RANT HERE

[Peter Voice]

Yes chance, any-one can do their own research, write their own piece and call themself a journalist(one who keeps a journal). It sort of works like street-performing, you go out and do it and if you are any good people start to pay attention, you keep doing it and it grows. Even you could try it.

The issue is not the journalist or even his perspective. The questions raised remain unanswered, "Will the rest of the world have to pay for the "unnegotiatable" US lifestyle? Why does the US assume exclusive rights to the ownership of weapons of mass destruction? Why will it not show leadership by giving up this right? Why does the US assume the right to covertly usurp the resources(oil, minerals and water) of other countries to maintain said "lifestyle" at the expense of the people who live there?

Yes, I know the article is provocative(why would I post a dull one) and I challenge some-one, any-one, to defend any of the accusations raised.

I feel that the founders of "Families for Peaceful Tomorrows" are the ones showing true leadership.

PS this is the "Rant here" bit, in the "Blah, Blah, Blah." section, complete with warnings, so if you're not interested, chance, don't bother bagging us. Go and write an uplifting article on the politics of pitch diplomacy in the appropriate section.
Mind you, I do enjoy your and other rantings as much as I enjoy posting my own.

[Triona]

[quote]Originally posted by Peter Voice:
<strong>Triona, the US bothers itself little with events in the rest of the world unless they hurt it's own interests. Australia has had several bombings and attacks, the Commonwealth Head of Governments Meeting at the Sydney Hilton was bombed, the main Melb. Police Station bombed, letter bombs in Gov't mail in Adelaide and Canberra and more.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I don't consider letter bombs a "major terrorist attack". We had the Unibomber in this country for several years, and I can't even being to count the number of other places that have received letter bombs. In fact, I'm not even counting the anthrax attacks that followed 9/11 (though the one post office was just across the river from me). Three thousand people dead in a single day because of a terrorist attack. Not even Israel has topped that number (and I pray they never will).

Also, I understand that the "accusations" are true. We're at war. That means a lot of not nice things happen. I feel sorry for the Afghanis who are caught in the middle. I will note that we are pouring a lot of money into their new government to help them rebuild what's been destroyed (did the same for Japan in WWII).

Before 9/11 I would probably have disagreed with the actions of the US. Unfortuantely, I've learned the hard way that if these people (the Al Quaida, Hamas, etc.) are not dealt with, they will only get worse. It has to stop.

[ 04-18-2002: Message edited by: Triona ]</p>

[martin ewen]

I think triona that peter was just pointing out that there had in fact been bombs planted for political reasons in recent australian history. (terrorism) thus refuting your assertion that the US was unique in the western world. You don't injest this, instead focusing on one aspect which is letter bombs and discounting them because their not big enough to rate in your world.
Almost typically texan, "hell you call those little biddy things bombs, you should see the size of the ones we get back home."
Letter bombs are a side issue you use to discount the fact that bombs have gone off and killed people in every western country I can think off. Even little old NZ, (Rainbow warrior and others)
As to your tax dollars, either yours or your parents helped train Bin Laden in the first place.
The post WW2 generiousity of the US was entirely self serving as most of the funds were given to american businesses to go over to a shattered Europe and set up shop.
If you could give one instance of america funding anything that wasn't in its immediate financial interest then I will revise my outlook but untill then, america the kindest gentlist most generious and missunderstood will remain in the same blinkered selective self-serving and deluded shelf shoulder to shoulder with the tooth fairy.
You don't really have any facts, you keep making assertions that are patently false, your ignorance and arrogance could sadly be called typically american

[Danny Hustle]

[img]biggrin.gif[/img] <img src="graemlins/haha.gif" border="0" alt="[ha ha]" /> <img src="graemlins/haha.gif" border="0" alt="[ha ha]" />

[ 04-18-2002: Message edited by: Danny Hustle ]</p>

[Peter Voice]

Triona, you say that "Families for Peaceful Tomorrows" are an insult to the victims of Sept. 11 and then discount the victims of letter bombs as irrelevant. One letter bomber in Adelaide left three widows and one victim living with no hands or eyes.


Life must be so much easier when your standards are flexible.

[jonnyflash]

Another day in the clash of ideas, the current phase of the battle between those who see the world as just, and those who view it as a work in progress. The only way to combat a continental propaganda wall is to help build a 'truth wave", person by person. Hey, we got our minimum wage, various civil rights, labour laws and the right to vote [and payed dearly for it(read: lots of us died)],and someday we will be able to vote on who gets bombed and who gets payed.and how much. It's as simple as that. Once serfs,once peasants, we are now overwelmingly landless workers who will one day have the democratic society we deserve, if we can just keep our wits about us and not get slapped senile by the invisible hand in the meantime. It can be a big struggle to learn not to hate the people that all the editorials tell us to hate(the poor,the addicted,sex trade workers,protesters,Indians,Blacks,single mums,unionized labour)
I think everyone's opinions are based on their basic assumptions of the topic.The way to change opinions is to shine light on those assumptions and try to get the person to compare them to reality.
That way scientific fact and logic will do their job.We are human beings, and the majority naturally tend to strive for a more humanistic world.
[img]biggrin.gif[/img]

[Danny Hustle]

[quote]Originally posted by jonnyflash:
<strong>
I think everyone's opinions are based on their basic assumptions of the topic. [img]biggrin.gif[/img] </strong><hr></blockquote>

Well Johnny, that's where you're wrong. A lot of people like to sift through all information and make a judgement on ALL of the information available to them, and not bend information to fit their personal preduduces.

To discount out of hand, information just because it dosen't coincide with your personal agenda is often called ignorant, obtuse, and narrow minded.

For instance, you are convinced I am some kind of "right winger". Let me inform you, I didn't vote for the dickhead in office now, his daddy, or the ex-movie star with the bad paint job. But because I have disagreed with you on occasion I must be some kind of Bush loving, Lexus driving, baby killer, in a seal skin coat.

That's just wacky.

Best,

Dan-

[ 04-19-2002: Message edited by: Danny Hustle ]</p>

[Danny Hustle]

oops almost forgot [img]wink.gif[/img]

[ 04-19-2002: Message edited by: Danny Hustle ]</p>

[jonnyflash]

Danny Hustle, I have nothing but love for you. Sounds like you picture me as a rabid zealot freakishly bent on conserving toilet-bowl water.
I don't care what you eat or wear, nor do I care what your transportation is and hey,give it an extra flush for me.I don't think you're any sort of whacko.
I've disagreed with almost every1 at pnet and agreed with those same folks other times. Everyone can agree that there are problems all around the world. Why this is and What to do about it(if anything) is where people start to disagree, depending on their vision of how the world works. I'm entering debates to get an idea of the way other people believe the world works. This is very important because this determines the strategies neccessary for the effective sharing of ideas and information. Oppression naturally breeds anger and a search for the people responsible, and I have a vested interest in trying to ensure that this anger and blame is focussed towards at the top rung of the social ladder, rather than at anyone on the rungs below, which is traditionally how it goes. This vested interest springs from the fact that myself and all those I care about are on the lower section of this ladder. There's my agenda. Biased? you bet.
[img]tongue.gif[/img]

[Mark Wessels]

I won't state an opinion, just some things i noticed.

I think of America as the sum total of the people in America and I include myself as part of that so try not to say things that are demeaning to America in general. I do, quite often, disagree with certain aspects of the American government and large American corporations but to talk about "America's actions" is misleading and only causes people to get mad. The same is true with the Catholic church and many others.

I love how canadians(and many others but canadians in particular) say mum.

Martin- your replies are always clever and well-worded though their aim seems to be to keep people from sharing their opinions, even if you think they are not well thought out or are biased. I think we should let everyone have their voice. I would also like to hear any of the countless good idea's I am sure you have. Besides, people arguing senselessly against you makes it easy to support your point.

Would anyone else say that most people on this board are pretty liberal? I think we should accept a bit more the unheard voice of more conservative people.

right.
bye now

mfw

[martin ewen]

aah, the velvet glove approach.
Americas technically very inclusive so it could follow that every opinion at least has a chance. (And chance at least has an opinion or 2 or 3 or 4)
Letting everyone have a voice is a good ideal, realpolitic suggests that some voices hold more sway than others.
I have no interest in putting people off sharing their opinions but reserve the right to disagree. Platitudes and opinions worn thin by repetition till they almost resemble facts annoy me. Lots of things annoy me actually, childproof lids, oh and children, oh and certain parents but I digress.
I have no illusions in regards changing anyones minds on any given topic and people I disagree with on these boards are as entitled to their opinions as I am mine.
I'm not however going to condesend to people with a more conservative view than my own simply because they might be a minority. To do that would risk me losing my prickily status and really thats the only thing between me and what amounts to an unfathomable reality.
It may not be evident but I'd happily spend time with anyone I've written to or about on these boards for as long as it took me to work out exactly how much I disliked them (or not)
The right venue and wholesale applications of social lubricants and I might even slur some sort of agreement and go off with my new buddies to bomb an abortion clinic.
I'm joking-The fact is I'm almost always joking but being mean and nasty and browbeating the braindead is like number 7 on my list of life threatening addictions.

[Mark Wessels]

Like a lizard on a window pane.

"Americas technically very inclusive so it could follow that every opinion at least has a chance."

this is true idealogically but many groups opinions are discounted and I am, though caucasian, though male, included in many discriminated against groups as far as being heard is concerned. I am young, (only 16) liberal, not terribly elequent (watch me prove it), not planning on recieving a college education (as of now), and not very patriotic. In America this leaves me with little to no voice outside of my circle of peers. I do however have a voice here and am glad to be able to use it without being shot down.

"Letting everyone have a voice is a good ideal, realpolitic suggests that some voices hold more sway than others."

Agreed. I was wondering if you knew if realpolitic( or realpolitik?) is originally a french or a german concept. I was having an arguement with a friend.

"I have no interest in putting people off sharing their opinions but reserve the right to disagree. Platitudes and opinions worn thin by repetition till they almost resemble facts annoy me. Lots of things annoy me actually, childproof lids, oh and children, oh and certain parents but I digress."

digress away. it is your strength. those things ARE irritating.

"I have no illusions in regards changing anyones minds on any given topic and people I disagree with on these boards are as entitled to their opinions as I am mine."

i thought you were trying to shut down people's voices and my opinion of you has since changed so don't give up on sharing views and being persuasive. (though i don't quite believe you have)(on further readings is that what you meant?)

"I'm not however going to condesend to people with a more conservative view than my own simply because they might be a minority."

good

"To do that would risk me losing my prickily status and really thats the only thing between me and what amounts to an unfathomable reality.
It may not be evident but I'd happily spend time with anyone I've written to or about on these boards for as long as it took me to work out exactly how much I disliked them (or not)"

I would love for you to work out my distastefulness sometime or another.

"The right venue and wholesale applications of social lubricants and I might even slur some sort of agreement and go off with my new buddies to bomb an abortion clinic."

drugs are wack. a statement made to argue with. like the shirt my classmate was wearing today in my very liberal history class "bin laden SUCKS" how tasteful.

"I'm joking-The fact is I'm almost always joking but being mean and nasty and browbeating the braindead is like number 7 on my list of life threatening addictions."

as we all are. as it is on all of ours.

thanks for all that clarification and blather, needless to say i enjoyed it thoroughly.

Smunk.
mfw

[Butterfly Man]

Number 7? Are you guy's fuckin' stupid? It's #1!

[Mr.Taxi Trix]

Who is this kid? Shit Mark, you're good. You'll have to wait a bit for your response though, kid. As Martin's unofficial New England social director and part-time nanny, I have it on good athourity that he will be unable to touch a keyboard tonight for reasons best left to the imagination. Since i liked your post, I'll take the liberty of nailing you once.

"I do however have a voice here and am glad to be able to use it without being shot down."

Pretty lofty goal, for a wet-behind-the-ears regurgitating cretin punk without so much as an ounce of heft to add to the party.
Shouldn't you be crashing cars or getting tucked in somewhere?


Welcome. Got any whitefish, Butterfly?

[Stephon]

Feel compelled to weigh in here for a minute, even if it’s a bit of a tangent. Triona, you pushed one of my most hair-trigger hot buttons (is that a mixed metaphor?)

[quote]Originally posted by Triona:
<strong>

Yeah we got lucky, if that's what you want to call it. Over 50,000 people used to work in those buildings. We were sure there would be tens of thousands dead on 9/11, but thank, whatever higher power you believe in, it was a lot less.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Excuse me, but where was God, or whatever higher power, for the people that died on 9/11? What, was 3067 dead His cutoff for the day, so He saved the rest? Good thing the quota wasn’t “tens of thousands”.

Why is it that survivors of a tragedy will give God credit for the survival, but not blame for the tragedy? There was an American pilot who was downed in enemy territory in '95, and because of his own training, cunning, and "problem-solving ingenuity", he survived for 6 days to be rescued. What does he say when he's interviewed? Says he made it out because of his "relationship and love for God." Not, “Where was that omnipotent S.O.B. when they were shooting at me?”

If there really is a God, I sincerely hope he is not so arbitrary and megalomaniacal, stepping in as the whim takes him, handing down judgements, then taking credit for the work of others.

(Wait a minute, I think He may have posted on this forum. . .)