually non existant.

    But even on general terms...if the civil war is practically over, the repressive govt out, US bombing stopped how can it not be more peaceful?

    Could shit like this go on 3 months ago, muchless 5 years ago?


By Czarina on Tuesday, February 12, 2002 - 12:49 am:

    Am I the only one who thinks its odd, that the US is picking up/scraping up body parts,and bringing them in for DNA abd dental testing,to see if this is Bin Laden?

    This is just very fucking strange.Don't ever blow my relatives to smitherenes,and then have the fucking audacity to come and scrape some of their remains up,to try and identify them.

    This is too weird,even for me.


By Fb on Tuesday, February 12, 2002 - 12:58 am:

    so they can clone him, then spank the clone. come on it's obvious.


By Czarina on Tuesday, February 12, 2002 - 01:08 am:

    Well,when you put it that way,I'm always up for a good spanking :)


By Fb on Tuesday, February 12, 2002 - 02:32 am:

    czarina, where are you? at work?

    damn i want a cigg, i better go to bed and resist the craving


By Czarina on Tuesday, February 12, 2002 - 07:14 am:

    No, I was just in from Mardi Gras festivities.


By Hal on Tuesday, February 12, 2002 - 10:34 am:

    I missed something... Somewhere...

    Cat, Patrick.... Just have some hot fuck with budder and all will be good.

    As for the rest of this, its FUCKING WAR, it FUCKING HAPPENS. Bitch and Moan, complain and gripe, what the fuck are you doing to stop it?

    At least we get both the pro's and the con's of such a liberal media. A: we are getting a story meant to shock us, therefore we only get half the facts but we are moved to speak. B: We actually get to hear something about it this time, unlike vietnam.

    Shut the fuck up, or do something about it.


By patrick on Tuesday, February 12, 2002 - 11:35 am:

    We arent getting the pros and cons mister hal.

    Sitting on a fence yelling your neck off aint exactly an ideal way to make your point biyatch.

    We only hear what they tell us, which aint much. We only see the footage they want us to see. Media has no access like they did in Vietnam. The war footage shown on the nightly news is part of the reason the war failed. They learned their lesson.

    We really have no idea.

    and i can only protest on the weekends sir. the system has me by the balls, i have to work so i can pay my Enron electric bill.


By Pollypacifist on Tuesday, February 12, 2002 - 03:16 pm:

    the solution is for the citizens to band together, take up arms and, err, wait a minute. never mind.


By LoneStranger on Tuesday, February 12, 2002 - 07:17 pm:

    GET UP FOR THE DOWN STROKE!

    EVERYBODY GET UP!

    LS


By Nate on Wednesday, February 13, 2002 - 02:48 am:

    sit back and realize it doesn't matter you think.

    it has begun.

    slip slip slippery slope.


By Fetidbeaver on Wednesday, February 13, 2002 - 08:33 am:

    damn!!! i just gave my skies away.


By patrick on Wednesday, February 13, 2002 - 01:57 pm:

    Civil Rights/LA Attorney Stephen Yagman along with others have filed suit, as you may have heard several weeks ago, against the US Govt to demand the prisoners in Guantanamo be subjected to due process under US law.

    He's a notorious lawyer in LA known for taking on the LAPD in civil right abuse cases, and he wins.

    I'll spare you the entire article as to WHY they are fighting for due process for the homies in Cuba, but i want to share two scathing quotes, one by him and another by reknowned USC law professor Erwin Chemerinsky.

    "Asked why he thought Bush would ignore the Geneva Convention, Yagman said, 'The Bush administration is an illegitimate administration who stole an election, headed by a man who is not intelligent and who is surrounded by uninformed, ill-advised warmongers who are so arrogant they will do as they please so long as they think they can get away with it.'"

    OUCH!!!

    "USC law professor Chemerinsky voiced the same objection. 'I donít see much concern on the part of [Defense Secretary Donald] Rumsfeld or even Bush in following the law.'Ē


    both men have received hate mail and death threats because of the lawsuit they lead to demand the gov't follow the law its obligated to uphold.




    OUCH!!!!!!



By patrick on Wednesday, February 13, 2002 - 05:32 pm:

    war on terrorism

    *watcher feel free to click, i promise its nothing dirty, in fact it came from NPR*


By semillama on Wednesday, February 13, 2002 - 06:15 pm:

    Anyone wanna say WWIII?


By trace on Wednesday, February 13, 2002 - 07:13 pm:

    I have been saying that since the begining


By Roone Arledge on Wednesday, February 13, 2002 - 07:43 pm:

    SPUNKY? IS THAT REALLY YOU, SPUNKY?


By spunky on Wednesday, February 13, 2002 - 07:51 pm:

    yes, finally


By Granny on Wednesday, February 13, 2002 - 07:56 pm:

    You sure it's really Spunky and not Sponky? I've heard tell of a feller named Sponky who's impersonatin' somebody named Spunky round these parts. Say something conservative and prove it's you. Go 'head...


By eri on Wednesday, February 13, 2002 - 08:50 pm:

    Trust me, Spunky's back. This is not an impersonation. You see, I have to get off of the computer so he can post now.

    He is now by not one but two Air Force Bases. Sound like him?

    As for Patrick, tell him two of his 80% are right here :) as if he didn't already know that.


By Cat on Wednesday, February 13, 2002 - 10:49 pm:

    You know I gave Trace the name "Spunky", which is from the latin "spunkrat"?

    Anyway, I have now taken to calling a friend "spunktard" which makes her giggle every time.

    She has the cutest giggle.


By Nate on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 01:35 am:

    spunk is semen.


By heather on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 01:56 am:

    hey!

    where's my packaging website smartass?


By patrick on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 12:23 pm:

    any particular reason why eri? why you belong to that 80% who think Bush is doing the right things?

    You're the first i've spoke to.

    I promise i'll do my best to leave my obvious opinions out. I just want to hear yours.


By Fb on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 01:03 pm:

    i like what bush is doing. i hope he authorizes further development of tactical nukes. i'm a firm believer in the big stick.


By eri on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 01:30 pm:

    Remember that I live in a cave. I have not been able to keep up on all of the current events for about 3 weeks now. First the ice storm, then fleeing our house and staying with others, them packing and getting hypothermia, and we JUST got our cable hooked up. I am not sure what he is doing with the war. On that I can't really talk.

    Just getting to Texas, I am able to see some of the things he did before. I absolutely LOVE the schools out here. The accountability that was proclaimed, well it is amazing. I have noticed that the teachers attend a large array of classes, not just what is necessary to keep their certification. There are high standards set for everything, from schoolwork to personal conduct to dress and hygeine. There are tutors available for areas where your children struggle. The resources are amazing. The science department is wonderful in the way it gets the children excited about science. The teachers have a wonderful way of encouraging above average kids to try new things and keep them excited about it without pushing them in any way. They have given Hayley a Harry Potter book to read and she is only 7.

    I know that no one is perfect and I do not expect our President to be, but I firmly believe he is trying to do the best he knows how for our country. Of course, I am an oddball in this because I am right wing. It is easier for me to say this because his beliefs and politics are similar to mine and I agree with things most people here don't.

    I agree with a war against terrorism, but I do have my questions about how it is being handled.

    I don't believe in civil rights for the POW's. They are not U.S. Citizens, but prisoners of war and therefore, I don't think that they should receive the benefits and protections and due process that is American. They are not American and they did attack these very things. I don't think that they deserve these things.

    Frankly I don't agree with as much media access as in Vietnam. I think that there are things that need to be kept secret from our enemies and that in order to do that many things need to be kept from me, at least during the war itself. I am fine with this. Giving out tactical and strategic information will only help the enemies defeat us. I think that the media does give out a lot of information trying to inform us, which is great, but unfortunately it also helps aid those we are fighting. Therefore, I don't want to see all kinds of information out there on my television, because if I can see it so can Bin Laden or any other terrorist who wishes to hurt us.

    Patrick, I really don't expect you to agree with any of this. I am simply stating how I feel. We differ quite a bit in our thinking, so if I am in for it (and I probably am) please give me facts. You know me well enough by now that if you want to effect my thinking the best way to do it is to tell me facts which I don't have or don't have access to.


By patrick on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 01:58 pm:

    ok. *breath*.

    objectively as I can....let me pose some questions back at you, perhaps spur some thought, if you feel like dealing with them. No big deal if you don't. You just have to understand, Im pretty isolated from individuals with beliefs like youself, so Im curious as hell.




    "Remember that I live in a cave"

    Understood. Is that reason enough to offer your precious blind faith? Admitting you don't know the whole story yet going along with the program is just that isnt it?

    "I am right wing."
    What does this mean to you? What do you identify with when you say this? What are president Bush's ideals that you share? Does this mean you arent a humanist? You state it like its an excuse for your beliefs.



    "I don't believe in civil rights for the POW's"

    You realize the inhumanity in this position? Its almost against your proclaimed Christianity to deny a basic human right to another individual, no? Do you think American soldiers captured by a foreign force, say Iran should be denied the same civil rights?

    Do you think America, as a self proclaimed moral leader in the world, should be taking the moral high road here, in order to set an example? How can we preach human rights to countries like China when we dont practice them ourselves?





    "They are not American and they did attack these very things"

    Would you consider this a very unAmerican attitude since one of the values Americans hold dear is 'innocence until proven guilty'? You are stating that those held in Cuba and Afghanistan are guilty yet we haven't publically identified these people, much less brought them before any kind of court.

    Can you consider the idea that we aren't really "protecting democracy" when we are violating the very core principles we hold dear?

    As far as I know even illegal aliens, unnaturalized immigrants are granted the same rights as naturalized citizens should they commit a crime.

    "Frankly I don't agree with as much media access as in Vietnam. I think that there are things that need to be kept secret from our enemies and that in order to do that many things need to be kept from me, at least during the war itself"


    Have you considered the possibility that media access such as they had in Vietnam has now been virtually done away with due NOT to revealing tactical and strategic data, but rather swaying the American public opinion against the war? Its a well known notion in American media that the horrifying images of Vietnam on the nightly news pretty much countered everything the politicans were saying and in essence turned American support against the war. Can you entertain the idea that THIS is why media access is limited, rather than tactics?







    I dont want to be your fact giver, and I dont want to make you think one thing or the other. These things shoudl be sought yourself, no?


By Antigone on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 02:30 pm:

    Actually, eri, you can thank Ann Richards and Ross Perot for the schools in Texas. Bush had just about nada to do with it...


By patrick on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 02:34 pm:

    AS I understood, Bush, just instilled strict testing measures, like he's doing on a national level, so kids now know how to take tests, but did little for actual curriculum improvement.

    I thought all 7 year olds read harry potter.


By Antigone on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 02:47 pm:

    Most of the current testing structure was created in 1984 by a commission led by Ross Perot, and the standards were later strengthened by Ann Richards. Bush rode the wave...


By droop on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 03:07 pm:

    i was in high school when perot's reforms were implemented. an entire year of teachers constantly grumbling about ross perot.

    texas school reform.


By eri on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 04:06 pm:

    Thanks for the link droop. I'll check it out later.

    Harry Potter books are intended for 4th grade and up. Hayley is only in 2nd and reading on her own for 2 years.

    I voted for Ross Perot. I liked him. I screwed over the republican party.

    O.K. Patrick, I will try to answer each of your questions. I like it when you pick my brain or try to make me think about something without degrading me. I appreciate that.

    I am a person of faith. Many aspects of my life evolve around that, so in many instances I will show a blind faith in things, but they are partially blind. I try to get what knowledge I can, but my life doesn't give me time to do a lot of the things others like yourself do for the sake of self education. I leave what I cannot know to faith. It is not just politics, or religion, but also relationships, my cooking, and many other things. That is just part of me.

    I will get back to you on the values I agree with Bush on and why I say I am right wing. I want to be able to give you a specific answer on this and not just spout out something like I usually do. I want it to be well thought out and precise. I am not blowing you off, I just want to give you the best answer possible.

    Do I understand the inhumanity of my position? Yes, I do. I never claimed to be a humanist. I understand why others think my position is wrong. I simply think that if you are not an American or legal immigrant of our country then the benefits of our country don't apply to you, kinda like a job, if you don't work for ABC company then you don't get ABC's benefit package. I do believe in self preservation and not letting someone attack you and then giving them the same treatment as I would my friends. Setting the example that if you wound me I won't say it is allright. Giving them the same civil rights we have to me is the same as saying what they did is just fine. Like the courts giving my sister her son back. To me this is the wrong example and the pain will simply continue. I also think that illegal aliens shouldn't have these rights.

    I feel that the innocence until proven guilty aspect should apply to Americans. I don't feel that a member of the Taliban should necessarily have that. They should be treated as enemies. I am not saying they should all be shot in the head, but I am not about to let them play poker with my family either. I don't have any reason to believe in their innocence.

    I don't see this as a violation of the core principles of American Democracy, because I don't feel it is America's job to take care of the world. We have our own problems to figure out and by no means are perfect ourselves. If we are to set an example of our core values, it should be taking care of our own first.

    Lack of information has always been used to sway the public in times of war. That is common knowledge. Our President knew about Pearl Harbor before it happened and had time to remove the troops safely before the attack, but withheld that information because the drama and loss of what happened swayed the American public to get involved in WWII. I am not saying that withholding information through the media is a perfect method, and it can be used against us in many ways. I agree with that. Why it is withheld is not a cut and dry answer either. I just think that too much is said already and it puts a lot of key components of our plans or our people in power at a high risk of attack from the enemies. The first thing that pops into my head on this is 9/11. The news was reporting where each person (President, V.P., etc.) were at each moment. When they were having their discussions on the war and the strategies, everyone knew where they were and the media was there video taping them. When there is an enemy attacking U.S. buildings and they are having a war strategy meeting, why don't we just tell the enemy where they are meeting (i.e. Camp David) and what they are discussing (i.e. ass kicking). Then Mr. Enemy can very simply just bomb the damned building and put our country in even more turmoil. Just one example.

    I do seek what information I can, but I do have a limited education and limited resources. I once had a friend tell me that I am middle America. I am a conservative housewife. That is who I am and what I do. The older I get the more I feel like June Cleaver, and funny thing is that I like it.

    I have to go get Hayley from her bus stop now, but I will be back.


By trace on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 04:13 pm:

    God Bless Texas!

    I beleive Bush is doing the best he can at this point with the present circumstances. I see what is going on with the military from the inside, and wow, lot's of damage from the past decade to repair, but we are still able to get the job done.
    War is hell, war is messy. there is no way on god's green earth to ensure NO civilians are killed, but we did a pretty good job of keeping it at a minimum. The alternative would have been to take a hit like we did and whimper and pass a bunch of useless sanctions against who... a group of people who do not care about law anyway???
    The economy was tanking before Bush took office.
    Remember what started it? I sure do. I can pin point it easily. The Dep of Justice was going after Microsoft for *gasp* including their internet browser with their operating system.
    Sure, they gobble up smaller companies left and right, but what major corporation does not?
    While concentrating on that, they took their eyes off oil prices. gas went through the roof and hit corporations and families alike.
    So down down down went the economy.
    Idiot fed reserve also said "the economy is growing too fast, raise the interest rate to slow it down"
    oooops


By eri on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 04:56 pm:

    The economy was tanking before Bush took office. I have never blamed him for the decline in our economy. I think that he is genuinely trying to help repair that even now, before it is the "Great Depression" all over again.

    There is a lot of repair work needed for the military. It has been cut so low and down to so few it is ridiculous (who did that?) and it is going to take some serious cash to get it back to where it should be, just in the staffing and the people serving alone. Not to mention any other aspect of it.

    There is a lot on America's plate right now. He needs more time to get a good fix started. At least he is trying.


By semillama on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 05:36 pm:

    I'm curious eri and trace - you may not want to
    give the prisoners in Cuba the legal rights
    under our system of justice, but do you agree
    with the Bush Administration's denying them
    rights under the Geneva Convention? If they
    hadn't denied the Geneva Convention in the
    first place, no one would be raising a stink
    about their civil liberties.

    If any of our guys get captured, they're
    guaranteed to come back in individual
    baggies if we keep flounting international law.
    If we want support, we have to play by the
    rules. When CANADA won't line up behind us,
    then you know we're out of line.

    And don't get me startedon Enron. If that was
    Clinton you guys would be howling at the
    gates. The Bushies are involved, they are
    covering it up. Not Right. Clinton had a
    crooked land deal, Bush and Cheney seem to
    be involved in something that resulted in
    thousands of people losing a good chunkof
    their savings while the corporate overlords
    gave themselves BONUSES.

    Off with their heads I say! How about
    including those bastards in the Axis of Evil?

    (Axis of Evil is going to rank up there with the
    biggest diplomatic blunders of all time)


By patrick on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 05:45 pm:

    oh fer pete's sake.

    you actually believe mister bush is just a hard workin man doin his honest to goodness best to bring world peace?

    fuck me with a chainsaw.

    Where should the military be exactly? Who exactly do we need to be prepared to fight?

    Missle defense to fight the terrorist? f22 fighters to do loops around Iraq's 30 aged and broken mig-21s? Those b-2s flown half way around the world at the cost of millions each were totally necessary against al Queda right?

    Its interesting to note that the 50+ year old b-52 bombers were utilized more and far more effective than the b-2. B-2s being Reagan's payback to the military industry complex.


    The military was cut back during Clinton's term eri because it was peace time. You of all people should understand in peace time, it doesnt need buildup like fucknuts Reagan created, and those funds should be diverted to "taking care of our own" as you say.

    i've come to accept that who and what are to blame for the economy are far more vast than 99% of the American public understands myself included.






By eri on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 06:06 pm:

    If we cut back our military every time there was a supposed "peace time" we would be attacked every time. On top of that, we were having problems with Al Queda at the time the military was cut back. Besides, I felt safe when we had Ronnie Ray Gun in office :) Besides, that money was used to protect our own and that is a major part of taking care of our own.

    I do believe that Bush is doing what he thinks is best to bring world peace. People aren't going to agree with him, and that is normal and expected, but I think he is a good person underneath it all. There is no such thing as a politician without corruption to some level. I don't excpect perfection. It is our job to say something when we think he is doing wrong. I do still believe he is doing his "honest to goodness best to bring about world peace" to the best of his ability. I don't think that I could do any better.

    I liked the B-52's and thought they did great. I loved the B-17's and thought that they did the best of their time and they were absolutely beautiful planes to boot. I like the B-2's and don't discredit their effectiveness. But what planes to use when, I am not qualified to make that decision and won't even try.

    Missle defense to fight the terrorist? Why not? They flew planes into our buildings and killed uncountable thousands. Why the hell should we be nice? What, like some mugger is going to attack me and I am going to say "Hold on, let me get out the pepper spray, because my taser is inhumane." Sorry, but I don't think so.

    Never tried a chainsaw Patrick. You will have to let me know if it is any good :)


By eri on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 06:18 pm:

    Patrick, I forgot to ask, could you please give me some info on the Geneva Convention. I have a vague glimmer in my minds eye, but it is growing dim. Please inform me.


By patrick on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 06:54 pm:

    "If we cut back our military every time there was a supposed "peace time" we would be attacked every time"

    This is preposterous and totally baseless. There are no indications that ANYONE gearing up to invade the US. Military spending would not have stopped 9/11.

    "On top of that, we were having problems with Al Queda at the time the military was cut back"

    Eri, listen to reason. You don't need multi-million dollar superjets and billion dollar missle defense systems to protect us against al Qaida. Thats preposterous. al Qaida attacks will come in forms that no super-million dollar weapon can stop. No missle launched from Vandenberg AFB will stop an al Qaida nail bomb from going off in Times Square or where ever. Missle defense doesnt even have anything to do with jetliners being flown into tall buidlings. Missle Defense is a system designed to launch a rocket to destroy another ballistic missle in the upper atmosphere before it hits the US. Missle Defense is "RayGun Ronnie's" Star Wars all over again. This time around there is even LESS justification for it than Ronnie had.

    listen to me:

    THERE ARE NO al Qaida in the upper atmosphere, nor will there ever be. (unless the decide to launch those in Cuba)

    Military cut backs of the Clinton era have nothing to do with al Qaida.

    al Qaida was developed in the late 70s early 80s and its beginngings have little to nothing to do with the US. Its only become involved against the US in the last 10 years or so. One of the biggest reasons being is the our military presence in Saudi Arabia which Bush Sr. put there.

    Another reason is our short-sided and biased support of Israel. Which many American presidents are to blame regardless of party affiliation.

    Another reason al Qaida has taken arms against us are the unhuman sanctions we have squeezed the Iraqi people with for over a decade, started by none other than Bush Sr. after his little military playdate in the sand.

    THESE are the reasons al Qaida took arms against us.


    Though i don't expect a biased opinion from trace, maybe he can come through for me here since he worked on the same base they were launched from. The b2s are a complete waste which is why we didnt see or hear much about them recently. Its terribly costly to store them, to protect them from damaging sunlight. They are too big of a secret and too costly to house to station them anywhere else but in US territory. Their stealth-ness is utterly useless in places like Afghanistan where they can barely get a rocket off the ground much less have any viable air defense system.

    the b2's were designed to be deployed over significant (former) enemies like Russia or China.


    If you want to learn about the Geneva Convention in terms of prisoners of war and how we are totally disregarding it, making up the rules as we go and pissing off our allies all the while go here


By patrick on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 06:55 pm:

    on that ridiculous note. i need a drink.

    this country is going to shit faster than I though if the 80% share your ideas Eri, Trace.


By heather on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 07:16 pm:

    do you feel better now, patrick?


By patrick on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 07:21 pm:

    i suppose your point is that i don't so why bother.


    so no, of course not. i havent gotten my drink yet.

    and i just got an e-rant from my studio mate bitching about the mess from my other slobbish studio mates.

    i just need to make a bit more money so I can pick up the slack and get said slob studiomate out.


By eri on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 07:32 pm:

    Patrick, if you need a drink, I have plenty here :)

    That link you gave me said that basically, the POW's are POWs, and that they are to be treated humanely. That is probably the part that we converse over. To me, treating a POW humanely is not physically harming them or maiming them or starving them, etc. Again, it doesn't mean giving them our civil liberties.

    In the renaissance forts and towers and walls were built with military guards on watch 24/7. This was true for every castle, etc. It was protecting the people. That is how I see what Ronnie did for us. I do not, have not, and will not agree with cutting back the military and closing bases because it is supposedly peace time. I want to know that the bases along our coasts and other various places are up and running with people defending us when neccessary and ready to defend us should the need arise. That is what makes me feel safe. I don't find this to be a waste of money. We may not have been able to stop Al Queda or we may have. They would have been stopped prior to this attack if Clinton had gotten off of his ass and done something when the problems started, but all he did was bomb civilians when it was convenient to distract from Monica Lewinsky. Wag the Dog much?

    Your reasons for thinking why Al Queda attacked us and the facts I have been given differ. More of it is based on religion and culture and various other things (including money). They were also upset because after we aided them in ridding them of Russia, we didn't stick around to wipe their asses for them and give them job skills. Yeah, well, the government doesn't pay for me to attain job skills either. They wanted something that we all have to work for without working for it and they didn't get it. That was the initial conflict. My reaction to that is tough shit. We have our own problems to take care of. They need to take care of themselves. If they want independence from another country then be another country. I get tired of people getting pissed off because America doesn't wipe their ass and change their diapers for them. So again we disagree.

    Might as well get good and drunk Patrick.


By LoneStranger on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 07:43 pm:

    Hear hear! Drunk it is!

    LS


By patrick on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 07:46 pm:

    Eri, are you comfortable being called an isolationist or a nationalist? In essence your great big safe castle theory and your "no civil rights for anyone who isnt American" notion are just that.

    Hitler was a nationalist and many other tyrrants through out history were as well. Pat Buchanon is an isolationist and he's not very popular for it.

    Jsut realize who you stand with when you say these kinds of things. If you're still comfortable with that, cool.


    if you think al Qaida attacked us because of our culture you've been brainwashed. Thats the shit Guilliani spouted on Super Bowl ads but its as about out of touch as saying we are going to attack Iraq because we don't like their brand of rice.

    al Qaida wasn't pissed because "we didn't stick around to wipe their asses for them and give them job skills" they could do without out our cultural influence at that.

    Eri, seriously, I don't know where you get your partial information from (you say yourself you only get half the story, if that) but you really gotta read up because your notions are alarmingly fanatical, just like the Taliban. They were fanatics with the half truth as well.




    ok, i swear im done. really.


By dave. on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 08:13 pm:

    the economy is tanking because the average 30k/year or less joe (i.e. the majority) has maxed out on credit and not only can he not spend any more to support the unrealistic profit growth expectations that wall street puts on companies when evaluating what they're worth, but joe average has also become less able to pay back that debt, which is putting banks in a big bind. do they let joe spend all his income on loan interest, forsaking retailers and producers and manufacturers and distributors and causing the folks who employ joe average to lay him off and destroying completely his ability to pay back the debt (which, btw, they have already reported to the sec as income) or do they up the credit line so joe can keep buying?

    whoops! how'd that happen?


By eri on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 08:27 pm:

    I am comfortable with those titles. I am not fanatical. I don't expect anyone to believe as I do. I am not Hitler, and I do not condone his actions. I am me. As individual as you, and just as disagreeable. You see, I think that you are as fanatical as you think I am.


By trace on Thursday, February 14, 2002 - 08:54 pm:

    "In essence your great big safe castle theory and your "no civil rights for anyone who isnt American" notion are just that."
    Patty....
    I am not an isolationst. Hitler was not a nationalist. Jews were/are part of his nation, and he betrayed them. He was a racist.

    Just because one calls themselves something does not make them that


By Dog on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 12:18 am:

    ok all you fucking morons. back to the center.

    bush is a great guy. he's a drunk pretzelboy.

    we are in the midst of what i like the call the nixon policy (not the hixon policy, trace.) which is, of course, be the nation with the nukes and the insane man at the helm. everyone is afraid of what we are going to do next, it's great!

    that iraq, iran and north korea are an axis of evil is so retarded that i can't believe that even the american public swallowed it. iraq and iran hate each other, and north korea is starving to death.

    china is the reason for the missle defense shield. we can't just come out and say it for obvious reasons. now shut up about it, patty. it's a good idea. china has 4 times the army we do, and they're working on doubling their nuke force using the top of the line nuke technology clinton/gore sold to them.

    afghanistan was a great starting point for our anti-arab terror crusade. not the lack of 'anti' before the word 'terror'. we are the terrorists! hooray for us! we're kicking ass in the world and soon we will run the whole globe.

    hitler was a nationalist. the jews owned the german people. they were not part of his nation nor are they today. check the definition of diaspora.

    we're killing arabs like it's going out of style. just because we call ourselves patriots, doesn't mean we aren't evil.

    watch apocalypse now. listen to what brando says. the oppressed are willing to be more vicious than the fat ugly americans. they will win ultimately.

    jesus is the end.



By Cat on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 09:20 am:

    I'm reserving my opinion on Bush. I'm not sure if it's just that it's easier to look impressive and commanding when there's a war on, but he seems to be doing better than I thought. I do wish he'd stop saying "let's roll" though.

    "we are in the midst of what i like the call the nixon policy (not the hixon policy, trace.) which is, of course, be the nation with the nukes and the insane man at the helm. everyone is afraid of what we are going to do next, it's great!"

    The time has long gone since America was the only country with nukes. They're practically given away with Big Macs these days. And the way the Russians keep losing them, even the North Pole elves are going to be nuclear-capable.

    "that iraq, iran and north korea are an axis of evil is so retarded that i can't believe that even the american public swallowed it. iraq and iran hate each other, and north korea is starving to death."

    Yep. But it's so much easier when you have bad guys to hate. Then you don't have to focus on the problems at home.

    If there was no big baddie in the form of Osama Bin Laden, would there be so much support for blowing apart Afghanistan? I don't know. He provided such a focal point for the rage.

    "china is the reason for the missle defense shield. we can't just come out and say it for obvious reasons. now shut up about it, patty. it's a good idea. china has 4 times the army we do, and they're working on doubling their nuke force using the top of the line nuke technology clinton/gore sold to them."

    Yeah and they'll have missiles to penetrate the shield before you guys can even take it out for a spin. The Chinese are working three times as hard as the Americans on developing new technology, and they don't have pesky human rights and congress to worry about.

    "hitler was a nationalist. the jews owned the german people. they were not part of his nation nor are they today. check the definition of diaspora."

    Check the definition of "old holocaust excuse 101". It's right next to "oh we didn't know what was going on at the camps". The jews were German. They had a right to be German. Hitler wasn't nationalist, he was racist. Read his book sometime. He preyed on the nasty deep racism within every human being. That fear of people who are different, who are smarter and who eat funny food.

    "watch apocalypse now. listen to what brando says. the oppressed are willing to be more vicious than the fat ugly americans. they will win ultimately."

    True. Things get shaken up every 50 years or so. It's natural. You can't stay at the top of the heap forever.


By Nate on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 10:54 am:

    "The time has long gone since America was the only country with nukes."

    i don't expect you to be big on US history, but when nixon was our president the rooskies were quite nukeful.

    the idea isn't to be the only one with the mutual destruction stick. it is to be the one with said stick AND someone insane enough to use it.

    "The jews were German. They had a right to be German."

    diaspora is a jewish construct. the only home of jews is israel, in any country they live they are just visiting.

    i didn't say hitler was right, i was just saying that in his mind and the mind of his people he was a nationalist. it was for love of country, not some irrational hate of jews.

    he was a racist too, obviously. this wasn't what drove his conquest.

    i think everything else is us agreeing.


By Fb on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 11:26 am:

    so, what is wrong with the rice in Iraq? please do tell.


By patrick on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 11:47 am:

    how was Hitler not a nationalist rolling his tanks into Poland, France and other parts of the eastern bloc? How about northern Africa? How was he NOT a nationalist?

    The extensive Linebacker raids over Vietnam are a clear example of Nixon's, what I like to call, "make em think were so out of our god damn minds we'll use the most destructive weapons at our disposal to win". The Linebacker raids were some of the most destructive in the war.


    Eri, you're a fanatic in this sense

    fanatic-marked by excessive enthusiasm and often intense uncritical devotion


    the "intense uncritical devotion" part makes you a fanatic or at least possessing fanatical characteristics. Your devotion may not be intense but its certainly uncritical and blind and potentially dangerous. Its dangerous in the sense that many people in Nazi Germany were like this. They just went along with the program, with out really knowing the truth, turning a blind eye.

    Im not saying you're a nazi, its just a good example to use as most know a little something about it.


By patrick on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 11:57 am:

    if you think im annoying now...just wait till i finish this chomsky book.


By eri on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 12:23 pm:

    I understand what you are saying Patrick, but I think that you misunderstand me. You are making this to simply be more than what I am intending. I am not so into all of this that most of the things you relate to me have anything to do with me or my thinking.

    Many people in Nazi Germany were so oppressed that they feared speaking up. That is not me. As I read of Nazi history, I realize that I would have been in the concentration camps as well, not because I am jewish, but because I am different from the norm at that time and would not just go along and keep my mouth shut because if I did I might get some coffee (a major luxury then).

    I am not a nationalist to the point of making my nation rule the world. Hitler fought to take control of Austria because they spoke German, and if they speak German, then they must be part of Germany. I don't think along this line at all. I don't think that because most Canadians speak English they must be Americans or that because we speak English we MUST belong to Britain. We are each our own countries and have the right to do as each see's fit within their individual countries.

    My enthusiasm isn't excessive. I am merely being honest, and possibly a little upset. I am sure you can understand this because I am sure that some of what I say upsets you as much as what you say upsets me. That is simply our difference in thinking.

    I don't think of you as annoying. I just think of you as different from me. That is as it should be. I embrace the fact that we think so differently because you cause me to look at things differently and think about them. Usually, it doesn't change what I think, but at least you make me wonder sometimes. I hope that I can do the same. If I was fanatical or if I didn't respect you, then I would call you names and say retarded insults like Dani used to do to you.

    If I came across harsh or fanatical in my posts last night, I apologize. When I drink wine I get really loose with my tongue and often say things I regret.

    To bottom line it, I think differently, and have different convictions, and morals, and belief systems. I am not fanatical, but rather very simple. I just get mouthy on wine.


By patrick on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 12:49 pm:

    "I am not a nationalist to the point of making my nation rule the world"

    At the same time Eri, you don't really understand the implications and impact this war on terrorism.

    "Many people in Nazi Germany were so oppressed that they feared speaking up"

    Thats not the case as much as people just didn't know or turned a blind eye. Most citizens under Nazi rule had little to no idea of the concentration camps.

    Most people in Nazi Germany supported Hilter on the domestic front. People we so content domestically, they paid little attention and/or were misled on the foreign front. Sound familiar?


    "My enthusiasm isn't excessive. I am merely being honest, and possibly a little upset."

    But Eri, there becomes a point in which your lack of understanding supercedes our differences as a matter of opinions and honesty. I can have the opinion that the sky is green and make the claim that we just have differing opinions, yet all the while, the sky is still blue.

    We're not really discussing differences in philosophy here.

    You didnt come across as harsh or fanatical at all. You did however come across as not knowing or understand whats really happening. Whats really at stake. Saying, for example, 'al Qaida was pissed because we didnt stick around after the Russians left to give them job training' is just flat out wrong. Numerous interviews with bin Laden, himeself saying flat out they are pissed at the US for the reasons I stated.

    What's alarming to me, what is most upseting that many people in this country, more than not, chew the same crap, propaganda if they even bother to pay attention at all. Its a dangerous situation to be somewhat clued in and see this happening. I So many facts get overlooked, so much history gets ignored. It makes me want to shout! We're far more concerned with stupid senseless crap like Oscar nominations than we are with the guns we deploy around the world, so to speak.

    Im not upset by the difference in opinion at all.


By Nate on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 12:50 pm:

    chomsky is a pud in the same way newt gingritch is a pud.

    you're just jerking off reading that, patty. justifying your own flawed logic.


By patrick on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 12:52 pm:

    says you.

    i havent even began to read it yet.

    chomsky is not justifying anything im saying.


By patrick on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 12:56 pm:

    don't talk to me about flawed logic either while saying missle defense is a good idea to protect us from china.


By patrick on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 01:03 pm:

    don't talk to me about flawed logic either while saying missle defense is a good idea to protect us from china.


By Nate on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 01:16 pm:

    without some sort of defence against chinese ICBMs, we have little chance in a war against china.

    where is my logic flawed?


By patrick on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 01:19 pm:

    that war is inevitable with china.

    that missle defense works despite easily deployed counter-measures.

    that the money spent on missle defence couldn't be used to better serve peace and diplomacy.




    where exactly is my logic flawed? it seems we pretty much share the same view on this mess of a foreign policy.


By eri on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 01:47 pm:

    Patrick, have you read "The Devil's Mistress"? It is the journal of Hitler's wife from age 17 to the day they committed suicide together. It also shows where the journal came from and gives it a historical base in the person that had it was in the compound at the time and using a different name to keep from trial. It can shed a different light on some of the things you may think about Germany at the time of Hitler's rule. Not all of my information is propaganda put out by television. I don't believe anything Bin Laden would say in an interview about why he did what he did or why he didn't. If the man can do what he did, I don't expect him to be honest. So there we will differ, because I don't believe the interview and you don't believe my information. Not lack of knowledge. Disagreement about information. I think that your logic is biased, as is all of ours, because of what we choose to believe or not to believe.
    Just as you think that my information is flawed or I don't see the big picture, I think that you are biased in closeminded in your opinions and what you choose to believe and therefore, miss another part of the big picture as well.


By Nate on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 03:15 pm:

    your logic is flawed- you misrepresent my assertions.

    "that war is inevitable with china."

    no, but the chance is high enough that we should prepare. do you claim it that war with china is impossible?

    "that missle defense works despite easily deployed counter-measures."

    the current systems that are being publiclly tested isn't perfect. this is why we need to develop the system, not just install it. do you claim that missle defense is impossible?

    "that the money spent on missle defence couldn't be used to better serve peace and diplomacy."

    we are not walking down a road that leads to peace and diplomacy.


By patrick on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 04:39 pm:

    i don't see where my logic is flawed and simply telling me it is doesnt really make your point. i have no idea how i misrepresent your assertions, its most certainly not my intention.

    nonetheless...

    "do you claim it that war with china is impossible?"

    no of course not.

    "do you claim that missle defense is impossible?"

    no of course not.

    "we are not walking down a road that leads to peace and diplomacy."

    this can change.


    i simply don't advocate arms proliferation based on the possibilities. There is no outright threat.

    Installing a missle defense system only increases the chances it will have to be used. Same logic used by gun control advocates...have a gun in your house on increases the chance it will be used, even against you.








By Nate on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 05:00 pm:

    gun control advocates are flawed, too.

    every state that has instated a law allowing the carrying of concealed weapons has seen an immediate decrease in crime.

    "Installing a missle defense system only increases the chances it will have to be used."

    this is flawed logic. what is your basis for this?

    the balance of nuclear weapons between opposing superpowers prevents hot war. do you disagree with this?

    while we make deals with russia to reduce our nuclear arms, china is working hard to double theirs. do you disagree with this?

    you agree that china is a threat? you agree that war with china is possible? you agree that a working missle defense is possible?

    but then suddenly you think we should spend our money on daisies and good will? this is where your logic is flawed.

    do you want to be chinese?





By semillama on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 05:33 pm:

    Hey, Patrick, you may be interested to know
    that in fact Al Qaeda does have american
    roots, in that many of its key operatives
    (including ol' OBL) were trained in guerrila
    warfare by the CIA.

    I hope to God that doesn't come as a surprise
    to anyone. We do a have a pretty impressive
    track record in training death squads and
    terrorists, although I think the Soviets probably
    had us beat.

    As far as feeling safe during the reagan years:
    I personally went to bed every night several
    years in a row with the terror of a nuclear
    attack. You do remember the arms race,
    right? From about 4th grade on until the fall of
    the Berlin Wall, I was afraid of nuclear
    annihilation. I had dreams of Ronbo pressing
    the button. I was freaking 10 years old for
    crying out loud. I most certainly did not feel
    safe.

    And as far as Uncle Billy using missles to
    divert our attention from monica lewensky,
    isn't Bush using his war rhetoric to help folks
    forget the scandals of his election, Enron, his
    rollback of vital environmental legislation, his
    basic ineptitude with foreign relations, etc. etc,
    etc.

    Would bush have an 80% approval rating
    without 9/11? Make me laugh. If it were
    Clinton, the republicans would be claiming he
    orchestrated the whole thing to avoid getting
    heat from his extracurricular activities.

    As far as reducing drug use by 10%, I heard a
    big part of the plan was to ground the twins
    and his niece! That stuff runs in the family it
    seems!


By patrick on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 06:03 pm:

    yeah sem i was aware of that.al Qaida though, was originally formed as an organization to keep log and track of Arabic men who went to Afghanistan to fight against the Russians, naturally it formed in a paramilitary group.


    "every state that has instated a law allowing the carrying of concealed weapons has seen an immediate decrease in crime"

    i know this is your favorite statistic nate...but, its just a statistic. If you have unbiased support for this, Id love to see it. I would also be curious as to other factors that could be at play. I don't believe that simply because concealed weapons were permitted, criminals suddenly got smart. Thats too simple. This statistic seems based on the same notion that the death penalty is a deterrant to crime...which we know isnt. Knowing your 7-11 clerk may be packin heat doesnt seem to stop them from getting robbed.


    "Installing a missle defense system only increases the chances it will have to be used."

    my basis for this is the obvious. it confirms and/or creates a threat that may or may not have been there, the one-up-manship of an arms race.


    "the balance of nuclear weapons between opposing superpowers prevents hot war"

    Disagree? There's not enough history to make this statement. We only have one example of this historically. US and Russia. The end of the cold war was not due to our mutal nuclear proliferation. Look at India and Pakistan...they are on the virge of war. I don't see nuclear arms preventing India from massing tens of thousands of troops on the border. All i see is a greater chance of mass destruction. All i see is a very volatile situation and nuclear potential agitating it.

    "while we make deals with russia to reduce our nuclear arms, china is working hard to double theirs"

    I'm well aware that China is building arms at an unprecedented rate. Do i see having enough nukes to blow the world up 50 times over necessary? Fuck no. Thats absurd. Whether we have 50 nukes, enough to wipe out all of Asia and China has a 100 nukes to wipe out North America...it doesnt fucking matter. It only takes one missle...just one, to destroy the world.


    If wanting an end to arms proliferation, worldwide is flawed logic. So be it.


By Nate on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 06:33 pm:

    "This statistic seems based on the same notion that the death penalty is a deterrant to crime...which we know isnt. Knowing your 7-11 clerk may be packin heat doesnt seem to stop them from getting robbed. "

    again, your flawed logic. death penalty isn't a deterrant to crime because people don't think they'll get caught. wondering if someone has a gun in their pocket is a totally different notion.

    "my basis for this is the obvious. it confirms and/or creates a threat that may or may not have been there, the one-up-manship of an arms race. "

    the threat is there-- you acknowledge it two paragraphs down. you think china is building missles because of the impending UFO invasion? maybe because they watched one too many metor movies?

    "It only takes one missle...just one, to destroy the world."

    one missle will destroy the world? all by itself? this is what i mean about your reality being out of whack.


By Cat on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 06:50 pm:

    "i don't expect you to be big on US history, but when nixon was our president the rooskies were quite nukeful.

    the idea isn't to be the only one with the mutual destruction stick. it is to be the one with said stick AND someone insane enough to use it."

    Ya, ya, that's exactly my concern. I don't think the world (and ya, they elected me to speak for them) is too worried about Bush's sanity. He may be a bit of a fuckwad but I don't think he's going shoot his nuclear wad just for the hell of it. How long do you think it's going to be before Hussein, or someone who has a big moustache like him, is stroking a nuclear cock?

    "diaspora is a jewish construct. the only home of jews is israel, in any country they live they are just visiting."

    I don't expect you to know your World history too well, but there was no Israel before WWII.

    The jews were easy targets for Hitler. Even the many jews who no longer practised their faith. Even the many "jews" with only 1/8 jewish ancestory. By Hitler's reckoning, my mother would be Jewish, and that would just clash with her nice diamond crucifix.

    And I guess Hitler's "nationalism" is the reason jews from Holland, Belgium, France, Poland, Russia, etc, etc, were rounded up? It was pure anti-semitism. Nasty stuff.


By patrick on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 06:56 pm:

    here nate...

    According to the Federal Bureau ofInvestigationís Uniform Crime Reports, from 1996 to 1997 the nationís overall crime rate dropped 3.2%, from 5086.6 to 4922.7 crimes per 100,000 population.

    In the 29 states that have lax CCW laws (where law enforcement must issue CCW licenses to almost all applicants), the crime rate fell 2.1%, from 5397.0 to 5285.1 crimes per 100,000 population from 1996 to 1997

    During the same time period, in the 21 states and the District of Columbia with strict carry laws or which donít allow the carrying of concealed weapons at all, the crime rate fell 4.4%, from 4810.5 to 4599.9 crimes per 100,000 population.

    Furthermore, the rate of violent crime fell even faster in states with strict carry laws - falling 4.9% in restrictive states compared to 3.0% in lax states from 1996 to 1997

    From 1992 to 1997, the violent crime rate in the strict and no-issue states fell 24.8% while the violent crime rate for the lax states dropped 11.4% (the national average is 19.4%)

    i WILL admit, in my brief time, i don't have time to dig deeper. This info DID come from bradycampaign.org. They are citing straight up numbers from the FBI, i feel relatively safe in mentioning them.



    gun control aside....

    i acknowledge China is building arms...is it possible they are building arms because we already have arms? And the tennis match continues.....back in forth....missle is bigger than yours, no wait, now mine's bigger than yours, now wait NOW MINE IS BIGGER than yours and on and on and on until something terrible happens.



    The bit about one missle destroying the world was figurative nate. Of course one single missle won't destroy the world but nuclear war won't stop with one missle.




By Cat on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 07:08 pm:

    Eri, if you want some good stuff to read in the cave, go here: http://www.aldaily.com/ I always find something new to think about there.


By patrick on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 07:13 pm:

    i just want to lay down....im so so so so so so tired.

    i have to put on my party face in a few short hours.



By eri on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 08:05 pm:

    Thanks for the link Cat. It will be well used in my cave :) On first glance I was impressed with all of the different papers involved.


By Antigone on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 08:15 pm:

    patrick! You just presented a logical, to the point, effective retort to Nate's gun control BS!

    My nipples are all atwitter!


By Fetidbeaver on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 08:37 pm:

    i'm off to a gun show now. i'm looking for a street sweeper shotgun. wish me luck.


By Dani on Tuesday, February 19, 2002 - 11:55 am:

    Uh, hold the phone there Eri...

    "If I was fanatical or if I didn't respect you, then I would call you names and say retarded insults like Dani used to do to you."

    You may wanna go back a few months to some of your posts to Patty because I hate to burst your bubble but you were just as horrible to him as I was. If I didnt delete your e-mails to me, I'd gladly share your insults about Patty right here but sadly, I did delete them.

    Yet again my name just had to be thrown up in a conversation I see.
    Nice move Eri.


By Fb on Tuesday, February 19, 2002 - 12:16 pm:

    gun show sucked. didn't buy a thing


By Fb on Tuesday, February 19, 2002 - 12:21 pm:

    p.s. the gun show is at the national gaurd armory each year. not this year due to terrorism yada yada yada. it was in a small rented hall and didn't have anything but hunting rifles and knives.


By patrick on Tuesday, February 19, 2002 - 12:33 pm:

    since when has a gun show not sucked?










    on another note....coincidentally i was a victim of a crime. my car got busted into during my party. no gun would have changed that. my car would have still been robbed had i packed heat.



    cocksucking crackheads.

    they didnt get anything but a few clothing samples. they couldn't get to my cd changer because i lock my trunk latch. they didnt even get the 17 cents in my change drawer. just a busted window.

    they got the DJs car as well, and got his cd player.

    nonetheless i filed a police report, insurance claim and headed back to the vodka.

    i felt like king of the world. everyone dug the studio space and went on and on about it. to me its just another loft/photo/studio/dance space, but others see more in it i suppose. i met some dopey photography agent that was...well....dopey. He was trying to impress me by offering me $750/day to shoot there. He didnt seem to understand its not a public place, nor is it available for lease.

    I met some dopey blondes who were so coked up they felt id be impressed that they worked for Dreamworks and they went on and on about what a superstar photographer I was though they just met me and had never seen my work.

    In short, i had a better time with anrgy sam nearly passed out on the couch making grunts to the Santana album. I got more enjoyment out of playing chase with "Spunky the love sponge pooch".

    who wants cake?


By eri on Tuesday, February 19, 2002 - 12:36 pm:

    Sorry Dani. I was just remembering the insult contests you two used to get into. I am not saying that I am completely innocent, just that I have moved on from that phase.

    I am not worried about what I may have said about Patrick in an email to you, because I say the same things to him here.

    When it comes to him, the battle of wits or the battle of understanding works much better without it. I do respect him. I just disagree with him.

    I also respect you, but wonder if the old quibbling did any good. I simply have been trying to go a different way about things here. I felt like I was coming across as unintelligent. I am not saying that you are. Just that you make your point in a different way than me.

    Notice, I haven't called him Patty in a long while.


By patrick on Tuesday, February 19, 2002 - 12:57 pm:

    "Just that you make your point in a different way than me."

    sometimes you display those good ole christian niceties that get me warm inside, and then I remember you're ardent fan of Bush's war on the world.



By Dani on Tuesday, February 19, 2002 - 12:58 pm:

    Notice that I have gotten over this whole entire "tiresome" war conversation in which everything has been repeated over and over and over for the last 5 months.
    Feel free to go on and on and on and on but when I continue to see my name mentioned (for reasons I still cant figure out) in not so nice ways, I respond.
    You can call him whatever you wanna call him. Call him Sir Patrick for all I care but you and Patty can go on with your little debates without me having anything to do with it.
    Thank you.


By patrick on Tuesday, February 19, 2002 - 01:00 pm:

    so you interrupted this whole affair to say that you dont have anything to say about this whole affair?




By Dani on Tuesday, February 19, 2002 - 01:03 pm:

    Uh-huh.


By eri on Tuesday, February 19, 2002 - 01:13 pm:

    I don't know if ardent fan is quite accurate, but rather supporter. Remember, that my intentions are for the stopping of terrorism, as much as may be. Not war on the whole world. I don't want to see lots of innocent people hurt. Some is unfortunate. I support the stand, but not complete and total senseless anihhilation. Anyways, I think you understand where I stand on this.


By spunky on Tuesday, February 19, 2002 - 01:19 pm:

    I think that world annihilation is not such a bad idea.
    Maybe we need a fresh start


By Fetidbeaver on Wednesday, February 20, 2002 - 01:36 am:

    i get to push the button!!!!!!


By eri on Wednesday, February 20, 2002 - 09:43 am:

    I will be the one in robes walking down the streets with a bell yelling "You are all going to die. The Darkman is coming!!!"


By J on Wednesday, February 20, 2002 - 11:04 am:

    Anybody see The Stand? I get to be Trashcan man."My life for you"!


By Antigone on Wednesday, February 20, 2002 - 11:18 am:

    I get to be Nick Andros, then. :)


By droopy on Wednesday, February 20, 2002 - 11:21 am:

    i read a japanese story a few days ago in which an earthquake had happened and a little girl would dream about "the earthquakeman" who would try to stuff her into a tiny box and take her away.

    i wondered what the japanese word for "spider" is.


By Czarina on Wednesday, February 20, 2002 - 11:39 am:

    I know that story! Wasn't it "The Box of Knowledge"?


By droopy on Wednesday, February 20, 2002 - 11:52 am:

    the story i read was called "honey pie." the author's name was something like haruki murakami.


By eri on Wednesday, February 20, 2002 - 02:06 pm:

    J, did you miss my reference to "The Darkman"? I am a nut, I actually read the long version of the book. Watched the movie so much the tape is worn out. Can't find it on DVD yet.

    I always liked the saying that the end is coming, not with a bang but a whimper. I don't know why.


By droopy on Wednesday, February 20, 2002 - 02:18 pm:

    i like it because my headpiece is filled with straw.


By Platypus on Wednesday, February 20, 2002 - 02:47 pm:

    Haruki Murakami is great!

    Just thought I'd mention that. Everyone should go out and read everything he's written, because it's excellent.


By eri on Wednesday, February 20, 2002 - 03:00 pm:

    He actually is an excellent author. Haven't read any of his stuff in years, though.


bbs.sorabji.com
 

The Stalking Post: General goddam chit-chat Every 3 seconds: Sex . Can men and women just be friends? . Dreamland . Insomnia . Are you stoned? . What are you eating? I need advice: Can you help? . Reasons to be cheerful . Days and nights . Words . Are there any news? Wishful thinking: Have you ever... . I wish you were... . Why I oughta... Is it art?: This question seems to come up quite often around here. Weeds: Things that, if erased from our cultural memory forever, would be no great loss Surfwatch: Where did you go on the 'net today? What are you listening to?: Worst music you've ever heard . What song or tune is going through your head right now? . Obscure composers . Obscure Jazz, 1890-1950 . Whatever, whenever General Questions: Do you have any regrets? . Who are you? . Where are you? . What are you doing here? . What have you done? . Why did you do it? . What have you failed to do? . What are you wearing? . What do you want? . How do you do? . What do you want to do today? . Are you stupid? Specific Questions: What is the cruelest thing you ever did? . Have you ever been lonely? . Have you ever gone hungry? . Are you pissed off? . When is the last time you had sex? . What does it look like where you are? . What are you afraid of? . Do you love me? . What is your definition of Heaven? . What is your definition of Hell? Movies: Last movie you saw . Worst movie you ever saw . Best movie you ever saw Reading: Best book you've ever read . Worst book you've ever read . Last book you read Drunken ramblings: uiphgy8 hxbjf.bklf ghw789- bncgjkvhnqwb=8[ . Payphones: Payphone Project BBS
 

sorabji.com . torturechamber . px.sorabji.com . receipts . contact