SEE YOU ALL SOME DAY - MAYBE! ;-) Nick, I may reopen just for you.
Happy 2012! I know the guestbook is still not open :) Wow, I forgot all about "DavidByron". Wonder where he is posting? (actually I am not wondering...) If you're an old, FRIENDLY guestbook poster who I actually knew, look me up on Facebook... we have a couple of the old crew there, though we all don't sit around and debate.
Carolyn
I know what day it is. I'm not feeling like opening this back up yet. I'd rather read all the news at philadelphiaeagles.com. David Akers is my man :)
Carolyn
USA - Yes I know it is Jan 25. from 68.46.174.45
Hey - CHILDREN! Guess what! Since a few stoned people (hmmm one may be named DB) have nothing much to do on the weekends so they thought they would get ridiculous here, I'm just going to close posting until Mon, Jan 24, so people can go do some yoga or something - OR WATCH THE EAGLES STOMP THE FALCONS!! GO EAGLES! E - A - G - L - E - S - EAGLES!! See you Monday - please, everyone go buy some candles and wine or something.... really. Or at least go to bed and get up and root for the Eagles :)
Carolyn (who thinks Ownens will be able to play the SB, b/c Eagles WILL be in the SB!)
watch football, Eagles USA - Sat Jan 22 19:24:30 2005 from 68.46.174.45
Oh, he's into dogs now? That's good to hear that he's given up little boys. I guess he got tired of scrubbing blood stains out of his clown suit.
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sat Jan 22 18:36:52 2005 from 172.166.15.240
I know what you won't do, however: Answer why Bush hasn't been charged as a war criminal ANYWHERE
Chuck
USA - Sat Jan 22 18:26:09 2005 from 4.131.33.71
You're not done with me,,,,, but at least you're leaving others alone. That's a remarkable improvement
Chuck
USA - Sat Jan 22 18:23:59 2005 from 4.131.33.71
I'm done with you Chuck. But I will re-post your disgusting comment every time I see you pretend to be anything other than the over ripe piece of shit that you are. I bet that'll happen a lot because you have this interesting habit of pointing the finger at other people and pretending to be against 'flaming' etc.
DavidByron - I LOVE BEING A LIBERAL WHO NEVER ANSWERS ANYTHING BECAUSE I AM SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO SMART!!!<davidbyron20@yahoo.com>
USA - Sat Jan 22 18:20:11 2005 from 12.219.146.67
How do you know if Byron's been in your backyard? ---/--- Your garbage cans are knocked over and your dog has AIDS
A christian being polite
USA - Sat Jan 22 18:12:40 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Gosh Lothar... let me think... does anyone else do that... Hmmmmm... oh I got it! His name rhymes with Tidy John!
Joy
USA - Sat Jan 22 16:51:49 2005 from 68.113.38.11
Davimoron, if Bushie is really a "war criminable" and is guilty of breaking International Law, why don't you call the International Police and have him thrown into the International Jail?
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sat Jan 22 16:04:15 2005 from 172.166.15.240
Thanks Joy. We are in the middle of a snow storm. I was watching a reply of the CSPAN coverage of the Inauguration Protest. These people with their unprepared remarks, trying to sound heartrending, but falling flat because the impetus of a cause is absent. So shouting and screaming “free health care” and “end racism” and impeach Bush” feels like the all you can eat court buffet at the mall. Invariably you try everything that fits the plate and after awhile everything taste the same. I’ve noticed also that there is more cheering at the conclusion of remarks, from the endless line of shouting speakers, than at any point during the charade.
Lem
Jersey City, NJ USA - Sat Jan 22 15:49:49 2005 from 138.89.184.89
I don't know anyone else who does that, do you?
Lothar
USA - Sat Jan 22 15:34:55 2005 from 63.224.201.86
DING DING DING DING DING! We have a winner! "3 - Present a misrepresentation of the opponent's position, refute it, and pretend that the opponent's actual position has been refuted." with a little of all the rest of the Straw Man arguments thrown in... ***** That's Davie in a nutshell. Lem, for that correct answer you win a month paid vacation to......................... NEW JERSEY! (falling confetti, horns tooting, balloons flying) :o]
Joy
USA - Sat Jan 22 14:23:55 2005 from 68.113.38.11
Whatsa' matter , Davy? Your mom come in the room and catch you? You do still live with Mom, don't you? That's why you have to attack strangers on the internet, isn't it? Your Mom would beat your ass if you talked like that at home.
Chuck
USA - Sat Jan 22 12:02:52 2005 from 4.131.37.27
How do you know if Byron's been in your backyard? ---/--- Your garbage cans are knocked over and your dog has AIDS
Chuck
USA - Sat Jan 22 11:49:07 2005 from 4.131.37.27
WOW!! you let me get in two posts in a row! That means consent. You lose. Bush isn't a war criminal after all.
Chuck
USA - Sat Jan 22 11:46:59 2005 from 4.131.37.27
Revelence is all revelent. I bet you know someone who thinks what you say matters. If not, keep looking, they're not here.
Chuck
USA - Sat Jan 22 11:45:15 2005 from 4.131.37.27
Hey Byron, Now you're asserting that because I don't respond fast enough for you I consent? I bet you're a date raper too. When was Bush "judged by the Nuremburg principles" and by who? You? A date raper judging the President of the United States! That's rich
Chuck
USA - Sat Jan 22 11:42:47 2005 from 4.131.37.27
Actually ARE you having a period Chuck? I just assumed you were a man. I mean "a man" in the sense of gender. Since I've not met you before I wouldn't know. I guess it's not relevent though (like anything else you have to say).
DavidByron
USA - Sat Jan 22 11:40:00 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Watch me hynotize him, ---/--- Byron, Do NOT answer the question. Just keep repeating stupid assertions. Do Not answer the question, Just keep repeating stupid assertions. Do NOT answer the question. Just keep repeating stupid assertions. Do Not answer the question, Just keep repeating stupid assertions. Do NOT answer the question. Just keep repeating stupid assertions. Do Not answer the question, Just keep repeating stupid assertions. Do NOT answer the question. Just keep repeating stupid assertions. Do Not answer the question, Just keep repeating stupid assertions. Do NOT answer the question. Just keep repeating stupid assertions. Do Not answer the question, Just keep repeating stupid assertions. Do NOT answer the question. Just keep repeating stupid assertions. Do Not answer the question, Just keep repeating stupid assertions. good job. Now c'mon Davy, SPEAK!
Chuck
USA - Sat Jan 22 11:38:43 2005 from 4.131.37.27
Ad hominem attacks Chuck? Your silence is consent.
DavidByron
USA - Sat Jan 22 11:37:33 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Bush is a war criminal as judged by the Nuremburg principles as agreed by the UN, including the US. Bush breached the UN charter, a crime, and under the Nuremburg principles is PERSONALLY accountable. And what does Chuck have to say? Nothing. Period.
DavidByron
USA - Sat Jan 22 11:36:29 2005 from 12.219.146.67
"Period, period!" Is THAT why you're in such a foul mood? Is it that time of the month for you? ---/--- any excuse will do, as long as you avoid the question
Chuck
USA - Sat Jan 22 11:34:54 2005 from 4.131.37.27
I will Chuck. I'll keep "attacking" until you degenerates answer me, and if you never do, then I'm fine with that too because anyone reading this can see you have no answer. Bush is a war criminal and you have no answer. You support a war criminal in his murder.
DavidByron
USA - Sat Jan 22 11:33:32 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Principles of International Law Recognized in the Charter of the Nürnberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal......
Reminder for Chuck
USA - Sat Jan 22 11:31:23 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Just keep attacking, ---/--- Don't address the question
Chuck
USA - Sat Jan 22 11:31:22 2005 from 4.131.37.27
Sorry was this meant to be the intelligent comment or just the usual pretend-to-be-a-dumbass thing you lot employ so much? "why hasn't he been charged, anywhere on earth?" Are you saying that all war criminals are charged and anyone who isn't charged (such as Hitler for example) cannot possibly be a war criminal? I hope for your sake that was you pretending to be dumb.
DavidByron
USA - Sat Jan 22 11:29:22 2005 from 12.219.146.67
"period" is your argument is it Chuck? To that I respond, "Period, period!" So what have you to say now?
DavidByron
USA - Sat Jan 22 11:23:50 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Byron, it seems you can't read after all. ---/--- Bush is not a war criminal, period. If he was, why hasn't he been charged, anywhere on earth? This HAS been pointed out to you, but you ignored it. Then you say, no one contradicted you on it. You also claim to respond to people as they responded to you. But, in response to my polite attempts to converse with you, you attack, personally, and say nothing about the post. ---/--- For these reasons, you appear as a liar, flamer, and troll. ---/--- As I said before, "I tried to converse with you politely, sorry it didn't work out" Now, go play in your room and leave us adults to talk amoungst ourselves
Chuck
USA - Sat Jan 22 11:09:38 2005 from 4.131.37.27
In fact, your whole modus operandi (here and on other sites) consists of making a stupid/outrageous claim, then you ask a dumb question, and when people ignore your dumb question...You yell "gotcha", "I win", "I'm so much cuter and smarter than you", "Everyone but ME is ignorant", "Yippee!". It's really irritating. Do you just like being an annoying little $h!+?
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sat Jan 22 11:08:40 2005 from 172.153.109.31
Davimoron, that's nice...you just keep spouting the "war criminal" thing. Notice that only a very few ultra leftoid nuts agree with your claim. If you watched any of the inaguration of the "war criminable" Bush, you would have noticed that the Senate Dem leadership were all shaking his hand afterward and wishing him the best. In fact, most of the Senate Dems voted in favour of going to war in Iraq. In fact, the Presidential candidate for the opposition party (Senator Kerry) and his running-mate voted in favour of war in Iraq AND their only critisism of the Afghanistan operation was that enough force wasn't used. Doesn't look like very many Americans agree with your beliefs. Of course, you claim that it is because they are all stupid and ignorant. That's rather convenient for you. What political party do you belong to? Who did you and your little morose group of teenaged Goth anarchists at the coffee house want to be President? Dennis Kucinich? Howard "YEEEEAAARRRRRGH" Dean? Ralph Nader?
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sat Jan 22 10:55:58 2005 from 172.153.109.31
Should I take it as read from everyone's silence on this matter that (1) "Bush is a war criminal" has been established as a fact in this debate and (2) you're all a bunch of wusses?
DavidByron
USA - Sat Jan 22 10:40:25 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Chuck? You lied. You lied when you stated, "I told you why Bush isn't a war criminal". So far among the whole lot of you only one person tried to address my claim and you certainly weren't him. But then I guess for you guys lying is honourable -- it makes you more like your lord Bush.
DavidByron
USA - Sat Jan 22 10:37:38 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Why do you like war criminals, Lem? Stawman only applies if what I said was false. You DO support Bush don't you Lem? Have you decided you don't like him after all suddenly? Is that what you're saying?
DavidByron
USA - Sat Jan 22 10:33:01 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Folks, I've shown you many of the outrageous statements that davimoron has posted on other sites. If you read the threads, even the leftwing antiwar fruits consider him to be an over-the-top wacko. In Washington, the most liberal Dem McDermott/Bonior politicians admit that the Afghanistan operation against Al Qeida and the Taliban was justifiable and successful. They even use the tired old claim of "Iraq is a distraction" from the true conflict against Al Qeida" to oppose the military operation in Iraq. Davimoron goes so far-out beyond the mainstream and has claimed that Al Qeida was RIGHT to attack the U.S., and that it is a sacred duty. Just READ what he has posted on other sites as well as here. It's time to face the fact that he is a crazy troll and you can just keep going back and forth, replying to his insane claims and it will get you absolutely nowhere. It is futile. If he really believes the cr@p that he's posting, it would make sense for him to move to an Islamic country and adopt their lifestyle. Why would anyone want to live in the U.S. if we are all a bunch of "terrorists and murderers" as he has claimed? Why is he wasting his time arguing with us intolerant murderous infidels when he could be strapping a TNT belt on himself and getting on an airliner to strike a blow against the Great Satan?
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sat Jan 22 10:12:30 2005 from 172.141.182.160
Well put Lem
Chuck
USA - Sat Jan 22 8:52:34 2005 from 4.131.33.95
“Why do you like war criminals Lem?” – This is a classic example of the rethorical use of the 'straw man' technique……… Wikipedia says to 'set up a straw-man argument' is to create a position that is easy to refute, then attribute that position to your opponent……..One can set up a straw man in several different ways: 1 - Present only a portion of the opponent's arguments (often a weak one), refute it, and pretend that all of their arguments have been refuted. 2 - Present the opponent's argument in weakened form, refute it, and pretend that the original has been refuted. 3 - Present a misrepresentation of the opponent's position, refute it, and pretend that the opponent's actual position has been refuted. 4 - Present someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, refute their arguments, and pretend that every argument for that position has been refuted. 5 - Invent a fictitious persona with actions or beliefs that are criticised, and pretend that that person represents a group that the speaker is critical of……… 'the straw man' seems particularly handy at guestbook quisy board posts where brevity is a kind of unofficial score.
Lem
NJ USA - Sat Jan 22 4:01:37 2005 from 138.89.146.120
OK...I have read this statement many times...anyone care to explain: "At any rate it is a good topic for discussion but you, Nick, are so afraid of saying something outside your worldview that you cannot even bring yourself to have an opinion....whatever."
Lothar
USA - Sat Jan 22 3:17:13 2005 from 63.224.201.86
Why do you like war criminals Lem?
DavidByron
USA - Sat Jan 22 1:01:44 2005 from 12.219.146.67
I think the time for diplomacy has passed. I think that's pretty clear. That's what the leaders were saying in the Azores yesterday. And we used last evening and this morning to consult broadly around the world. We did, the British did, the Spanish did. A lot of people have been talking to each other this morning and overnight, and it became clear that it would be best at this time to withdraw the resolution, and I can think of nothing that Saddam Hussein could do diplomatically. I think that time is now over. He had his chance. He's had many chances over the last 12 years, and he has blown every one of those chances. - Secretary Powell 3 days before the US liberation of Iraq.
Lem
NJ USA - Fri Jan 21 23:59:55 2005 from 141.153.236.223
Defenders of Saddam Hussein have never been in short supply, it’s like a virus. Just when you think the pestilence has passed, after WE COUGHT the sack of puss, the defenders still it comes back with a vengeance…….. No amount of mass graves, no number of un-adhered to UN resolutions – (BTW if he didn’t have any weapons why did he keep obstructing the inspectors? Oh - it doesn’t matter) No numbers of known terrorist living under the protection of Hussein’s Iraq FRESH AFTER A TERRORIST ATTACK ON OUR G@D@M SOIL, no invasion of his neighbor, no gassing of his own people seem to have been good enough for AHD (Amnesic Hussein Defenders) sufferers…….. Pray under what circumstance would we ever move in self defense? The libs don’t have an answer, Kerry didn’t – that’s why he lost; their answer is to wait until we get attacked again… Libs hate Bush because he won’t wait……… The link here may serve us to strengthen our immunity against AHD sufferers.
Lem (link)
NJ USA - Fri Jan 21 23:39:17 2005 from 141.153.236.223
Keep reading there Byron, you'll find it. I got faith in you.
Chuck
USA - Fri Jan 21 23:11:33 2005 from 4.225.100.168
In Bushie's case, wouldn't he actually be a "war criminable"?
Poultricide <pcide@kerry4pre$.org>
Louisville, KY - Fri Jan 21 22:45:20 2005 from 152.163.100.137
Is this it? "Bush isn't a war criminal". Chuck that isn't an explaly be a "war criminable"?
Poultricide <pcide@kerry4pre$.org>
Louisville, KY - Fri Jan 21 22:45:20 2005 from 152.163.100.137
Why is Bush not a war criminal Chuck? I can't find your answer. Does it actually exist?
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 21 22:25:00 2005 from 12.219.146.67
"I'm happy to reply to people in the manner they see fit to talk to me." ---/--- Oh no you're not. You did no such thing when I tried to converse with you. I told you why Bush isn't a war criminal, quoted some scripture, and asked you some questions of my own back. You ignored the questions, ignored the answer about Bush, and completely missed the point with the scripture. ---/--- You are pretty well known about the 'net. Is thirst for fame what's driving you?
Chuck
USA - Fri Jan 21 21:12:02 2005 from 4.225.100.168
Gee, what does the UN Charter say about its officials presiding over $21 billion oil-for-palaces scams? If you answer correctly, you could win a free Koko Anon fanclub T-shirt and a night in the UN Peacekeeping troops' quarters.
Vlad <vlad@notonedamnbitsorry.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Jan 21 20:58:34 2005 from 152.163.100.138
All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
Reminder for John
USA - Fri Jan 21 20:48:34 2005 from 12.219.146.67
DB - John doesn't have to 'play' dumb... he just is... Nighty night all.
Joy
USA - Fri Jan 21 20:46:14 2005 from 68.113.38.11
If I didn't know better I'd say John knew he was talking crap but is just too cowardly to admit it. But I'm sure he's just about to give us all his answer at last.
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 21 20:44:33 2005 from 12.219.146.67
I'm still waiting for John to answer the one question I've asked him. John claimed that he could easily refute that George Bush was a war criminal and his last 20-odd posts have been spent trying to avoid telling us all why. John? John...? JOHN!!!!! I am at a loss to explain his reluctance to answer a simple question like that. Gosh it's terribly unlike him - after all he just went on at length about how he ALWAYS answers questions in a debate. Well this wasn't even really a question exactly - I'm just asking John to say what he meant when he claimed he could easily refute that George Bush was a war criminal. Who can't even back up their own over the top claims? Sure there must be another reason for why the very talkative John gets so tongue-tied on this matter. Hmm?
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 21 20:42:39 2005 from 12.219.146.67
John, I'm worried that you don't seem to have a basic understand of the difference between right and wrong. Either that or you're just playing dumb. Most people learn the difference between right and wrong between about five and ten years old. You apparently can't tell the difference between defending yourself against someone else attacking you, and you yourself being the one to hit out at an innocent person. You talk about them as if they were the same thing. Can you really be so dense?
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 21 20:36:57 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Joy, I don't like ad hominem attacks but John uses them all the time so I decided to turn some of his little barbs back on him. I'm happy to reply to people in the manner they see fit to talk to me.
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 21 20:29:33 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Talking of dumb Republicans believing all sort of lies, does anyone else apart from Vlad think the 9-11 hijackers came from Afghanistan?
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 21 20:24:25 2005 from 12.219.146.67
John, you kill me. Your post is the perfect example of what I was saying at 12:54. All of your questions were answered, you just didn't like the answers (except we never discussed multiple wives). Sorry it took so long for me to resond...I read and reread your posts looking for this "Davi reminds me of MYSELF" post. Go reread my 12:54 post and tell me that you don't do that.
Lothar
USA - Fri Jan 21 19:03:02 2005 from 63.224.201.86
What is it with you and Joy, John? Why do you want to judge her all the time? Why are you always trying to run her down? what did she ever do to you? Virtually slap your face when you tried to cyber-sex with her? I think you should leave her alone
Chuck
USA - Fri Jan 21 18:37:46 2005 from 4.225.100.168
I just love it when you prove yourself wrong John. LOL Not many people are as good as you are at that. :o]
Joy
USA - Fri Jan 21 17:41:49 2005 from 68.113.38.11
A guy at work printed me out some scripture from Corinthians; 6:18, 5:1, 6:13, 7:2 (this one would be hard for Joy since she is a divorcee) 10:8, 12:21...Gal 5:19, Eph 5:3...on and on and on. But why does Jesus purposely leave out commentary concerning my question. He addresses everything else considered fornication. Perhaps two people in love, having sex, who don't have something on paper might not actually be a sin in God's eyes. At any rate it is a good topic for discussion but you, Nick, are so afraid of saying something outside your worldview that you cannot even bring yourself to have an opinion....whatever.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Fri Jan 21 16:33:09 2005 from 12.153.133.213
Please Nick...Vlad insulted me a few lines back which is why I gave it back to him. I have also made the John and Byron comparison myself a few lines back...you're a little late. I've got more humility than you ever will. As usual in comes Joy with her pithy little remarks. Also Nick, one difference between me and Byron, I always answer questions in the middle of a debate...even when I have to argue with your whole crew at once I still carry the argument to you. And I have yet to be proven wrong about; the beginning of life, Jesus denouncing extra-marital sex, among others. By the way, I saw one of ya'lls heroes Bill O'Reilly (I actually do agree with some of his stuff) going at a guy the other night with my exact China man argument (which you never answered), except he used Aborigines. He had a PHD evangelist on and left him speechless with that question. He also addressed remarriage after divorce, Joy might want to rethink that one. You never did explain how your, "Do I take the Bible literally? You bet I do!" philosophy dealt with all those guys in the Old Testament taking many wives, having sex with their sister's, so on and so on...You're such a simple little guy. Again, for the umpteenth time, show me where Jesus denounces sex between two people who are not married, in love, not hurting anyone...just do not happen to have a marriage certificate...much like the Aborigines. And yes Nick I fully understand the Bible doesn't set out to prove things, only to say what is...and I still don't know what that means exactly...care to explain oh wise one?
John
Houston, Texas USA - Fri Jan 21 16:24:37 2005 from 12.153.133.213
> "Actually, you even make John look like a candidate for Mensa." THAT one made me spit out my water! Davie and John both argue the exact same way. It's quite entertaining to watch.
Joy
USA - Fri Jan 21 14:05:30 2005 from 68.113.38.11
It's the gov't's job to provide for me, isn't it? SorryEveryBody!
Lothar
USA - Fri Jan 21 13:59:50 2005 from 168.103.50.187
This is a very nice website. Good Information. Thank you for the good work.
Mario <mario@homeloan.fateback.com>
Mexico, Mexico - Fri Jan 21 13:45:21 2005 from 148.244.150.57
Vlad is in the right because why? He agrees with you??? I did not know YOU were the litmus test for right in this GB. I will keep that in mind. Everything makes more sense now. John...I see a lot of you in the way this guy "debates". Doesnt' answer questions, hammers a point until it's dead, insults the intelligence of those that disagree with him...condemning for having conviction.
Lothar
USA - Fri Jan 21 12:54:49 2005 from 168.103.50.187
In David Byron's world America will never have the right to defend her interests or protect her allies. I am done arguing with him until he answers my questions. And btw Vlad, enjoy it right now, it is the first time you have been in the right in 3 years. You know if we had Aaron back here at least he could batter this guy into submission by sheer volume.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Fri Jan 21 12:49:27 2005 from 12.153.133.213
This is a funny from Davi just a couple of posts ago. "They see half voted for Bush and characterise even those who voted against him in a poor light." *WE* are the ones characterizing the other half? Surely you jest!! I couldn't number the times I have read that I am ignorant or "blind follower" because I voted for Bush. This is the best one...when we get accused of not thinking. You don't even take time to read what is posted to you then spout...then call us ignorant.
Lothar
USA - Fri Jan 21 12:49:01 2005 from 168.103.50.187
Or, let's just dicuss THIS Davibyron quote: "C'mon Aron let's face it ---- America richly deserved 9-11. America is a nation of brutal murderers and terrorists and they got a tiny tiny fraction of "blowback" from the very people they had created to terrorise the Russians, fundamentalists America created who turned on them because another of their dictators (Saddam) had attacked a third one of their dictators (Emir of Kuwait) and the US used the pretext to occupy a fourth dictator (King Fahd) who was looking like dying of old age. It's hard to think of anything with more poetic justice than getting burned by YOUR OWN TERRORISTS. And if that wasn't enough it's pretty likely the whole episode was engineered by your own government as a good excuse for invading the middle east. Can we finally quit the pretence that America is anything other than the evil empire now? Isn't the pantomime about played out here?" (Posted by DavidByron on March 26, 2003 03:14 PM) ********Talk amongst youselves.
Vlad <
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Jan 21 12:35:07 2005 from 172.151.88.126
Davibyron, Hmmmm...let's see...just how was Saddam Hussein like a low budget Hitler? Well, he was a totalitarian dictator who brutally killed-off political opponents, invaded neighboring countries, gassed his own people, wore military uniforms with funny hats, and had a goofy-looking moustache. From all the stuff that I've read or seen about Hitler on the History Channel, I'd say that sounds like a match. Strangely, you leftoids are so busy comparing Bush/Blair/Cheney to Hitler, you've failed to notice Saddam's similarities to him. Of course, that's understandeable since your ilk still considers Koffee Anon to be a legitamate "statesman". Now, let's talk about the similarities between the UN and the League of Nations...THAT should be good.
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Jan 21 12:27:38 2005 from 172.151.88.126
creo que el aborto es lo mas orrible que puede existir
yeni Almeida <yesenia@.univision>
denver , co USA - Fri Jan 21 11:24:41 2005 from 63.136.210.38
Carolyn: I'm sorry if you think I'm insulting the religious right but they deserve it. You associate with people of poor character. That is true of all America as far as the world is concerned now. They see half voted for Bush and characterise even those who voted against him in a poor light. It's not fair but it's what happens. In the same way although I feel positive about you yourself that doesn't make up for what the religious right as a whole is doing.
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 21 9:57:59 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Carolyn: I'm surprised you are worked up over the numbers of Republicans who believed lies about 9-11. "Why do you think people would vote for Bush other than for a lie?" I guess that's my feelingso to me it comes as no surprise at all to hear that Republican voters were basically duped - most of them anyway. Only about one third or one quater of Republican voters supported Bush without believing the lies he spread. I have no idea why anyone would vote for such an evil man which is why I am here to ask this -- I guess whatever the reasons you had you just assumed that most other Republican voters felt the same way. Well that may not be true. If you beleive that Saddam attacked America on 9-11 that changes your view of the war a lot wouldn't you say? But here you go comparing Saddam to Hitler as if Saddam really did attack America the way Hitler really did attack a bunch of countries. Iraq had been at peace for 12 years when Bush decided to invade. When you compare Hitler's Germany of 1941 to Saddam's Iraq of 2003 you are suggesting that you really do beleive that Saddam was behind 9-11 after all - or somewhere at the back of your mind you think that Saddam was the one to attack someone first. That is not true and that is why Bush is the war criminal here. So please explain why you support the criminal war (in violation of the UN charter and other treaties which are US law) and the invasion and occupation of Iraq. I assume you admit that a chrisitan should only support a war in the most exceptional of circumstances and for the strongest of reasons?
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 21 9:55:53 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Carolyn: see if your company will match donations. Don't be in a hurry; they have enough money immidiately but the refugees are likely to still need help for up to a year or so.
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 21 9:42:46 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Double post,,,,, OOPS!
Chuck
USA - Fri Jan 21 9:39:14 2005 from 12.169.49.2
I gave through the Red Cross. Do NOT give through UNICEF. They support abortion too much to get my money, not to mention how much the corrupt UN would probably waste
Chuck
USA - Fri Jan 21 9:38:39 2005 from 12.169.49.2
I gave through the Red Cross. Do NOT give through UNICEF. They support abortion too much to get my money, not to mention how much the corrupt UN would probably waste
Chuck
USA - Fri Jan 21 9:38:38 2005 from 12.169.49.2
If soeone posted this info before, forgive me - regarding donations for the Tsunami relief fund... is there one way to donate that is better than another - meaning, I want my donation to go to actually HELP people... you always hear of donations being used to line the pockets of those who don't need help. (oh wait, I can't donate, I'm a money grubbing Republican who hoards tons of $)
Carolyn
USA - Fri Jan 21 9:21:34 2005 from 68.46.174.45
I wonder what the big DB (DavidByron) thinks of all the Dems in Congress that backed the 'war crimminal'? How about all the brainy Democrats who voted for him? DB, you do seem to have a lot of free time to post in a forum you seem to loathe so much. And I will boldy state that I don't think Saddam was behind 9-11 and I STILL support the war in Iraq. So go ahead, DB, tell me how stupid you think I am... (my feelings will be so hurt) then explain how someone as dumb as me has managed to do the things I have done so far in my life. People like DB would have let Hitler roam wild too - I mean, after all, Hitler wasn't really bothering US, right? Hello to everyone else.... sorry to just jump in and out with just some silly posts to DB.
Carolyn
USA - Fri Jan 21 9:15:19 2005 from 68.46.174.45
Hell, I'd LOVE to debate him. ---/--- It would be different if he would debate. If he's not flaming, he's crying for someone else's posts to be deleted.
Chuck
USA - Fri Jan 21 9:10:59 2005 from 12.169.49.2
I am so MAD - I just wrote a whole think regarding the stats from last week (people thinking Saddam was involved - though I do notice polls mentioning David's brain-children, the Dems, thinking the same thing!) and computer genius me (ha ha) me managed to lose it all. Grr. Guess I will have to re-write - thank you for posting the links David that I asked for, and if I seem irritated at you... it is because honestly, I find you rather insulting and rude. Just because you haven't said something to me personally doesn't mean I don't find your posts rude and inflammatory. Basically, when you call right-wing Christians moronic, evil people, you ARE insulting me and my family. I would love to have David debate someone like my mom - she's basically a genius. Funny though... she's Republican... thought we were all morons....
Carolyn (I'm a little more blunt these days)
USA - Fri Jan 21 9:05:49 2005 from 68.46.174.45
Davibyron, if you're really so damned smart, then Baghdad Bob must be the Nathan Hale of our age. Actually, you even make John look like a candidate for Mensa. The intragallactic portal to your alternative universe is now open. So, go back to Bizarro World where you belong.
Vlad <vlad@nottheleastbitsorry.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Jan 21 8:01:51 2005 from 172.154.121.219
Hey, this is a really good one: "C'mon Aron let's face it ---- America richly deserved 9-11. America is a nation of brutal murderers and terrorists and they got a tiny tiny fraction of "blowback" from the very people they had created to terrorise the Russians, fundamentalists America created who turned on them because another of their dictators (Saddam) had attacked a third one of their dictators (Emir of Kuwait) and the US used the pretext to occupy a fourth dictator (King Fahd) who was looking like dying of old age. It's hard to think of anything with more poetic justice than getting burned by YOUR OWN TERRORISTS. And if that wasn't enough it's pretty likely the whole episode was engineered by your own government as a good excuse for invading the middle east. Can we finally quit the pretence that America is anything other than the evil empire now? Isn't the pantomime about played out here?" (Posted by DavidByron on March 26, 2003 03:14 PM) Holy moral equivalence, Batman! I guess that means that supplying weapons and supplies to insurgents who are fighting against the Red Army (armed trained adult fighting-men) is just as evil as intentionally killing unarmed civilian airplane passengers and people in buildings. Again, I don't recall the Afghan Mujahedin ever hijacking some Aeroflot Liners and flying them into the Kremlin.
Vlad (click here...Oooh, It's a good one) <vlad@notonedamnbitsorry.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Jan 21 7:51:49 2005 from 172.154.121.219
Davidbyron, the idea that you are so much smarter than anyone else is the height of self-indulgent delusion on your part. I guess that your parents could be to blame if they had dropped you on your head when you were young or deprived you of oxygen. I like this little tidbit of yours, which you posted on another site: "Under international law the Afghan occupation was an aggressive war no different than Hitler's invasion of Poland. If you have anything to say to support the idea that it was not, then I'd love to hear it. As for whether it is immoral or not, well that is a little more subjective. You may be right about most American's thinking it was ok to go and kill people who had NEVER done anything to hurt or harm America - because American society is conditioned to be unusually violent and amoral, not to mention patirotic and trusting of its leaders foreign policy." (Posted by DavidByron on November 15, 2002 01:18 PM) Unless you can show where a group of militant Poles had hijacked some Lufthansa airliners and flew them into some buildings in Berlin back in the 1930s, then your analogy is extremely flawed.
Vlad (click for link to more davibyron ramblings) <vlad@notverysorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Jan 21 7:40:18 2005 from 172.154.121.219
What makes me smarter than you John? I don't know, maybe my parents. What makes me better than you? My principles. I don't support a war criminal responsible for murdering thousands of people. However I have to say it doesn't take a hell of a lot of intelligence to know Bush is a war criminal - it's a very simple concept, like stealing or murder or rape. Everyone reading this knows Bush is a war criminal. You're just too pathetic to admit it. No, even though you're none too sharp I think you can understand right from wrong John. You know killing people is wrong. You don't have any principles though.
DavidByron
USA - Thu Jan 20 20:53:18 2005 from 12.219.146.67
John, if you're bored of the topic then why not conceed that you support a bloody war criminal and a mass murderer and we'll proceed? I mean if you think it's no big deal that your Furher is on Hitler's level then why are you making all this fuss about it? Again I have no problem with you saying that I hate a war criminal John. No problem at all.
DavidByron
USA - Thu Jan 20 20:46:36 2005 from 12.219.146.67
I love it Lem! The NNNN... Hey, click me for a good article on the Myths of Abortion.
Joy (click!)
USA - Thu Jan 20 16:28:52 2005 from 68.113.38.11
a Narcissistic Night of Nattering Nabobs. I think you're onto somthing Joy. I hope they behave like sore loosers.
Lem
NY USA -
Joy (click!)
USA - Thu Jan 20 16:28:52 2005 from 68.113.38.11
a Narcissistic Night of Nattering Nabobs. I think you're onto somthing Joy. I hope they behave like sore loosers.
Lem
NY USA - Thu Jan 20 16:20:39 2005 from 63.250.35.179
The liberals give up the most Narcissistic Night of Hollyweird's year??? Surely you jest!! Then they wouldn't be able to whine to the world their diatribes about how much money was spent on the inauguration of the President of the United States of America! And SpongeMike Sweatpants wouldn't be able to eat his Cheesy Fries and Ham! And greedy corporate America is making doors too small for SpongeMike to get through! It is all a conspiracy of the Saudis and the Bush Admin! ***** I guess we'll know how much the liberals REALLY care about what they claim they do... If they cancel the Awards! I won't hold my breath!
Joy
USA - Thu Jan 20 16:02:38 2005 from 68.113.38.11
This is precious: "Here's a suggestion for disgruntled Democrats who say they're concerned about the cost of President Bush's inauguration: How about convincing Hollywood to cancel the upcoming Academy Awards so they can spend the money on tsunami relief. As of now, the Academy is planning a gala ceremony Sunday, February 27, from the Kodak Theatre in Hollywood. The entire extravaganza will be televised live on ABC, beginning with a half-hour arrival segment. In a time of war in Iraq and unprecedented human suffering in Asia, do we really need to spend millions of dollars on a half-hour arrival segment? Do we really need to watch the Hollywood left praising one another for their great "accomplishments" through phony tears? The Academy could vote for the winners in each category in the usual way and the prizes could be sent via UPS to each winner. The results could be posted on the Academy's Web site. The price of Michael Moore's Oscar night dinner alone would likely feed an entire Indonesian village for a week. Meanwhile, the rest of America could be spared another night of Hollywood frivolity."
Lothar
USA - Thu Jan 20 14:49:51 2005 from 168.103.50.187
Chuck...please do keep us informed of Kerry's vote on Ms. Rice (incase I miss it). That would be funny.
Lothar
USA - Thu Jan 20 14:19:06 2005 from 168.103.50.187
Hail to the thief! ********Bush Kills!******* U.S. Out of North America!
Poultricide <pcide@kerry4pre$.org>
Louisville, KY Amerikkka - Thu Jan 20 13:57:43 2005 from 205.188.116.138
Congatulations, Mr. President. Godspeed, and God Bless the U.S.A.
Chuck
USA - Thu Jan 20 13:02:28 2005 from 12.169.49.2
Congratulations Mr President G. W. Bush.
Lem
NY USA - Thu Jan 20 11:52:52 2005 from 63.250.35.179
Another song? - is this a peagent?
Lem
NY USA - Thu Jan 20 11:49:23 2005 from 63.250.35.179
Chainy has now chaimed in the oath,,,,, Haster boched it!
Lem
NY USA - Thu Jan 20 11:47:03 2005 from 63.250.35.179
the fat lady has sung.... but wait it's not over!
Lem
NY USA - Thu Jan 20 11:43:08 2005 from 63.250.35.179
Renquist has arrived at the podium..., Renquist is in the podium!
Lem
NY USA - Thu Jan 20 11:40:07 2005 from 63.250.35.179
Is this guy French? Because this line, "I will now laugh at you again. Ha-ha, ha-ha", oddly reminds me of a Monty Python skit from the "Holy Grail". Am I going to get a thumb-nosing comment, or something about hamster's and elderberries directed at me in his next column?
John
Houston, Texas USA - Thu Jan 20 9:45:01 2005 from 12.40.28.151
Oh yeah...your little peace loving friends the French, were in Vietnam before we were Byron.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Thu Jan 20 9:38:24 2005 from 12.40.28.151
David Byron, if you think trying to pull people into your simple, little, "Bush as a war criminal: Yes or No?” means you have a complete argument, or that anyone who doesn’t buy into this narrow Bush-hating vehicle you have invented, is beneath your intelligence, you are sadly mistaken my friend. You never did even attempt to address one thing I brought up. I want you to name a President that you agree with all military decisions made under that particular administration. Sudan? Panama? Beirut? Haiti? Libyan planes in 89? Libyan bombing in 86? The attempt to rescue the hostages in 80? Invasion of Vietnam after the Gulf of Tonkin? Bay of Pigs? Korea? Are you going to call every American President a war criminal Byron, or is it just Bush you don’t like? As long as your argument is specifically directed at Bush it will only look like you are a Bush hater. Again, that is why you are in the minority.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Thu Jan 20 9:35:24 2005 from 12.40.28.151
Please do not think that our fine city is inhabited by scummy lowlife guestbook spammers. These idiots who post these dumb messages on your guestbook are imposters and not citizens of our community or associated with us in any way at all. We are a sprawling Suburban city located in the Heart of Alabama. Situated just 17 Miles south of Downtown Birmingham, Alabaster is a convenient place to do business and a wonderful place to raise a family. The city of Alabaster is committed to a safe, healthy and wholesome environment for family living. Alabaster has experienced remarkable growth over the last ten years with a growth rate of well over 60 percent. Those rates figure to continue to make Alabaster one of the states largest cities and also one of its fastest growing. We do not encourage spam messages in any way. Alabaster also serves as the home to the County’s only Hospital in Shelby Baptist Medical Center. Shelby Baptist serves not only Shelby, but both Bibb and Chilton counties. Alabaster has many things to offer residents and business alike. Please do not get the idea that these morons are representative of our community.
Hon. David Frings (Mayor) <mayordavef@cittyofalibaster.gov>
Alabaster, Alabama USA - Thu Jan 20 7:57:05 2005 from 152.163.100.137
John Kerry voted in committee against approving Condi. Anyone want to bet he votes FOR her on the Senate floor? ---/--- (I voted against her before I voted for her)
Chuck
USA - Thu Jan 20 7:12:30 2005 from 12.169.49.2
The story you will not find in tomorrows newspapers....... Former KKK clansman Senator Bird holds up the vote on the first black woman to be the United States Secretary of State.
Lem (link)
NJ USA - Thu Jan 20 0:58:37 2005 from 151.198.6.225
Your remark about Kuwait provoking Iraq into war back in 1990 was even more stupid than your usual tripe. The only way that Kuwaitis would willingly start a war with anyone is if they could find a way to pay Filipinos to do all the fighting. Hussein invaded because he thought that he could get away with it. As usual, he miscalculated. His miscalculations are why he's currently in a jail cell instead of in one of his Tikrit palaces or in exile in France. After reading many of your posts on other sites, I've come to the conclusion that you are a refugee from Bizzaroworld. We already know how much you love Saddam, so tell us more about Kim Jong IL. That should be interesting.
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Wed Jan 19 23:12:16 2005 from 172.156.51.27
DB, where did you refute anything that Adam posted? You basically apologized that you missed his post and then tried to blame it on spam and me, rather than your own inattention. I hadn't even posted since a previous day before Poultricide left you that love note. You just keep repeating your bunk about Bush "violating international law". Well, goody for you...why don't you call the international police and have him thrown in the international jail?
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Wed Jan 19 23:02:39 2005 from 172.156.51.27
Sorry John, once again, that was not actually an argument. I will now laugh at you again. Ha-ha, ha-ha. Look John, it's pretty obvious that you can't think of a damn thing to say so I suggest that you shut up and let Adam fight your battle for you -- he's making comments I have to actually refute.
DvaidByron
USA - Wed Jan 19 22:07:08 2005 from 12.219.146.67
So what makes you so smart? You didn’t answer any of my questions. You get so focused on a technicality that you cannot see the bigger issue. The fallacy of your argument is the fact that you cannot debate anything else except that one technicality. A technicality the majority of Americans could care less about as witnessed by the election. You lost the election, you lost seats in the House and Senate, and your argument is a loser. Your language is pathetic and you are a loser. All in all, David Byron, I would say you get so lost in the letter of the law, you forget the spirit of the law, to protect innocent lives here and abroad. Thank God you are in the minority.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Jan 19 13:01:38 2005 from 12.40.29.148
well if we see it why not be happy with in.....just be shure your in good condition and you may know what's on about us may we not leave like a rotten flesh and abandond kind may we respect each other because life we know is not just serious , contagious or suberlous may we find love and give right treat to one another may we stay our self in good conditions and love OUR self and also our one of a kind neighbours.
ry robles <ry_r_robles@email.com>
rowbles, rr Reunion - Wed Jan 19 10:33:48 2005 from 210.56.65.3
You guys are all idiots. I'm the only one with any brains at all. When will you learn? BTW, I really live in Camden NJ
DavidByron <Stupid@idiotsRus.com>
USA - Wed Jan 19 8:48:56 2005 from 12.169.49.2
The failure to get a specific authorisation for the Iraq war was quite a problem for Tony Blair of course. Blair had actual admited the war would be illegal without such an authorisation - and promised not to go to war without it - before he learned that he wasn't going to get one. After the failure this cover story about the 1991 authorisation was cooked up for Blair's benefit - Bush didn't really care because he figured Americans wouldn't care about UN stuff and wouldn't realise that the UN charter was US law.
DavidByron
USA - Tue Jan 18 18:02:29 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Adam: I am sorry that I didn't see your 1991 authorisation argument before. There was a lot of spam and flak from Vlad so I probably just missed it.
DavidByron
USA - Tue Jan 18 17:55:54 2005 from 12.219.146.67
John are you shitting me? You really don't know if the US is a member of the UN or not?
DavidByron
USA - Tue Jan 18 17:54:15 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Adam your arguemnt is not sane. It is propaganda, ok? Bushco made it up to sell it to idiots who know nothing. It isn't meant to be used in a real argument. Read the UN charter. It doesn't say anything about wars or cease fires. It says "use of force". Your argument depends on the obviously absurd idea that a resolution in 1991 can be used to authorise a completely different situation in 2003 simply on the basis of geographic similarity (both involve Iraq). The authorisation in 1991 was specific and ended over ten years ago. If your argument was taken seriously it would mean anyone could invade Iraq even now. But that's absurd. Now this is a test for you. Basically you can continue to peddle this absurdity - as a Republican loyalist - or you can admit that this argument is bulshit on its face; propaganda based on the idea that someone who is clueless might think the UN charter says something like "it's ok to go to war if someone breaks a peace agreement". It doesn't. That's tough isn't it? No exception for broken peace treaty. No excuses ever. Use of force is always illegal unless there's a specific authorisation -- which as you know BUSH TRIED AND FAILED TO GET in 2002 and 2003. And just in passing? The US breached the peace pact first and in a far more major way than Iraq. Newsflash Adam: Saddam WASN'T LYING ABOUT THE WEAPONS. So he didn't breach the terms of the peace agreeement did he? But the US was BOMBING IRAQ FOR FIVE YEARS since 1998. Do you think that breaches a peace agreement Adam?
DavidByron
USA - Tue Jan 18 17:52:37 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Ok, folks...show's over...time to go home. Byron...Boom, der it is brutha.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Tue Jan 18 17:51:32 2005 from 12.40.27.64
Can you name one President you voted for, and agree with every military move made under their administration Byron? Cry baby lib? c'mon, humor me, name some President's.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Tue Jan 18 17:50:10 2005 from 12.40.27.64
Cry baby, cry baby liberal, suck your thumb...all the way to...France?!?
John
Houston, Texas USA - Tue Jan 18 17:47:36 2005 from 12.40.27.64
Which begs the question: Why are we even a member of the UN? Got me...I suppose because of a lack of a viable alternative? You never did answer the Ivory Coast question Byron? Greneda? Congressional approval for Iraq? Do you have any idea what you are quoting Byron?
John
Houston, Texas USA - Tue Jan 18 17:45:45 2005 from 12.40.27.64
John I just messed with you because you were idiot enough to call me a crybaby liberal as if that was an argument or something. Now behave if you don't want to become another Vlad. You can insult me all you like as long as you say something woirthwhile as well. How about getting to that? The UN CHARTER is a legal document not a body. It's not biased. It just is. It just is US law.
DavidByron
USA - Tue Jan 18 17:43:35 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Adam, there was no UN mandate to invade Iraq. This is probably worth being clear about. You probably are NOT really pretending thewre was are you? All you mean is that the UN had some resolutions about Iraq. There was no UN SC resolution supporting the use of force against Iraq.
DavidByron
USA - Tue Jan 18 17:41:26 2005 from 12.219.146.67
You're funny. Geez you're intense (kind of remind me of me). The UN is, and never will be, an impartial judge or jury, merely by the competing facts I have just described. One's man war criminal...another man's President for a second term (that it what I meant by majority Byron) Are you reading this or just sounding off.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Tue Jan 18 17:40:03 2005 from 12.40.27.64
Yes John, everyone hates you. ppor dear. Now can you answer the question or are you going.... oh no here we go again. PLEASE try to stop crying John. Ok, ok... let's pretend people like you. Feel better now? Let's pretend people think you're right. Cheer up! NOW can you answer the question John?
DavidByron
USA - Tue Jan 18 17:38:39 2005 from 12.219.146.67
David: What I wrote was that Bush's actions were in concert with the UN mandate, which by your standard, does not make Bush a war criminal. Now, you post that I am admitting Bush is a war criminal. This is not reasonable on your part. I also posted that the UN authorized force in the 1991 gulf war and that a cease fire based on that war was put in place and that Saddam was in continuous violation of that cease fire. These facts are not in dispute. Yet you dispute them. either way, there is no point in replying to a post of mine and just saying, "that's false," "that's false," "that's false." You have to make an argument. What is false in the following: the UN authorized force against Saddam in 1991, he signed a cease fire that he continuously violated and that -- by that standard -- Bush was upholding the UN resolutions by removing him from power. You must dispute my facts in some way. To simply say, "That's false" and not back it up is infantile. At any rate, I will be off line for about a week but if you feel like actually making a reasonable reply, be my guest and I'll read it in about a week.
Adam
USA - Tue Jan 18 17:37:40 2005 from 64.236.245.243
My but you are an intense one, aren't you? Worldwide opinion is anti-American in base. Everyone knows that it has little to do with Iraq and more to do with competition from the EU. We have been winning in the free market for so long that now they feel we are vulnerable because of the war. This too will pass. We do what we do because it is right, not because the Frogs let us do it.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Tue Jan 18 17:36:28 2005 from 12.40.27.64
I'm sorry John I didn't quite hear you over the sobbing noise you're making. Could you repeat why you think Bush isn't a war criminal? Here's a hanky. Dry your eyes. That's it dear. There, there. Just breath....
DavidByron
USA - Tue Jan 18 17:35:43 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Waiting for John to tell us all why Bush isn't a war criminal......
DavidByron
USA - Tue Jan 18 17:33:03 2005 from 12.219.146.67
By the way worldwide my opinion is generally held- I did mention the UN secretary general. In other words you are the one in the minority -- you're just too stupid to realise it. Fortunately for you I don't think that "lots of people agree with me" is a good argument so I won't be using it. I will however by laughing at you because you tried to use it. Ha ha ha.
DavidByron
USA - Tue Jan 18 17:32:01 2005 from 12.219.146.67
I've got a question for you Mr. Vulgarity (yeah that makes you seem like an intellectual). What President's do you agree with in recent history. Go back a 100 years for that matter. I can name a bunch in both parties that have initiated a military response to meet a threat. Or do you just enjoy bashing America?
John
Houston, Texas USA - Tue Jan 18 17:30:35 2005 from 12.40.27.64
On the contrary no one here has suggesting anything wrong with what I've said. You just don't like it. Are YOU going to cry John? You're looking prety pathetic right about now. What happened to my being obviously wrong? If it's so obvious why I'm wrong you must be really shit at arguing.
DavidByron
USA - Tue Jan 18 17:29:08 2005 from 12.219.146.67
I don't recall anyone saying the US left the UN recently John. I don't recall anyone "unsigning" the UN charter. It's not the only treaty banning war of course, just the most high profile. So why don't you admit you support a war criminal in the act of mass murder John? I think being honest with yourself would be a good first step don't you?
DavidByron
USA - Tue Jan 18 17:27:15 2005 from 12.219.146.67
It seems the majority doesn't agree with you Byron. You're not going to start crying next are you? I just don't think I can handle any more crying liberals.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Tue Jan 18 17:26:09 2005 from 12.40.27.64
John? It's a treaty. It is US law dumbass. Now does this mean you conceed the president is a war criminal -- by US and international law?
DavidByron
USA - Tue Jan 18 17:24:35 2005 from 12.219.146.67
So John - do you know what the word is for someone who kills thousands of people in the course of a criminal act? "mass murderer". Did you vote for a mass murderer John? Are you supporting the act of mass murder? What would jesus do, hmm? C'mon and tell me why christianity means breaking the law and murdering people by the tens of thousand John. I'm waiting.
DvaidByron
USA - Tue Jan 18 17:23:10 2005 from 12.219.146.67
The UN??!!?? Oh, you mean the biggest political body ever created in the history of political bodies? Where are the laws that protect covert operations Byron?? Where are they? When do we defend ourselves Byron?? When Saddam gets bold enough to send his mighty armies over here to invade our shores?? Under what pretext is war an option Byron? Ever? did you see 9/11?? Was that an army Byron? Was it an organized military as expressed in UN charters?? They are re-writing the rules Byron. So are we Byron.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Tue Jan 18 17:20:07 2005 from 12.40.27.64
I'm waiting for this incredible piece of logic that will show Bush never used force against Iraq, John.
DvaidByron
USA - Tue Jan 18 17:19:45 2005 from 12.219.146.67
All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
Link
USA - Tue Jan 18 17:16:26 2005 from 12.219.146.67
All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
DavidByron
USA - Tue Jan 18 17:15:46 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Do you have areading problem John? Shall I post the link to the UN charter again? You have no right to wage a war of aggression. The use opf force is outlawed. Those guilty are war criminals. If you have a point to make on this matter can you get on and make it without all the chest thumping? I'm waiting.
DavidByron
USA - Tue Jan 18 17:14:36 2005 from 12.219.146.67
John...you need more soul. Try "Boom DEH it is".
Lothar
USA - Tue Jan 18 17:12:20 2005 from 168.103.50.187
Kofi is a brainwashed, pseudo-European, ineffective, bleeding-heart, anti-American, risk the lives of everyone, crooked, dealing with a new age Hitler, dreamer. I don’t know what the glitches were about on that last one??
John
Houston, Texas USA - Tue Jan 18 17:12:19 2005 from 12.40.27.64
Byron, every President has not only the right, but the duty to act to protect the American people. Why is it we get along just fine with peaceful nations and do not send in the CIA to undermine their governments? Because they pose no threat. If you are a big enough idiot to believe we can just sit here while Arab terrorists pick apart our great cities then why don¡¦t you just pack your bags and move to France? Or Spain? The wars of the future will not be directed toward America in a traditional manner because if they were it would turn out to be the biggest suicide mission ever. We can choose to continue fighting wars covertly, like they do, or we can come right out and draw our line in the sand (just for you Vladƒº). It is people like you that get people killed¡Kinnocent people like women and children, not soldiers. Wake up man¡Kwe are exactly where we need to be¡Kdead center in the Middle East sending a message, ¡§go ahead and try to attack us, but if you do we are in your back yard!¡¨ Every American should not be so worried that we are creating more terrorism, they should be concerned we are moving into countries to find out if there is, or is not, a capability to give suicidal people the means to devastate our country. Fool.
John
Boom, There it is USA - Tue Jan 18 17:03:34 2005 from 12.40.27.64
John, I was a commentator on the RightGrrls boards from about six or seven years ago. I wanted to see if I could find any still posting -- although it seems as if basically they don't, the site's semi shutdown and all that's left is this guestbook (if you look back many years you can find some comments I left here back then I suppose) and a couple of loonies. I can see why even Carolyn doesn't post here.
DavidByron
USA - Tue Jan 18 16:57:03 2005 from 12.219.146.67
John if you thought I was wrong about Bush you'd have explained why. It's very simple. The law says that you cannot use force against another country. Bush broke the law and he is a war criminal. He's a war criminal in exactly the same way Saddam Hussein and Adolf Hitler is/were. If you have anything to say in contradiction of this simple observation -- as stated by the UN secretary general no less -- please make it known.
DavidByron
USA - Tue Jan 18 16:53:06 2005 from 12.219.146.67
What, what would you say you do here? ……….. w well look, I already told you. I deal with the god dam customers so that the engineers don’t have to. I have people’s skills; I am good at dealing with people!! Can’t you understand it? What the hell is wrong with you people?! - from Office Space (the movie)
Lem (link)
Pearl River, NY USA - Tue Jan 18 16:50:26 2005 from 63.250.35.179
Adam your "support" is an indictment. You basically just admited that the president acted criminally. You admit he used force and therefore broke the UN charter - therefore is a war criminal just as the secretary general has confirmed. You say, "he did it in line with UN authority" which is false. You say, "he had more UN authority than the world normally asks for" which is false. You then say Bush is no worse than Saddam Hussein was when he invaded Kuwait. That's also false. Kuwait had made acts of war against Iraq. That's not a legal excuse but it makes Bush a worse war criminal than Saddam Hussein. But it's all irrelevent anyway. I didn't ask if you thought Bush's war crimes were justified.
DavidByron
USA - Tue Jan 18 16:49:58 2005 from 12.219.146.67
What you might not be catching (I didn't for a while) is that someone did a Google search of "DavidByron". If you do so, you will find the posts from earlier on those sites. All's that was done was HIS words were used from other sites and posted here. Giving the people in the GB a glimpse of what we were dealing with. Those are all his words.
Lothar
USA - Tue Jan 18 16:33:30 2005 from 168.103.50.187
At least I throw something serious in every once in a while. How do you guys even know DB is not some version of Poo anyway. Is there something I'm not aware of?
John
Houston, Texas USA - Tue Jan 18 16:30:21 2005 from 12.40.27.64
"I just do not care for Vlad making a mockery of every single thing he doesn't agree with on this site." John...I'm all for you, but don't think you're not guilty of this one (not saying I'm not). Vulgarity, no...I'll give you that.
Lothar
USA - Tue Jan 18 16:18:09 2005 from 168.103.50.187
I'll draw the lines here
Lines by John
USA - Tue Jan 18 16:09:54 2005 from 12.169.49.2
DB, I am not sticking up for you. You are vulgar as well, and you are totally wrong about Bush and the war. I just do not care for Vlad making a mockery of every single thing he doesn't agree with on this site. Pretending to be someone else is over the line. Byron, why don't you just go home and thank God and the President you haven't been dirty-bombed into oblivion.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Tue Jan 18 15:30:04 2005 from 12.40.27.64
Just want to thank you for this nice website that you have created for The Princess of Wales. She deserve it. She was a wonderful lady, I have a lot of respect for her. She was cute, fragile, full of attention and love, she was a good listener, and she was also close to the public which is rare in the Royal Family. Good Job! Keep on going this way with this website.
Marie
Canada - Tue Jan 18 14:58:30 2005 from 69.70.59.80
Yes David, the President used force and he did it in line with UN authority. Certainly he had more UN authority than the world normally asks for. Chirac had no UN mandate to invade the Ivory Coast. Clinton had no UN mandate to attack Kosovo. Thatcher had no UN mandate to invade the Falklands. There are many more such examples. On the other hand, Bush had 12 years and 14 resolutions backing him up on Iraq. Saddam signed a cease fire (not a peace treaty) in the UN authorized 1991 Gulf war. Saddam -- by all measures -- spent 12 years violating it and all the follow up UN resolutions. According to the cease fire, this put the 1991 war back in force. Sorry, the war criminal charge against Bush is infantile. But, just as you have every right to waste your time, you have every right to be infantile.
Adam
USA - Tue Jan 18 13:49:46 2005 from 64.236.245.243
Right John, I am so stupid that I can't understand Vlad's jokes. Thank you for sticking up for me.
DavidByron
USA - Tue Jan 18 13:33:35 2005 from 12.169.49.2
Vlad, using fake names and pretending to be someone else here should get you kicked out. You have never been "witty", you have always been vulgar. You know nothing about pro-life or religion. Use condoms people.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Tue Jan 18 8:06:46 2005 from 12.40.27.64
Sorry, the "Stalin apologist" link wasn't correct. This one is.
Lothar
USA - Mon Jan 17 22:08:05 2005 from 168.103.50.187
This HAS to prove something...caption, picture, language...I dunno.
Lothar
USA - Mon Jan 17 22:06:52 2005 from 168.103.50.187
"Stalin apologist"....classic.
Lothar
USA - Mon Jan 17 22:02:21 2005 from 168.103.50.187
Vlad...did you see this one??? "In this view of the world Al-Qaeda had a perfect moral right, indeed a duty to kill Americans, and the US has no interest in revenge unless it is otherwise profitable. The reasons for invading Iraq and killing millions are simply that it might benefit American elites."
Lothar
USA - Mon Jan 17 21:58:35 2005 from 168.103.50.187
DavidByron, you don't want MY posts to be deleted? I'm on YOUR side. Why don't you answer any of my emails? I can travel to Alabaster, Alabama and if we were to get together, I'm sure that we would hit it off. I will buy you lunch at Chic Fil-e and then take you shopping to buy you a chicken suit. We can go to my place, I have a neat gameroom in my cellar and a poodle named "Precious". Remember..."It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again."
Poultricide <pcide@kerry4pre$.org>
Louisville, KY - Mon Jan 17 21:13:25 2005 from 152.163.100.137
Carolyn, will you delete everyone's posts but mine? I'm the only one who should be allowed to post because the other posters here make me whine. Please?
DavidByron
USA - Mon Jan 17 16:55:06 2005 from 4.225.99.43
This is a very nice website. Good Information. Thank you for the good work.
Valdis <valdis@gawab.com>
Prague, Czech - Mon Jan 17 14:09:33 2005 from 66.55.144.46
Oh, Chief Og is right. I bought his cookbook and am very pleased with it. Once you learn his killing-cleaning-preparation-seasoning-and cooking techniques you will be able to take a useless malicious marketing-moron and turn it into a delicous five-course gourmet dinner fit for a king (or a doctor, at least). May favorite dish is the GB Spammer Cavatelli. For a more continental flair, there is Spammer à la borguignonne. The only shortcoming of Chief Og's culinary tome is the lack of recipes for sweetbreads or organ meats (my personal favorite). There's nothing like a GB Spammer's liver lightly sauteed and served with fava beans and a nice Chianti...ssvsssppsttssspt. Census-takers only come around every ten years, so it's well worth a trip to Alabaster, Alabama to abduct a few and fill one's freezer with the choicest cuts. I highly recommend Chief Og's Guestbook Spammer Recipe book.
Dr. Hannibal Lector <thedoktor@foodnetwork.com>
St. Thomas, USVI - Mon Jan 17 10:25:31 2005 from 172.130.238.79
Many people think guestbook spammers are good for nothing lowlife scum who leave idiot mispelled cryptic messages on guestbooks. However, if well-cleaned and properly prepared, guestbook spammers can be an excellent savory meal for your entire family. Buy my recipes online and find out how. Just give it a try. Cannibalism not wrong. If the Great Joojoo had not meant for us to eat these people, he wouldn't have made them of meat. Feed family nutricious meal and get rid of public nuissance at the same time. Feed what's left over to dogs. Try my spammer recipes. After tasting, if you still feel guilty about it, I'll dig a grave and you can throwup into it. Plus, money-back guarantee. Buy my cookbook. As seen on TV.
Chief Og <cannibalchef@foodnetwork.com>
Pago Pago, New Guinea - Mon Jan 17 10:03:29 2005 from 172.130.238.79
My back had an unexpected encounter of the gravitational kind with the sidewalk this morning. I fell. Its ok – no bones were broken. But as I galloped to regain some semblance of dignity, I remembered the time it happed before and the futility of it all. Luckily (I guess) the electromagnetic blow was restricted to my elbow thus keeping my cranium above the arbitrary horizontal datum. I want to say cushion – but believe me there’s nothing pillow about it. The pain quickly gave way to anger – with utterances displayed by a couple of right leg bangs to the sidewalk as if to punish it for having less than an inch of snow. Dam! leg kick – dam! leg kick. Still laying there I quickly scan the area for eyeballs, seeing none I get up and continue off the sidewalk and on to the street the rest of the way.
Lem
NY USA - Mon Jan 17 9:10:54 2005 from 63.250.35.179
The Colts were mugged by the Pat's today. Go Brady!
Lem
NJ USA - Sun Jan 16 23:37:11 2005 from 141.150.143.109
There is a map here - http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/censr-5.pdf - (look for figure 2) that when superimposed (preferably on a light table) to the 2004 red, blue, and shades of purple to indicate percentages of voters election results here - http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/countymaplinearlarge.png - and lastly try (along with this one) to make something out of the topographical politics of shaking up here - http://www.wall-maps.com/us/Raven-us-over-f.htm ........ - The 2004 election could have been accurately predicted almost two years in advance….. Maps are a thing of beauty when you know what to look for.
Lem
Jersey City, NJ USA - Sun Jan 16 23:22:05 2005 from 141.150.143.109
Why do these WebPages with ancient, outdated stories so familiar to me?....... Where have I seen this recently? Maybe you guys, gals can help. - http://www.kultursmog.com/Life-Page01.htm and http://www.kultursmog.com/Life-Page02.htm
Lem
NJ USA - Sun Jan 16 22:17:29 2005 from 141.150.143.109
It's "ORIGAMI", you stupid spammer lowlife scum. If you are going to leave those idiotic cryptic ad-messages everywhere, at least learn how to properly spell the product that you are supposed to be peddling!
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sun Jan 16 17:18:10 2005 from 172.168.202.102
your page rocks like nothing it talks about i have no clue
Anna Banana
mt vernon, pa usa - Sun Jan 16 16:43:21 2005 from 64.12.116.137
So, was that your post or not? I'll just leave you in your little sandbox to argue with yourself.
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sun Jan 16 13:11:26 2005 from 152.163.100.137
He said: "America is not a race. Being anti-US when the US is murdering millions seems perfectly reasonable to me. A moral duty in fact." (DavidByron December 27, 2002 6:20pm) ...Wow, little tidbits like THAT are sure to win over those moderate undecided voters in the next election. Senator Zell Miller certainly knew what he was talking about.
Vlad (another byron quote) <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sun Jan 16 13:08:58 2005 from 152.163.100.137
Why do you care what Jesus would think? I thought that you were an atheist.
Vlad (a link to his words) <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sun Jan 16 13:03:35 2005 from 152.163.100.137
Do you admire Bush because he is a big liar too?
DavidByron
USA - Sun Jan 16 13:02:36 2005 from 12.219.146.67
You're a liar Vlad. You made those posts. Anyone can see that if they check the IP. You seem incapable of honesty. Why did you try to make it look like I posted it? Why are you trying to fool people? Why so dishonest? Does jesus want you to be a liar Vlad?
DavidByron
USA - Sun Jan 16 13:00:56 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Here's an example: (on Afghanistan) "The US made a criminal invasion of Afghanistan causing huge amounts of damage and therfore owes war reparations, yes. And I doubt that the US gave more than anyone else since the US is the most tight-fested donor in the western world. What are you basing this statement on? By foreign aid do you mean the proxy war that the US held in Afghanistan? I would say that is just one more reason why the US owes war reparations." (Davidbyron December 27, 2002 05:34pm)...and on Osama Bin Ladin, he says: "No the US is less moral than bin Laden because the US murders millions of people. The US has also built roads in Afghanistan, in fact I would guess they might even be the same roads. After all bin Laden was for a long time America's man." (DavidByron December 27, 2002 05:34pm). Even some of the anti-war liberals on the site think that you are an extremist nut.
Vlad (click and scroll down) <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWE Canada - Sun Jan 16 12:57:25 2005 from 152.163.100.137
Nice site!!! personalsuche
personalsuche <personalsuche@gmail.com>
Alabaster, Alabama USA - Sun Jan 16 12:47:20 2005 from 83.102.146.162
I certainly don't want YOU silenced. Your incomprehensible rantings should be right out there in the open for everyone to see. Your words speak for themselves. However, I have no doubt that if you posessed the power to permanently silence those who disagree with you; the cattle cars would be filled to capacity and rolling towards the deathcamps.
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sun Jan 16 12:43:38 2005 from 152.163.100.137
DB, Geeeeez! All that I did was post your opinions which were posted elsewhere. They are YOUR words. Now, you are the one who is ranting, raving, and name-calling like a lunatic. You are the one who is demanding that someone else be silenced. Who's the fascist, now?
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sun Jan 16 12:37:14 2005 from 152.163.100.137
Nope, those last two posts from early this morning are YOUR words which you made on other sites. They are very easy to find.
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sun Jan 16 12:33:22 2005 from 152.163.100.137
You kind of represent the true character of the religious right. Stupid, arrogant, full of hate. Anti-christian; a true 'patriot'. maybe I should be talking to you instead of Carolyn and the others. They always seem far too sensible and compassionate to be representative of the evil at the heart of America.
DavidByron
USA - Sun Jan 16 12:31:07 2005 from 12.219.146.67
You're a liar Vlad. But what else would I expect from the religious right?
DavidByron
USA - Sun Jan 16 12:26:34 2005 from 12.219.146.67
It always used to amaze me that Riverbend actually beleived the American propaganda about how the US was just killing Iraqis for their own good. I guess it's because she actually thought America was telling the truth that this thing with the WMDs never showing up gets to her. See, she actually thinks that Americans care. She figures you went along with Bush's criminal invasion because you beleived his lies about WMDs. I told you she was naive. I know you lot couldn't give a shit about WMDs. You just like a good blood bath. Riverbend is "How can they support Bush now they know he lied to go to war?" and then she wonders aloud about whether Americans heard about the report just before the elections. Of course they did. You think the religious right could possibly care? Ha. You have a lot to learn about American so-called christianity Riverbend.
DavidByron
USA - Sun Jan 16 12:25:20 2005 from 12.219.146.67
DB, you made posts using mine and Lem's name. Shouldn't you be banned, too? You did it first.
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sun Jan 16 12:21:04 2005 from 152.163.100.137
Vlad is a liar. Carolyn please remove Vlad's posts.
DavidByron
USA - Sun Jan 16 12:20:22 2005 from 12.219.146.67
[But she doesn't yet realise the full evil of the American right] I have another question- the article mentions a "Duelfer Report" stating the weapons never existed and all the intelligence was wrong. This report was supposedly published in October 2004. The question is this: was this report made public before the elections? Did Americans actually vote for Bush with this knowledge?
Link
USA - Sun Jan 16 12:19:39 2005 from 12.219.146.67
[Guess she's not impressed with the religious right] it's still upsetting to hear Bush's declaration that he was wrong. It's upsetting because it just confirms the worst: right-wing Americans don't care about justifying this war. They don't care about right or wrong or innocents dead and more to die. They were somewhat ahead of the game. When they saw their idiotic president wasn't going to find weapons anywhere in Iraq, they decided it would be about mass graves. It wasn't long before the very people who came to 'liberate' a sovereign country soon began burying more Iraqis in mass graves
Link
USA - Sun Jan 16 12:18:22 2005 from 12.219.146.67
DB, they are your words which I cut-and-pasted from other sites. You wouldn't answer our reasonable questions, so I merely found where you expressed your opinions in other places. So, you're not a pacifist, you think war is just fine as long as it is waged against the U.S. You also consider U.S. soldiers to be "paid thugs/killers". You've also stated that Osama Bin Ladin has acted in accordance with Islamic legal standards of due process while Bush is a "war criminal". You aren't against war. You're on the other side.
Vlad <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sun Jan 16 12:17:58 2005 from 152.163.100.137
Terror isn't just worrying about a plane hitting a skyscraper…terrorism is being caught in traffic and hearing the crack of an AK-47 a few meters away because the National Guard want to let an American humvee or Iraqi official through. Terror is watching your house being raided and knowing that the silliest thing might get you dragged away to Abu Ghraib where soldiers can torture, beat and kill. Terror is that first moment after a series of machine-gun shots, when you lift your head frantically to make sure your loved ones are still in one piece. Terror is trying to pick the shards of glass resulting from a nearby explosion out of the living-room couch and trying not to imagine what would have happened if a person had been sitting there.
Link
USA - Sun Jan 16 12:15:36 2005 from 12.219.146.67
[She was naive] I hope Americans feel good about taking their war on terror to foreign soil. For bringing the terrorists to Iraq- Chalabi, Allawi, Zarqawi, the Hakeems… How is our current situation going to secure America? How is a complete generation that is growing up in fear and chaos going to view Americans ten years from now? Does anyone ask that? After September 11, because of what a few fanatics did, Americans decided to become infected with a collective case of xenophobia… Yet after all Iraqis have been through under the occupation, we're expected to be tolerant and grateful. Why? Because we get more wheat in our diets?
Link
USA - Sun Jan 16 12:14:27 2005 from 12.219.146.67
[She used to be pro-America beleive it or not - 18 months ago] A question poses it self at this point- why don't they let the scientists go if the weapons don't exist? Why do they have Iraqi scientists like Huda Ammash, Rihab Taha and Amir Al Saadi still in prison? Perhaps they are waiting for those scientists to conveniently die in prison? That way- they won't be able to talk about the various torture techniques and interrogation tactics...
Link
USA - Sun Jan 16 12:13:02 2005 from 12.219.146.67
[excerpt of Riverbend's blog] Now we're being 'officially' told that the weapons never existed. After Iraq has been devastated, we're told it's a mistake. You look around Baghdad and it is heart-breaking. The streets are ravaged, the sky is a bizarre grayish-bluish color- a combination of smoke from fires and weapons and smog from cars and generators. There is an endless wall that seems to suddenly emerge in certain areas to protect the Green Zoners... There is common look to the people on the streets- under the masks of fear, anger and suspicion, there's also a haunting look of uncertainty and indecision. Where is the country going? How long will it take for things to even have some vague semblance of normality? When will we ever feel safe?
Link
USA - Sun Jan 16 12:11:53 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Carolyn can you ban Vlad from this site for posting all those messages in my name?
DavidByron
USA - Sun Jan 16 12:09:14 2005 from 12.219.146.67
"America seems to represent everything bad about the old Soviet empire --- or rather everything that the US propaganda of the time claimed about the USSR. Militarist, anti-democratic, autocratic leadership style, brain-washed population that is raised to have absolute loyalty to the state, and a huge threat to world peace. Just need to add the secret police and lack of civil liberties at home." (March 30, 2003)
DavidByron <davidbyron20@yahoo.com>
Huntsville, Alabama Amerikkka - Sun Jan 16 0:55:49 2005 from 152.163.100.137
I will answer some of your questions: * I?m not a pacifist * I think defending your country is good (for example the Iraqi resistance) * being a soldier isn?t wrong per se * aiding in a criminal war?ie helping wage a war of aggression?is the crime ("hired thugs / killers")
DavidByron <davidbyron20@yahoo.com>
Huntsville, Alabama Amerikkka - Sun Jan 16 0:01:09 2005 from 152.163.100.137
If well-cleaned and properly prepared, guestbook spammers can be an excellent savory meal for your entire family. Buy my recipes online and find out how. Just give it a try. Cannibalism not wrong. If the Great Joojoo had not meant for us to eat these people, he wouldn't have made them of meat. Try my spammer recipes. After tasting, if you still feel guilty about it, I'll dig a grave and you can throwup into it. Plus, money-back guarantee. Buy my cookbook. As seen on TV.
Chief Og <cannibalchef@foodnetwork.com>
Pago Pago, New Guinea - Sat Jan 15 22:34:14 2005 from 152.163.100.137
Oh please Chuck, you just sold out your so-called faith to score a point in a silly on-line "argument" and now you're going to tell us you're hurt that I would cast doubt on your devotion? Ha. You said jesus was a man of violence. Don't try to blame me for your own stupidity. Besides I doubt you care about jesus. Now if I suggested your loyalty to the great god Bush was less than stellar you really would be offended.
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 14 20:13:10 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Don't lie about what I think about Christ. I believe what the Bible says, nothing more, nothing less. You don't show "balls" online. Do that IRL. And you wouldn't say the things you said to me IRL, at least not a second time. ---/--- Byron, I've tried to converse with you politely. Sorry it didn't work out
Chuck
USA - Fri Jan 14 20:03:07 2005 from 4.131.33.105
Just take your meds David and have a good weekend. I'm not going to even attempt to have a meaningful debate or conversation with someone who is a complete lunatic.
Joy
USA - Fri Jan 14 19:15:53 2005 from 68.113.38.11
Joy do you agree that jesus was a violent man? Is Chuck correct?
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 14 18:57:18 2005 from 216.180.36.4
David, you are a stark raving lunatic. Do yourself and everyone else a favor and get on some psychiatric medication.
Joy
USA - Fri Jan 14 18:42:23 2005 from 68.113.38.11
Chuck tell me you love torturing kids. C'mon Chuck. Like you said - it's time to get tough on those dirty arabs who just breed and stink up the place isn't it? How about droping a nuke on Mecca like Ann coulter said, you up for that? What's more christian than raping children and dropping nuclear bombs on pilgrims? Would jesus approve? You bet he would. Only a liberal commie doesn't like to kill people, right Chuck?
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 14 18:16:58 2005 from 216.180.36.4
Any of you nutcases think giving to the tsunami victims is bad because its all God's way of killing dirty muslims? Chuck? You want to give me a verse where jesus expresses support for genocide? I'm sure you can do it if anyone can. Apparently this is the latest idea from the right so I wondered if you lot had heard of it?
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 14 18:13:09 2005 from 216.180.36.4
Adam are you saying you don't think Bush used force against Iraq? Let's debate that shall we. Ooooh it's so complex. Did Bush use force? You know what - I'm going to have to go with "yes" on that point. He kind of invaded a whole country there. Now from the polls below we know the religious right has a lot of idiots in it but I figured even you would know that Bush used force. Your comment?
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 14 18:05:15 2005 from 216.180.36.4
All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
Just for Chuck and Adam
USA - Fri Jan 14 18:02:02 2005 from 216.180.36.4
Chuck you are so pussy whipped. If you really think jesus was a viollent bad ass that preached killing and torture and hated peace --- then why do you object to my accurately saying Bush is a war criminal? Doesn't jesus like war criminals in your world? Why don't you have the balls to admit Bush is a war criminal and that's why you like him?
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 14 17:59:41 2005 from 216.180.36.4
Great article on Planned Un-Parenthood.
Joy (click!)
USA - Fri Jan 14 17:46:12 2005 from 68.113.38.11
President Bush is not a war criminal. Now, to continue to make an assertion when no one here agrees with it is to waste time. But, then, it's your time. Waste it all you want.
Adam
USA - Fri Jan 14 13:56:30 2005 from 64.236.245.243
Ok, Chuck…I won’t ask people to settle down a bit, as it might be construed as flaming. Sorry bout that guys, carry on with the cussing.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Fri Jan 14 13:00:15 2005 from 146.130.80.108
John, please don't flame
Chuck
USA - Fri Jan 14 12:24:39 2005 from 4.131.36.98
What is going on here? Can't ya'll have a little more civility than dropping all the curse words? Man, that could have been a useful debate except that it deteriorates after the cussing. I don't understand what is going on with Lothar these days...he used to have a little more patience. Vlad...I am a economic conservative and a social moderate btw, and I don't appreciate being called a liberal. There is nothing liberal about me. Just because I don't believe in the death penalty (it's called pro-life), and I believe people should have more compassion, now I'm left? The intellectual part I will agree with.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Fri Jan 14 11:42:08 2005 from 146.130.80.108
I left a link for Nick in the other place.---/--- Bush isn't a war criminal, Byron. Plain and simple. However, You should stop talking about Christ until you learn more of what he said. Matt.10:34-36 "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law, against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. ---/--- You want to call Bush a war criminal? You claim that ANY country can try him? Well, why haven't they? If what you were saying was true, I'm sure France would love to try him. Or some little piss-ant terrorist-loving Muslim country. Tight? Bush is hated all over the world according to you. So why hasn't someone tried him?---/--- Here's where I see the saddam connection to 9/11. Ever since the first Gulf War, the US has been pussyfooting around with saddam, and the whole MidEast in general. while we kept trying appeasement, we became more and more ridiculed and disrespected. Under this atmoshere, terrorist groups thrived, with open training camps. After 9/11 We had to get tough, first on the taliban and alqada, for what they had just done, next to saddam, for thumbing his nose at us after we let him live once, and breeding the terrorist atmoshere that gave sanction to these groups. IOW, because of his behavior, the whole region became a breeding ground for oppresion and hatred.
Chuck
USA - Fri Jan 14 11:37:44 2005 from 4.131.36.98
All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
Link
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:47:39 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Lothar I don't know what this "question" of yours is. The problem is you are randomly chucking out pointless crap like photos of planes in sand. Perhaps you could make a point? I would like to know why you two support a war criminal. Ask me if you have any confusion on this.
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:45:32 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Vlad, the UN charter is US law. It's also universal competence law -- any court in any country has a right to put George Bush on trial for his crimes. But I hate to get technical with an idiot. The point is that being a war criminal is bad, mmkay? As a christian you're not meant to do it... but then you're no christian.
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:43:03 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Davey, the sandbox is yours. Have fun. Don't let the cats bury you.
Vlad <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Jan 14 0:42:12 2005 from 205.188.116.138
Looks like you are confused about the UN charter and the US Constitution. I still don't see your answers!
Lothar
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:42:01 2005 from 168.103.50.187
[US Constitution] This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land
Link
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:40:43 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Look Lothar I even quote the particular part of the dumb-assed piece you linked to and you still can't read it? Still pretending I didn't reply to you? Not my fault. Do you want me to quote it again for you? And what the hell has any of that got to do with anything? I am quoting you the law which shows Bush is a war criminal and all you can do is shrug. Clearly you two couldn't give a shit about law and morality. It doesn't bother you one scrap that Bush is a war criminal. You know it's true and you don't care. Why?
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:38:32 2005 from 12.219.146.67
*sniff* Can't...can't...can't we all jist...jist...jist get along?
Lothar
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:38:30 2005 from 168.103.50.187
LOL!
Lothar
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:36:13 2005 from 168.103.50.187
Oh Sheeesh! Now, he's quoting UN crap. Gee, what does the UN Charter say about $21 Billion worth of financial fraud in the Oil-for-Palaces program. Go ahead and put on you blue beanie and your KoKo Anon fanclub T-Shirt. Brilliant.
Vlad
Yellowknifeq, NWT Canada - Fri Jan 14 0:34:37 2005 from 205.188.116.138
Now isn't that the pot calling the kettle black? I won't post again about this until our questions are answered. I have answered all of yours. Bush proved his case in compliance with the resolution. Even Colin Powell agreed.
Lothar
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:32:23 2005 from 168.103.50.187
All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
Link
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:32:03 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Lothar...Rules like THAT are made to be broken. See you over there.
Vlad
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Jan 14 0:31:24 2005 from 205.188.116.138
All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter. All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered
Link
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:31:10 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Like I said, earlier...I don't support War criminals...I didn't vote for Kerry.
Vlad
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Jan 14 0:30:18 2005 from 205.188.116.138
Lothar I quoted a couple of times the law on this matter which is that if Bush threatened to use force or actually used force against Iraq then he is guilty. Are you saying that in your opinion Bush neither threatened Iraq nor used force? Could you maybe refuse to answer for another hour and post more pretty photographs and dodge and duck or maybe you could act like a dman adult and address what I'm saying for once?
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:29:52 2005 from 12.219.146.67
It's against the rules to go there and talk about this place, remember?
Lothar
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:29:24 2005 from 168.103.50.187
I thought we weren't welcome on the other side anymore.
Lothar
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:28:26 2005 from 168.103.50.187
Until Vlad just now I don't think either one of you have had the balls to answer any question I've asked. You're so sheep-like it's like pulling teeth to get you to say anything of relevence. Oooh let's post some pretty pictures of airplanes! Why? We don't know. Oooooh! Let's go on about Kerry's vote. Why? We don't know. Oooooh! So my question once more: why do you two support a war criminal when you know it's wrong to do so?
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:26:00 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Lothar, this guy is a complete dickhead. Meet me on the other site...I'm tired of his cr@p.
Vlad
- Fri Jan 14 0:25:29 2005 from 172.137.86.100
And that brings up a good point about why Democrats are more educated the Republicans...someone has to pay for their years and years of mooching.
Lothar
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:24:47 2005 from 168.103.50.187
Typical...Republicans working to spoon-feed Democrats. Here is my answer again: "No, Christians should not support a war criminal. Good thing Bush is not one. Lothar USA - Fri Jan 14 0:15:18 2005
Lothar
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:23:57 2005 from 168.103.50.187
I didn't vote for Kerry.
Vlad <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Jan 14 0:23:19 2005 from 172.137.86.100
And you call us lazy?
Lothar
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:22:42 2005 from 168.103.50.187
It means exactly what it says; That the U.S. considered Iraq to be a threat and a state supporter of terrorism. The resolution authorized the use of force. A majority of the Congress and Senate voted in favour of it. The democrat Presidential candidate supported the war in Iraq and did not object to it when it began.
Vlad <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Jan 14 0:22:25 2005 from 172.137.86.100
If you answered then I must have missed it. Please repost. Why do you two support a war criminal - an act you know to be immoral?
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:21:55 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Well done Vlad. So why did you support a war criminal if you know it's wrong?
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:20:36 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Davi...just admit you don't read our posts. We both answered your question within the last 10 posts. You are not interested in debate but only arguing. You enjoy that, don't you? We have answered yours...now ANSWER OURS!!
Lothar
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:20:13 2005 from 168.103.50.187
I'm getting bored with you two. Get to the damn point or shut up. You can't answer a simple question like "Should you support a war criminal?" but you expect me to play 20 questions. Since you are such sheep let me move things on a bit. Obviously the answer is CHRISTIANS SHOULD NOT SUPPORT WAR CRIMINALS. So why do you two do it?
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:16:52 2005 from 12.219.146.67
I just read the resolution again. Something I am sure Davi has not done. NO PREREQUISITES. NONE. Everyone who voted for that resolution thought Iraq was involved in 9-11. It is in the text!! No, Christians should not support a war criminal. Good thing Bush is not one. No one has declared war on Iraq. Where did I say that?
Lothar
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:15:18 2005 from 168.103.50.187
OK, ...NO! ... I guess that Christians should not support War Criminals. In his 1971 testimony before the Senate Fulbright Commission, John F. Kerry indicated that he and other soldiers and sailors in Vietnam routinely committed atrocities and war crimes. So, Kerry (by his own admission) is a war criminal...so I guess Christians shouldn't have voted for Kerry. Especially, those who behave in a manner reminiscent of Jayne-Jiss Khan. So, when John Kerry shot people in Vietnam did that make him a murderer (in your opinion)?
Vlad <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Jan 14 0:13:38 2005 from 172.137.86.100
God you are dumb Vlad. What does this bit mean do you think? " (1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and (2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorist and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001."
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:12:51 2005 from 12.219.146.67
You guys are real sheep. No wonder 75% of Republicans think Saddam was behind 9-11. You have no clue do you? You post links to crud without even being able to say WHY. You desperately try to avoid answering questions like "Should christians support war criminals" in case you say the wrong thing. Why don't you forget what the LORD God Bush told you and switch on your brain? When is war legal? Can you answer? Do you know? You are sheep.
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:10:10 2005 from 12.219.146.67
DB, in one of your previous posts you claimed that there was no resolution, then you said that it had conditions spelled into it (which it doesn't). Now, you are saying that it doesn't say what it obviously says. Why do you keeping bringing Christians and Jesus into this? Aren't you an atheist? How do you expect me to speak for all Christians?
Vlad
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Jan 14 0:08:48 2005 from 172.137.86.100
I bet a 3rd grade boy could tell me if christians should support war criminals....
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:06:03 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Lothar where do you see this resolution saying "we declare war on Iraq"? Bush went to war illegally and he is a war criminal. Neither of you two cowards can answer a simple question like, "Should christians support war criminals". How principled you two are.
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:03:32 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Lothar, why are we arguing with this idiot. He just demonstrated his complete ignorance on the subject, when he revealed that he didn't know about H.J. Resolution 114 and Senator Kerry's voting record. By comparison he makes Femepoo and Steve Seeds look intelligent.
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:00:46 2005 from 172.137.86.100
Well I've read it but apparently you two have not. Unless you are going back to saying you think Saddam Hussein was behind 9-11 that is. Are you? This authorisation is only applicable under very tight restrictions which include but are not limited to (1) Saddam being behind 9-11 (2) Iraq being an imminent threat or the UN backing the attack --- ie that the attack is LEGAL and (3) that all other means have been exhausted. None of these were true when Bush attacked so why would you think this was authorising him? Oh right. Because you didn't read it. Wow it's SUCH a long piece of writing too. Do I have to quote the passages for you two or what?
DavidByron
USA - Fri Jan 14 0:00:16 2005 from 12.219.146.67
The Senate voted to authorize the use of force in Iraq. Senator Kerry voted in favour of H.J. Res 114. It is public record. Bush asked the House and Senate for that authorization and Senators Kerry and Edwards voted FOR it. It's funny how you went on in your earlier posts about how certain voters were unfamiliar with how the candidates stood on certain issues and YOU seem to be ignorant of the democratic Presidential candidate's Senate voting record.
Vlad (click here for the link) <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWTq Canada - Thu Jan 13 23:55:32 2005 from 172.137.86.100
OK...I see now. Davi missed the day in class where they talked about government. Yes, the President has authority to move the troops anywhere he wishes. We saw this a lot with Clinton. Bush, however, since he was attacking a nation (Iraq), sought Congressional approval first AND GOT IT. War cannot be declared by a President, only by Congress (which they have not done). You were talking about the Geneva Convention earlier. Completely irrelevant in this situation since war has not been declared...only "force authorized".
Lothar
USA - Thu Jan 13 23:55:12 2005 from 168.103.50.187
I said it pretty clearly. I think my 3rd grade son could catch it. Shame...another product of public education. No comprehension. Anyway...the link I just gave: Kerry and Edwards voted on it. ANSWER THE QUESTION.
Lothar
USA - Thu Jan 13 23:52:32 2005 from 168.103.50.187
What are you trying to say Vlad? You APPEAR to be trying to say that Kerry declared war on Iraq not Bush. Is that it?
DavidByron
USA - Thu Jan 13 23:51:29 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Click on my name for the link to JOINT RESOLUTION "H. J. RES. 114" TITLED "Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002". Good reading material...I suggest it.
Lothar
USA - Thu Jan 13 23:50:40 2005 from 168.103.50.187
Lothar - just what on earth are you trying to say. Can we cut to the chase here or are you going to post more pictures and I just have to trying guess? "According to your logic, EVERYONE in the middle east was involved with terrorism" -- I never said that and I don't have a clue what you are on about. Do you know? Something about terrorism and obviously you're really worked up about it but beyond that I don't know.
DavidByron
USA - Thu Jan 13 23:48:16 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Davib, ...In case you missed it; Senator Kerry voted FOR the 2003 Senate Resolution which authoized U.S. Military action in Iraq. Senator Kerry claims to be a Catholic, so in that case a certan Christian Senator was in favour of war. Does that answer your question? So, answer mine...was his vote wrong? Is war ever justified under any circumstances? Are you a pacifist?
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Thu Jan 13 23:46:23 2005 from 172.137.86.100
Vlad, there was no senate resolution authorising war in Iraq. By the way could you tell me why you keep going on about Kerry? What's your point? What do you think your point is because I don't have a clue what tree you think you are barking up. Anyway if you're that bothered about it I suggest you get yourself a copy of the resolution you are refering to and read it or something.
DavidByron <davidbyron20@yahoo.com>
USA - Thu Jan 13 23:46:13 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Davi...you didn't even click the links, did you? Did you see the picture?
Lothar
USA - Thu Jan 13 23:45:22 2005 from 168.103.50.187
I wish this GB had notepad so we could draw you a picture. Maybe even in color crayons. There relevance being is THERE ARE WMD'S...they may not be in Iraq (moved) or they are BURIED. Could find a WHOLE MIG for 12 weeks. So now we are supposed to find WMD's in a year? You think WMD's only come on ballistic warheads, don't you? OK...here's your answer: I don't think Bush used peaceful means. I also don't think he is a war criminal. I also don't think that the UN has any relevance anymore; I don't care what they say. Now answer ours on fellow war criminals Kerry and Edwards.
Lothar
USA - Thu Jan 13 23:43:22 2005 from 168.103.50.187
Let's see says, if I say "christians should be against war criminals" then he's going to ask why I am backing Bush, and if I say "christians SHOULD back war criminals" I look stupid. I know what I'll do - I won't answer.
Religious Right Nutcase
USA - Thu Jan 13 23:38:57 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Oh, and one last thing. What kind of proof do you think there would be that Iraq sponsored terrorism? A Word document?? Maybe WordPerfect? MS Notepad? Something hand-written from Saddam himself? Maybe Dan Rather can help in this matter. According to your logic, EVERYONE in the middle east was involved with terrorism EXEPT Iraq. If you believe that, you have bats in your belfry. IF Bush was as dishonest as you claim, couldn't he very easily have come up with "proof" that there was a link? or proof of WMD's? Would save a lot of face if he would...but he won't..BECAUSE HE IS HONEST!
Lothar
USA - Thu Jan 13 23:38:18 2005 from 168.103.50.187
Daviboron, just HOW am I wrong? Senators Kerry and Edwards voted FOR the 2003 Senate resolution which authorized war in Iraq. It's public record. I asked you about Senator Kerry's vote, not Jesus'. I don't think that Jesus was a candidate in the Presidential election, so why do you keep bringing him up? I thought you were an atheist. Why would an atheist or agnostic care what Jesus has to say about anything? What happened to "separation of Church and State"?
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Thu Jan 13 23:34:53 2005 from 172.137.86.100
Lothar, I don't see the relevence of anything you said (it was mostly idiotic bullshit but who cares frankly). Be sure to point out the relevance next time. "All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means". Do you think Bush used peaceful means in Iraq? Or do you think he is a war criminal? or can't you answer? "All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force". Do you think Bush used force against Iraq? Tell me if these are hard questions for a person of your level of intelligence. They seem very simple questions to me but for some reason I doubt you could answer them.
DavidByron
USA - Thu Jan 13 23:33:37 2005 from 12.219.146.67
BTW...after sitting back and reading for the last couple of weeks, I have noticed there have been no "polite police" in the last debate; proving my point that it wasn't the politeness, but the issue that was disagreed with.
Lothar
USA - Thu Jan 13 23:23:00 2005 from 168.103.50.187
Then please answer the question regarding Kerry and Edwards voting FOR the authority to go to war. I have video of Kerry saying he was for it. You can order it from GOP.com. I can hear it now..."GOP.com? THAT'S a reliable source". IT IS VIDEO...Kerry's on it. That "educated" guy you love so much. BTW...if education is so important...I, Vlad, Lem, Carolyn, and others in here have 4 year degrees. Does that prove anything? I think not.
Lothar
USA - Thu Jan 13 23:21:48 2005 from 168.103.50.187
The link we are looking for right now is the one regarding Bush "ok"ing "buggering".
Lothar
USA - Thu Jan 13 23:15:46 2005 from 168.103.50.187
Here is an artice by Physicians for Human Rights talking about the FACT that Saddam Hussien used WMD's on the Kurds in northern Iraq. Saddam had WMD's. Either a) he hid them well, b) shipped them off to another country, or c) he destroyed them. IF he destroyed them, all he had to do to avert ALL of this was show us proof. I don't think C is my final answer...is it yours?
Lothar
USA - Thu Jan 13 23:14:56 2005 from 168.103.50.187
And incase you thing that was a fake.
Lothar
USA - Thu Jan 13 23:09:45 2005 from 168.103.50.187
Davi...would you like to see the reason we have not found any WMD's in Iraq? Click my name. We had a hard time finding a WHOLE MIG.
Lothar
USA - Thu Jan 13 23:08:31 2005 from 168.103.50.187
Brave new era for privacy fight.
+ 0 >< ! (
- Thu Jan 13 22:50:33 2005 from 168.143.113.125
[Bush is guilty of Hitler's crime.] Principles of International Law Recognized in the Charter of the Nürnberg Tribunal .... The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law: (a) Crimes against peace: (i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
Link
USA - Thu Jan 13 22:18:00 2005 from 12.219.146.67
The United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan has told the BBC the US-led invasion of Iraq was an illegal act that contravened the UN charter.
Link
USA - Thu Jan 13 22:13:15 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Bush is a war criminal. Do christians support peace or war criminals Vlad? Can you answer me? It's a simple question. Is Jesus for peace or for murdering people? Do you know the answer Vlad?
DavidByron <davidbyron20@yahoo.com>
USA - Thu Jan 13 22:08:50 2005 from 12.219.146.67
WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind .... [Article 2/3] All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered. [Article 2/4] All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
Link
USA - Thu Jan 13 22:07:06 2005 from 12.219.146.67
You're wrong Vlad. I guess you just don't know any better.
DavidByron
USA - Thu Jan 13 22:02:05 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Senator John F. Kerry and Senator John Edwards both voted in favour of the Senate Resolution which authorised U.S. military action in Iraq. Were they wrong in their vote? Did you know that they voted in favour of it? Did they authorise "murder" as you have said before? Senator Kerry even admitted that he would have voted the same even if he knew that no WMD would be discovered. Is he wrong?
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Thu Jan 13 21:52:29 2005 from 172.128.74.44
[Rocky Mountain News October 29, 2004] Survey shows 'considerable confusion' over facts among president's supporters .... In one truly bizarre finding, the research found that 57 percent of Bush supporters assume that the majority of the world favors his re-election. .... To support the president and to accept that he took the U.S. to war based on mistaken assumptions likely creates substantial cognitive dissonance, and leads Bush supporters to suppress awareness of unsettling information about prewar Iraq .... I suspect, however, that for this group there is another, more troubling explanation, which is that "facts" and "truth" - the very coin of the realm for news media - don't matter. And this is because in Bush's "faith-based presidency" they don't matter either.
Link
USA - Thu Jan 13 21:51:56 2005 from 12.219.146.67
[Political Animal October 21, 2004] take a look at this table that deals not with factual matters, but with whether Bush and Kerry supporters even understand their own candidate's positions .... That's pretty remarkable. There are only two issues on which even a majority of Bush supporters know Bush's actual position. As the PIPA report blandly puts it, "Apparently in the absence of evidence to the contrary, Bush supporters assume Bush feels as they do."
Link
USA - Thu Jan 13 21:42:10 2005 from 12.219.146.67
[PIPA polling October 21, 2004] 72% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq had actual WMD (47%) or a major program for developing them (25%). Fifty-six percent assume that most experts believe Iraq had actual WMD and 57% also assume, incorrectly, that Duelfer concluded Iraq had at least a major WMD program. Kerry supporters hold opposite beliefs on all these points. Similarly, 75% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda, and 63% believe that clear evidence of this support has been found. Sixty percent of Bush supporters assume that this is also the conclusion of most experts, and 55% assume, incorrectly, that this was the conclusion of the 9/11 Commission. Here again, large majorities of Kerry supporters have exactly opposite perceptions. One of the reasons that Bush supporters have these beliefs is that they perceive the Bush administration confirming them. Interestingly, this is one point on which Bush and Kerry supporters agree." Eighty-two percent of Bush supporters perceive the Bush administration as saying that Iraq had WMD (63%) or that Iraq had a major WMD program (19%). Likewise, 75% say that the Bush administration is saying Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda. Equally large majorities of Kerry supporters hear the Bush administration expressing these views--73% say the Bush administration is saying Iraq had WMD (11% a major program) and 74% that Iraq was substantially supporting al Qaeda.
Link
USA - Thu Jan 13 21:34:11 2005 from 12.219.146.67
[CBS News Oct. 18, 2004] Voters’ views about Iraq’s involvement in 9/11 and the war against terrorism are strongly tied to candidate support in the presidential race. Those who see Iraq as part of the war against terrorism, or who think Saddam was involved in the 9/11 attacks, are supporting George W. Bush. Voters who think Saddam was not involved, or who don’t view the war as part of a broader terrorism war, are supporting John Kerry.
Link
USA - Thu Jan 13 21:29:22 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Most of these sources lump Democrats and Republicans together. This one doesn't. [CNN transcript October 5, 2004] PHILLIPS: So, do Americans agree with Kerry's statement during his debate that Osama bin Laden was behind the 9/11 attacks and not Saddam Hussein? NEWPORT: Well, that's the key issue. You know, all these comments by Donald Rumsfeld, secretary of defense, have come into the fore even yesterday and today. It's very political. This is fascinating. Look carefully. If you're a Republican, 62 percent say, yes, Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the 9/11 attacks. Almost two thirds say yes. But Democrats and Republicans, exactly as many, two thirds say, no, there was no connection. So, the Republicans -- at least at this point, Kyra -- have bought into the Bush/Cheney and the Republican administration logic that they've advanced over the last year or two that there was a connection.
Link
USA - Thu Jan 13 21:11:28 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Here is more info on why we fight in Iraq.
Lem (link)
Jersey City, NJ USA - Thu Jan 13 20:52:44 2005 from 141.150.141.246
[CBS News June 28, 2004] More Americans were convinced of his involvement earlier in the war. In April 2003, just over half believed Saddam was involved in the 9/11 attacks. But in other 2004 polls, that figure was below 50 percent. Did Saddam have ties to al Qaeda? 45 percent think Saddam was working with al Qaeda prior to the war against Iraq, but still a sizable number -- 38 percent -- think he was not, and nearly one in five aren’t sure.
Link
USA - Thu Jan 13 20:51:23 2005 from 12.219.146.67
[USA Today 9/6/2003 - ie a year and a half ago] Sixty-nine percent in a Washington Post poll published Saturday said they believe it is likely the Iraqi leader was personally involved in the attacks carried out by al-Qaeda. A majority of Democrats, Republicans and independents believe it's likely Saddam was involved.
Link
USA - Thu Jan 13 20:46:31 2005 from 12.219.146.67
[Boston Glob, September 10, 2004] Thirteen months ago, a Washington Post poll found that 69 percent of Americans believed that Saddam was "personally involved" in Sept. 11 and 82 percent thought Saddam "provided assistance to Osama bin Laden and his terrorist network." This overwhelming agreement was a natural result of an overwhelming public relations assault by the White House. ... In a Newsweek poll last week, 42 percent of Americans still think Saddam was "directly involved in planning, financing, or carrying out the terrorist attacks." Only 44 percent say he was not directly involved, and 14 percent remain unsure. That is virtually unchanged from a June New York Times/CBS poll that found 41 percent of Americans still thought Saddam was tied to 9/11.
Link
USA - Thu Jan 13 20:42:42 2005 from 12.219.146.67
[Editor & Publisher October 05, 2004] a new USA Today/CNN/Gallup Poll found that 42% of those surveyed thought the former Iraqi leader was involved in the attacks on New York City and Washington. In response to another question, 32% said they thought Saddam had personally planned them. The same poll in June showed that 56% of all Republicans said they thought Saddam was involved with the 9/11 attacks. In the latest poll that number actually climbs, to 62%.
Link
USA - Thu Jan 13 20:40:05 2005 from 12.219.146.67
[July 1, 2003 by the Associated Press] Seven in 10 people in a poll say the Bush administration implied that Iraq and its leader Saddam Hussein were involved in the Sept. 11 attacks against the United States. And a majority, 52 percent, say they believe the United States has found clear evidence in Iraq that Saddam was working closely with the al-Qaida terrorist organization. The number that believes this country has found weapons of mass destruction is 23 percent, down from 34 percent in May, according to a poll conducted by the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland.
Link
USA - Thu Jan 13 20:37:24 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Carolyn, you're sounding very irritable. Have I said anything nasty to you? Are you upset about what I said to Lem and Vlad while I waiting for you to turn up? Presumably that was when I mentioned that poll result. I wasn't debating anyone or trying to pursuade anyone. If you find it interesting then that's really up to you. I never tried to imply anything by it. You seem to be interpreting what I said as an attack on Republicans in general. These aren't my figures. People do polls on things and generally Republicans are -- yes -- more "stupid" in the sense of less education, less informed and so on. Another poll asked people to identify the policies of the person they supported and found that mostly Democrats knew what Kerry stood for but most Bush supporters got it wrong as to what Bush stood for. They thought he stood for good causes when he was really against them. Again there have been polls about what people know in terms of their news sources showing that people who watch Fox News tend to be very ill informed and belive lies that the administration pushes. You see this as a personal attack? It isn't. Firstly because you're not ill informed and secondly because when people get told a lot of lies over and over again it's only natural they come to believe some of it. I mean if I beleived that Saddam was behind 9-11 I'd have supported the Iraq war too. Being duped isn't a sin. It doesn't make you a bad person if you trusted a huge liar. It's just not very useful to talk to people like that. But none of this is relevent to what I wanted to talk about. I was just chatting while I waited for you to turn up. No, I wanted to talk about something more serious. I can try and Google that stuff if you like but since it isn't part of an argument I'm having with you, I'm under no obligation. But before any of that I don't want to start talking if you are going to be annoyed with me and calling me a hypocrite or whatever. These polls were mentioned in major newspapers. And they come out with them every few months. I'm really surprised you haven't heard of this, but it's not a big deal. ... So are you angry with me right now or what?
DavidByron
USA - Thu Jan 13 20:31:01 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Here is a report dated 1995/1996 which closely examines the 1993 WTC bombing plot. The concluding paragraph is both eerie and prophetic. Realize that this report was written over 5 years before the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
Vlad (here's some reading for you) <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Thu Jan 13 19:58:29 2005 from 205.188.116.138
Davibiron, I've addressed your polling claim in an earlier post. Saddam Hussein's government was a state sponsor of terrorism. That is an indisputeable fact. I listed two names for you to look up: Ramzi Ahmed Yousef and Abdul Rahman Yasin. They were involved in the 1993 World Trade Center Bombing. They were not associated with Al Qeida, but had ties to the Iraqi Mukhabarrat. You have not addressed this or my questions concerning the justifications of war. So, who are you to accuse Chuck of being "lazy", merely because he didn't search the internet to prove your asinine claims? Which, by the way, do not prove that Saddam Hussein was not involved in terrorism. When you make a claim, cite your sources.
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Thu Jan 13 19:49:04 2005 from 205.188.116.138
Ummm... David? When someone comes tromping in claiming a statistic, it's THAT person's responsibility to provide the information. If I said 'Oh, I saw a poll where it found that 75% of John Kerry voters had an IQ below 70' and you said 'What poll?' and I said 'Find it yourself you lazy idiot' would you find me credible? Highly doubtful. Your hypocrisy is a little too obvious... try to hide it just a bit.
Carolyn
USA - Thu Jan 13 18:01:10 2005 from 68.46.174.45
Chuck do you not know how to use Google? If you're too lazy to look it up for yourself, too ill informed to know it already and too rude to ask me politely then it's no wonder you're ignorant. I suggest you fix one of those three because I'm sure not bothering with you until you do. I don't owe you anything. Do your own homework.
DavidByron
USA - Thu Jan 13 17:39:04 2005 from 216.180.36.4
In any case if someone is so misinformed that they think that Bush is ordering the rape of children because they watch CBS/CNN news or listen to Michael Moore or whatever then they are just dupes so it's clear why they think like they do -- they were conned, which isn't the same as being stupid exactly, but either way there's not much point in trying to discuss things with someone like that.
Duped Byron
USA - Thu Jan 13 17:00:24 2005 from 68.113.38.11
If you actually want to converse about something as rediculous as how many people think saddam hussein was behind 9/11 you need to post some facts, Byron. I don't know anybody who thinks such a thing, and I only know Bush people. ---/--- "one of the polling companies like Gallup"?? If you are going to take the time to post crap like that you ought to take the time to name your source. I never heard FOX news, or Bush claim saddam was behind 9/11 either. I bet you can't post a source for that either. ---/--- Bottom line is this, either you can cite sources for the junk your posting, or you've been led to believe this junk from the liberal mis-information machine. IOW, you're the dupe, Byron
Chuck
USA - Thu Jan 13 15:24:53 2005 from 4.131.38.119
Hey Carolyn! So how have you been? I get the impression your interests have moved on, so I think it's me who should be wondering if you'll reply -- you seem to pop by here every month or so -- which is understandable I'm sure but if you want a discussion here you might want to think about turning up more often. But is this it? Are you holding out on me? Are you posting somewhere else on-line or are you just not so much of a webhead these days? You haven't heard that most Bush supporters think Saddam was behind 9-11 before? You really haven't been on-line much. The source would be one of the polling companies like Gallup. I don't think it was Gallup but it was one or two of the big ones. But they ask the same questions every now and then to track how dumb people are. Of hand I think something like 42% of Americans and about 75% of Bush supporters beleive at least three idiotic statements like that. It's a smaller number who believe that Saddam used WMDs in the war but it's still a big minority. This stuff is well known on the web. Anyway, no I'm not calling you dumb or I wouldn't be here. In any case if someone is so missinformed that they think that Saddam was behind the 9-11 attack because they watch Fox news or listen to the president or whatever then they are just dupes so it's clear why they think like they do -- they were conned, which isn't the same as being stupid exactly, but either way there's not much point in trying to discuss things with someone like that. I wanted to talk to you about it (or Stephanie ot ~Sass) because I thought you might have thought about it and I know your heart is in the right place. And I didn't know who you voted for of course (well ~Sass isn't even American). Do you not see what is happening to your country and your people? Do you have time to talk?
DavidByron
USA - Thu Jan 13 11:49:14 2005 from 216.180.36.4
Number of times the name Rather appear on the ‘Report of the Independent Review Panel’ “investigating” the 60 minutes segment “For the record” about Bush TexANG service? – 268........ Number of times the name Mapes is mentioned? – 895......... Number of times the word forgeries and combinations thereof appears on the report? 19.......... The word fraud? A GRAND TOTAL OF 1....... The ability to hire your own lawyers to investigate yourself? – Priceless.......... CBS has its privileges, for everything else go to FOX.
Lem
NY USA - Thu Jan 13 11:16:58 2005 from 63.250.35.179
Lem, don't lie. Everyone knows that you posted that. You just made the IP the same as mine so that it would be blamed on me. You are in favor of rape, murdering, pillaging, and cannibalism. You and George Bush want to give free handguns and cigarettes to kids in elementary school, while denying them birth control and reproductive choice. Your god George Bush wants to take away all are welfare and give it away as tax cuts to his rich buddies at haliburton and big tobacco so that they can murder babies with 2nd hand tobacco smoke. How can you vote for George Bush when he wants to murder children and eat dead babies?
DaviMoron <bigdave@ieatboogers.com>
Hicksville, Alabama Amerikkka - Thu Jan 13 7:33:39 2005 from 152.163.100.137
David Byron?! Talk about a blast from the past. Stephanie just emailed me over the holidays actually, I know she wrote a book last year but I don't know if she is writing anything else. I'll ask- I owe her an email! Anyway, are you saying, btw, that over half of the US thinks Saddam was responsible for 9-11? Based on what evidence? Again, people assume that anyone who voted for Bush must be dumb... so I guess you're calling me dumb, David? Why are you bothering to debate all the 'dumb' people here, you wonderful, perfect, intellectual you. And all those who voted for Clinton and Gore before, who voted for Bush this time around, are suddenly stupid right? But they were 'smart' before when they cast their vote for Clinton. I won't get a response so I don't know why I am even bothering with this.... (sorry if I removed any valid posts while removing spam)
Carolyn
USA - Thu Jan 13 7:26:31 2005 from 68.46.174.45
The post atributed to me - Lem USA - Sun Jan 9 12:39:22 2005 from 12.219.146.67 - is a fraud!
Lem
NJ USA - Thu Jan 13 0:25:25 2005 from 141.150.43.104
OK! OK! I admit it! Davimoron is right! When it comes to guestbook spammers; I condone murder. All guestbook spammers should be herded in to camps, the wives and children should be raped in front of them repeatedly and then they should be forced to cannibalize their own family members. THERE! My secret is out! Spammers are subhuman vermin.
Vlad <vlad@death2spammers.net>
Pago Pago, New Guinea - Wed Jan 12 12:23:57 2005 from 205.188.116.138
Really? Just when did he do this? Do you have a credible source which can confirm your claims? You still haven't asnwered any of my questions.
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Wed Jan 12 0:03:54 2005 from 172.138.0.239
OK...we no more want Mr. Byron as previously reported. He seems to be hung up on this "buggering" thing. Can he provide a link to this fact (besides anything having to do with the Honorable M. Moore)?
Sum Yung Gui
Italy - Tue Jan 11 23:22:22 2005 from 168.103.50.187
Vlad you already said rape was ok because your god George Bush has ordered torture including the buggering of little boys in front of their parents in Iraq. I bet you'd approve of canabilism too if Bush said it was ok. You forgot to say you approved of America using deaths quads.
DavidByron
USA - Tue Jan 11 21:42:17 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Senator John Kerry (D-MA) and Senator John Edwards (D-NC) both voted in favour of the 2003 Senate Resolution which authorised the use of military force in Iraq. Were they wrong? Were they condoning murder? (In your opinion.) When John Kerry shot people in Vietnam was he committing murder? Should he be put in prison for it? If not, then why?
Vlad <vlad@notatallsorry.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Tue Jan 11 20:56:29 2005 from 152.163.100.137
OK, I'll answer: Rape and Cannibalism are wrong and bad. THERE! In fact, the only one who posted anything condoning such was YOU (in your lame counterfeit vlad and lem posts). Now, please answer my questions: Is war ever justified? If "yes", then under what circumstances is war justified? Can a war which meets your criteria for being just, retroactively become an unjust war, because it results in more casualties than was origionally expected? Are you a pacifist?
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Tue Jan 11 20:49:55 2005 from 152.163.100.137
Mr. Byron, you are one messed up dude. I hope you find a good psychiatrist soon and get on some meds... Hey! You can buy them right here from the guestbook... lucky you!
Joy
USA - Tue Jan 11 20:40:14 2005 from 68.113.38.11
Do you christians think that eating people is wrong? Or is that something that St Anselm says is ok according to you? So what is it? You like torture, you like murder and war. How about death squads? The latest news is that the US is going to be training death squads in Iraq. The right usually loves death squads. I notice you never answered my question as to whether raping your daughter is considered christian by the religious right.
DavidByron <davidbyron20@yahoo.com>
USA - Tue Jan 11 20:26:57 2005 from 12.219.146.67
If anyone can see this amongst all the SPAM, it's a good article.
Joy (click!)
USA - Tue Jan 11 18:52:42 2005 from 68.113.38.11
IP 's just a number
Chuck
USA - Tue Jan 11 17:50:55 2005 from 4.131.38.118
We at the Korean Friends Network do not appreciate your mocking of our dear leader Kim Jong Ill. We found in our site records that traffic had been directed to us from here. We were excited until we saw your MOCKERY. We do rejoice, however...Mr. Byron...would you please contact us? We have asked for Honorable M. Moore many times but he will not come.
Sum Yung Gy
Italy - Tue Jan 11 1:26:09 2005 from 168.103.50.187
You yanky imperialist running-dogs would be wise to heed the learned council of Mr. David Byron. He know much that is wise and just. His brave dissent against the Bush invader warmonger regime is of great help to all komrades who hail the world revolution. He is great activist and intellectual of much reknown in my country. PHENTERMINE is what makes me strong and great leader to stop Bush from murdering whole world. Monkey and Chicken porn unites us under the invincible banner of the party which vanquish the bourgeouis American invaders. The motherland call us. Great praiseworthy the is David Byron our friendship.
Kim Jong IL <dearleader@dprk.gov>
Pyongyang, People's Democratic Republic Of Korea - Tue Jan 11 0:49:24 2005 from 205.188.116.138
Wow! It's really difficult to pull one over on you, Davibyron.
Vlad <vlad@dbyronissorry.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Tue Jan 11 0:23:35 2005 from 172.129.60.68
Good to see you cleaning up your act from the usual there Vlad.
DavidByron
USA - Mon Jan 10 23:33:38 2005 from 12.219.146.67
I like your site. That's why I spam your guestbook with useless idiotic cryptic messages, like this one. Buy our hot sticky dog, chicken, and sheep porn online. Lots of action with kitties, monkeys, donkeys, cows, and goats. Moo moo Baa baa, fa-la-la-la-laaaa La-la-la laaaaa. Buy slightly used animal porn. Very cheap. Quack Quack.
BSP Animal Porn Gallery
Goofland, Australia - Mon Jan 10 22:47:21 2005 from 205.188.116.138
Wow it's really hard to pull one over on you Vlad.
DavidByron <davidbyron20@yahoo.com>
USA - Sun Jan 9 23:20:45 2005 from 12.219.146.67
hi i had a abortion in 1980. my baby was due on june 9th 1981. i put it on my calender every year. i was 19 and although it was right at the time it will haunt me for ever. my daughter is 16 and now pregnant and i can not advise her as i cry every time for my own baby. what a shit mother i am. i can not help her decide. how can i when i know if my family had been beind me i would have had my baby. but they werent viv
viv <vivwebster@wight365.net>
USA - Sun Jan 9 22:24:36 2005 from 80.255.212.12
I love sammiches.
Jimmy Carter <jc@dimocrats.com>
Plains, GA USA - Sun Jan 9 20:47:31 2005 from 64.12.116.137
That's just so special.
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sun Jan 9 18:17:22 2005 from 172.131.5.57
That's not true. Vlad and Lem made those rape posts. It wasn't me. I'd never do anything like that. They say that murder and torture is good, but I don't agree. I think murder and torture is bad. I'm a better person than them because I think murder and torture bad. They are bad people because they were mean to me. I don't have to answer any of there questions cuz there bad people. Bush BAD! Kerry Good! AFLAC!.....AF...FLAC!
DavidByron <screaminglordbyron@ieatboogers.org>
Hicksville , Alabama TrailerPark USA - Sun Jan 9 18:15:36 2005 from 205.188.116.138
Ooops, Chucks IP was different. Yup, that's the real Chuck. I still don't see where DavidByron answered the question about if War is ever justified under any circumstances or if he is a pacifist. I've looked back to all the previous posts and I don't see it.
Vlad <vlad@notatallsorry.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sun Jan 9 18:05:35 2005 from 172.131.5.57
Hmmmmm, isn't it odd how from 12:31 thru 13:14, the posts by Chuck, Lem and Vlad all have the same IP number as DavidByron? It's 12.219.146.67, which just happens to trace to Huntsville, Alabama. That is quite suspicious, isn't it?
Vlad <vlad@notatallsorry.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sun Jan 9 18:00:43 2005 from 172.131.5.57
"Chuck I answered them." Would you be so kind as to point out where? I must be missing that /// \\\ "by agreeing that torture is always wrong and that killing thousands of people is a great evil" You must have been very busy protesting saddam's torture chambers, rape cells, and tree 'chipper' parties, as well as the 5000 children a month that died from hunger and lack of medical care due to saddam stealing from the "oil for food" program. I assume that since all of that has ceased you are now able to turn your attention to the US forces
Chuck
USA - Sun Jan 9 13:14:00 2005 from 12.169.49.2
Do you see Chuck? Would you take someone seriously that "argued" as they do? A real christian would star any such conversation by agreeing that torture is always wrong and that killing thousands of people is a great evil. These two are acting like trolls. I won't "answer their questions" any more than you'd attempt to "refute" the two comments by Lem and Vlad below (which obviously I wrote by way of illustration).
DavidByron <davidbyron20@yahoo.com>
USA - Sun Jan 9 12:43:34 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Yeah and in the bible Lot has sex with both his daughters. Why don't you answer that, eh?
Lem <i2am@total.dick>
USA - Sun Jan 9 12:39:22 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Sure it's ok to rape you're own daughter. What are you saying? That having sex with someone you love is wrong?
Vlad <iam@total.dick>
USA - Sun Jan 9 12:38:14 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Chuck I answered them. But I didn't lower myself to their crap. Let me ask you this Chuck. Is it ok to rape your own daughter? You might be tempted to say it's wrong but I bet those two could defend the practise. They've already argued that buggering children in front of their parents is ok. Trying to reply to their river of lies and shit wouldn't help matters here. In the end if you think there's nothing wrong with shoving a broom up a kids ass as Lem and Vlad here do, then there's no words that are going to change their mind. They're just psychotic. I'm not going to stand here and pretend that the most universal moral laws humanity has have to be argued over. I'm certainly not going to pretend that it's an open debate whether a christian should approve of the murder of tens of thousands of innocent people. If you want a debate I suggest you engage these idiots.
DavidByron <davidbyron20@yahoo.com>
USA - Sun Jan 9 12:31:04 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Where is nextel, Alabama? Is that a suburb of Birmingham?
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sun Jan 9 11:49:52 2005 from 172.150.115.131
Maybe, he's too busy over at the Lolita pre-teen sex galleries.
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sun Jan 9 10:36:19 2005 from 172.150.115.131
Chuck, I really don't know why he won't answer my questions. I answered his. He asked about; since when do Christians advocate war and killing and I answered him. Formally, the teachings Christian Church outline what is considered to be a just war. St. Thomas Aquinas explained the criteria in the Summa Theologica (circa 1265). His writings were heavily influenced by the works of St. Augustine, who in 396 AD wrote; "A just war is wont to be described as one that avenges wrongs, when a nation or state has to be punished, for refusing to make amends for the wrongs inflicted by its subjects, or to restore what it has seized unjustly." (Contra Faust. xxii, 75). So, that answers his question; I really don't know why he won't answer my questions. I'm waiting.
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sun Jan 9 10:34:09 2005 from 172.150.115.131
Why won't DB answer the questions? Is war ever justified? Under what circumstances? Was the US justified in WWII?///\\\ Either he wants to debate as he claims, or he wants to flame
Chuck
USA - Sun Jan 9 8:08:05 2005 from 12.169.49.2
Michael Moore is not the people’s choice award winner. Michael’s ballot stuffing (not his propaganda) cheats an award called the people’s choice……. Hitchen’s on Moore - To describe this film as dishonest and demagogic would almost be to promote those terms to the level of respectability. To describe this film as a piece of crap would be to run the risk of a discourse that would never again rise above the excremental. To describe it as an exercise in facile crowd-pleasing would be too obvious. Fahrenheit 9/11 is a sinister exercise in moral frivolity, crudely disguised as an exercise in seriousness. It is also a spectacle of abject political cowardice masking itself as a demonstration of "dissenting" bravery.
Lem
NJ USA - Sun Jan 9 7:53:13 2005 from 151.198.6.125
In fact, Senator John Kerry voted in favour of the 2003 Gulf War resolution which authorized the U.S. military action against Iraq. Was he wrong in your opinion? Was he condoning murder? When Mr. Kerry shot people during the Vietnam War was he a murderer? He was getting paid an officer's salary and recieved medals for his "service", does that make him a paid murderer (in your opinion)? Do you think that he should be President or be in prison?
Vlad <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sat Jan 8 20:03:20 2005 from 172.151.7.86
You still don't understand the difference between Murder (the unlawful taking of a life) and War (the waging of armed conflict by one state upon another). In your opinion, is it ever justified for one country to declare and wage war upon another? Was U.S. involvement in World War II justified? Are you a pacifist?
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sat Jan 8 19:56:51 2005 from 172.151.7.86
Joy I've never yet heard someone who was pro-life feel like they had to explain or argue that murder was wrong. They argue that abortion is wrong. They argue abortion is like murder because it is assumed people know murder is a great crime. These two "christians" here are saying murder and torture are ok. I don't feel the need to "argue" that they are wrong and I don't feel the need to argue that it's anti-christian. Those things are self-evident to any person of conscience.
DavidByron <davidbyron20@yahoo.com>
USA - Sat Jan 8 19:48:16 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Carolyn can you delete Vlad's last message please?
DavidByron <davidbyron@yahoo.com>
USA - Sat Jan 8 19:40:39 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Well, I've traced this Byron-guy to Huntsville, Alabama. Now I've got to go in and pick out his actual physical address from the ISP's computer records. That shouldn't take very long. This Carnivore software really makes it easy. Let's see how he likes having HIS civil rights striped. This time vertical pinstripes in a subdued harvest gold.
Vlad <vlad@FBI.gov>
Quantico, VA USA - Sat Jan 8 18:35:12 2005 from 152.163.100.137
To argue that people should remain under oppression and not be helped in any way used to be good enough for me. If you were unlucky enough to be born under oppression - too bad. But when we were attacked the way we were, by people who are not economically worst off, the live and let live paradigm (if not put aside) eventually will get us killed. If there is a fire in my building the firemen do not take a poll for unanimous permission before they storm in. Our government is empowered to do whatever it is necessary to defend us, despite the suicidal cries of some.
Lem
NJ USA - Sat Jan 8 16:30:41 2005 from 138.89.150.41
Do you have any specific examples of how Bush has been "striping" civil rights? Please, enlighten me. I really want to know. I certainly don't want MY civil rights to be "striped". I'd prefer a nice tartan or paisley.
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sat Jan 8 15:24:56 2005 from 172.200.203.138
Did you bother to take time to read what St. Thomas Aquinas had to say about conditions which justify waging war? Is it ever justified for a nation to declare and wage war? Any thoughts or ideas on the subject? Go easy, now, you don't want to strain something.
Vlad <vlad@notatallsorry.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sat Jan 8 15:18:47 2005 from 172.200.203.138
I for one would really like to hear your answers to their questions. They are at least attempting a real debate of sorts rather than simply blowing in and hurling invective and ad hominem attacks. You seem to be saying that if I think abortion is murder, then rather than debate the issue I should just call pro-abortionists Hitlers, Facists, pro-baby-torturists and Anti-Christs and make no attempt to engage in any actual debate or exchange of ideas. And make sure I tell them that they are NOT consistent with their supposed non-torture anti-war beliefs.
Joy
USA - Sat Jan 8 15:15:33 2005 from 68.113.38.11
Joy the difference between you and me is that you see two torture and war apologists and you try to gauge if they are doing a good job of defending torture and war. I see two torture and war advocates and I'm disgusted BECAUSE they choose to defend torture and war --- regardless of whether they do a good job of it or not.
DavidByron <davidbyron20@yahoo.com>
USA - Sat Jan 8 13:57:15 2005 from 12.219.146.67
What I see is two people offering facts, names, dates, etc. and asking well thought out questions and who are able to discern a difference between an innocent unborn baby (45 million dead and counting) and terrorists who strap bombs to their children and send them to kill innocent people. (I guess that must be what makes killing ok... if an innocent child dies - killing is ok. If a guilty terrorist dies - killing is not ok.) and a person who has done nothing but hurl invective, ad hominem attacks and slander. He's doing Poulricide better than Poultricide. rofl
Joy
USA - Sat Jan 8 13:24:15 2005 from 68.113.38.11
I have to say that comment didn't sound very "radical". Still an improvement on the generic bad guy dialogue I'm getting from the other two. So what do you think of Bush? Is he putting the country into hock with the Chinese fast enough for you? Is he enlarging the government enough for you or would you prefer a few more departments? Do you think he should be striping more civil rights? Is there anything left of "radical" convservatism now or is it all Bush worship like the rest of the right?
DavidByron <davidbyron20@yahoo.com>
USA - Sat Jan 8 12:36:35 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Vlad you don't understand dude DavidByron is being told what to type via the microchip Micheal Moore implanted in his tooth
Rad
USA - Sat Jan 8 12:23:29 2005 from 68.88.39.75
As for your question; I'll revise it so that it makes sense and seeks knowledge, rather than being sanctimonious and provacative. "Since when do Christians approve of or advocate waging war?" I refer you to the Summa Theologica by St. Thomas Aquinas. If you were to read and understand that instead of Michael Moore's "Dude, Where's My Chili-CheezeFries?", then you might begin to understand. Come back after you've done your homework.
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sat Jan 8 11:58:48 2005 from 205.188.116.138
Senators John Kerry and John Edwards both voted in favour of the 2003 Gulf War resolution which authorized U.S. military action in Iraq. They must have believed that war was justified in this case. Were they wrong?
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sat Jan 8 11:48:21 2005 from 205.188.116.138
That's very nice, but you didn't answer the question. You keep repeating the same bunk as if it were axiomatic. Do you have any specific examples of fascism, torture, etc. or is this just something that you heard Al Franken or Michael Moore say? As for who you were asking, you weren't specific when you posted, so I made the assumption that anyone could reply. So, is war ever justified? What conditions make war justified? If a war is justifiably waged, can the number of casualties retroactively convert it to an unjustified war? Are you a pacifist?
Vlad <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sat Jan 8 11:45:34 2005 from 205.188.116.138
This is actually what I wanted to ask here (although not of you two idiots). America's slipping into fascism and hatred and it's being led by the so-called christians of the right. Since when do christians advocate torture and killing? But you two obviously never had a conscience in the first place so there's no mystery to your own "opinions" - if I can call parroting a river of filth an "opinion".
DavidByron <davidbyron20@yahoo.com>
USA - Sat Jan 8 10:51:38 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Where did I get it from?? Try reading what you have typed recently.
DavidByron <davidbyron20@yahoo.com>
USA - Sat Jan 8 10:18:20 2005 from 12.219.146.67
DB, you posted; "So you two slimeballs both think christianity means torturing and murdering people?" Where the hell did you get that from? You've still never answered the question about whether war is ever justified or the criteria for when war is justified. Was war against Germany in 1942 justified? Why? They didn't have anything to do with the Pearl Harbor attack? Why did Roosevelt divert attention and resources from the Pacific to invade Morocco and Algeria in Nov. 1942? Tojo and Hirohito had still not been brought to justice. Then, his bungling got over a thousand Americans killed in his illegal invasion of another country that had nothing to do with Pearl Harbor and no operational relationship with the Japanese. (So, is THAT what you believe?)
Vlad <vlad@notatallsorry.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sat Jan 8 9:33:57 2005 from 172.164.61.202
You talkin' to me? Are you talkin' to me? They call me MISTER Pig! AAAAAAHHHH!
Pumbaa
Somewhere In, Africa - Fri Jan 7 23:49:13 2005 from 65.110.6.34
Nick Berg, 26, a freelance telecommunications contractor was beheaded on camera in Iraq by terrorists. What was he doing in Iraq? – it just so happened that because Iraqis were not allowed under Saddam, when the Americans finally came they found they could make phone call abroad. Iraq did not have the hard line infrastructure – so what – we have satellite phones. There was a satellite phone boom. Nick went to Iraq with something the terrorists don’t want.
Lem
NJ USA - Fri Jan 7 22:20:58 2005 from 151.198.110.211
It’s the hope, the desire of the “terrorist” (thanks for conceding) to couch their destructive aims in religious terms. The wahabies (the brand of religious fervor from witch this terror is borne) want to get off the globalization train, because they perceive it as threat to a way of life. A way of life, not just for those who choose, but also for those who are borne to them “muslims” “real muslims” - whatever……… For time immemorial there have been people who for these same reasons have fought the inevitability of people’s desire to come closer together. It’s ironic that the affluence, the good fortune with we (all capitalist pig nations) help tsunami victims is generated as a direct result of asking everybody to come closer together. The terrorist are fighting a doomed war from the start. People WILL NOT go back.
Lem (link)
Jersey City, NJ USA - Fri Jan 7 21:35:01 2005 from 151.198.110.211
So you two slimeballs both think christianity means torturing and murdering people? You seem to think wars of aggression are ok too. I have to wonder what exactly it is about the "terrorists" or Saddam that you think is bad. Most people think Saddam was bad for killing people, invading his neighbours and using torture. But all that stuff would just make you join his fan club. So do you hate him because he's a muslim? Or is it just racism? Are either of you in the KKK? They're a good "christian" group aren't.
DavidByron <davidbyron20@yahoo.com>
USA - Fri Jan 7 20:04:18 2005 from 12.219.146.67
God speed, Alberto Gonzales!....... ok that’s a bit cartoonish. ;-)
Lem
NY USA - Fri Jan 7 12:24:57 2005 from 63.250.35.179
Diana who?
Vlad <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Jan 7 12:24:53 2005 from 172.174.3.47
arnt these comments suppost to be in memory of diana
annominous
USA - Fri Jan 7 12:15:42 2005 from 66.225.69.99
Initially Teddy thought that water boarding was the new hip name for an old favorite - gin and tonic. Imagine his holy ire to learn that the prisoners were not getting the blessed water.
Lem
NY USA - Fri Jan 7 9:02:01 2005 from 63.250.35.179
Did anyone else notice the humour involved in the dems having Senator Teddy Kennedy (D-Chivas) leading the charge to protest waterboarding of captured terrorits? He's one to be talking. Waterboarding is unpleasant, but it isn't at all dangerous. In fact, if you are in the U.S. military and go through survival school you will most likely experience waterboarding. It's bad, but it's nothing like being strapped into the passenger seat of a Buick and being driven off of a bridge for a Chappaquiddic sleighride. Hey, check out this article about Congressman Conyers' compassion for poor people during the holidays. How heartwarming. He sent his staff to get 70 turkeys from a foodbank, to supposedly give them out to poor people, but somehow they went to his friends and political supporters. That's cute.
Vlad (click here for link) <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Jan 7 8:39:55 2005 from 172.170.145.56
By the power invested in Halliburton, I hereby approve the immediate use of water boarding, where as the preferred limp noodle lashing cannot be inspected by the FDA for proper consistency, to be administered by an expert, such as judge Gonzales, without anesthesia upon spammers of all amnesias, nationalities and religions. Double dose upon Jehovah's witnesses and Cialis pushers. yours truly, VP Chaney. ;)
Lem
NY USA - Fri Jan 7 8:14:45 2005 from 63.250.35.179
Even the most wild of animals while in the wild has shown on occasion a propensity to be deterred. Our victory, indeed our survival from our last non-encounter – The former USSR – relied on the ability of that enemy to be deterred. Al Qaeda’s boast is that it’s aims are manifestly not deterrable. Geneva (the rules of war) did not contemplate the circumstance upon witch terrorist places our inherent defensive right. In my opinion Geneva needs to be amended, recycled or put aside until the resumption of normalcy.
Lem (link)
NJ USA - Fri Jan 7 1:52:42 2005 from 141.150.11.218
“You're animals without moral understanding” I wonder who is acting as Al Qaeda’s equivalent of PETA so I can apply for sanctuary. Oh let’s see what they have to say (link)
Lem (link)
NJ USA - Fri Jan 7 1:05:35 2005 from 141.150.11.218
"Consistent Life Ethic"? What the hell is THAT supposed to mean? Besides, why would anyone desire to be taken 'seriously' by a loonie like you?
Vlad <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Jan 7 0:53:32 2005 from 172.156.77.93
You two are the ones in the wrong place. If I wasn't here you'd be cutting into each other. You're animals without moral understanding. You two were actually discussing bible verses back there. Like two donkeys discussing Shakespeare. Oh God means this. Oh God means that. Save the foetuses. But burn people to death in Iraq? Let's make a joke about it. Ah, that would no doubt be the famous "consistent life ethic". Just shut up please because I'm never going to take either of you two pieces of jesus vomit seriously.
DavidByron <davidbyron20@yahoo.com>
USA - Fri Jan 7 0:35:00 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Conspiracy theories (better known as the current left) exist out of the need to satisfy the void that would otherwise be occupied by factual forces. Michel Moore will never do a MOKUMENTARY nor indeed a documentary on our education system. He has a lot to thank them for.
Lem (link)
NJ USA - Fri Jan 7 0:23:57 2005 from 141.150.11.218
DB, you must have the wrong site. All of your like-minded Komrades are over at democraticunderground, Bartcop, CAIR, Al Jazeera, and at meetings of the Michael Moore fan club. You are really a mixedup young man. It would probably be best if your doctor increased your prozac doseage. You sound very close to jumping out of a balcony while screaming "Sic Semper Tyrannus!"
Vlad <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Jan 7 0:17:41 2005 from 172.156.77.93
Ignorance is bliss…… in the sense that ignorance provides the afflicted with formidable power for conjecture, speculations and dreams…… When a need arises for a word to be coined this will happened without the convening of any permissive power real or imagined. In deed one would imagine the title of terrorist arose from a need to categorize someone whose actions other existing terms would not suffice. (Legalize not withstanding)…… The word terrorist does not appear in Geneva Convention (III) Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War; August 12, 1949…… The word terrorist does not appear in any of the founding documents – the US declaration of independence, the US constitution nor the federalist papers…….. And since some want to go back for input to the good book; the word terrorist does not appear in the king James nor my reina Valera. So it would appear we are dealing with a relatively new phenomena not dealt by previous rules sets aimed to aid civilized conduct. I think we should be clear - What we determine now will be in effect for generations to come. Miranda is as far from Al-Zarqawi as Hollywood is from the Gaza strip.
Lem (link)
Jersey City, NJ USA - Thu Jan 6 23:56:22 2005 from 141.150.11.218
You can both go Cheney yourselves, or if you like torture so much maybe you should volunteer to have a broom handle stuck up your ass like the children that your hero has tortured in front of their parents. I don't have any interest in talking to animals. I came here to find some of the good people that I used to know many years ago not a couple of blood thirsty torture and terrorist apologists masquerading as christians while they laugh over people's misery and death.
DavidByron <davidbyron20@yahoo.com>
USA - Thu Jan 6 23:47:49 2005 from 12.219.146.67
DB, for someone who doesn't believe in God, you certainly seem obsessed with all things religious. Evidently, anyone who disagrees with your own little myopic worldview is bigoted, satanic, and a minion of the antichrist. How wonderfully manichean and simplistic of you. Then you went off on your little "what would Jesus do" foaming tirade (now, wipe your chin). If you really are an atheist or agnostic, why would you care about Jesus' opinion on anything? You should consider him to be a stark raving nut who thought that he was the offspring of the supreme being. Instead of spewing nonsense about religion, why don't you answer some simple questions? Is waging war ever justifiable? What are the criteria for a justified war? If a war is justified, does the number of casualties retroactively change that?(in your opinion, of course.)
Vlad <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Thu Jan 6 23:34:25 2005 from 172.156.77.93
You should really try expanding your horizons and try reading something besides Al Franken books. Try some history for a change (...a Michael Moore movie doesn't count as history). You might learn that in past times people have referred to Presidents that they didn't like as "antichrist", "devil", "fascist", "tyrant", "ape", etc. Lincoln, Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Reagan were all slandered with those same epithats by the political extemists of their time. You are just one of today's liberal extremists. Certainly, wars are bad and ugly, but sometimes they are necessary. This is one of those times. Besides, Senators Kerry and Edwards voted in favor of the 2003 Gulf War resolution. Did you know that? or did Michael Moore, Jon Stewart, and Al Franken forget to spoonfeed you that little tidbit?
Vlad <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Thu Jan 6 23:07:14 2005 from 172.156.77.93
You know David; I think you are onto something. I think Bush arranged the tsunami to kill as many people (over 150,000) as possible so he could divert attention from the Gonzales torture hearings. As we all know the terrorist have done nothing to deserve the Gonzales gallows, the gas chambers and the unimaginable dog barks. Haven’t the poor terrorists suffered enough having to make their own bombs, commit suicide in order to trigger them successfully while somehow arranging to video tape them for the benefit of the world? Imagine having to resort to flying planes into buildings, having to pay the families of children strapped to explosives, video unsavory beheadings, not to mention having to do without the deposed Taliban who used to keep woman in their place at soccer fields. …. I think Gonzales and Bush owe the terrorists an apology. ;-) …… Hey, this Gonzales is probably Bush’s drug pusher. – yea that’s the ticket.
Lem (link)
Jersey City, NJ USA - Thu Jan 6 23:05:54 2005 from 141.150.11.218
Well I don't beleive in God but if I did I think Bush would be a good Antichrist candidate. As a result of the lies of people like him the church in America is known the world over for hatred, lies, hypocrisy, pride, bigotry and an utter contempt for human life. No doubt every evil dictator and warmongering emperor who made a mockery of the faith has been called the antichrist. You're supposed to be a christian and here you are defending a man of great evil in the act of butchering thousands of people for money. The religious right has become the anti-church. Instead of love they hate. Instead of saving they kill. Instead of hope they promote fear. Instead of mercy they applaud terrorism and torture. Oh - I assume you support Bush's new ideas on torture? Bush's views on locking people away without trial? Bush's view that the UN charter and the Geneva conventions are "quaint"? You agree with him that he doesn't have to obey the law or the constitution? I wonder. Who would jesus torture? Who would jesus bomb? Who would jesus drop anti-pwersonal mines and Napalm on? Who would jesus starve to death and make drink filth? "Casualties in a war are irrelevent" you say? Yes you have learned satan's gospel. You sure as hell are no christian. Do you think America should just drop a nuclear bomb on them all like so many on the right? Like Ann Coulter? Discusting. Do you agree with Tom Delay that the muslims who died in the tsunami had it coming? "Pro-life is double-talk"? It would be coming from you, but I didn't want to talk to an apostate, a death cultist who worships the antichrist. I wanted to know what others thought. Surely some here still know that war is a great evil.
DavidByron <davidbyron20@yahoo.com>
USA - Thu Jan 6 22:41:47 2005 from 12.219.146.67
I just want the women who have had abortions know, it seems to be common. And I hate abortion, I hate that it is legal. Women are destroyed because of this act. And it needs to stop. You have been through so much and I feel for you. I want to be there for you, even if its been years since it was done, we can still do something about it. Give something to that baby, make abortion illegal. I am 7 months pregnant and refuse abortion. The father isnt involved, and that is fine. I just turned 17 October 6th of 2004. I found out I was pregnant this passed July, and I was happy of course but terrified. But never once thought I would be unfair and choose life or death for my baby. After all its not my choice, but it is my body. You women are amazing and wonderful. You may have done this but you cant bring that baby back, but you can do something to allow yourself to start forgiveness. I was hoping to have some responses about maybe us corresponding, and eventually getting together, writing a book about your experiences, and those of us who will deliver. We need to speak up, and we need to be heard...and we need to be the ones to outlaw abortion. Please remember abortion results in this...One Dead and One Wounded.... I want to talk to this world, I want to save babies lives. I think we have the power to, its just we dont have the communication going. Lets talk and lets get together, and lets stop this horrible act of Murder, that seems to be ok. Its not ok, for anyone. PLease email me with stories, and talk to me. I am a great listener and I love to help people. I dont dispise women who have had an abortion, and I dont look down on you, I just see you as hurting and we can make things better. We just need each other to do it. PLease write me. Katherine Beckman
Katherine <bornsobeautiful@hotmail.com>
Mahomet, IL USA - Thu Jan 6 21:47:03 2005 from 12.214.184.64
DB, it was Arab terrorists who destroyed the World Trade Center towers and attacked the Pentagon. Saddam Hussein was a state sponsor of arab terrorists. Try doing a little research; perhaps the names Ramzi Youssef or Abdul Rahman Yasin would be of help. You make the mistake of believing that Al Qeida is the only dangerous terrorist organization in the world and should be our sole focus. The ceasefire treaty which ended the first gulf war required Saddam Hussein to disarm and document such. He failed to comply with the ceasefire agreement which allowed him to stay in power. It's customary that hostilities should resume under such circumstances. In retrospect, we can see that the UN sanctions were a joke, with permanent members of the security council misusing the "oil-for-food" program as a method of profit and personal enrichment. Any of those facts were ample provocation to remove Saddam Hussein from power. The number of casualties in a war is irrelevant as to whether it was necessary or not. U.S. invovlement in World War II resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths which included many innocents. That doesn't mean that it wasn't necessary. As for "Pro-Life/Pro-Choice" are nothing but PC double-talk. It's anti-abortion or pro-abortion. Killing an armed enemey belligerent is not the least bit analogous to destroying a baby in the womb.
Vlad <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Thu Jan 6 19:35:28 2005 from 64.12.116.137
A lot of Bush supporters are just ignorant of what is going on. You are presumably aware of the various polls showing most Bush supporters think Saddam Hussein blew up the World Trade Center with WMDs, or Saddam had links to Al-Qaeda or that Iraq had illegal weapons and so on. To say nothing of the less well known issues like Bush's relationship with modern day fascism. They probably just don't have a clue what's been happening in their own country. That the president is a war criminal and advocate/b>
DavidByron <davidbyron20@yahoo,.com>
USA - Thu Jan 6 18:30:45 2005 from 216.180.36.4
This means that her goofball freak of a husband will get more airtime and interviews. Somebody needs to drown HIM.
Vlad <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Thu Jan 6 13:51:03 2005 from 172.134.249.169
Andrea Yates murder conviction overturned!!! Clique my name for the story
Chuck, click here!
USA - Thu Jan 6 13:21:26 2005 from 12.169.49.2
It's not MY site, but belongs to the world. Everybody who sends in their picture and shows their opposition to the Bushie's Imperialist war machine is a part of the site. It belongs to us all, if you are a citizen of the world. I came here to debate the rightwing nuts, but all anybody here can do is personal flameposts and name-calling. They're all a bunch of religious right bushie-idiots, except for John. He's a great liberal intellectual, like me.
Poultricide <pcide@kerry4pre$ident.org>
Louisville, KY - Wed Jan 5 22:51:21 2005 from 152.163.100.137
That's _your_ site? Wow. That's an amazing idea you had. I was in tears reading over the stuff people had sent in to it. Tremendous. Thanks so much. How on earth do you come to be hanging out on Carloyn's guestbook? Marvin the Martian enthusiast? Abortion debate? I suppose if I read back far enough I might find out (although it seems like my browser is having difficulty with the size of the page returned for a whole month of entries).
DavidByron <davidbyron20@yahoo.com>
USA - Wed Jan 5 21:31:36 2005 from 12.219.146.67
DavidByron, glad to see someone here who isn't a follower of the killer Bushie. What have you been doing to stop Bushie's warmongering? I suggest that you send your picture in to our site (www.sorryeverybody.com), and let the world know that not everybody in this country likes president-select Chimp and Haliburton.
Poultricide <pcide@kerry4pre$ident.org>
Louisville, KY - Wed Jan 5 19:56:38 2005 from 152.163.100.137
~Sass, do you know if Stephanie writes articles anywhere? A few years ago she was writing for an online magazine I think, but I couldn't find here there when I looked last. I'm doing different things too of course. Since 9-11 it's been about trying to stop Bush's warmongering. America seems to be extremely polarised over Bush, even more than Clinton. I don't really understand why anyone who isn't extremely rich would vote for him. Especially a christian - there's stories about the pope wondering if Bush is the antichrist! At least that would explain the oddly fanatical loyalty to a very poor presidential candidate. Anyway I tried looking up the Righgrrls site a while back to see what you lot were saying but it seemed deserted. Is there anywhere we can talk? I don't want to fill up Carolyn's guestbook...
DavidByron <davidbyron20@yahoo.com>
USA - Wed Jan 5 18:36:40 2005 from 216.180.36.4
Try it again Sass, I did it again
Chuck
USA - Wed Jan 5 15:53:05 2005 from 12.169.49.2
Try it again Sass, I did it again
Chuck
USA - Wed Jan 5 15:53:04 2005 from 12.169.49.2
Chuck, I didn't see your message; I've not been online again since the 30th when I left that last post. --- David Byron, I certainly do remember you. Heavens, the tilde has been gone for a really long time. (If I leave the cash in a briefcase behind the phone booth, will you keep it hush how long ago that was?) Maybe someday I'll re-do my old site? Carolyn does check the book, but infrequently. She does have to come by every now and then to get rid of the ridiculous spam that plagues everywhere online these days so if you leave a post for her, she will eventually see it. Hope your holidays were great!
Sass
USA - Wed Jan 5 15:01:34 2005 from 24.66.94.140
I think that I liked you Russians better back when you were commies. Here's a little marketing hint: people won't buy your product if you make annoying repetitious spam ads on guestbooks. Not all publicity is good publicity. Try finding something worthwhile and constructive to do. Spammers register on humanity's usefulness scale somewhere below mimes, telemarketers, and bag ladies.
Vlad <vlad@notonedamnbitsorry.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Wed Jan 5 12:15:09 2005 from 205.188.116.138
Something stinks about Amber Fry on national tv, crying and carrying on “telling her story”. Laci is dead and she’s pretty much alive. Who has suffered the greater loss? Laci’s family that’s who!...... Oh Laci’s family probably doesn’t do tv as Amber would. I’m going to throw up
Lem
NJ USA - Tue Jan 4 22:25:03 2005 from 141.150.140.79
Wow. ~Sass! What happened to your ~ ? I was trying to look up what happened to your site ("Write To Life") the other year and I couldn't find it. Ok now I can find the fairwell message. Wonder why I couldn't find it last time. I thought Carolyn's site was closed down too, even the Rightgrrls's site seemed to be dead. Stephanie and her were (are?) such a pair of webheads I figured they must have moved somewhere but I couldn't find where. Don't suppose anyone here remembers me at all - it's been years. Does Carolyn ever read this guestbook?
David Byron <davidbyron20@yahoo.com>
USA - Tue Jan 4 22:23:17 2005 from 12.219.146.67
Vlad: Orbach was a friend of my father's but I didn't know him. I wish I had. He was an old school, NY theatre guy.
Adam
USA - Tue Jan 4 13:43:38 2005 from 64.236.245.243
Adam, did you know Jerry Orbach or work with him?
Vlad <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWTq Canada - Tue Jan 4 13:08:29 2005 from 172.139.15.174
Secretary Powell hopes that our generous reaction to the call for help with tsunami relief will help our image – WHAT? what’s wrong with our image?
Lem
NY USA - Tue Jan 4 11:48:45 2005 from 63.250.35.179
Hey guys, take a look at her picture: Just see what you missed by not attending a Kerry rally? Man the harpoon, ye swabs!
Vlad (ahoy, thar she blows!) <vlad@harpoonthegaywhales.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Tue Jan 4 0:58:34 2005 from 172.175.107.200
OK guys, here's a picture of the of your dreams. According to her, she's been wearing that banner over her face for 14 years. Perhaps she's doing us all a big favour? (Isn't it amazing that she was clairvoiant enough to know that there would be a 2nd President Bush in 2000, so she didn't take the banner off during the 8 years of Clinton, huh?)
Vlad (click here for the picture) <vlad@shemustbeverysorrylooking.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Tue Jan 4 0:38:38 2005 from 172.175.107.200
Hey, ladies...click on this picture and get ready to swoon. Be still, thy beating heart...it's...Antigreggo! sigh.
Vlad (warning for the feint of heart: don't click) <vlad@hillary,saveus.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Tue Jan 4 0:16:36 2005 from 172.175.107.200
How about the guy in THIS picture? How can this guy expect to be taken seriously when the venue he chooses is to take his own picture in his bathroom, while using a bandana as a mask to hide his acne? One can imagine that his mother is banging on the door yelling; "What are you doing in there for so long? You've been in there for hours!"
Vlad (take a look at this picture) <vlad@youlooksorryashell.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Mon Jan 3 23:39:51 2005 from 172.175.107.200
The hygienically challenged-American community has been disenfranchised. It's just not fair. It's Selma all over again!
Vlad (oh boy, click here and look at this picture) <vlad@yupyoulookverydamnedsorrytome.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Mon Jan 3 23:28:08 2005 from 172.175.107.200
...and take a look at this picture. They must be related in some way, because they desided to use the same dingey/depressing structure as their backdrop for delivering their important vital handscrawled message to the entire world. Too bad neither of them have recieved the grand message concerning the joys of personal hygiene.
Vlad (click here for another link) <vlad@notonedamnbitsorry.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Mon Jan 3 22:53:28 2005 from 172.175.107.200
Hey, I had to go back and look at everyone's favorite site (sorryeverybody.com). I came across this picture (link). Can anyone tell me exactly what her little crayola drawing is supposed to be? I'm really trying to understand.
Vlad (click here for link to the picture in question) <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Mon Jan 3 22:44:54 2005 from 172.175.107.200
w00t!
Poultricide <pcide@sorryeverybody.com>
Louisville, KY - Mon Jan 3 21:01:26 2005 from 64.12.116.137
Merry New Year!
Poultricide <pcide@kerry4pre$ident.org>
Louisville, KY - Mon Jan 3 20:50:16 2005 from 64.12.116.137
Poultricide made a funny!!!!!! By the way Poultricide I guess you didn't get the memo KERRY LOST! He lost in a major way too
Rad
USA - Mon Jan 3 17:54:44 2005 from 68.88.32.149
Hey, does anybody know where I can buy cheap medications or a fake Rolex watch? I've got a large amount of money coming in from Nigeria and I can't wait to spend it.
Poultricide <pcide@kerry4pre$ident.org>
Louisville, KY - Mon Jan 3 13:37:15 2005 from 152.163.100.137
i deserve that chuck
Lem
NY USA - Mon Jan 3 8:37:24 2005 from 63.250.35.179
This is the first time I've seen your story. Keeping your integrity and making decisions for the benefit of the patient is our job. Here, there are two patient lives at stake. If we as pharmacists can't discern when therapy is appropriate in terms of therapeutics, safety and the ethical mandate to prevent harm, don't be surprised if we are replaced with gumball machines. Our Boards are corrupt and those issues need to be addressed. Too often, the Board members are merely the mouthpieces of big business, and they don't care about successful outcomes and fruitful lives. I also am going through some hell for having stood up against a company-refusing to disclose patient information to a manager and refusal to fill for an addict. Wish me luck and let me know if there is an organization out there interested in protecting the pharmacist's right to protect the patient. Regards, Marge
Margaret Kohler <kohler@ispwest.com>
Mims, Fl USA - Sat Jan 1 17:34:45 2005 from 4.235.63.39
Happy New Year, Carolyn.,,,-,,, Lem, how goes the soul searching?
Chuck
USA - Sat Jan 1 11:21:27 2005 from 12.169.49.2
You all may accuse me of conspiring to one day get away with love. I’m commanded to wish the worst love intoxication to come upon you all too. As a prominent American once was told to say - I don’t give a dam.
Lem
USA - Sat Jan 1 8:31:34 2005 from 141.150.11.232
If sending flowers in the mail (1 800) is an undeclaratory willful ballistic intention – so be it. My flag has shades of white; it will be good for something.
Lem
NJ USA - Sat Jan 1 8:16:25 2005 from 141.150.11.232
I will (I hope) one day ask her to marry me. When that happens I will be about 99.9 percent certain of the answer I want, beg and dream about.
Lem
USA - Sat Jan 1 8:04:17 2005 from 141.150.11.232
I work (you can check this – I post from Pearl River also) about 50 miles away. I don’t want to be that far away. BTW – I have not been biblically known to her. (Just in case anybody is wondering). If we are to get together eventually is not going to be because of an interpretation. It’s going to be because a discovery, a birth, wonderment other than a cheap….. (I don’t have words for that stuff)
Lem
NJ USA - Sat Jan 1 7:53:44 2005 from 141.150.11.232
I used to be of some use to her when her English was not up to New Jersey City University snuff. And then there was a pause. Tom Wolf’s latest book gives one (like me) pause. And yet I would (I have secretly to be near) turn my life upside down.
Lem
NJ USA - Sat Jan 1 7:45:23 2005 from 141.150.11.232
As for me, I have just spent the eave of the new year the way I have for (I’m guessing) the last eight years. With the family along with the target of my cupidal instincts. I know that she knows and the family knows what I told them – witch as this times go is very little. I broke down crying on the phone to her a few years ago – only to catch myself in time to ask her not to say anything – right there and then.
Lem
NJ USA - Sat Jan 1 7:38:11 2005 from 141.150.11.232
There is very (tone of voice) little affection when a brother (new years or not) makes a phone call at a rather unforsaken hour. I have just done that to a couple of my siblings. One of them picked up. We spoke (briefly) for what seemed to me an eternity – I called only to say “happy new year” ? (Imagine a response) – I have to start seeing my family other than when there are getting hitched – memo to lem. Your sisters and your only one brother are married, they have to be understood by other people that are close to them, (sleeping together) by law and by a promise to each other to be true. I call at 7 in the am, no matter how much they love me there is only so much they will put up with me – at this stage of play – I don’t blame them. I’m supposed to be their older brother...... Happy to you too rad.
Lem
Jersey City, NJ USA - Sat Jan 1 7:27:25 2005 from 141.150.11.232
Happy New Year Carolyn!
Rad
USA - Sat Jan 1 1:42:06 2005 from 68.88.33.68
Private message for Sass in chat
Chuck
USA - Fri Dec 31 12:38:28 2004 from 12.169.49.2
Yeah, Sass, it's me. Good ol' ST from the old "Home of the HOT debate".
ConservaTibbs <tibbs1973@yahoo.com>
USA - Fri Dec 31 9:25:58 2004 from 12.210.212.117
The best spyware remover is Ad-Aware, not the garbage that is shown below. Best of all, it's free and the people who put it out don't spam guestbooks.
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Dec 31 2:12:45 2004 from 205.188.116.138
They call ME "Mister Tibbs"!
Lt. Virgil Tibbs <vtibbs@sfpd.gov>
San Francisco, CA USA - Thu Dec 30 20:10:36 2004 from 205.188.116.138
Hiya yourself Chuck. Is that Tibbs? The real Tibbs? If so... hi, long time! (Guess I should click and see.)
Sass
USA - Thu Dec 30 17:50:52 2004 from 24.66.94.140
Hey, I got on for you. Let’s say you are the president of Indonesia and Osama Bin Laden sends you a check for a million dollars to help the muslims tsunami survivors – do you endorse it or do you send it back with a note - 'stingy'
Lem (click)
NY USA - Thu Dec 30 12:31:34 2004 from 63.250.35.179
Hi'ya Sass!!
Chuck
USA - Thu Dec 30 8:56:14 2004 from 12.169.49.2
I just happened to read the following on your hate mail page: "Condsidering that Italians have been known to leave infant girl children liying on the side of the road in Italian villages abandoned. I wouldn't listen to a word you say. Your track record stinks." This is one of the dumbest statements I have read in a long time. So is everyone of a specific ethnicity responsible for the actions of some people who happen to share that ethnicity? There's a word for people like the person who sent that email: bigot. *eyeroll*
ConservaTibbs
IN USA - Thu Dec 30 6:50:50 2004 from 12.210.212.108
Well don't look at me regarding all the spam - I haven't had a (usable) computer for the past week! Now that I have it back though, I've seriously considered spending at least three hours a day just on spamming and possibly another one or two on forwarding chain letters. ;-) Hope you all had a Merry Christmas. One other thing... can anyone recommend a good (or even just decent?) pop-up blocker for download that will work where Windows 95 is still being used? Thanks!
Sass
- Wed Dec 29 19:56:15 2004 from 24.66.94.140
I just removed slightly under 700 comment spams from my site, all of which were left in the past 24 hours.
Mike
Canada - Wed Dec 29 18:31:57 2004 from 24.36.1.75
I see the spam has taken on a rather Southparkesque theme. Much improved... Maybe Poultricide will be ordering now that they are selling something of interest to chickens. :oD
Joy
USA - Wed Dec 29 14:18:10 2004 from 68.113.38.11
Hey Randy! Nice post!!
Aaron
USA - Mon Dec 27 13:19:31 2004 from 67.41.223.34
Merry Christmas Carolyn
Rad
USA - Sat Dec 25 1:41:58 2004 from 66.143.141.113
Wow. I think I'm going to stock up on all my medications from some dude with an obscure email addy. I'll send him tons of money and just know I'll get the medications I order and that they'll be real name brands. Kind of like the authentic Rolex I bought on the beach in Taiwan. The guy said he'd mail the certificate and warranty to me later. Uh huh... I wonder why I haven't gotten it yet.
Norom
2 dumb, Forwords Ozone - Fri Dec 24 14:34:05 2004 from 68.113.38.11
A nice tribute to the soldiers in Iraq. Get some tissues.
Lem (link)
NJ USA - Thu Dec 23 22:49:44 2004 from 138.89.145.10
Bush JunioOOOOOOr is MY HERO! THO I HATE him - i love dEMOcRZTZS - YEZH
GuessWho - I M TOO SUM 2 HAVE N EMAUK ADRES
USA - Thu Dec 23 13:04:49 2004 from 69.156.127.82
Merry Christmas folks. I am outta here until Monday. Talk to you then. God bless.
Adam
USA - Thu Dec 23 12:52:24 2004 from 64.236.245.243
Here is an excellent Mark Steyn article about "the C-word". I thought that "the C-word" was something completely different. Merry Christmas! Dammit!
Vlad <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Thu Dec 23 9:18:05 2004 from 64.12.116.137
Hey look, here is Bush making a video for the cause.... morons.
Lem (link)
NJ USA - Thu Dec 23 0:23:29 2004 from 151.198.9.125
The soldiers remains, in route, are probably still warm. Waht do we have here? people celebrating some hidious political calculation?
Lem
NJ USA - Wed Dec 22 23:36:50 2004 from 151.198.9.125
Let’s be clear. It’s an epithet on the remains of the soldiers killed in Iraq. To say that they were killed by any other, other than those truly responsible (homicide bomber) is akin to spiting in their graves. Denying their ultimate sacrifice is akin to spiting in their grave.
Lem
NJ USA - Wed Dec 22 23:26:42 2004 from 151.198.9.125
“Bush has made sure at least 20 families will never see their love one again this week.”…… This is like saying Police departments around the nation have made sure police agents get killed on duty by sending them to their deaths in the dangerous streets of America so they never see their families again……… NASA made sure dozens of astronaut’s families never see their families again……… Edison is a widow maker…….. This is why the president won so easily. Liberals caricatured themselves. It was too easy.
Lem
Jersey City, NJ USA - Wed Dec 22 23:08:02 2004 from 151.198.9.125
Having put together the lay out for Time's Man of the Year issue for 4 years in a row, I can't see what point is being made here. Ghandi and Dr. King were also Man of the Year. Earth was Planet of the year. Khomeni was man of the year. The computer was machine of the year. It has to do with impact on the news.
Adam
USA - Wed Dec 22 19:19:05 2004 from 64.236.245.243
Hey Aaron,Bush's insane war Has made sure at least 20 American Familys will never see there loved onez agan this week,, Merry Xmas...Bush should seeme nude since i am so sexy.. Who btw were Both Times man of the Year. mee and bush - see hOw much i rool.
Randy - BIG MAN OF WOOSIE - SEND ME EMAIL! <rlhsjh@yahoo.com>
USA - Wed Dec 22 19:12:53 2004 from 67.1.99.204
Caricatures are for the most part (guess who included) widely disseminated but short on substance. One of the reasons why Moore did so well with his propaganda is that he did provide a version a story line to people who genuinely are looking for one. Regrettably Moore is nothing more than a savvy charlatan. There is a reason, reasons why we are in Iraq. One of them is that IT IS INEVITABLE. We either get on with it now or do it down the road when it will be forced upon us and thereby at a much higher cost in lives and treasure. Social Security reform is very much the same story. Pay me no or pay me later.
Lem
NY USA - Wed Dec 22 14:58:54 2004 from 63.250.35.179
let's see: Bush is smart enough to fool all mankind and laugh at it, but he is too dumb to fight a war.
Adam
USA - Wed Dec 22 13:08:40 2004 from 64.236.245.243
I'm laughing at you
Chuck
USA - Wed Dec 22 10:31:30 2004 from 12.169.49.2
Bush has no idea what he is doing when it comes to war. The man was a coward during the Vietnam war in that he joined the TNG with the help of his father and thus avoiding serviving in Vietnam. Iraq will be just another long drawn out event that will cost thousands and thousands of American lives and cost billions of dollars. Until the public start protesting as we did during Vietnam this war will drag on. The cowardly lihis father and thus avoiding serviving in Vietnam. Iraq will be just another long drawn out event that will cost thousands and thousands of American lives and cost billions of dollars. Until the public start protesting as we did during Vietnam this war will drag on. The cowardly little chimp is laughing at us all, just like I am laughing at Blue Clues right now, though some of it is hard to understand.
GuessWho - I am naked right now - you all I bet want to see! Next time I will give a web site where you can see my NAKED PICTURES!
USA - Wed Dec 22 9:29:56 2004 from 64.231.201.174
It seems professor Barnett has become something of an overnight sensation. His website (linked below) is down, do to traffic, no doubt. People do want to understand why the administration is doing what it’s doing in Iraq. While the professor gets up to speed you might want to try this link.
Lem (link)
Pearl River, NY USA - Wed Dec 22 8:10:06 2004 from 63.250.35.179
Love the editing job
Chuck
USA - Wed Dec 22 7:27:09 2004 from 12.169.49.2
The most compelling of the pentagon’s competing grand strategies for winning the war on terror has been briefed literally hundred’s of times, without much fanfare, to anyone who would listen. The briefer’s name is Thomas P.M. Barnett. The book is The Pentagon’s New Map. He also blogs. People who say Bush doesn’t know what he’s doing are either politically inclined to say so, have not bother finding out or both.
Lem (link)
NJ USA - Tue Dec 21 22:31:29 2004 from 141.150.12.81
By the way, my regards to your fine state for delivering this election for us.
Aaron
USA - Tue Dec 21 15:02:35 2004 from 67.41.223.34
Oh Brent, you have my sympathies.
Aaron
USA - Tue Dec 21 15:00:10 2004 from 67.41.223.34
No-Comment, I dont do drugs my son. (except crack)
GuessWho
USA - Tue Dec 21 14:12:48 2004 from 64.231.201.162
this is the most disgusting site i have been to since i was on bill oreily's conservation trash hole. you should be ashamed to be conservative not proud of it. it is you kind of people that are slowing this nation down, keeping gays from marrying, keeping blacks out of office, and electing a douche bag for president - i hope to graduate from 3rd grade next year, which is why i know i am so smart! hope to work as a paper boy soon.
Brent - email me and tell me HOW Cool I AM! <for8605@yahoo.com>
Canton, OH USA - Tue Dec 21 13:15:50 2004 from 156.63.78.201
GuessWho quit taking LSD it's fried your brain
No comment
USA - Tue Dec 21 10:49:15 2004 from 66.143.141.113
If Bush had of listened to the warnings coming out of Saudi prior to 9/11 he would have removed his storm troopers from the Holy Cities of Mecca and Medina. Bush refused to listen and death and destruction followed. I beleiev that Bush is as guilty of the 9/11 atrocities as Bin Laden is. Perhaps even more for Bush could have listened and removed the Storm Troopers.
GuessWho
USA - Tue Dec 21 9:10:04 2004 from 67.68.32.69
Regarding the Scott Peterson trial. I believe he is awsome. Love me.
Guesswho
USA - Tue Dec 21 9:07:44 2004 from 67.68.32.69
A tv "CHIPS" second rate actor as a real state Bonanza? waht gives? Fl first, Arkansas dayas? nay.... I should go to work tomorrow, let's get some sleep? maybe.
Lem (link)
USA - Mon Dec 20 3:44:01 2004 from 138.89.168.113
If there is anything genuine about the blogsphere/guesphere is how seriously they/we confront fakes, phonies and frauds. Bloggers, comets like our selves, were the only ones capable of telling Rather where he was at. Not even the Republican Party (with a big name, big money) could achieve what we and our inquisition, take no prisoners, love me leave stile did in the span of a week. I loved it. Rather stories no more, we rather the truth.
Lem
USA - Mon Dec 20 3:23:10 2004 from 141.150.133.85
I hate to joke about serious matters but joking sometimes is the only serious matter people take seriously. Serious is not half of what the mullahs want (to kill us) from us. I remember some people complaining to me (wanting to change my vote) that after 9/11 Bush had missed a big opportunity by not asking, as Roosevelt had, the American people to sacrifice. I say that after an attack like September 11 not having to sacrifice (Abram Isaac) should be to the credit of those who do not ask. If I may add, have been proven right not to.
Lem
USA - Mon Dec 20 3:00:14 2004 from 141.150.133.85
One of the things that “caught my eye” as I red was that the writer seems to appreciate my impression that celebrations in mass have certain phoniness to them that history lacks. (We never seen before is how some people put it) The writer doesn’t leave it there, but mourning in mass has a lack of genuine mourning that only “real grieving” can approach, and at the same time intuitively restrain. It’s tricky. How dare anyone judge? Anyone who isn’t, say, the Brit on American Idol?
Lem
USA - Mon Dec 20 2:30:55 2004 from 138.89.6.190
And then I watched how the Brits do it, and lo and behold they are trying to one-up our American Press. A legally blind Home minister, close to Blair (somewhat equivalent to our James Watt) wrote a letter to the ministry of immigration about an alien. Oh for havens sake we mustn’t do that! WHAT PLANET ARE WE – VIRTUALLY- LIVING ON?... That’s the explanation – reality is having to conform to an idea of reality – virtual reality. It’s very easy for people to confuse an unborn real live child for something other than what in their hart of hart they know to be true! Just read the article I’m speaking about.... it's not abortion per say, but it is about us!
Lem
USA - Mon Dec 20 1:59:24 2004 from 138.89.6.190
Come t think of it, I think it’s unfair of me to ask those of you here to read Harpers. Harpers can be toxic for those of us who are adamant in “principle”……. So I read them – for say - opposition research. Bla blab la. I owe you people (rush speak) an explanation! I too work with the most liberal wing of the democrat party…………Joy – you are not alone………..I believe the Hero worship phenomena and genuine lack thereof is directly responsible for a lot of the confusion on the part of people otherwise known as sensible, intelligent, next door neighbors……….. Say people who donate to the Peterson’s, the Menendez. The you and me we reflexebly gaze upon, the live prime time mirror so called television. I want you all to read this article, upcoming book, not so much to change your way of thinking as so to confirm what YOU in your hart of harts already know……. We make things that have nothing to do with us – about us. Weather we “like it” or not. Just the fact that we have to like/dislike something is proof of our burden influence on things our forefathers only dreamed about. Yes, including the ones that died in the thousands for the idea that maybe freedom, our way of life was worth it……….. Could we image our WWII leaders to be asked to resign because somebody had not signed the letter of condolence to the hundred of thousands of family survivors?......... What is it that makes our bunch so special they need to be acknowledged personally?....... (reality TV?) …. We need to think long and hard about these questions. Can we be clear on OUR present absolute danger?..... If we are obscure about each other here in our own land – how can we expect to fear with an (unread) unwatched, unentertaining enemy? Aljazera (of all people) is regretting censoring Osama Bin Laden, because as a retaliation for the censoring Osama (our enemy #1) went directly to the internet so as to avoid censorship. For p#2@5% sake! We need to pay attention.
Lem
USA - Mon Dec 20 1:27:36 2004 from 138.89.6.190
of course i got it wrong - click lem for the writer i'm raving about! e tu lemuel brunt upon!
Lem
NJ USA - Mon Dec 20 0:05:40 2004 from 138.89.6.190
Good Lord! Just so I don’t offend the lord’s name mentioning out of turn fellowship. The reason why I do things sometimes is uncertain to me. The reason why I can is because I’m here. That I will never be uncertain about!
Lem
USA - Sun Dec 19 23:55:40 2004 from 138.89.6.190
Sometimes my faith is reduced to weather or not I believe I have set my alarm clock properly. Believe or not I’m frightened by only one thing. Falling asleep only to awake beyond a get to work on time allotted fashion. You well to do folks here have no idea what the rest of us have to put up with!
Lem
USA - Sun Dec 19 23:49:29 2004 from 138.89.6.190
Who is a hero and who is a fake is very important to me. if you read the article i'm recomending it may become important to you TOO. i hope so anyway. - Attack of the superzeros. the author is using Harpers as a spring board for his upcoming book. His name is Thomas de Zengtitta. I like the sipnopsis article... the book? I have so much bias from the article it would be best if i remain impartial (like thats possible) I want to recomed the book. We want, need to understand the American Hero fenomena. Campbell only touched the surface.
Lem (link)
NJ USA - Sun Dec 19 23:33:24 2004 from 138.89.6.190
I went to Hoboken’s Barns & Noble as I usually do, so I red about my pet peep subject – heroism and who and what constitute heroism. The article is on Harpers, a some what liberal magazine. However sometimes I get informed by those who opose me. sue me!
Lem
Jersey City, NJ USA - Sun Dec 19 23:05:07 2004 from 138.89.6.190
PRESIDENT BUSH AND OUR PARTY HISTORICAL VICTORY IS AN UNFORGETTABLE DEFEAT FOR TERRORISM AND ITS SUPPORTERS AND A SECOND DEATH FOR COMMUNISM.PRESIDENT BUSH AND OUR PARTY HISTORICAL VICTORY IS A PERSONAL VICTORY FOR EVERYONE WHO FIGHTS TERROR AND STANDS FOR PROGRESS.MR PRESIDENT GOD BLESS YOU FOR THE GREAT JOB YOU HAVE DONE AND THE GREAT JOB YOU ARE DOING AND THE GREAT JOB YOU WILL DO
MAWLOUD OULD DADDAH <mawloudoulddaddah@usa.com>
DAKAR, SENEGAL USA - Sun Dec 19 11:29:01 2004 from 213.154.87.232
Schwarzenegger says the Republican party should move "a little to the left". Anyone surprised?
+ 0 >< ! (
USA - Sat Dec 18 22:07:11 2004 from 168.143.113.125
I went to a liberal whine and cheez Christmas party last night... They talked about 'angry white men'... I assumed they were speaking about themselves due to the venom and bile sputtering forth from their mouths coupled with their histrionics. But come to find out... they thought they were talking about Conservatives! Go figure... Anyhoo... I have an idea for liberals who want so desperately to help the poor and less privileged. Instead of the astronomically expensive wine and hideously expensive cheese and other fine fare... serve inexpensive cheese and crackers and inexpensive soda and donate the savings to the poor and less privileged... The money saved from their 'bitching about the conservatives' parties would feed a whole lot of hungry people. On the upside... the guy that threw the party was one heck of a cook. He'd make some gal a fine wife! Too bad he's a liberal. lol :o]
Joy
USA - Sat Dec 18 12:16:12 2004 from 68.113.38.11
Good advice, Joy
Chuck
USA - Fri Dec 17 18:34:22 2004 from the upside... the guy that threw the party was one heck of a cook. He'd make some gal a fine wife! Too bad he's a liberal. lol :o]
Joy
USA - Sat Dec 18 12:16:12 2004 from 68.113.38.11
Good advice, Joy
Chuck
USA - Fri Dec 17 18:34:22 2004 from 12.169.49.2
Roshie, Are you happy with the fact you killed your child? You seem to think that because you voluntarily suffered pain while killing your child it's OK. You yourself called it "dreadful" and "not something i'm proud of", as well as admitting you killed your "child" but you continue to be pro-choice. Do you advocate killing your children after birth too? I wonder because most "pro-choice" people hold that it's not a child, but you admit it is. With the low esteem you hold for children, I hope you never become pregnant again.
Chuck
USA - Fri Dec 17 18:33:14 2004 from 12.169.49.2
"i refused painkillers I did so because I believed that i should bare the pain of the death of my unborn child..." Wow, how altruistic of you. Do you really believe that just because you endured some pain that killing your unborn child is ok? The question is, why did your child have to die at all? There are many more options other than abortion in almost all circumstances. There was a time when mothers would defend their children to the death... now the children are FORCED to die for thier mothers convenience. I'm not trying to be mean... but you really need to come to realize what you did. Maybe the pain you should have endured should have been for the sake of your child by giving birth and giving him/her up for adoption. THAT would be worthwhile pain. Enduring pain while you are killing your baby just doesn't cut it. When you come to realize what you really did, I suggest calling your local Pregnancy Care Center and getting some counseling. Maybe don't wait till you understand... maybe just go anyway and they can help you.
Joy
USA - Fri Dec 17 18:28:17 2004 from 68.113.38.11
while you do present your position please let me present mine... My name is Roshie Abrunzzi I'm 15 years old and I myself have had an abortion and it was dreadful and not something i'm proud of but something that has made me who i am and yet it wasn't anything like the stories you have on your site (I first stumbled here pre-procedure) the pain the women disscribed was nothing like what i had and i refused painkillers I did so because I believed that i should bare the pain of the death of my unborn child...and while i am still pro-choice I respect you for placing this site here thank you ~Roshie~
Roshie <amoonra51@hotmail.com>
ME USA - Fri Dec 17 13:57:36 2004 from 169.244.70.148
Someone may have said this before. Governing ourselves is analogous to making bread, (Or, cookies) you put in some religion and some secular dogma in an apparent constant attempt to keep the whole thing from collapsing. The argument is as old as the republic……… When the uninitiated reads the declaration of independence it seems riddle with contradictions. Until you realize that it was very likely done on purpose; the purpose of giving ourselves the luxury of negotiation.... …….. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world..... This coutry is the best cookie under the sun.
Lem (click)
Pearl River, NY USA - Thu Dec 16 14:04:10 2004 from 63.250.35.179
It's another Festivus miracle!
Frank Costanza
Queens, NY USA - Thu Dec 16 13:24:21 2004 from 64.12.116.137
Surf's up!! Fifty foot waves in Hawaii
Chuck
USA - Thu Dec 16 13:03:56 2004 from 12.169.49.2
Several years back, I think I recall that a man was arrested for praying the Rosary outside an abortion clinic in Toronto (by himself, minding his own business). That last link prompted the memory. I also heard on the news here this morning, that somewhere in Canada (can't remember the city), the city in question was calling their Christmas tree a 'holiday tree'. Things are totally out of control.
Sass
USA - Thu Dec 16 11:59:34 2004 from 206.163.232.93
Here's your freedom of speech and freedom of religion in America:
www.afa.net/clp/ReleaseDetail.asp?id=78
- Thu Dec 16 11:49:42 2004 from 168.143.113.125
Rad, your scrooge routine doesn't fool anyone. You probably have hat hair from wearing your Santa hat day and night and your neighbours are probably sick of how many times your CD player repeats the Christmas music. And I bet you went to that site AND saw the lights. ;-) lol
Sass
USA - Thu Dec 16 11:04:00 2004 from 206.163.232.93
Sass: I have so often found myself arguing the same point with people incessantly that I relate very strongly to those who do. In fact, I am sorely tempted to weigh in on this argument but a) most people here probably already know my opinion and b) I have nothing to add beyond what has already been said. BUT!!! In order to find serenity when I think the person I am arguing with is either an idiot or being deliberately dense I remember this, "If I say something once, I've made my point. If I find I am saying it over and over again, I am trying to control the situation or some other person."
Adam
USA - Thu Dec 16 9:45:23 2004 from 64.236.245.243
I will leave it right here if everyone does the same. Sass, you are a wise woman. Actually, I'm taking a break...I don't even feel like this productive at all for me to be doing this here...in fact it's starting to feel a little unhealthy, so I'm going to take a breather.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Thu Dec 16 8:42:45 2004 from 146.130.90.177
I think i met you in colledge. Componella. Anastasia web? http://www.anastasiawebscam.com
Anastasia web <ikcut-guest@yahoo.com>
NY, NY USA - Thu Dec 16 7:48:44 2004 from 213.247.150.99
Leave it go John
Chuck
USA - Thu Dec 16 7:17:01 2004 from 12.169.49.2
Bah humbug Sass
Rad the scourge
USA - Thu Dec 16 0:12:41 2004 from 68.88.38.232
Go here, have some fun. See the lights, sing a Christmas carol. ;-)
Sass
USA - Wed Dec 15 22:08:35 2004 from 206.163.232.93
In hopes that I won't be misunderstood by anyone here... John believes one thing about sex outside of marriage. Others here believe John is wrong. John will not convince the others to see it how he does because that would mean they have to change the very make-up of who they are. The others won't get John to see it how they see it because then John would have to change the very make-up of who he is. Both sides have done their best to show why they believe it the way they do and so it would seem that both sides have done their duty as a Christian (that being to help someone else understand what they believe the truth to be since there are so many versions of Christian truth). At this point and on this topic, the only reason to keep posting to each other that the other is wrong serves only to fight with each other. I believe you are all posting your beliefs because you believe that you have an obligation to speak what you believe to be the truth. You have done so and others are able to read your thoughts and form their own beliefs because you did. There is merit in that. -|- Please though, remember that each one of you has good things about you that are valuable in the eyes of God and no matter who is wrong, we will all find out eventually. No one dies with a perfectly clean slate, most will arrive with an abundance of mistakes made in life and I'm quite sure that God wants to bring home each and every one of you whether you convinced the next guy or not. God knows your hearts. That's the beauty of it all, God knows what we did and why we did it even when we don't know the reasons ourselves. God knows if you honestly tried to be the best person you could be or not. God knows if you've tried to convince others and that's what counts, not whether you convinced them. The convincing isn't up to us anyway, as Christians we all know that's the job of the Holy Spirit but sometimes we forget (me too) and try to be the convincers because it's frustrating to watch someone use their free will to choose what we think is wrong (imagine God doing that with billions of us - sheesh). You cannot force another to walk through a door unless the other opens the door first; that applies regardless of which side does the walking/opening and that's not an endorsement of anyone, just me asking people to remember that about each other and me asking us to take a breath long enough to pass the convincing part of the job over to Whom it belongs. I mean no disrespect to anyone in posting this, I'm trying to say you all have goodness in you and asking you all to try see it. Now, if ya don't chill (words of a wise man), I'm going to have to dig up that "Night before Christmas" thing I wrote two years ago with all your names in it and SING it so loudly you'll be sorry. ;-) Please? - With the surfspeedy host cherry on top perhaps?
Sass
USA - Wed Dec 15 22:04:21 2004 from 206.163.232.93
Wow, that article just absolutely proves all my points. “King David had countless wives”…yeah that would be a sin. “Abraham had sex with his sister???”…uh, yep, that would be a big one. “If the men didn’t find proof of her virginity they stoned her to death??!!??” Man, that’s got to be murder if ever there was such a thing. “Anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery. Matthew 5: 32” Wow…if you take this literally then I sure hope you were cheated on Joy because at this point, if not, then you’re gonna have to look into becoming a nun. Ok, this old testament stuff is starting to sound a little like what’s going on in Iran right now so I’ll move on here. “Love. It is the principal virtue in the New Testament”…um, hello, exactly what I’ve said over, and over, and over, even after Nick disagreed with this…so here this guy proves it up for me real quick (it is a fact btw). Jesus warned us about LUST people, lust!!! This is not the same as two people who are in love who just don’t happen to have a marriage certificate. “Love is patient: love is kind. Love is not envious or boastful or arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth. It bears all things, believes all things, endures all things. 1 Corinthians 13: 4-7” I just like this passage so I wanted to say it again. “Remember: Sexual deprivation never killed anyone.” Yeah, but having sex used to get people killed…still does in some parts of the world. This is really becoming ridiculous…do ya’ll really believe I’m just shouting out stuff I’ve no idea what I’m talking about??!!?? Look, be reasonable here people…I’m sure Joy wants to get remarried right? Shouldn’t she be able to without the Old Testament getting in her way?? I’m not going through this anymore…I’ve taken religious studies classes and I know what religious dogma is all about and the effect it has on peoples’ worldview. Just let it go.
John
Interpretation by ??, Texas USA - Wed Dec 15 21:01:31 2004 from 69.151.107.19
Jesus condems people who are prostitutes, whoremongers, and people who have sex out of selfishness, or greed...those are the sins. You don't even know the difference between adultery and fornication for that matter.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 15 20:22:48 2004 from 69.151.107.19
Joy, you'll appreciate this article.
S
USA - Wed Dec 15 18:22:33 2004 from 206.163.232.93
Matt 15:19 - Interpretation by Jesus.
Joy
USA - Wed Dec 15 17:12:21 2004 from 68.113.38.11
Interpretation by Joy...ok, I'm done...now. Extramarital sex is not immoral. Jesus did not say that.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 15 16:29:45 2004 from 12.153.133.143
I didn't realize we were talking about the sex thing still. I thought we were talking about a psycho who chopped off her baby's arms. And I didn't hear anyone say that sex in and of itself was dirty or immoral. It is sex outside of the marital covenant relationship that Jesus said is immoral. And like I've said before, take it up with Him. Arguing with me about it isn't going to change the truth at all. If you don't agree with Him, just say so and stop trying to twist and wrest the scriptures to fit what you want them to say... He also gave you the free agency to choose what you believe. He's not going to force you or anyone else to follow Him or obey Him. He wants us to follow Him because He knows exactly how the world works as well as the entire universe... after all, He created them. So when He provided the rules it's for our own good because He loves us and knows how things work. Accept it or not.
Joy
USA - Wed Dec 15 16:00:27 2004 from 68.113.38.11
Ok...Carolyn doesn't want us arguing here so I'm not going any further with this...go ahead and get the last word if you want to. "too literally"...degrees of literal...funny:)
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 15 15:46:19 2004 from 12.153.133.143
She was psychotic...so was Yates...so are many people who cannot see the difference between right and wrong. I agree with everything ya'll just said, and the story still...stands on its own...chopping off body parts...absurd. Jesus didn't tell her to chop off limbs...neither does he say premarital sex is immoral...it's all in the eyes of the beholder. Right is right...wrong is wrong, and no matter how much spin you put on it, or how many different ways you interpret it...sex is not a dirty, immoral thing. You guys can go on and on at this point but there it is...interpretation.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 15 15:36:24 2004 from 12.153.133.143
While I was responding a customer came in... so Chuck had already said basically the same thing I did. Sane minds think alike. LOL
Joy
USA - Wed Dec 15 15:25:23 2004 from 68.113.38.11
What that woman did was due to psychosis. It has nothing to do with taking the Scriptures literally. The point being that were she not psychotic, she wouldn't have done it. Sheeesh.
Joy
USA - Wed Dec 15 15:23:52 2004 from 68.113.38.11
What "good" referred to you claiming that action was based in the Bible. What good did YOU expect to accomplish by claiming the woman was following the Bible? She did NOT take anything in the Bible literally. She is a nut job and so is anyone who says she followed the Bible "too literally"
Chuck
USA - Wed Dec 15 15:18:30 2004 from 12.169.49.2
Who said there was anything remotely "good" about that horrible story? Also, the story speaks for itself...happens all the time because people take things literally, instead of figuratively, or spiritually. Cutting off body parts...absurd.
John
Houston, texas USA - Wed Dec 15 14:26:54 2004 from 12.153.133.143
There was nothing taken "literally" from the Bible in regards to that story, and I'm surprised you would say so. What good could possibly come from claiming that woman's actions are Biblical, in any sense?
Chuck
USA - Wed Dec 15 12:36:50 2004 from 12.169.49.2
Here is something interesting...well, gruesome, but anyway...it just goes to show you what some people are capable of when they cannot combine the ability to use common sense when reading passages. It is really sad...but sometimes folks take things too literally.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 15 10:43:37 2004 from 12.153.133.143
That is great news Joy. That rate has been falling for a while now and it’s awesome. It is great that teens are finally starting to listen to their parents when they tell them they are not ready for sex. The duty of every parent is to make sure they are involved in their teenager’s lives and teach them that it will have a devastating effect on their lives if there was a pregnancy. Teens are simply not equipped to deal with the responsibility of a sexual relationship…parents. So no matter how you do it, morality, religion, just good ole fashioned common sense, get out there and teach your teens to wait until they are old enough to respect their bodies...and use condoms people.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 15 9:03:47 2004 from 12.153.133.143
Paula Zahn backs down - Pale Male hawk soars.
Lem (click)
NY USA - Wed Dec 15 8:20:20 2004 from 63.250.35.179
That great news from both Joy and Lem
Chuck
USA - Wed Dec 15 7:08:47 2004 from 12.169.49.2
From the Star tribune……’It is not always a rosy path through adolescence -- for parents or children. But there is an upbeat teen spirit wafting through their lives that smells nothing like Generation X disaffection. Unlike the chasm that separated baby boom parents from their parents, many of today's teenagers' tastes in clothes and music, as well as their political and social beliefs, dovetail with those of their parents. They are part of a generation from ages 9 to 19 that looks to Mom and Dad as role models………. "In the history of polling, we've never seen tweens [roughly ages 10 to 12] and teens get along with their parents this well," said William Strauss, co-author with Neil Howe of "Millennials Rising: The Next Great Generation" (Vintage, 2000), about those born since 1982.’
Lem (link)
Jersey City, NJ USA - Tue Dec 14 23:26:51 2004 from 141.150.11.202
Good news from the Family Research Council about one of our favorite topics! "According to a new report from the National Center for Health Statistics, fewer teens are having premarital sex. Among 15- to 17-year-old females in 1995, 38 percent had engaged in sexual intercourse, compared to 30 percent in 2002. Among males this age, the percent who had ever had sex declined from 55 in 1995 to 46 in 2002. The report also shows that about half of teens are virgins. In 2002, 53 percent of females age 15-19 and 54 percent of males this age had never engaged in sexual intercourse. The main reason teens cited for not having sex was that it was "against their religion or morals." These statistics are no surprise, since teens have consistently said that they highly value abstinence. Ninety-two percent of teens say they should be given a strong message from society about abstinence, and the majority of sexually experienced teens (67 percent) regret being sexually active. In 2003, 73 percent of teens said they are not embarrassed to admit they are virgins. These statistics show why we need more government funding for abstinence-until-marriage programs, which are very effective in giving teens the knowledge and skills they need to save sex for marriage."
Joy
USA - Tue Dec 14 18:59:57 2004 from 68.113.38.11
Cigarettes kill...and they're nasty.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Tue Dec 14 15:18:49 2004 from 12.40.28.195
Death row inmates are not kept with the general population in California, they are isolated from the general population. That is what I meant when I said that unless we stick him in with the general population that it will be a long time before he dies. How so, because he will not get shanked unless he is with the general population. That would also solve the issue that some would have with state sanctioned killing. Is there some problem with my English?
John
Houston, Texas USA - Tue Dec 14 14:37:20 2004 from 12.40.28.195
As I understand it death row inmates are not kept in with the general population. I could be wrong about California. I just don’t know for a fact.
Lem
NY USA - Tue Dec 14 14:22:31 2004 from 63.250.35.179
"Peterson will sit on death row in California for 25 years and cost millions in appeals." John, Unless somebody shanks him in prison they don't like woman killers or babykillers in prison
Rad
USA - Tue Dec 14 13:53:28 2004 from 68.88.38.232
That was, of course, a excerpt from the latest essay by William F. Buckley, Jr.
Adam
USA - Tue Dec 14 13:50:29 2004 from 64.236.245.243
Peterson will sit on death row in California for 25 years and cost millions in appeals. Considering the case was built on circumstantial evidence it will probably, literally amount to life in prison except that it will cost taxpayers a lot more money. What we ought to do is stick him with the general population, that way he would really suffer. I still don’t see how one person can murder a fetus and another performing an abortion cannot…bewildering. Kofi, Kofi, Kofi…go ahead and gloat in your standing ovation (except us), but soon you will not be gloating. Your mistake? Placing Europe’s protection at a cost of our own.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Tue Dec 14 13:04:14 2004 from 12.40.28.195
I made it a point NOT to watch anything about the trial. Therefore, when I watched the news conference with the jurors last night it was all fresh to me. I think the jurors all served admirably. However, the media behaved terribly. Always, "one or two more questions", and "thank you for answering us" but NO ONE thanked them for their service to their community. Instead it was all "What did you think of Amber?" The jurors behaved respectfully, the media didn't
Chuck
USA - Tue Dec 14 11:32:25 2004 from 12.169.49.2
Top cop tops tattle tales….. Kerik has gone from savior Saint Bernard to SNL skit faster than an overdose of viagra. What was he thinking?
Lem (click)
NY USA - Tue Dec 14 10:46:11 2004 from 63.250.35.179
Here here Chuck.... I don’t think Drudge’s “Death by Jury” headline is fair. I recognize that he is doing it for effect so that people will go to it. The headline seems to transfer some burden to the jury. In my opinion Petersen is solely responsible for the punishment he will ultimately get.
Lem
NY USA - Tue Dec 14 8:09:19 2004 from 63.250.35.179
Continuing the victory for the unborn, Scott Peterson got the death penalty last night. That lady juror laid it on the line: "A husband and father should protect his family, not kill them", a paraphrase, but accurate.
Chuck
USA - Tue Dec 14 6:15:14 2004 from 12.169.49.2
This is the season for giving. I have given in the past, and I intend on giving more. I recommend doing this, especially if you use these venues and benefit from them. You should at least check into the reasons why that might be necessary, at least proper Christians should.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Mon Dec 13 14:21:26 2004 from 12.153.132.107
Wow…that was quite an exchange. I don’t think I’ve ever heard some people here lay it all out there like that before. I do want to thank Sass for her point, a very valid one that I am going to try and adhere to. Looking back I probably should not have dressed down Nick about the over simplifying. And for the record Nick, I don’t think you are less of a man, but I do think it is terribly irresponsible. One incident can bankrupt you and all your plans. I was actually going to send you some info on getting with some contractors I know that get decent rates by pooling together, but you probably have already made plans. As far as the arguing, I am getting a little tired, a little older, and little less willing to get people to understand real truth. I want abortion to end. Sometimes in my zeal I get very angry with the extreme right because I feel that instead of reflecting on real truth they hide behind scripture, or misuse it to their own agenda. There is a reason we have separation of Church and State, it is because no one can agree on biblical interpretation and how it should affect our lives, so it is probably best left out of our law. Thank God our forefathers have learned that lesson. I do know people talk about me in the chat, but I am ok with that. Do I think it’s petty? Yes, but I understand why they do. If I have gotten people to question their own worldview then I can take all the other. I have thick skin. I for one really, really, appreciate differing opinions. I very much appreciate opinions from folks outside our little country that we like to think is the whole world. This is the only way we can see ourselves and I know that to be true. We are not an island and if we think we are then we will lose our way. God created everyone, those who came before Jesus, and those who came after. God created Americans, Canadians, and even Islamic extremists. God created sexual beings- he made us this way so that we would come together and be peaceful. He made us this way so that we would procreate. But too often we use our sexuality in a sinful way, instead of the way he meant. I think Jesus was not so interested in sex itself, as much as he was in how some were using it. Selfishness and greed are the true sins, not sex. People sin in how they use their sexuality, which is a sin against God and a gift he gave us. Marriage, in and of itself, does not sanctify a selfish act, nor does the absence of marriage mean an act of love is immoral. These are my beliefs. There are many progressive biblical scholars who feel the same.
John
Sorry for the fighting Carolyn, USA - Mon Dec 13 14:17:16 2004 from 12.153.132.107
Lem, What seems to be the problem my bro? Ive read many of your messages and when compared to other's like Joy and Vlad your's are actually quite good.
Guesswho
USA - Mon Dec 13 10:39:45 2004 from 67.68.32.142
As promised, the e-mail thing turned out as I had suspected. A rash of paranoia indulged my sanguine, fertile imagination simply was let out. If apologies are in order I shall execute the order in due time. In the mean time I want to tell you all that I feel a little guilty I have not helped pay for any of this. You know, I brag about conservatism here and how wonderful it is bla bla bla bla…. not you Vlad. But, have I helped conserve the preservation of this site? Have I bought anything? Have I even offered? the answer is NO... (you know, I don’t think Carolyn’s is related to Soros) I promise to remedy this oversight in the near future, hopefully some time between the next altercation here and the end of the century…. (I always like to give myself as much time as I can consume) BTW. I’m only speaking for myself here! Ok?.. Ok.
Lem
NY USA - Mon Dec 13 10:36:46 2004 from 63.250.35.179
Come on gang, try and discuss like mature adults. Stop this silly childish behaviour. Okay ?
Guesswho
USA - Mon Dec 13 9:56:11 2004 from 64.231.11.155
i dont mean to sound mean (Sass is a wonderfull lady) but sometimes we need to be reminded about the important things. Let's make Carolyn proud. (i promise no to post more than 73 times in a row) new year resolution, maybe.
Lem
ny USA - Mon Dec 13 9:50:38 2004 from 63.250.35.179
Oh.. happy holidays to you too... I insist.... NO I demand each and every lot of you to hava good time and wahtever so on and so on.... NO CHEATING! all i have to do is come here and check. you give yourselves away. so there!
Lem
NY USA - Mon Dec 13 9:37:58 2004 from 63.250.35.179
Apparently someone has succeeded in making my e-mail at work and at home difficult (impossible) to read….. I can speak two languages (fluently! I like to add) read a third somewhat. But what I cannot do is make the wrongdoer (if that is what is going on) understand the fussy line between privilege and “right”, much less how hard it is to keep things from downgrading, deteriorating to the “rights” thing. I don’t know how if it would be possible but I shall find out once the IT “authority” is convened. Ok…. the guy is late to work. But he will discover, if there is anything to be discovered! I’m confident. Details… later today. Hopefully, I’m needlessly calling attention to a matter that does not call for…….. Rad I will implore you not to get in the habit of apologizing for others and again if I’m out of line, I do not wish to do so heedlessly… Let’s just not get our dear Carolyn to shut down our web away from home.
Lem
Pearl River, NY USA - Mon Dec 13 9:29:25 2004 from 63.250.35.179
...or as they say in Alabama; "Happy Chakka-Kahn!"
Vlad
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sun Dec 12 18:51:08 2004 from 172.155.24.78
Happy kwanza Vlad
Rad
USA - Sun Dec 12 15:15:17 2004 from 68.88.38.232
Right, Happy Festivus to you, too.
Vlad <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknive, NWT Canada - Sun Dec 12 10:29:57 2004 from 64.12.116.137
Sorry Carolyn
Rad
USA - Sun Dec 12 9:55:34 2004 from 68.88.38.232
I may not be here all the time, but I would really like some people here, who are regulars, to please grow up. I really don't NEED to keep this open, ya know? Merry Christmas - you all really make me feel great.
Carolyn
USA - Sun Dec 12 0:04:19 2004 from 68.46.174.45
And (I know) one more thing. Everything that was said in the chat was public domain. John knew where it was and could have read it at any time. Honestly, I think Vlad is hilarious. He has good wit and is pretty quick with it. He will say just about anything. So yes, I was egging him on. It was fun, Sass. John came back with some other shots. Don't you think he thinks of ways to come back? Certainly does. Did you happen to read where I agreed with John that Tidey was an insult and also told him that I would no longer use it (except in this sentence)???
Lothar
USA - Sat Dec 11 22:13:49 2004 from 168.103.50.187
And please do me this one favor...give me enough credit that I have thoroughtly read your posts and disagree with you...not misunderstand you. I see the points you are trying to make. We are treating each other badly. Any one of us can simply slip out or stop discussing the current topic. I can at any time just not type "gargaro.com" and not click "Guestbook". I can also ignore people in here; I have at times. Ignore me...it will not hurt my feelings. Really. I am not for bringing Bible discussions into here. I started this topic with the simple line: "Keep you pants zipped". It does not take a Christian to say that. You speak a lot of your experiences. Please also give me credit that I have had plenty myself. I have seen these things work. I see them daily. I do not focus on what didn't work other than to take notes and make sure I don't do it.
Lothar
USA - Sat Dec 11 21:52:44 2004 from 168.103.50.187
As for the interpretations...of the ones discussed so far...not one serious Bible student can honestly say that fornication is OK. As for Romans 12:3-8...there is no debate: it is about a church and it's functions (hence "BODY"). Romans was a letter from Paul to the CHURCH at Rome. I DID NOT BRING THIS ONE UP. Did you look up Acts 8:37 for yourself? Matthew 18:11? These are not complicated topics. Let the Bible interpret itself. It does a fine job. I cannot just flip to a passage and use it for whatever I want. I will say this...at least Joy, Vlad, John, Church, Adam, and I were making a point. We were discussing ideas. Not the way YOU like us to... The only point you are discussing or trying to prove is how much of a jerk I am. GUILTY. Feel better? I did not comment on how rude I felt your comments to me in the chat were: "20:02:52 [Sass] so say "Thank you mike" like everyone else did and take it as it is" I can be belittled and that's OK. I asked a couple of simple questions that could have been answered simply by: "Yes, Mike wants us out of here".
Lothar
USA - Sat Dec 11 21:39:58 2004 from 168.103.50.187
You are one crazy bitch
Suck My Balls <SmyD@yourchach.com>
USA - Sat Dec 11 18:34:10 2004 from 67.83.82.73
Lothar and Vlad - I have no idea why you have to make everything I say way more complicated and have all these hidden meanings. I'll be very basic here. 1. I have all along, been referring to what's been going on with you folks and John. 2. You people are treating each other badly, insulting each other etc. 3. I pointed it out and said it wasn't right and wasn't very Christian. (an unarguable truth) 4. I pointed out that this is obviously about not liking each other moreso than disagreeing with each other (and you all know it because you all know what you post other places). -|- Somehow, you are both reading all kinds of other nonsense into my posts. Thinking it has to do with something else is only avoidance of the points I've made that keep getting buried by all this other nonsense - the point of how you folks are treating each other. I chose to post because I grew totally sick of coming here or the chat and finding nothing much more than a constant "blah blah John this, blah blah John that." If that's all you want the gb or the chats for is to whine, bash and moan about John and plan how you're going to come in and jerk his chain, then I don't blame Carolyn if she just closes this again or mike if he would choose to remove the chat. I remember a chat where we actually CHATTED about stuff and enjoyed each other's company. So I chose to say my piece and you chose to misunderstand it. -|- Clarifying other issues: I have no desire to have religious discussion with any of you because I have decided that in the past I was (quite frankly) a jerk in thinking that I have all the answers. I am now of the opinion that those who think they have all the answers are equally jerky in that regard and therefore it's best not to talk religion with them. I totally disagree with you on many points and therefore have no desire to debate in circles just to try 'win'; I don't need nor want to. I disagree with you in how you see Bible truths because if you give three people the same Bible, they will end up interpreting it three different ways, so whose is the 'right' one? You will never convince me to see things the way you do and I will never convince you to see things the way I do so I WILL NOT debate scriptures with any of you. When you 'correct' me (or others who post scriptures) it comes off as arrogance since there is no way you can prove to anyone that your interpretation of a scripture is in fact, the 'right' interpretation. In addition, scriptures are meant not only to be understood in their immediate context, but for their messages to be put into place in our everyday lives... in other situations. You cannot show me where you have authority to correct me or anyone else, and so debate is pointless. -|- Lothar, the whole concept of debating not to win that particular person but for the benefit of others reading isn't lost on me. As a matter of fact I have an (old) article in the Rightgrrl library called "Why do we debate each other" which makes that exact point. My point to you was that if you debate like a jerk, those reading will certainly 'think', but *your* points will be not taken seriously because you made them like a jerk. I'm not saying I've never been a jerk, I have too. I'm just saying that it doesn't work and isn't very Christian in behaviour and that's what I see you've been doing lately. You seem to want to defend the practice. I've seen it over and over back to 1997/1998 when we used to debate the Leftgrrls repeatedly. The pro-life people who would make their points in condescending 'jerky' ways were NEVER taken seriously and NEVER once did I see an abortion supporter say "you've made me think". I have to believe it holds true for any subject. THOSE were the things I was trying to say to you. Why all this other nonsense needed to be dragged in, I don't know. Lothar, I think that in discussions among yourself, John, Vlad and Joy, if ALL of you tried to be more DECENT to each other, you'd ALL be surprised and then maybe the behaviour wouldn't make everyone else want to run screaming the freak away from here. That's my point and I DEARLY don't want to keep repeating it. PLEASE see the point for what it is and not what you'd like to make it.
Sass
USA - Sat Dec 11 18:24:04 2004 from 24.66.94.140
Looking forward to being part of the webring. Code is already on site.
Richard <cpsuff@cpsuffolk.org>
Suffolk, NY USA - Sat Dec 11 16:31:26 2004 from 69.113.65.181
Sass, I did not mean my remark as you are taking it. Many people make that conclusion concerning the story of the fallen woman. The lesson that I take from the story is that people don't change. People back then are just like they are now. The Pharisees were the keepers of the Temple and the faith, religion was their vocation and it was a very lucrative one for them. Along came Jesus and challenged their monopoly as "holy" men. Jesus was a Rabbi and Teacher and spent much time in the temple asking them questions, debating them, and confronting their misguided beliefs. They resented it and saw him as a threat to their livlihood. Casting stones is much different from exchanging words and ideas. Not all of the religious leaders of the time opposed Jesus. When Jesus was very young, one Rabbi enjoyed talking to him in the temple and was so astounded by his knowledge and ways that he remarked; that he could now die contented having seen the Messiah. I've always suspected that the fallen woman in the story was nothing but an unfortunate dupe that the Pharisees had tricked. They seem to have been using her and exploiting the angry mob to trick Jesus into condoning something that is cruel and ghastly so that they could discredit him. She could have even been innocent. I could see people, today, doing something similar if their little routines, beliefs, and shibboliths were challenged by some guy. I don't think that people have changed at all.
Vlad
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Dec 10 19:37:06 2004 from 64.12.116.137
Joke time: A BLONDE goes to the post office to buy stamps for her Christmas cards. She says to the clerk, "May I have 50 Christmas stamps?"** The clerk says, "What denomination?"** The blonde says, "Heaven help us. Has it come to this? Give me 6 Catholic, 12 Presbyterian, 10 Lutheran and 22 Baptists. :o]
Joy
USA - Fri Dec 10 18:54:21 2004 from 68.113.38.11
And forgot this one. Joy sent me an e-mail probably 3 years ago after I stated "what's the point, I will never convince him anyway". To which Joy said it is not about convincing THAT person, but about the people reading on. That sunk in. If I present a truth in a manner that is unkind, I will agree that it is not the best way. But what happens is people reading on THINK. If I have gotten a couple of people to think...I have won (as has the other side). The way I view this GB changed that day but did not sink in til later. I consider some of the people that meet here friends. I do not consider anyone an enemy...just annoying. They probably see me that way. Fine. I'm a big guy and can take it. I still think you are hung up on the sex IN marriage issue. Just opinion.
Lothar
USA - Fri Dec 10 15:31:15 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Yes, Vlad...that is the first thing I thought myself. Jesus was not condoning behavior, He told her to "sin no more". Not "Go and do whatever you think feels good". Sass was quoting from my favorite chapter of the Bible, John 8. Here some other quotes from John 8: "I go my way, and ye shall seek me, and shall die in your sins". Another: “Ye are from beneath; I am from above” and “Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin” and “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do”. Also, if we want to look at the Bible technically, Jesus DID NOT write in the sand. For some reason, we all just automatically picture Jesus doing that. He was in the TEMPLE. There is NO sand in the temple. Small detail, but proves the point. As I read the past posts in this conversation, I notice that all I did to start this was tell someone to keep their pants on (Mon Nov 22 12:18:24). I even stated that I don’t think it is a FAITH IN GOD issue (Mon Nov 22 16:56:21 2004) but a faith in right. As a matter of fact, on Mon Nov 22 21:17:42 I stated that this is not a religious site. So then we go into the DHMO thing and then (Sun Dec 5 23:17:54 2004) the lady comes in blaming everyone but herself for her problems. OK…here’s the kicker: John then tells me in the next post that I am less of a man because I don’t provide health insurance for my family. Funny how we made it so long without it. I am making sacrifices to do something bigger than me that probably will never pay off financially this side of Heaven. And I am supposed to stand by quietly??? I have never questioned his character or manhood. Then I read where *gasp* Sass calls down someone for posting outside of his age. THIS IS A GUESTBOOK. Apparently I do not take it as seriously as you do. You talk about “converts”. I don’t like to brag on God’s blessing, but I have seen thousands come to Christ in the last 12 years. How? Truth. People are so sick of wishy-washy churches and the “men” who run them. Then I committed the cardinal sin…not particularly liking the “Passion”. Here is my problem: I take the Bible as truth. When someone misquotes or misuses it, I cannot let it go. You can call it blind faith all you want. Believing anything takes faith. I mentioned watered down Bibles. I am not the holder of the truth, God is. There is a BIG difference between “QUARRELING OVER OPINIONS” and “DOUBTFUL DISPUTATIONS”. Big difference. We think when it comes to most areas of our life until we get to religion…then it becomes a “feel” thing. I don’t mind “feeling”, as long as it is based on the 66 books God gave us. Back to the watered down thing: Is Matthew 18:11 in your Bible that you were quoting? Acts 8:37? John 5:4? Why not? This site is about abortion. Abortion is a moral issue. So the GB occasionally veers off into other moral issues. Nature of the beast. We debate here. Should we revert back to a guestbook where people say something like, “Enjoyed the site…coming back again”? I am not here to make a “convert”. I have been posting here for about 4 years. It has gotten heated in here before…and I guess it probably will again. Realize that misunderstanding is a two-way street…please don’t always assume that I am misunderstanding you because I disagree with you. The only thing I mentioned about being “off” was your view of witnessing. And, as I said, I am not the epitome of Christianity. Never claimed to be. Things escalate here…they always have.
Lothar
USA - Fri Dec 10 15:18:22 2004 from 168.103.50.187
No Vlad, I don't misunderstand the passage, I was applying the same concept to another part of life which is something we should all be able to do otherwise we can't function. I thank you for posting that attempted correction of my 'lack of knowledge' and illustrating exactly what I meant about the danger of thinking one knows more than the other about Christianity. I was applying the *concept* of that situation to this situation and you assumed I am less knowledgeable than you so needed to be taught. LOL. You think Jesus was only trying to tell us that *in that situation only* we should make sure we don't throw the first stone? You think He was ONLY talking about that one particular situation when in so many other areas of life, we are quick to condemn one person for something that more than one party needs to accept responsibility for? Applying that CONCEPT/LESSON to this situation, It would be fair to condemn John for the way he has spoken to any of you IF NONE OF YOU HAD EVER MISPOKEN TO HIM. However, just as the woman was not the only one guilty of the sin, neither is John the only one who has spoken badly to any of you. See how that's so logical? In fairness, please take that last comment, and switch names so that it reads opposite and you can see I'm not saying John has never spoken wrongly to any of you. LOL When my kid was 2, I told him not to touch the burner on the stove. In fact, there were four burners on the stove and when I used the one burner as an example, I really expected him to learn and apply that concept to ALL the burners on the stove. I didn't think I should have to tell him not to touch each separate burner because I gave him credit for being able to take one lesson learned and apply it to another situation. I'm quite sure that Jesus gives us credit for being able to do the same, otherwise the Bible would have to be of such an immense volume, one could never hope to carry one around. Thanks anyway though Vlad, you helped make one of my original points about why we should be kinder to each other and stop thinking we know it all when it comes to matters of faith. Assuming my ignorance instead of trying to really hear what I'm saying is exactly how to make sure a person will not listen to your message and be turned off if that is what being Christian is all about. I don't happen to think (if the goal is to help save other people) that's very productive. -|- I don't intend to get into a five hundred post long debate over who knows more about the Bible. My point was that we should be more decent to each other, and I'm pretty damn sure that Jesus would be OK with that. If anyone wants to argue with that, go ahead...
Sass
USA - Fri Dec 10 15:05:00 2004 from 24.66.94.140
Speaking of abstinence. This is a great article.
Joy (click!)
USA - Fri Dec 10 14:19:29 2004 from 68.113.38.11
I have linked to you from my web site, and have included the link in a book I am writing called - Psychiatry, Mind Control, Genocide and Infanticide which will be on http://www.LuLu.com/Net4TruthUSA I am a MAN who suffers Survivor's guilt from the abortion I consented to in 1981 - so I know from whence I speak. This is a part of the book: While over 3,000 died before our eyes in an instant on September 11th, an equal number of victims perished at the hands of legal terrorists, operating on a much wider killing field. And while the events of September 11th were indeed tragic, the daily personal tragedies of this modern-day slaughter of the innocents, and the spiritual, mental, and emotional repercussions on the parents of aborted children all told, is infinitely worse.
David J. Todeschini <Dave44mag4u@aol.com>
Long Island, NY USA - Fri Dec 10 14:05:35 2004 from 149.123.12.36
Sass, I have to say this: You've got the story of the fallen woman all wrong and completely missed its meaning. The Pharisees were testing Jesus. They brought an adulterous woman before him and asked what they should do; that by their laws she must be stoned to death. Notice, that there was no MAN who was also being condemned. Doesn't it usually take TWO people to committ adultery? Jesus looked at her accusers and the mob waiting to kill her and he knew that they had committed the same or worse sins as she. When he said; "He who is without sin cast the first stone". The mob and the Pharisees gave up and left. He also told the woman "Go, and sin no more". He did not approve of her or anyone else's sin, but did not want her killed by fellow sinners. Liberals often misuse this passage to seek approval for bad behavior or lawbreaking. The only places on earth that I know of where adulterers or even criminals are stoned to death is in Muslim countries like Sudan.
Vlad <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Dec 10 14:03:05 2004 from 64.12.116.137
One last thing Lothar - you referred to Jesus confronting the woman about her sin. I also recall reading where Jesus challenged the crowd that he who is without sin should thrown the first stone. All I've been saying is that it looks like there's a whole lot of stone throwing going on here (and then other places behind the scenes and you know it) and there doesn't have to be. This isn't only about not agreeing, this is about people who don't like each other trying to each get the upper hand on the other and AGAIN, you know that's true. All I'm saying is that you folks don't have to be that way. You folks don't have to goad each other into it and again... you KNOW that's what's happening. To post snide crap about "the unpardonable sin of disagreeing with Sass" is horse manure. It isn't about disagreeing with me because all I've taken issue with in my post last night was the way you folks are treating each other and speaking to each other. You all know that everything I just said is true about how there are deliberate attempts on (nearly) everyone's part, to GOAD the other into this quarrelling. Go do a /show 3000 in any of the chats to remind yourselves about whether all this is really about speaking Christian truth or if it's about everyone not liking each other and trying to get the upper hand. But sure Lothar, make snide remarks about me and people ostracizing you for disagreeing with me. Like that would happen. I have no hold over anyone who visits this book. Go read all your own conversations held in other locations and then come back and try truthfully say to me that all this quarrelling isn't about what I said it is.
Sass
USA - Fri Dec 10 12:22:12 2004 from 24.66.94.140
Yes Chuck... people should be able to get along. That's what I was trying to say in the first place. I was trying to say that treating each other badly is the stumbling block. It prevents the other person from wanting to hear what one is saying (and if it's truth one wants to tell them, wouldn't one WANT to make sure they will listen) and it also prevents the telling person from really telling. I mean, what good is it if we tell someone truth in such a manner that they're guaranteed not to hear it? Do we get kudos from God for the act of telling (technically I spoke the truth, nevermind if my actions didn't match my words, the words came out and that should count??) or shouldn't we try match our actions to our words so that the person we're telling sees the word and so believes the word? -|- Yeah, but what the heck do I know, my ideas are "off". I guess that old saying "do it because I say it not because I do it" is the way we're supposed to live. Yeah, that. That wins 'em over every time. Who am I to think my crazy and "off" ideas (about how we should be decent to each other and show we're Christians with our actions as well as our words) have even a smattering of truth in them. You have teenagers Chuck. How often does it work when you tell them "don't do as I do, do as I say"? Anyone past the age of reason needs to SEE the Word not just hear it in order to believe and follow, and the onus is on us to BE the Word not just preach it. If that's "off" thinking, then I guess I won't need to worry about being cold after I die.
Sass
USA - Fri Dec 10 12:05:58 2004 from 24.66.94.140
Lothar, you consisitently misunderstand anything I say. I posted the "I used to" to say that I admit I used to speak with an "I know more than you" attitude, and I was admitting that was wrong because I've certainly come across people who don't believe everything exactly as I do and yet, they are good people in whom I can plainly see Christ. My post had nothing to do with any of our previous conversations about abstinence and marital sex, my post was about how you all are treating each other. Be as defensive as you want but the fact remains that reading as a spectator, the behaviour in this book is a HUGE turn off to Christianity. It's not an example of it and if that upsets you to hear it, so be it. -|- By referring to the scripture quotation I posted as from a "watered down" version, it is essetialy you who is holding up their own beliefs as truth to the damnation of all others'. You are not the end authority on what is true Christianity and which Bible is the correct one yet you post to me as though you are while out of the same mouth tell me it is me who is acting superior. I don't want to be 'superior' in religious knowledge. I'd rather be ignorant and judged as the one who didn't have all the answers but did her best to be a decent person. THAT was the point of my post; it's better to show by how you live than by what you can spout. And no... I am not nor did not suggest I am the best example of that, in fact I said I was not. I said I've learned this from the example of OTHERS of late and can see that this is not what's happening in this book. You can believe whatever you want about whether my ideas are "a bit off". My "ideas" are simply that what you guys are doing is just downright insulting each other under the guise of spreading "truth" and THAT is the 'stumbling block' you are placing in front of each other, so sorry you misunderstood me. You don't have to be insulting to tell someone the truth. We ALL know that when you initiate a conversation with an abortion supporter by calling them horrible names, you're guaranteed that they will not 'hear' you because the method with which you tried to speak to them is a stumbling block to their really hearing your message. It's why we don't support the Neil Horsely's of the world. You're doing the same thing with how you witness and you refuse to see the stumbling block you place. -|- I did not accuse any one person in particular because there are many involved in treating each other badly. You seem to be the one most defensive about it though. Get as mad as you want, post snide barbs at me all you want. Try turn this back into the abstinence/sex discussion I wasn't even referring to, it won't change the simple fact that (the collective) you folks aren't treating each other right and that was the WHOLE point of my post. You know you're not and if you want to shoot the messenger, go ahead... I hope it's worth it to you. For me, I'm not superior to anyone here, not in knowledge or behaviour and I don't want to be. If that's (treating each other like cowpies) what and how Christians have to be in order to be the righteous ones, I'll take my chances with my own "off" ideas.
Sass
USA - Fri Dec 10 11:49:28 2004 from 24.66.94.140
Lother, there you go...oversimplifying again. Tsk-tsk-tsk.
Vlad <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Dec 10 8:06:03 2004 from 205.188.116.138
Can't we all just get along?
Chuck
USA - Fri Dec 10 7:21:02 2004 from 12.169.49.2
Sass…first off, thank you for telling us what our intentions are here. I don’t recall ANYONE claiming to be a better Christian than ANYONE else. I can only speak for myself, but I am only a sinner saved by grace and deserve the very pits of Hell. It’s funny, though, how your post has an air of “I cannot wait for you to come to where I am”. Quote: “I used too to”. That, in my opinion, is someone claiming to be better than someone else. I’ll go ahead and open up here. We spoke about abstinence. Am I 100% pure on the subject? No. Did I fail before marriage to keep my hands off? Yes. Do I go all day with only having pure thoughts (since Jesus told us that if we simply look at a woman to lust, it is sin)? No. Does that have ANY effect on the truth? NONE WHATSOEVER. This is about truth, Sass. Truth is truth regardless of who or what I am. Am I perfect? Far from it. Never claimed it. Have never thought it. You quoted Romans 12:3-8. That portion of scripture, no matter how you use it, is referring to the local church…not my conversation in a guestbook on the internet with someone who doesn’t believe the Bible. I am sorry, but debate sometimes gets ugly. It did for Jesus! Paul was stoned THREE times. He was beaten for the truth. If you think that God is a God of love (and He is) and not rules, you have never read Leviticus, Deuteronomy, or Numbers. You misquoted Romans 14:1, or used a new, watered down, version of the Bible. Here is the text of the verse: “Him that is weak IN THE FAITH (notice IN the faith) receive ye, but not to DOUBTFUL DISPUTATIONS”. This is not doubtful and it is NOT opinion. This debate was about TRUTH. I believe your idea of witnessing is a little off. How did Jesus do it in John 4? He confronted the woman about her sin. If someone doesn’t realize he is a sinner and needs to be saved (I fit 100% into that category), what need is there to be saved??? Witnessing is about seeing people GET SAVED. Trust Christ and Him alone as their Saviour. Witnessing is NOT about getting the other person to feel good about himself. You cannot show me one scripture stating otherwise. About Romans 14:13…I was unaware that truth was a stumblingblock. AGAIN…please let me state that Romans 12:3-8 is talking about a church, not a friendship or a guestbook. One question….BIBLICALLY is sex before marriage (in the Bible called fornication) wrong? Yes, God wants us to see us how we are…but with that is understanding Who He is. I do think, however, that if we were arguing the issue of sex IN marriage always being right or wrong, or pro-choice violence, you’d jump in with us (as you did earlier). There are absolutes. People do disagree about those. I know I have committed the unpardonable sin of arguing with Sass. If that causes my ostracization, so be it.
Lothar
USA - Fri Dec 10 6:03:13 2004 from 168.103.50.187
A while back I posted that if I've learned anything, it's that I realize I don't know as much as I thought I knew. I'm really sick of reading folks arguing over who's the better Christian. You all probably don't think that's what you're doing but it is what you're doing. How about good old Romans 12:3-8? "For by the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think of yourslelf more highly than you ought to think, but to think with sober judgement, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned. For as in one body we have many members, and not all of the members have the same function, so we, who are many, are one body in Christ, and individually we are members one of another. We have gifts that differ according to the grace given to us; prophecy, in proportion to faith; ministry, in ministering; the teacher, in teaching; the exhorter, in exhortation; the giver, in generosity; the leader, in diligence; the compassionate, in cheerfulness." -|- Some of you obviously feel superior to others in your knowledge and faith. I used to too. (Hence the beginning line of this post) Is this (very negative) type of exchange that's going on in the gb going to shore up or gain another follower for Jesus? I doubt it. Isn't that the point of Christian witness though? It isn't about proving who's right, is it? Romans 14:1 "Welcome those who are weak in faith, BUT NOT FOR THE PURPOSE OF QUARRELING OVER OPINIONS." It isn't about proving who's right, that's not witnessing for Christ, that's about holding one's self up as smarter than the other guy. Geez, let's not worry about actually helping someone else in their faith, lets make it about us making sure everyone knows WE'RE right and THEY'RE wrong. Romans 14:13 "Let us therefore no longer pass judgment on one another, but RESOLVE INSTEAD NEVER TO PUT A STUMBLING BLOCK OF HINDRANCE IN THE WAY OF ANOTHER." -|- You want to witness for Christ? I've got news for anyone who thinks that's what they've been doing in this book for the last while... you're wrong. Notice how the first scripture I posted pointed out that we all have different gifts and abilities? That the measure of faith you have was assigned by GOD? Note that this must mean that the measure anyone else has is also assigned by GOD and if you think that arguing and belittling each other is the way to increase the faith of the next guy - you're wrong. All you're doing is proving that despite thinking you have the gift of ministry, you do not and are placing a stumbling block in front of another whom you are part of. -|- Know who has this gift of ministry? It is the person who SHOWS ME Jesus by doing kindnesses for others well past their deserving them. It is the person who SHOWS ME Jesus by understanding that I am not a perfect Christian and loving me anyway. It is the person who SHOWS ME Jesus by NOT shoving their version of being a Christian in my face as the RIGHT way. Those people have the gift of ministry because their example will make me want to be better than I am and it is their EXAMPLE not their haughty posts pointing out how they know more than the next guy which will make me want to be a better Christian. I wish I'd learned that longer ago. Incidentally, those three people are indeed actual people in my life, none of whom have been arguing here. -|- So, I apologize for creating such a long post, but you ALL need to stop the way you treat each other or at least lose the whole "I'm a better Christian because..." and just admit it's because you like to argue, want to be right more than you want to witness and don't see the stumbling blocks you put in front of the other guy when you do so. And just in case anyone here misunderstands me... no, I do not think I am a particularly good Christian and no, I don't have all the answers. I just know that what's happening here isn't an example of good Christians either. I'm sure some people won't see themselves in this and that's unfortunate. God doesn't expect us to be perfect, He just expects us to be able to see what we really are and take it from there.
Sass
USA - Fri Dec 10 3:33:38 2004 from 24.66.94.140
IP Check
Chuck
USA - Thu Dec 9 21:34:01 2004 from 68.217.128.53
The US joined in his standing ovation yesterday
Chuck
USA - Thu Dec 9 14:46:37 2004 from 12.169.49.2
The US joined in his standing ovation yesterday
Chuck
USA - Thu Dec 9 14:46:34 2004 from 12.169.49.2
Indeed!
Vlad <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Thu Dec 9 14:18:31 2004 from 64.12.116.137
Lothar!! That is a good question old friend. And by the way I think this is better tv than you get on cable. I should say, "legislate certain morality." Right now Kofi is enjoying a standing ovation from all the member states except the US. This is the state of things. If we pull our funds they will rally the troops even more. If we try and get out we will soon be ostracized from the world community. This will eventually make its political way into the WTO and we will find ourselves without trading partners. Then it will start having an effect on our economy. Once that happens we will find it hard to pre-empt future strikes. It is not looking good my friend...not looking good. Allright, I'm at the border on the Niagra River at a site.. leaving tomorrow until tues. I will see you then.
John
Houston, texas USA - Thu Dec 9 14:16:39 2004 from 146.130.101.72
thanks Vlad. not sure anyone noticed. or maybe the folks were just too young to get it.
Adam
USA - Thu Dec 9 14:11:27 2004 from 64.236.245.243
thanks Joy. Hey John: I have no beef with you. I was just making a little joke, you know? At any rate, I will be offline for a couple of days. I am going to Tyler, Texas to train teachers to teach test taking. How's that for alliteration?
Adam
USA - Thu Dec 9 14:10:41 2004 from 64.236.245.243
I really liked Adam's witty little comment about Mr. McGoo (Mugu).
Vlad <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Thu Dec 9 14:10:14 2004 from 64.12.116.137
Just checking very quickly before I leave. I disagree with the quote, "but we cannot legislate morality". I think if you were to think about it for a while you would as well. ALL legislation is morality, whether we agree with it or not. Legislation is a certain code of conduct. Should Kofi resign? How do we get rid of a Secretary General? How do we get rid of the UN? Have a good one.
Lothar
USA - Thu Dec 9 13:54:15 2004 from 168.103.50.187
"Good grief John, what a baby." more personalzed crap just because I give my opinion on a stupid subject
John
Houston, Texas USA - Thu Dec 9 13:53:20 2004 from 146.130.101.72
Good grief John, what a baby. Just stop whining. I'm glad you find my comments so enlightening that you feel the need to repost them all, but really... think of the bandwidth... :oD
Joy
USA - Thu Dec 9 13:51:16 2004 from 68.113.38.11
"rofl Adam! I got the joke in your first post. You GO guy!" yet another flame
John
Houston, Texas USA - Thu Dec 9 13:39:01 2004 from 146.130.101.72
rofl Adam! I got the joke in your first post. You GO guy!
Joy
USA - Thu Dec 9 13:33:56 2004 from 68.113.38.11
Once again the Drudge Rush Combo crashes site. I cant get on Greene County On(off)line. This is the pits.
Lem
NJ USA - Thu Dec 9 13:28:37 2004 from 141.153.245.123
Loth, the first part of my post got cut off. I was making a joke about recommending me for John's discussion. But, the computer ruined the joke. ah well
Adam
USA - Thu Dec 9 13:28:31 2004 from 64.236.245.243
Yeah, Chuck, except that birth rates are up...so I'm assuming people are having more sex.
John
Houston, texas USA - Thu Dec 9 13:27:10 2004 from 146.130.101.72
> gee, thanks Loth, I'll do the same for you someday. LOL :)
Adam
USA - Thu Dec 9 13:26:47 2004 from 64.236.245.243
This is the entire quote. "Lastly, I am not above reproach, I will listen to a sensible argument why a lack of abstinence is immoral." myself.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Thu Dec 9 13:23:54 2004 from 146.130.101.72
Abstinance = no sex = no pregnancy = no abortion. Period. If one has no sex, one won't get pregnant, therefore, one doesn't need an abortion. Get the picture?
Chuck
USA - Thu Dec 9 13:17:15 2004 from 12.169.49.2
Thank you
viagra <addse@mail.ro>
NY, NY USA - Thu Dec 9 13:04:58 2004 from 81.176.71.15
“a lack of abstinence is immoral” – I must say,
Lem
Jersey City, NJ USA - Thu Dec 9 13:03:48 2004 from 141.153.245.123
Lothar, I do not feel like getting into this anymore either, so I am moving on as well. That will be my last word on that subject, but I've got a lot to say about Kofi.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Thu Dec 9 13:02:48 2004 from 146.130.101.72
Here’s the problem as far as I can tell: if you look at declining abortion rates (US) since 1990 everyone with a program can take credit for it…and believe me they do. It’s bewildering to be honest with you. Trying to get direct cause and effect is impossible. Therefore I have to go back to my original assumption; Abstinence does not, in and of itself, lower abortion rates. That is the assumption I am going with. Now, considering the ethical aspects of abstinence programs; I am not a fan of big government, so I do not subscribe to spending my money on programs that I feel are the sole responsibility of parents (for teens), and individuals. I do not approve of my money being spent on programs that go against my morality, and I do not approve of my money being spent on programs that I feel should be taught at home. In my opinion if you want to take back the moral fabric of this country you do one thing and one thing only, outlaw abortion. Voluntary programs simply do very little to reduce the problems, and nothing to eliminate them. There also need to be stricter guidelines for Hollywood, video games, and the internet…that will have a real effect. We can legislate what we filter in, but we cannot legislate morality, and a God given right to private, consensual, sexual relationships among consenting adults. These are the hard cold facts and I still have yet to hear or see anything that would make me think otherwise.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Thu Dec 9 13:01:16 2004 from 146.130.101.72
After seeing how much time I spent here yesterday, I am out of this one myself. Go ahead and choose someone else. Adam might be a good choice. Have a good day.
Lothar
USA - Thu Dec 9 12:35:00 2004 from 168.103.50.187
The answer to question #1 is yes. The answer to question #2 is yes.
Adam
USA - Thu Dec 9 11:09:01 2004 from 64.236.245.243
Glad to see you taking charge of the GB
Chuck
USA - Thu Dec 9 10:17:37 2004 from 12.169.49.2
Ok, back to the original questions at hand. 1. Does abstinence lower the abortion rate? 2. Is sex outside of marriage a sin? These are the topics. First a few ground rules: I will not respond to anyone but Nick. I do not have the time to carry on yet another marathon debate with three different people, so choose one. I would choose Nick because even although he gets very emotional he does tend to stay away from personal remarks for the most part. I will not flame, even though I am being flamed constantly by Joy and Vlad, I will not directly flame back. I reserve the right when being flamed to post smart aleck comments quoting their flames. I will not argue about anything else until me and Nick have settled the two original topics I have listed above. Lastly, I am not above reproach, I will listen to a sensible argument why a lack of abstinence is immoral. I have not clearly made up my mind on that subject so I am still open to suggestion. Upon conclusion of these two matters I will then move on to general discussions concerning Jesus and organized religion
John
Houston, Texas USA - Thu Dec 9 9:46:31 2004 from 146.130.101.72
I like this one, “Turkeys are people too!! Have you hugged a turkey today??” in which Joy responds like a proper Christian and talks about my wife by saying, “John's wife has. (sorry folks, you all know I just can't help it.).” But I think this one, “Repeating gradeschool three times must make you feel real smart.” (Joy) is my personal favorite.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Thu Dec 9 9:23:01 2004 from 146.130.101.72
Abstinence...don't ask why, just do it.
John
Houston, texas USA - Thu Dec 9 9:10:14 2004 from 146.130.101.72
You kids play nice now
Chuck
USA - Thu Dec 9 8:08:06 2004 from 12.169.49.2
Hello, it is very cool site. I am from Russia and I am love him(your web site of course). Best regards, Sergei.
vicodin side effects <vicodin@buy.com2.ru>
NY, NY USA - Thu Dec 9 8:03:16 2004 from 200.109.231.102
Ay ay ay… for those of you coming around now – My father lived under a no so freedom loving dictator as a young man. He swore that ‘su sangre’ would not pass it, could he help it. And so we lived in electioneering, free traveling, some what speaking free nation. Carolyn, bless her hart, makes a lot of mine possible.
Lem
NJ USA - Thu Dec 9 5:42:20 2004 from 138.89.181.146
Dylan’s book is in my gift list. - Honesty from unspected quarters! (Go to the CBS website for a clipped Bob Dylan interview) - For Kerry voter friends of mine. Believe or not some people are really interested in knowing what happened in Nov 2nd. This interview from an ICON speaks volumes as to the result.
Lem
NJ USA - Thu Dec 9 4:46:54 2004 from 141.153.237.28
Life is the greatest love of all - and yet Americans give it away. I think it was Niche that said - Every man's death diminishes me! - Of course he most likely was not referring to Americans.
Lem
NJ USA - Thu Dec 9 4:22:23 2004 from 141.150.76.139
the price we pay for others (while needed), we are suffering for people who don’t look like us, may not necessarily have asked, like us and will never give their lives like us! - the reason why we doi so pay such a high price. there is no mention!
Lem
NJ USA - Thu Dec 9 4:11:52 2004 from 141.150.76.139
letters from iraq!
Lem
USA - Thu Dec 9 4:01:53 2004 from 141.150.76.139
The reason why living (breathing in and out) may seem inconsequential is because liberty may actually be more important. And yet those of us with plenty are the most gluttonous. resentment borne? maybe.
Lem
NJ USA - Thu Dec 9 3:55:26 2004 from 141.150.76.139
Shit - if LIFE is in question (you know, living – breathing in and out) liberty may seem like a obstinate leftover. But that's just me!
Lem
NJ USA - Thu Dec 9 3:24:02 2004 from 141.150.76.139
Terrorism is war on freedom and our way of life
Lem
USA - Thu Dec 9 3:00:25 2004 from 141.150.76.139
As a nation we need to question ourselves and constantly ask - are we really free? That has nothing to do with liberalism or conservatism. It has to do with what do we need to do to make this experiment - self government - work. Can we govern ourselves?
Lem
NJ USA - Thu Dec 9 2:57:52 2004 from 141.150.76.139
She sounded just like the son of Sam and that killer in California. The killer of celebrities.
Lem
NJ USA - Thu Dec 9 2:32:14 2004 from 141.150.76.139
I’ve never been “at peace” with sanctioned killing but – this woman is /was the definition of a natural born killer!
Lem
NJ USA - Thu Dec 9 2:27:06 2004 from 141.150.76.139
THERE IS NOTHING THAT EVEN BEGINS TO MAKE HER INOCENT – DOES THAT MATTER? WATCH! I love this guy's way of documenting but he fails the truth! he dosen't give a shit about what he knows reality to be!
Lem
NJ USA - Thu Dec 9 2:19:57 2004 from 141.150.76.139
i want to believe her but I CANT!
Lem
NJ USA - Thu Dec 9 2:05:38 2004 from 141.150.76.139
The documentarist that failed Nirvana is doing a documentary of an admitted serial female killer. An admitted killer – (just because he didn’t have footage for the murder of Curt Cobane doesn’t mean that Curt was not murdered). The admitted murderer makes his film about her but he still failed Curt……..They did her story in a movie already for peace sake. When will they do Curt’s death a movie?.......... No - it’s not convenient. The same documentary that made me think about Court’s death is now seemingly defending an admitted serial killer – go figure. I still watch because friends of mine run into similar situations regularly.
Lem
NJ USA - Thu Dec 9 2:03:08 2004 from 141.150.76.139
Oh really? Well, your village called and they said that they want their idiot back.
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Thu Dec 9 0:45:15 2004 from 205.188.116.138
Hey there! I just wanted you to know: 1987 called and they want their hair style back.
noneofyour damnbusiness - I am a dumbass<anleary@yahoo.com>
Chicago, IL USA - Thu Dec 9 0:02:59 2004 from 24.12.41.62
...and I forgot to mention how arrogant that statement is. That has to rank in the top 5.
Lothar
USA - Wed Dec 8 20:33:11 2004 from 168.103.50.187
"Trust me Joy, I'm way more educated than you are". And that proves what? Be careful how you answer...you don't know everyone's education or level. BTW, Joy, great answer. Also, John, you stated that there were corrupt churches in Jesus' time. Tell me about one, please?? Can't? Oh. OK...IF there were corrupt churches, what would be the criteria for corruption? Maybe doing as they please instead of the way their Lord wanted them to? I think so.
Lothar
USA - Wed Dec 8 20:32:26 2004 from 168.103.50.187
"...not wrong in my book." Well, there you have it: he has his OWN book. The gospel according to John. Ooops, there's already one of those and THAT John (the Apostle) agreed with what Lothar had to say. So, John the Guestbook Troll will have to come up with another name for his book. Maybe we can all just make up our own books and do whatever we want. Imagine that. Cool, huh? In MY book, I invented a perpetual motion machine and became a Gazillionaire! Whooohoooo!
Vlad <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Wed Dec 8 20:19:08 2004 from 172.162.179.116
First thing you do tomorrow in here should be to reread the posts. Once again, I notice that you don't read them all then post. You will also notice how predictable you are...claiming victory and asking us to get a DH are one in the same. You didn't see that post, now did you? What town you from again?
Lothar
USA - Wed Dec 8 20:12:01 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Take that up with God. Why don't you answer my question as to where Jesus threw someone out of a church?
Lothar
USA - Wed Dec 8 20:06:42 2004 from 168.103.50.187
I bet you did get a lot more education than I did. Repeating gradeschool three times must make you feel real smart.
Joy
USA - Wed Dec 8 20:02:04 2004 from 68.113.38.11
Ok, last one, and Nick, I'm sure you can tell I am at home right now and I've got a family to get to (one blessed by God I might add). I never said I had all the answers to everything, but I know some things are not wrong...and two people who love each other and decide to show it in a physical way with each other is...just...simply...not wrong in my book. I will begin this again tomorrow I suppose...whew, tiring, it would be nice if ya'll could cruise over to your chat and form one opinion and designate a hitter to bring it, btw
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 8 20:01:59 2004 from 69.151.107.19
Wow! After all that posting, I bet you dudes could sure use some Ice Cream. Right? Well, at Ben & Jerry's Ice Cream factory no animals are ever hurt when we make Ice Cream. Really! We guarantee it...Even with Chunky Monkey. It's not like we actually use chunks of real monkey to make it. Well, not very much. Only a bit, and from monkeys which alread died from natural causes. Oh, by the way...we agree with everything that John says. The rest of you are all right-wing fundamentalist Jesus freaks who want to take away all of our rights to our own bodies. Peace, luv, happy Yuletide season.
Ben & Jerry <bnj@cosmiccoyote.com>
Montpellier, VT - Wed Dec 8 19:56:58 2004 from 64.12.116.137
AAAAUURRRHGGGH!! See, this is what I am talking about. Show me ONE scripture where Jesus threw ANYONE out of the CHURCH!!
Lothar
USA - Wed Dec 8 19:56:36 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Trust me Joy, I'm way more educated than you are...and yes you were asking me what the difference was between murder and sex...I can only presume so you could throw the sin is a sin, is a sin...thing back. Why don't you get off your lame comparison, that everybody can see through and tell me for once why God would make sex a sin?
John
Howeth, Texas USA - Wed Dec 8 19:55:50 2004 from 69.151.107.19
"You can debate and discuss without dragging people and things through the mud. Well, you can't." I stand by this statement. I await for it to be demonstrated. You will find many times in here that I have disagreed without questioning character, defaming, or flaming. Ball's in your court.
Lothar
USA - Wed Dec 8 19:55:40 2004 from 168.103.50.187
George Bush and his partners in crime have done irreparable damage to the election process. You conservatives should wake up because you are all going to be remembered as those who have destroyed the infrastructure of what was regarded as the greatest country on earth. Here is the proof! Click these links. http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/120404W.shtml http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/a/2004/12/06/national1252EST0550.DTL&type=printable http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/images/0411/86ab26aafc39904fa835.jpeg http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/pdfs/Exitpoll_discrep_v00p1_Part_I.pdf http://www.madcowprod.com/mc6912004.html
Gunther
Germany - Wed Dec 8 19:55:33 2004 from 168.143.113.30
And I have never said I don't insult you. YOU are the one who claims to be innocent on those grounds.
Joy
USA - Wed Dec 8 19:54:02 2004 from 68.113.38.11
As for the Chinaman...the previous entries button as at the top of the page. Prediction: John will now leave and claim victory in debate. How convenient. As for Tidey...you are right. I will stop saying it.
Lothar
USA - Wed Dec 8 19:52:57 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Yeah, churches were corrupt even in Jesus' time...maybe that's why he threw people out. And stayed out of them preferring the countryside.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 8 19:52:23 2004 from 69.151.107.19
John - Your cognitive abilities are severely lacking. I never made any MORAL equation between those things. I made the POINT that it is impossible to PROVE anything is wrong. You either adhere to moral principles of a HIGHER source, IE God, or anything goes. You need to take a refresher course in reading and comprehension skills.
Joy
USA - Wed Dec 8 19:50:44 2004 from 68.113.38.11
"You can debate and discuss without dragging people and things through the mud. Well, you can't." This just as insulting as anything I've said. Tidey-John is also an insult. You know God knows when you lie.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 8 19:50:12 2004 from 69.151.107.19
Learn your history, John...there were other churches besides the Catholics and Protestants. I disagree with both. Neither form is found in the Bible.
Lothar
USA - Wed Dec 8 19:49:55 2004 from 168.103.50.187
You're the one doing the moral comparison between murder, rape, etc...with sex, not me. Ok a couple more and I have to go.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 8 19:47:45 2004 from 69.151.107.19
""Anyone has the right to his opinion. You seem to be the one always dragging religion, the Bible, and the church down."- This quote seems oddly contradictory...and a bit self-righteous and arrogant." No, actually, it isn't. You can debate and discuss without dragging people and things through the mud. Well, you can't. You're opinion is fine, it is your presentation that ticks everyone off. You can read as far as you want...I have never called you BRAIN DEAD or anything because you have held a certain opinion.
Lothar
USA - Wed Dec 8 19:46:03 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Jesus does talk more about love than anything. Not too concerned about every single little facet about the Protestant religion, which didn't even exist until they got mad at the Catholics. In fact it was first considered a cult and outlawed. If you can't underststand the ability to suspend disbelief when you are watching a movie then I can't help you here. What was that Chinaman answer again...refresh my memory?
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 8 19:45:04 2004 from 69.151.107.19
"Oh, and Joy, you can try and get me to believe that molesting a child is morally equal with a girlfriend and her boyfriend sharing a beautiful moment together making love, but it won't happen." WHEN did *I* say THAT? What's that matter John, decided you didn't get in a flame in your last post to me so you had to invent something to flame me for? Sheesh, and you wonder why you get the response you do. The POINT was, that you can't "PROVE" ANYTHING to be wrong. Good grief, reread my posts and at least attempt to understand them.
Joy
USA - Wed Dec 8 19:44:55 2004 from 68.113.38.11
John - Most Bible Scholars agree that the term used in the 7th commandment is inclusive of all sexual relations outside of marriage. This is backed up by MANY other scriptures where God clearly proclaims all sexual acts outside of marriage to be 'sinful.' (And just for the record, I am not saying that all sexual acts within marriage are about love or are good. There are always exceptions, I am only showing that the Scriptures clearly state that it is definitely wrong outside of marriage)
Joy
USA - Wed Dec 8 19:41:38 2004 from 68.113.38.11
So you have blind faith is that what you are saying.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 8 19:39:58 2004 from 69.151.107.19
Oh, and yes I did answer the Chinaman question, you just didn't like the answer. Ok...let's reason...IF there is a God, how does He communicate with us? He doesn't speak audibly to us. So I guess I should trust my feelings, right? Why have the Bible if we are not going to believe it? If you will look to the teachings of John and Charles Wesley (the founders of the Methodists), you will see that they would agree. You are the one who "quotes" scripture ignorantly (ie Jesus talked more about love than anything else). Why quote Him at all if we weren't there? The Passion looses ALL credibility as well. WE WEREN'T THERE!! Why even go to church anywhere since that is something Jesus instituted? Why have ANY moral code? **banging head on desk** It all comes back to you, John. Whatever you think or feel is right. Keep thinking it.
Lothar
USA - Wed Dec 8 19:39:42 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Oh, and Joy, you can try and get me to believe that molesting a child is morally equal with a girlfriend and her boyfriend sharing a beautiful moment together making love, but it won't happen.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 8 19:34:57 2004 from 69.151.107.19
Southern Baptist? NOT GUILTY. Too liberal.
Lothar
USA - Wed Dec 8 19:34:03 2004 from 168.103.50.187
The answer to me seems obvious. Like Joy said, look around. Beyond that, I don't always need an answer. "God, why is premarital sex wrong" is not a question I have asked. As for believing the Bible literally, GUILTY.
Lothar
USA - Wed Dec 8 19:33:17 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Ok Joy, I respect your opinion. You don't really need an answer to why extramarital sex, not the sin of adultery as we are commanded, is wrong, but I would like someone who tells me directly that it is "wrong" to tell me why...that's all.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 8 19:24:25 2004 from 69.151.107.19
Ooops.. I mixed up my challenge to John to prove murder is wrong with Lothar's to prove child molestation is wrong. But either way, prove them.
Joy
USA - Wed Dec 8 19:20:21 2004 from 68.113.38.11
My faith is in God and God alone, not your literal, and apparently one-sided, interpretation of scripture...you never did explain to me why the China man doesn't go to heaven Nick, btw.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 8 19:20:14 2004 from 69.151.107.19
Why won't you PROVE murder is wrong... I know why! Because as with anything moral, it's just an opinion. It may seem obvious to most why those things are wrong, but as Lothar mentioned, many members of NAMBLA would disagree. That is why our country's founders based our laws on Scripture (The Ten Commandments for starters). That's why they founded this country on Biblical Principles. They recognized that without a 'higher' law that comes from God Himself, we would be left with whatever people deem moral which would vary with every shifting wind. John - why don't YOU ask GOD why he listed extramarital sex as being in the top ten? There are many reasons, but whenever we list them, you simply flame on and ignore them. So ask the lawmaker Himself. Then look around you at what happens when people break that law from God... the ramifications alone should tell you why He says don't do it. Also, people of faith like myself don't always need an explanation as I understand God is so much smarter than me, I don't need to understand... just Him telling me don't is enough. Just like when we tell our children not to touch a hot flame, they may not understand but if they trust us, they'll listen and won't get burned.
Joy
USA - Wed Dec 8 19:18:58 2004 from 68.113.38.11
"Anyone has the right to his opinion. You seem to be the one always dragging religion, the Bible, and the church down."- This quote seems oddly contradictory...and a bit self-righteous and arrogant.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 8 19:15:13 2004 from 69.151.107.19
"I can go through history of this GB and find THREE times that I have given you a fair shake at starting over."(nah, this ain't arrogant) My mentor and my Pastor folks, the one who sets the rules, the one who sets the agenda, and the one who polices the tone...Nicholas. aka Lothar.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 8 19:11:33 2004 from 69.151.107.19
Abstinence...don't ask why, just do it.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 8 19:05:48 2004 from 69.151.107.19
Next. You Nick are the most arrogant so-called Christian I have ever met. You must be Southern Baptist, I'm thinking. I don't know why this matters but I have said a long time ago that I go to a Methodist church...remember, then you tried to get me tell you the roots of the Methodist church, as if just being labled something or another has anything to with right and wrong. Ok, answered that one...hmmm, something about flaming...oh yeah, sure Nick, you not guilty in this department. Ok, the next one...murder, rape, pediphilia...why are they wrong? Hmmm, that's a hard one...yeah you clever guys got me on that one. Once again Nick shouts his simple opinion on abstinence and then when confronted with another opinion flips out, freaks out, and cannot answer the simple question. How many times have we seen Nick avoid a direct question. You know what Nick, never mind I withdraw the question.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 8 19:03:21 2004 from 69.151.107.19
John - This is the only comment I'm going to make concerning this subject to you, but abstinence messages DO work and there are plenty of studies that show it. I personally know MANY young people who have, are and will continue to practice abstinence because it's a matter of FAITH to them. I don't expect someone like you to understand it, but just because you don't hang with those crowds doesn't mean they don't exist. And the young people don't even have to have 'faith', many of them are bright enough and care enough about themselves to be abstinent. It's a very wholesome and wonderful way to live. Many adults do too by the way... I'm one of them. Unless and until I marry, I will not have sex... PERIOD. And I was divorced YEARS ago. It's not that difficult. I'm sorry you're so jaded and your outlook so incredibly negative. And what Europe thinks... well... whatever! Although I know the abstinence message works wherever it is taught. Just because something doesn't reach 100% of the poplulation doesn't mean it shouldn't be taught, because it does work for a lot. And that is also why we 'religious' folks like to convert people... because it brings change to a person's heart and outlook that make them see themselves and others differently. And they find out what joy comes from living a wholesome life where you respect the other person too much to use them for sexual gratification alone. Anyway... maybe stop trying to prevent decent messages just because you personally don't understand them. Joy USA - Fri Nov 19 12:14:13 2004 from 68.113.38.11 THIS was what came right before my post to Joy. It seems "someone like me" wouldn't understand. It also seems I'm so "negative" and on top of that I'm "jaded." Ok, that would take care of that one.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 8 18:53:48 2004 from 69.151.107.19
I'm sorry...I missed this until just now. From John: "but never offer up what you think…your opinion". Do you actually read what is posted on this guestbook?? **falling of chair laughing** Yeah...I'm afraid, John, very afraid. I have also noticed this...I am not a loving Christian until I agree with YOU? Is that it? Sounds like democrats calling for bi-partisanship when they mean "everyone agree with me".
Lothar
USA - Wed Dec 8 18:04:06 2004 from 168.103.50.187
A little project for you John...prove that pedophilia is wrong. There are groups that will argue with you...starting with MABLA. That's what we are talking about (fourth time)...we used to have a Foundation but now it is just "everyone do as he sees fit". I reject that. That's why I ask what your faith is. What faith allows for sex with whomever you please because it "feels good"???
Lothar
USA - Wed Dec 8 17:58:35 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Then...YOU brought Joy into it with this comment: "Joy. I’m glad you are not having sex out of wedlock…but then again you are not really the target audience are you. Sorry about the divorce. I’m also sorry more and more people are having sex and you cannot adjust your faith to fit reality. And for the record I knew I was talking to a chicken. I can tell by the simplistic writing style. Also you’re not obligated to respond to what I have to say. Moreover, unless I engage you directly why don’t you simply provide some links like you always do and prove it to me how people are having less sex…here and around the world, we are not an island. Lastly, I am confident in my faith as well as my opinions. And if you think slipping in veiled attempts to question my faith you are solidifying your own, you are not only fooling no one, you are placing yourself in a class of self-righteousness that makes me think you are lacking a true confidence in your own morality. Maybe you should stop seeing yourself as a liberator of souls and realize that is for God alone. Chickens are so stupid. John Houston, Texas USA - Fri Nov 19 13:35:43 2004 from 12.40.29.178" You have no ground to stand on regarding flaming.
Lothar
USA - Wed Dec 8 17:55:40 2004 from 168.103.50.187
To which YOU responded (your next post)...While Lothar over-simplifies the issue of abstinence and abortion, he is correct on the rest of it. You cannot compare war with abortion, one is a defenseless killing. I do think the abstinence response is kind of brain dead. YOU called me brain dead for my opinion based on scripture. Wonder why I flame you?
Lothar
USA - Wed Dec 8 17:51:37 2004 from 168.103.50.187
OK, John...here is where I "brought it up". Wow, Mr. Dawg, could you contradict yourself any more? First, there is no "true" feminism...yet she is a "feminist or she's a masochist". Don't get us wrong...we are for a woman's right to choose: Choose not to jump into the sack until she's ready to take responsibility. Tell that man "NO". As for rape, that accounts for less than 1% of all abortions. Women DO have rights to their own bodies. DON'T let that guy TOUCH you!! No, you are right, simply telling a kid "no" does no good...being a good parent will stop it, however. I've seen it work 100's of times. No one here is "for" war...but unfortunatly it is still necessary. I'll bet you would have protested WWII where we wiped out Nazism (just to come back in the Democrat party), freed thousands of Jews, and stopped three dictators bent on killing us. I'll bet you would have protested the first Gulf War where we freed thousands of Kuwait people. "Rightgrrl" is an oxymoron? How? I am sure you didn't do this, but before you reply with the typical liberal emotion-filled, fact-starved drivel, go and read all the other liberals that have posted here. You are all the same. Throw out a few ugly comments then expect us not to react. When we do, call us mean spirited...but STILL no facts. Lothar USA - Thu Nov 18 14:39:33 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Lothar
USA - Wed Dec 8 17:49:26 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Ok John, prove murder is wrong without resorting to opinion or scripture.
Joy
USA - Wed Dec 8 17:44:28 2004 from 68.113.38.11
I still haven't gotten a clear answer to this question: You mentioned that you are confident in your faith. What is it???? Pray tell. The foundation of knowledge and wisdom is the Bible. I am sorry you dislike it so much. Until our foundations match, what's the point? You are completely unable to understand another point of view as being valid. Anyone has the right to his opinion. You seem to be the one always dragging religion, the Bible, and the church down. I can go through history of this GB and find THREE times that I have given you a fair shake at starting over. Each time you have thrown things in my face, I respond, then you accuse me of flaming. You're arrogant, John. We have tried many times to discuss issues with you but you get completely upset about it and start calling names and insulting...then get mad when it happens back to you. Amazing.
Lothar
USA - Wed Dec 8 17:44:06 2004 from 168.103.50.187
No one can prove murder, rape and pedophilia are wrong? Jeez...I didn't know we needed a bible to do that. I'm also wandering how sex fits in with these other sins. Why don't you just let Nick answer the question by himself. He brought it up.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 8 17:41:25 2004 from 12.153.133.244
John, SIN by its very meaning is the breaking of a law or commandment against God. Which means the only thing that CAN prove something a sin is Scripture. Without a higher law, everything is up for grabs and anyone's morals go. That means folks can declare murder, pedophilia, rape, etc. is ok and no one can 'prove' it isn't cuz after all, it's all perception and only opinion.
Joy
USA - Wed Dec 8 17:36:52 2004 from 68.113.38.11
Ok, Nick, what is your obsession with what I think anyway? I plugged in to the chat a year after I had last logged in and there ya’ll were talking about me…still obsessed. Have I gotten to you that bad? You know one thing I’ve noticed for these past few years is that you always have a lot of opinions about why I’m wrong but never offer up what you think…your opinion. Why is that? Afraid? So here’s your perfect opportunity…a topic you’re supposed to be an expert. Why don’t you tell us this: Why is extramarital sex a sin? Now, I know you’re going to do the usual thing (if anything at all) and quote scripture…but I want to hear it from you…your opinion, not what you heard, not what you read somewhere else, but what you, Nick, actually think about sex being a sin and why? Do some critical analysis about sex being a sin. Tell me exactly, specifically, why the physical act itself is a sin. If you want to quote scripture fine, but follow up with some critic. Explain to me why extramarital sex is a sin? As far as the movie: The question was asked why it was a great movie. I talked about her faith because that was the main focus of the movie in my opinion. You do realize it was just a movie don't you?
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 8 17:11:42 2004 from 12.153.133.244
What the latest interpretation of the Gospels said he said. Do you have a bible, or a brain? You're real knowledge, huh? Were you there? The answer is no...so your knowledge is perception as well. Open your eyes to reality and start acting like a loving Christian instead of always trying so desperately to flame me.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 8 16:35:20 2004 from 12.153.133.244
"her faith"? Just a question, not an attack: are you Catholic?
Lothar
USA - Wed Dec 8 15:58:12 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Wow. Open your Bible (if you have one), open your mind (preconceived knowledge is REAL knowledge's worst enemy), and read the Gospels. See EXACTLY what He said. I would get carpal tunnel (sp) before I got done replying to all of this.
Lothar
USA - Wed Dec 8 15:55:49 2004 from 168.103.50.187
As far as the movie goes, I think it only strengthened peoples’ faith. The graphic detail with which Jesus submitted is hard to imagine. The movie demonstrates exactly what “dieing for our sins” meant. Did Jesus suffer the greatest torture in the history of mankind? Probably not…Some of Saddam’s forays probably hold the record. The message in the movie, for me, was less about the crucifixion than it was about his mother’s torture; this is what had me up at 5 in the morning on a Sunday. At least for Jesus, the physical pain would end and he would be with his father. Mary, on the other hand, had to endure her son being killed in this manner, and the helplessness that went with it. Every parent can relate to this I would imagine. And afterward she had to live with what she saw the rest of her mortal days. It was her faith that I took away from the movie- her faith that makes Christianity what it is today, an unrelenting ability to endure the unthinkable in the face of the unknown. Yes…movie of the year, no doubt.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 8 15:40:11 2004 from 12.153.133.244
He knew a lot…but you know, for the most part the Bible really never does explain exactly why it is a moral sin; saying that it turns you away from God, or that your body is a temple, and such, are some pretty big phrases, but what is it about the act of sex that makes it a sin? God created sex before mankind created the institution of marriage. God made the act of sex feel good- why, so we would procreate? If that is the only justifiable reason to have sex then everyone here, including those married, sin constantly. I believe marriage and sex are not necessarily morally coupled. Many people are in bad marriages and feel obligated to have sex, esp. women (or all women). Does the title of “married” make the act any more or less sinful? In my opinion this is the basic difference between Western and Islamic culture. In Islamic culture, the women are sometimes forced to submit to sex, even raped, often under the threat or act of violence. Then they are told it is their duty because they are married. I believe when Jesus spoke of marriage, holy union, etc…he was speaking during a time and place when the institution of marriage was more than just two people who loved each other. Many marriages were arranged for one reason or another, in fact a couple who were actually in love with each other were probably seen as sinful because they may have alienated their families. No, I believe you have to look a little deeper than just a ritual…Jesus speaks of love more often in the bible than anything else. To me the fact that he places so much emphasis on this one virtue means it is an overriding aspect that should determine the rest of our virtues, with the lone exception of faith. There has to be a hierarchy, with love at the top. Love, in God’s eyes is all important; it determines whether a marriage, or any relationship, is worthy. Thank you.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 8 15:19:46 2004 from 12.153.133.244
YOU ARE ALL ON MY NAUGHTY LIST!
Santa Claus <santaclaus@northpole.biz>
The North Pole, - Wed Dec 8 14:01:56 2004 from 67.111.137.94
The movie is still one more drop in the watering down of religion in America. The man portrayed in that movie had quite a bit to say about fornication in real life, BTW. He was for abstinence before marriage. But what did He know?
Lothar
USA - Wed Dec 8 13:34:05 2004 from 168.103.50.187
The Passion of the Christ is a great movie for it portrays the Jew truthfully, and that is a wonderful thing.
GuessWho
USA - Wed Dec 8 12:45:21 2004 from 69.156.127.69
i wouldnt eat ben and jerry's if they tried to force feed it to me
Star Spangled Ice Cream
USA - Wed Dec 8 9:49:59 2004 from 68.88.36.125
Voted for the ‘Passion’…that movie was by far the best for me. True, it did affect me emotionally, but I thought the cinematography was awesome. It was a strange experience seeing it at the theatre. I’ve never walked out with a whole crowd where all the women were crying, and all the men were just staring around, looking blank.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 8 9:24:36 2004 from 12.153.133.244
That post by Blue Bell is an outrageous lie. We do not give money to terrorists, but to freedom fighters to save the planet from rightwingers, zionists, and corporate polluters. Unlike Blue Bell, we don't give money to rabid right-wing fundamentalist paramilitary organizations (so-called Boy Scouts) which descriminate against gay people. They forgot to tell you that the only reason that our Ice Cream has such a high rodent/roach hair/fecal content (RRHF) is that we refuse to use poisonous chemical pesticides which are harmful to the environment and dangerous to children. We prefer to make ice cream the natural way which is pleasing to mother earth. Plus, the fascists at the little creamery down in Jesusland want to destroy the environment, take away our rights to our own bodies, and force everyone to have nativity scense for the holidays. They also refuse to provide healthcare for the domestic life partners of employees and they let people smoke outside their factory which exposes Mother Gaia to harmful second hand tobacco smoke. Peace and happy yuletide holidays to everyone.
Ben & Jerry <bnj@cosmiccoyote.com>
Montpellier, VT - Wed Dec 8 7:49:19 2004 from 64.12.116.137
not as it was, but fixed.
mike
canada - Wed Dec 8 3:46:51 2004 from 24.36.1.75
someone's done something. more than an hour with tech support, and we might have it fixed.
mike
canada - Wed Dec 8 3:34:33 2004 from 24.36.1.75
Have you seen the documentary "Unconstitutional"? You should. If you ask questions like, "What rights and liberties have been lost through the Patriot Act?", "Who has the Patriot Act hurt?", or "How does the Patriot Act affect me?", this film will help answer those questions.
X
- Wed Dec 8 1:32:42 2004 from 64.246.11.20
Spam ice cream sounds good
Rad
USA - Wed Dec 8 0:50:05 2004 from 68.88.36.125
Vote for Turd Sandwich.
Eric Cartman
South Park, CO USA - Tue Dec 7 20:17:35 2004 from 205.188.116.138
I voted FOR spam...before I voted against it! Keywords: Abortion-on-demand, Partial-birth, Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, Tax and death, whiners, Jane Fonda, Hairy armpitted women, Hemp, Dreadlocks, No job, Protesting, Michael Moore, Wedgies, Terry McAuliff is my hero, Revrund Jesse Jackson, Pro-EU, EU Superiority, Peace, Ben Afleck films, and last but not least, taxes.
John Kerry
USA - Tue Dec 7 20:05:41 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Hi Joy.
Lem
USA - Tue Dec 7 20:04:48 2004 from 141.150.137.82
make it a 'protest' vote lothar. its a political thing with me. did you miss all that passion over the movie?
Lem
NJ USA - Tue Dec 7 20:03:54 2004 from 141.150.137.82
Heh... Lem managed to sneak a post in between mine and the ice cream one... :oD
Joy
USA - Tue Dec 7 20:02:52 2004 from 68.113.38.11
Notice they didn’t put Passion up against Moore's propaganda. But you know they would love to report F/911 winner and The Passion 2nd or whatever in its category.
Lem
NJ USA - Tue Dec 7 20:00:53 2004 from 141.150.137.82
What if The Passion of the Christ was not my favorite movie?
Lothar
USA - Tue Dec 7 20:00:25 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Well, that last post almost convinced me not to ever eat ice cream again of any brand. *bleck* :o\
Joy
USA - Tue Dec 7 19:54:16 2004 from 68.113.38.11
This is not SPAM you people - Please help me make ‘The Passion of the Christ’ the winner for Favorite Movie Drama at the 31st Annual Peoples Choice Awards. Vote as many times as your time on line allows. You can repeat vote by clearing your Internet Options temporary and History files. I don’t consider this SPAM but I might be wrong.
Lem (click here)
Jersey City, NJ USA - Tue Dec 7 19:53:29 2004 from 141.150.137.82
You can't find any better Ice Cream than Blue Bell. The folks at the little creamery in Brenham want to invite you to enjoy all the homemade flavors. We have all you favorites, in addition to our new flavors; lark, frog, liver, wood, asperagus, vole, and West Germany. Blue Bell Ice Cream has been proven to contain fewer rodent hairs/droppings, and roach parts than all the other leading brands. Unlike Ben & Jerry's, we don't give money to communists and terrorists. So, come on down to the little creamery in Brenham. Remember, at Blue Bell we eat all we can then sell whatever's leftover.
Blue Bell Creameries <bbell@sylacauga.com>
Brenham, TX USA - Tue Dec 7 19:47:28 2004 from 205.188.116.138
I've been around plenty, and honestly, no 15 year old I know actually talks like 'steff', I'm *sure* they're smarter than that. Either a) 'steff' is some old guy trying to pass himself off as a 15 year old girl or b) some 10 year old trying to pass themself off as a 15 year old girl or c) being online encourages people to talk as if they've left their intelligence at the log in window. I'm too weary today to decide which, it's up for grabs.
Sass
USA - Tue Dec 7 14:32:14 2004 from 24.66.94.140
i think abortion is wrong you wouldnt get pregnet if it wasnt ment to be just think what if you never got a chance at life
gloria <girlstoner60420@yahoo.com>
willisville, ill USA - Tue Dec 7 11:00:16 2004 from 209.7.236.66
Come on join the fun…be a teenager for a day…it’s refreshing, and there’s no stress (except for those pesky SAT/ACT’s).
John
Houston, Texas USA - Tue Dec 7 10:36:16 2004 from 146.130.117.49
Do you people ever debate serios issues? You seem to be a "bunch" of frustrated teenagers.....
GuessWho
USA - Tue Dec 7 9:42:12 2004 from 65.92.127.166
Sweeet...now ya'll can go back to your Stepford experiment...cept ya'll only got one girl, hmmm...but she's a dynamo!
John
Houston, Texas USA - Tue Dec 7 9:19:16 2004 from 146.130.117.49
hi im in my Jesus lesson, it'z fovourite lesson. We are searching for mother teresa and i happened to come across this site. It's a foboulous site. At 15years of age i have read many books on mother teresa, she is a machine! A legendary person!!! She changed the world for the better. For rich and for poorer! thank you for the wonderful site, you've made my day! love stephanie kidd and friends xoxox KISSES xoxo
steff kidd <saucy_steff@hotmail.com>
Daventry, northamptonshire England - Tue Dec 7 4:29:17 2004 from 213.249.155.242
What's back?
Rad
USA - Tue Dec 7 1:18:09 2004 from 67.64.207.112
w00t! It's back! It's back! Thanks Mike!
Joy
USA - Mon Dec 6 20:07:54 2004 from 68.113.38.11
It's not like you can't look at an IP address and figure out who it is.
Lothar
USA - Mon Dec 6 17:42:33 2004 from 168.103.50.187
The make believe characters are just that...not real. I don't think anyone didn't think that you didn't know they were fake (triple negative makes positive, right?). I remember something being said about someone debating with a chicken, but I am pretty sure they were talking about Dungbeetle, not you.
Lothar
USA - Mon Dec 6 17:41:38 2004 from 168.103.50.187
For the record I never received his name in an email. And also for the record, names I did receive in email..I would never publish last names that were given to me in good faith. Actually, I'm fine with talking to make believe characters as long as you know I know.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Mon Dec 6 17:16:33 2004 from 146.130.86.130
Posting of unpublished information here is NOT cool. My name is one thing...Vlad's is another. You are revealing what someone has e-mailed you in PRIVATE. Should that be the norm now??? Hmmm?
Lothar
USA - Mon Dec 6 17:04:20 2004 from 168.103.50.187
In his case, it is "pee" brain...it fits in line with the nasty stuff chickens do. Anybody got anything remotely associated with abortion? This is an abortion website not your extreme far right agree-a-thon chat.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Mon Dec 6 16:45:34 2004 from 146.130.86.130
Oh no! Head for the hill! It's AshKKKroft's Iron-booted spelling police. Remember, if you mispell a word, then the terrorists have won.
Poultricide <pcide@chiknsRfilthy.org>
Louisville, KY - Mon Dec 6 16:27:48 2004 from 152.163.100.137
It's PEA-BRAIN, not pee brain.
Chuck
USA - Mon Dec 6 16:17:11 2004 from 12.169.49.2
John, way to go! That's really telling that guy. It also goes for Stan, Kenny, Eric, Butters, and Timmy. You're all pee-brained chickens. This site was really good until the anti-choice clique showed-up and started their personal flame-post wars. Nobody wants to discuss valid issues, but just engage in childish namecalling, just like pee-brained chickens soiling their own nests.
Poultricide <pcide@chiknsRtasty.org>
Louisville, KY - Mon Dec 6 16:11:48 2004 from 152.163.100.137
Here’s your problem Craig…you see, you’re a chicken…and chickens are just plain stupid. They got these little-bitty, itsie-bitsie, pee brains. That is why they run around munching on their own waste. Much as you do. It’s the little pee brain. Sorry, there’s not much you can do with a pee brain. The most you can ever hope for is semi-funny little antidotes mixed in with uninformed, anti-abortion hysteria, but at the end of the day you’re still a little pee brain chicken who knows a little military history.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Mon Dec 6 14:40:07 2004 from 146.130.86.130
Yeah, Craig...you are good at making fun of everything, but, the question begs...can you put a logical argument together that stands on its own merit...the world waits.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Mon Dec 6 14:26:07 2004 from 146.130.86.130
Who cares about all that cr@p? What I want to know is; whatever happened to that Satyr guy?
Poultricide <pcide@chiknsRtasty.org>
Louisville, KY - Mon Dec 6 13:54:02 2004 from 172.134.161.129
As usual, Mr. Mugu oversimplifies everything. He says what a nice site this is but he is never specific about what he finds so nice aboot it. Why is it wonderful? He never says, but just leaves it up to us to decypher what exactly he is talking about. If we are not told what is so wonderful and nice aboot the site, it could lead to us wandering around confused like sexual terrorists, slaking our unbridled lusts on unsuspecting buxom young women who also don't know what is so nice and wonderful aboot this site. But that cannot be legislated against, because it is his right to oversimplify and we don't want the government to take away all of our rights and make all the hot buxom young women wear "burqas" and go back to the puritan saudi model where women live in shoe boxes, men live in trees, and the designated batter rule reigns supreme. Abortion rates are rising, people are having more more more sex, cats are sleeping with dogs, the monkey chases the weasel, hairy men in Spartan costumes hold bake sales on shady boulevards, and I say it is fine...fine...let's just tear down all the barriers. No matter how you slice it, it's still baloney!
Vlad <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Mon Dec 6 13:43:51 2004 from 205.188.116.138
Our abstinence programs are currently outlawed from talking about the use of condoms and they are currently preaching curricula that say people can contact AIDS through “sweat and tears”. You have got to be bleeping me??!!? This is what I’m paying for?? Nick, are you running this show?? Yeah, Frisk, if I were you, I would be investigating this big time.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Mon Dec 6 12:32:21 2004 from 146.130.86.130
Mugu, you've done it again! :)
Adam
USA - Mon Dec 6 11:31:13 2004 from 64.236.245.243
Also, Nick quoted me as saying this, "At least they loved each other and expessed it through a physical act before marriage". I never said this exact quote, it is being taken out of context because his arguement is falling apart...why, because as usual he over-simplifies every freaking issue. Also, why don't you throw a few more "whities" at us because I'm not quite grasping the full depth of your issues with black folks.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Mon Dec 6 10:26:21 2004 from 146.130.86.130
Nick, you’re just getting way too dramatic. I have no problem with people practicing abstinence. I have no problem with people who are in an impoverished situation doing whatever to not have anymore children they can’t afford. I said abstinence will never work to cure abortion because you cannot enforce it. Let me just repeat myself…abstinence will never, ever, stop the rate of abortion because you cannot make a law of it. This is a fact. You’re always carrying on with the lib’s about providing arguments that are not based in fact…well, there you go buddy, facts. People are not having less sex in the world, they are having more sex. People in this country are having more and more sex. Population is out of control. Abortion rates are rising. People are having more sex…more, more, more…and you know what else, why on earth would you want to try and legislate something like abstinence anyway? What are you some kind of Muslim extremist? Let’s see…say, we go ahead and take away everyone’s civil liberties- liberties that are written into our Constitution, and make abstinence a law. I mean…I think I can get a burqa on my wife, although she’s pretty tough…I might have to pin her down to get it on her….but, you gotta do it right? You can’t pass a law like abstinence and leave all the men out there with all that pent up sexual aggression and not cover up the women can you? That would just lead to the men running around like terrorists taking out their sexual aggression in a physical manner wouldn’t it? Yeah, I guess we can follow the Saudi model on this…or the Puritan model. And by the way, I wouldn’t be too proud of the fact that I cannot provide health insurance for my family. Man of the house…right.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Mon Dec 6 10:10:34 2004 from 146.130.86.130
Lothar, Senator Kerry DID win. It's just that killer Bushie-Junior and his greedy Haliburton buddies stole another election. Countallthevotes!
Poultricide <pcide@chiknsRtasty.org>
Louisville, KY - Mon Dec 6 8:18:58 2004 from 172.151.220.115
What an honor!! We finally get to meet the REAL Mr. Mugu! I thought that was a name Vlad made up...
Lothar
USA - Mon Dec 6 3:09:07 2004 from 168.103.50.187
I was completely unaware of that. Now I wish John Kerry WAS elected.
Lothar
USA - Mon Dec 6 3:08:22 2004 from 168.103.50.187
NICE AND WONDERFUL SITE I HAVE BEEN HERE 000000000000000000 GREAT MR MUGU
MR MUGU AGU <MUGU-MUMU@YAHOO.COM>
CHINA - Mon Dec 6 2:59:59 2004 from 202.104.18.70
Posted earlier: "millions of African American women like myself are dying of preventable diseases due to impossible health care prices. An OPTIONAL government health care system would allow myself and my family to live without worrying about getting sick." Gee Lothar, didn't you know that in countries which have government run healthcare, people don't get sick? No worries, whatsoever....Never have to worry about getting sick at all. Free government healthcare cures cancer, heat disease, diabetes, and even the heartbreak of psoriasis. Didn't you know that Dr. Jonas Salk invented the polio vaccine for free? Sheesh! Get with the program. Besides, white people never get sick anyway.
Vlad <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Mon Dec 6 0:06:26 2004 from 152.163.100.138
What needs to be figured out is getting African American men (all men, actually) to stand up and be responsible. I realize that for the most part they have. Too many kids are being raised by their mothers. I also realize this is a huge problem for us whities as well. The absence of men is killing families more than anything. Funny how it would be SOLVED by abstinence. But obviously, as John would tell us, "At least they loved each other and expessed it through a physical act before marriage".
Lothar
USA - Sun Dec 5 23:25:34 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Mrs. ? from Ohio...why do you rely on the gov't for your needs? The African American family has done more to hurt itself in the last 100+ years than "white Americans" could ever do. You stated "People like you keep poor African Americans like myself from advancing in the world". This is America, lady. Stop blaming other people for your problems, take responsiblity and do something with your life. Your kids need to see that work is the way to prosper...not the gov't. I, for one, would qualify very easily for food stamps right now. My wife, three kids, and I eat on a very small food budget. But it is money I earn. We are getting a business off the ground and it is taking a LOT of work. I have no health insurance...but don't think that it is "rich, white America's" job to pay my hospital bills. Stealing from the rich to give to the poor takes away all incintive to work. That being said, it was a good thing there were some gov't programs while I was growing up. My mom and I needed them. But at the same time, my mom did not give me an entitlement mentality and pounded into me to work, KEEP YOUR PANTS ZIPPED UNTIL YOUR MARRIED, stay with the one I marry, and provide for those I am responsible for. So far, by the grace of God and His provision, I have done it. I encourage you to do the same.
Lothar
USA - Sun Dec 5 23:17:54 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Dear Carol, I would like to thank you for your website. It has given me insight into rich, white America that I have never been able to see before. I would like to thank you for fighting so hard to keep a national healthcare system from being a reality. People like you keep poor African Americans like myself from advancing in the world. I would like to thank you for being one of the many conservatives who don't mind that millions of African American women like myself are dying of preventable diseases due to impossible health care prices. An OPTIONAL government health care system would allow myself and my family to live without worrying about getting sick. Without naive, white Americans like yourself, my family and I would never be able to experience the poverty, pain and injustice that has broken the African American family for the past 100+ years. I admire the fact that you can stand up for your rich, white lifestyle without thinking about others. Sincerely A Non-Partisan Negro
Non-partisan Negro <teentutoring@email.com>
Huber Heights, oh USA - Sun Dec 5 23:03:15 2004 from 63.194.185.3
CBS News shows bias on abortion/breast cancer link report.
+ 0 >< ! (
USA - Sun Dec 5 17:25:33 2004 from 168.143.113.5
Vlad this one is better
click me
USA - Sat Dec 4 20:33:50 2004 from 67.64.207.112
Too late...this one's already taken.
Vlad (click here for the link) <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sat Dec 4 17:21:04 2004 from 152.163.100.137
Hey ladies, check it out...He's available!
Vlad (click here for the link) <vlad@sympatico.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sat Dec 4 17:17:47 2004 from 152.163.100.137
What is it with liberals and taking off their clothes? They seem to think that it makes some kind of profound statement.
Vlad (click here for the link) <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sat Dec 4 17:09:11 2004 from 152.163.100.137
Yes...it let me post a comment. w00t!
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sat Dec 4 16:54:43 2004 from 152.163.100.137
Ok *clique*... I think it's fixed so you can comment if you're registered. :o]
Joy
USA - Sat Dec 4 12:42:48 2004 from 68.113.38.11
Hello from the sunshine state of Florida. Sawgrass was a ghost town yesterday, that’s about to change with the arrival of the rest of the family today. See you all back in NJ.
Lem
Somewhere near Boca, FL USA - Sat Dec 4 12:37:40 2004 from 65.11.108.187
*Clique* my name, post an introduction, and I'll get back to you privately
Chuck
USA - Sat Dec 4 7:22:12 2004 from 4.131.35.181
I got a username, password, but cannot do anything but log in????
Lothar
USA - Sat Dec 4 4:32:21 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Guilty? Yes, no matter what the motive, love of ease, or a desire to save from suffering the unborn innocent, the woman is awfully guilty who commits the deed. It will burden her conscience in life, it will burden her soul in death; but oh! Thrice guilty is he who, for selfish gratification, heedless of her prayers, indifferent to her fate, drove her to the desperation which impels her to the crime.
Susan B. Anthony
Rochester, NY USA - Sat Dec 4 0:12:40 2004 from 205.188.116.138
You are an idiot. You call yourself pro-life, pro-woman. So called "pro-life" is con woman. A fetus is a parasite. Without the mother it could not survive. It is a clump of cells. A potential human being. To call it a human is irrational. Just like calling a seed a flower when it obviously has not grown into a flower. To hold a clump of cells that has not reached the status of a human being over the rights of a self sustaining (biologically) woman is definitely not pro woman. If you were really pro woman, you would leave the choice of whether she chooses to keep her fetus or abort it up to her. Woman is and always will be higher than a fetus. (And by the way, Roe v Wade was the greatest advancement in the rights of women since the 19th amendment.)
Miranda Barzey
Nome, AK USA - Fri Dec 3 23:50:29 2004 from 68.53.37.114
Chuck... I think you have to 'join the team'... I think they should call it a gang or clique... lol :o]
Joy
USA - Fri Dec 3 18:41:56 2004 from 68.113.38.11
There's actually people who donate to the crybaby site? They donate money? To keep that crap going? Why not donate to all the unemployed people they think the taxpayers should support. Oh wait... they clearly ARE the unemployed... so who donates? I guess they steal money to donate. What a bunch of misfit malcontents. lol
Joy
USA - Fri Dec 3 18:39:44 2004 from 68.113.38.11
I get a funny error when I try to access the comments page
Chuck
USA - Fri Dec 3 16:57:18 2004 from 4.131.38.180
Who cares about the miners unless they are practicing abstinence.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Fri Dec 3 15:24:32 2004 from 146.130.73.109
Right. Don't hold it in, tell us what you really think. Hey Folks, take a look that the picture of these Blue State folks. I don't hate them; However, I cannot help to notice that they are rather humorous to look at. I can't really explain why, but something about them just ain't right.
Vlad (click here for link to photo) <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Dec 3 14:25:18 2004 from 205.188.116.138
I've noticed that everybody that is for abortion has already been born. If it isn't a baby, then you aren't pregnant, so what are you aborting? of course you are killing a baby...and you should be killed just for suggesting that...FUCK ALL YOU PRO-CHOICE PEOPLE. just because yall are monsters doesnt mean that you can choose the death penalty for inoccent children. i hate all of you...
COURTNEY JOHN <Qbertqt05@yahoo.com>
Denton, TX USA - Fri Dec 3 14:12:22 2004 from 68.185.199.32
Nobody has indicated whether the miners can feel pain. That would be an important consideration.
John Carlos I <joca1@tideybowl.com>
Woodside, TX - Fri Dec 3 13:54:53 2004 from 172.128.21.146
Chuck, Chuck, Chuck... you doorknob! Go check your mail again! Sheeeeeesh... ;o]
Joy
USA - Fri Dec 3 12:58:23 2004 from 68.113.38.11
There is no one here by that name.
lothar
USA - Fri Dec 3 2:24:00 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Well, Joy, I deleted the SOB accidentially,,,,,,, :( ,,, Will you do it again???
Chuck
USA - Thu Dec 2 21:38:17 2004 from 4.131.32.250
I already did Chuck! I emailed several folks, but Vlad's came back. I guess it was that move to Canada... :o] ***** Nick - I do not have your email and do not wish to post mine... so since Chuck posted his, email him with yours so he can give it to me. lol *****
Joy
USA - Thu Dec 2 19:30:18 2004 from 68.113.38.11
Me too!! Email me too!! , Joy, I need to hear from you
Chuck <WARHOST@prodigy.net>
USA - Thu Dec 2 19:23:31 2004 from 4.131.32.250
Vlad, if you are out there, please email me. :o]
Joy
USA - Thu Dec 2 17:10:05 2004 from 68.113.38.11
Vlad no way brotha Jessie is a racist pig
Rad
USA - Thu Dec 2 13:48:20 2004 from 67.64.207.112
Rad, so...is Jesse Jackson your grand-high priest, since he is a pseudo minister?
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Thu Dec 2 13:10:05 2004 from 205.188.116.138
Hey Vlad I'm a pseudo deity
Rad
USA - Thu Dec 2 11:07:09 2004 from 67.64.207.112
Hey everybody, Elohim is there for us...I feel all warm inside. Can I work at home and still worship Elohim? Just checking.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Thu Dec 2 10:07:20 2004 from 146.130.102.11
Did anyone else notice the guy who was claiming to be a deity in his long post, earlier? His link doesn't work.
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Thu Dec 2 8:03:57 2004 from 172.166.156.79
When I take over the world torturing spammers will become legal
Rad
USA - Thu Dec 2 3:14:13 2004 from 67.64.207.112
this is a so great page with diana. i working in school about princess Diana. God bye Ida 14 sweden
Ida
Sweden - Wed Dec 1 12:38:26 2004 from 81.226.3.154
I am first...or ist de girlyman calling me a chicken? This is not pleasing to me. You have brought fourth my anger.
Conan The Barbarian <cbarb@aol.com>
Cimmeria, Hyborian World - Wed Dec 1 12:29:45 2004 from 172.170.8.234
Which came first, the Chicken or the barbarian? Anyway, another UN slap in the face on Iran...just ridiculous. The EU and the UN liberals are determined to not guarantee our safety after we secured theirs all these years.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Dec 1 8:47:20 2004 from 146.130.68.138
I had to do an debate in my class and i choice to fight against pro-choice, I think life is a gift, but now people can take away that life as easy as taking a pill. I am 14 years old, a christian, and deaply believe that pro-life is the way to go!Thanks for the information on this WEBSITE!
Kara
ManchesterVt, Vt USA - Wed Dec 1 8:31:44 2004 from 209.198.102.131
Hi Carolyn!
Matt
USA - Wed Dec 1 3:47:50 2004 from 199.38.133.55
"I am the Poultricideman. Do I look like a chicken? " As a matter of fact yes
Rad
USA - Tue Nov 30 21:54:52 2004 from 68.88.37.157
I don't work with a partner, I'm a loner. Also, I'm not a chicken. I am the Poultricideman. Do I look like a chicken? w00t!
the Poultricide man (not a chicken) <pcide@chiknsRtasty.org>
Louisville, KY - Tue Nov 30 20:03:11 2004 from 64.12.116.137
You got it chicken...so where's your partner in crime? Just not the same without my old nemesis round here.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Tue Nov 30 14:34:58 2004 from 12.40.29.127
You tell'em, John-buddy! That Princess Di was really something, plus she had a great pair of drumsticks.
Poultricide <pcide@chiknsRtasty.org>
Louisville, KY - Tue Nov 30 13:40:06 2004 from 152.163.100.138
she was my bestest friend. to bad she had to go so early. i was mad at her before she die. and now i can not say ilove you any more. why did you ship my to Canada.
timmie <craig.domagala@holyspirit.ab.ca>
lethbridge, ab canada - Tue Nov 30 13:39:54 2004 from 209.115.232.94
Coverage of the Bush visit to Canada has been first about the “protesters” prospects to get up close to Bush and how Canadian authorities are scrambling to avoid embarrassing the president bla bla bla. The coverage so far has been nothing but a recruitment drive to make sure the visit live up to the billing – protest……… We just protested Bush for a second term with 60 million protesters, put that in your pipe and smoke it.
Lem
NY USA - Tue Nov 30 10:19:40 2004 from 63.250.35.179
I wish they would leave Princess Diana alone for once…we all know already about her affairs. I was sick of hearing about the Clinton affair starting at day one and I feel the same way about Diana. Why are we so obsessed about extramarital affairs? Does this make her any less of the lady she was? Was she still not a great humanitarian? Does she still not deserve our admiration? Is that the sum total of her life? I ask you. I think people, especially in this country, are so obsessed with sex and innuendo it seems to creep its way into every conversation. If you want to get to the root causes of problems in our society you can look to this obsessive behavior. Human sexuality was here long before the “institution” of marriage and it will be here long after. Evidently, for Diana, sex in her marriage had gotten to the point where it was so repulsive to her it defied moral principle. She might have gotten out earlier if not for the religious shame associated with divorce. Love is the only guiding principle in which sex is morally justified in every relationship, marriage or not. Without love there is no marriage.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Tue Nov 30 8:57:41 2004 from 12.40.29.127
The content of your site is very interesting. I really liked it, thank you
摩托车配件
USA - Mon Nov 29 20:34:33 2004 from 61.49.188.199
Melissa, being wary isn't such a bad thing so long as wary means wise and not 'throw the baby out with the bath water'. If one keeps note of the fact that people involved in organized religion are just that, people, one is able to keep it all in perspective and enjoy the aspects of organized religion that are good (community, friendship, bonding with those who share a common belief, knowing that we're not 'alone' in our beliefs, etc). It is only when people worship other people and things, forgetful of how we are all human beings (capable of wrong-doing) when organized religion becomes a bad thing. I've never met a person yet (who if keeping all things in their rightful place) has been anything but a good example of their particular organized religion.
Professor Plum
USA - Mon Nov 29 17:54:21 2004 from 206.163.232.93
I'm wary of ALL organized religions, not just Roman Catholicism!
MelissaInPhilly
Philly, where else, PA USA - Mon Nov 29 13:24:29 2004 from 66.237.219.26
Hope everyone had a happy Thanksgiving. As usual my beautiful wife outdid herself this year…man that woman can cook! God has really blessed my family this year so we had many things to be thankful for. Looking forward to the rest of the season. Tried to plug into Cooties, but nothing…oh well, will try back later…hope that website stays up, we need a conservative voice up there.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Mon Nov 29 10:24:28 2004 from 12.153.133.19
GuessWho says "I believe that the RC Church is an evil organization, an organization that shields criminal behavior." In every organization be it religious or non-religious, there are people who will do wrong. If it's logical to boycott a religious organization for "shielding criminal behavior" then instead of recognizing the good of the organization and singling out the wrong-doer for criticism, it becomes logical to boycott ANY and ALL organizations where wrong has been done. If GuessWho can't acknowledge and stick to that, then GuessWho is nothing more than a ONE ISSUE BANDIT whose REAL goal is simply to bash the RC Church and treat them like they have the monopoly on all the wrong-doers in the world. Normal people realize that there are wrong-doers within every religious denomination and within every organization where there is more than one human being present. Who's surprised that GuessWho doesn't get it?
Professor Plum
USA - Sun Nov 28 23:19:16 2004 from 24.66.94.140
I’ve been catching up on my favorite columnist’s and bingo, a gem pops up – Christopher Hitchen’s article on The Mirror UK “Not so dumb then”. Hitchens wonders if he should be miffed at a Headline on that paper (The Mirror UK) accusing all Bush supporters of being “so dumb”…….. Love this quote…… “Pound for pound of brainpower, Karl Rove and Paul Wolfowits can blow most liberals straight out of the water. Fact.”
Lem (click here)
NJ USA - Sun Nov 28 22:21:00 2004 from 141.150.21.80
No.
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sun Nov 28 20:26:35 2004 from 205.188.116.138
Aren't homosexual men and lesbians who want to marry affirming conservative family values?
Jessica <arbor@pinwheel.com>
Oaktown, CA USA - Sun Nov 28 18:56:30 2004 from 207.69.139.145
Paging Mike Brown, Paging Mike Brown. Will Mr. cooties please email me? thank you
Chuck
USA - Sun Nov 28 6:00:40 2004 from 4.131.34.80
Where is Insanitor when these people in China need him? Undoubtedly, btw, there is DHMO down there.
Lothar
USA - Sat Nov 27 23:59:33 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Speaking of military uses of DHMO, while in basic training in San Antonio, TX...we were compelled to drink it. It's amazing to me that something that has done that much damage could be forced upon our troups. Whatever floats their boat.
Lothar
USA - Sat Nov 27 15:25:03 2004 from 168.103.50.187
The problem isn't really so much with dihydrogen monoxidoxide it's just that stupid Americans cannot use it responsibly. Just look at France, they've been bottling it and exporting DHMO for generations and they don't have problems with it. In the Netherlands, it's legal and their country is surrounded by it, yet they don't have it seeping into their schools. Americans just give it this forbidden mystique and misuse it out of ignorance. Michael Moore is right.
Poultricide <pcide@chiknsRtasty.org>
Louisville, KY - Sat Nov 27 12:08:10 2004 from 67.174.169.121
I have personally been a victim of DHMO. It was being used in some soup that was being heated up. I opened the kettle too quick and my face was too close. I got a temporary 1st degree burn from the vaporized form of the chemical.
Lothar
USA - Sat Nov 27 4:09:18 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Without DHMO, Kerry's boat would not have been operable!! What are you talking about? The Navy is one of the biggest users of dihydrogen monoxide.
Lothar
USA - Sat Nov 27 4:01:15 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Senator Kerry is responsible enough to use Dihydrogen monoxide in a safe manner. He served in Vietnam in the navy so he has been exposed to the substance many times. Killer Bushie ducked his responsibility with regards to this dangerous threat. Junior Bush is just too busy winning his Daddy's fight in Iraq to worry about the threat that we face. Haliburton is probably involved.
Poultricide <pcide@chiknsRtasty.org>
Louisville, KY - Sat Nov 27 3:48:09 2004 from 67.174.169.121
It is the one issue with which I disagree with Bush. Honestly, Kerry would have done ZILCH about it as well. He used it recreationally during his campaign.
Lothar
USA - Sat Nov 27 3:25:12 2004 from 168.103.50.187
The littlest of life are our biggest problem. Respect life. Even the mean reptiles take care of their young. Yes, our biggest problem is our little ones. I sorry. Who am I to talk? Nov. 27, 2004. "Remember 9-11-01"
Daniel <winston@warwick.net>
middletown, ny USA - Sat Nov 27 2:51:23 2004 from 216.6.162.71
Lothar...Yes! You are right. Dihydrogen monoxide can be very dangerous. When inhaled into the lungs it can cause instant death, even quicker than second-hand cigarette smoke. Something should be done, but since Bush is in the pockets of big business and the Saudis ...nothing will be done. If only Kerry had been elected. (Think of the children!)
Poultricide <pcide@chiknsRtasty.org>
Louisville, KY - Sat Nov 27 2:20:16 2004 from 67.174.169.121
Shouldn't something be done about this?
Lothar
USA - Sat Nov 27 1:50:21 2004 from 168.103.50.187
You people should listen to GuessWho, he knows exactly what he's talking about. Since he's a defrocked priest he knows all of the inside dirt on the RC Church. He's been there on the recieving and the giving end of it. He goes both ways.
Poultricide <pcide@kerry4pre$.org>
Louisville, KY - Fri Nov 26 16:23:39 2004 from 67.174.169.121
PROF, Sorry buddy but I addressed the first message wrong. Would you continue to support a Church that does nothing to rid itself of those Priests who break the law? Remember that the RC Church hierarchy knew about the abuse. Also, would you send your child to a RC School where he would very likely be molested by one of those "Holy" men ? I do not fail logic 101 I believe that the RC Church is an evil organization, an organization that shields criminal behavior. Prof
GuessWho
USA - Fri Nov 26 11:30:51 2004 from 64.231.10.94
Would you continue to support a Church that does nothing to rid itself of those Priests who break the law? Remember that the RC Church hierarchy knew about the abuse. Also, would you send your child to a RC School where he would very likely be molested by one of those "Holy" men ? I do not fail logic 101 I believe that the RC Church is an evil organization, an organization that shields criminal behavior.
Prof
USA - Fri Nov 26 11:29:34 2004 from 64.231.10.94
GuessWho fails Logic 101. People who continue to go to the RC Church go because they believe in the Church, not as an endorsement of the imbeciles who violate what the Church is about. Similarily, people continue coming to this guestbook because they believe in what this guestbook is about, not because they endorse the imbeciles who violate what this guestbook is about. Logic 101. It is irrational (okay, downright stupid) to blame something which is good, for those ones who choose to abuse the goodness. It is neither the guestbook's fault that idiots choose to abuse it, nor the RC Church's fault, that idiots choose to be false followers.
Professor Plum
USA - Fri Nov 26 10:46:10 2004 from 24.66.94.140
If there are cases of child molestation in the UN I'm certain it will be dealt with promptly. I'm surprised that people are shocked by this. Cases of child molestation within the sacred halls of the Roman Catholic Church have been exposed on numerous occasions in the last ten or so years and people contimue to go to the RC Church. Im also sure that many who will scream the loudest about the UN are fanatical members of the RC Church. Pathetic and pitiful indeed.....
GuessWho
USA - Fri Nov 26 9:12:34 2004 from 64.231.10.94
Just when you think the UN could not sink any lower. Now we have child molestation allegations. Kofi should go! Padlock the UN and fumigate the place. Dan Rather has resigned for less. Kofi Annan has got to be the most incompetent UN secretary in history. (click Lem)
Lem (click here)
Jersey City, NJ USA - Fri Nov 26 1:56:04 2004 from 141.150.10.38
Turkeys are just as evil and chickens. Wade into them...spill their blood...shoot them in the belly. We are going to cut out their living guts and use them to greaze the tread of our tanks.
Poultricide <pcide@chiknsRtasty.org>
Louisville, KY - Thu Nov 25 16:57:02 2004 from 67.174.169.121
John's wife has. (sorry folks, you all know I just can't help it.) :o] Happy Thanksgiving to one and all! (offer excludes spammers and ficticious chickens)
Joy
USA - Thu Nov 25 15:21:31 2004 from 68.113.38.11
Turkeys are people too!! Have you hugged a turkey today?? (Eating one does NOT count!!)
Tom <Tom@turkeysRneat.com>
USA - Thu Nov 25 15:17:14 2004 from 68.113.38.11
Happy oppressed poultry day people
Rad
USA - Thu Nov 25 15:06:50 2004 from 65.69.50.13
Happy thanksgiving Carolyn and all who come here……. spammers not included.
Lem
NJ USA - Thu Nov 25 12:54:16 2004 from 138.89.186.49
Wow Mike,,, that's unreal. Spam is a scourge on soceity. I support public execution for convicted spammers.
Chuck
USA - Thu Nov 25 12:24:40 2004 from 4.131.36.251
Hiya were in r.e at the mo, searchin muther teresa. were in stafford englnad, n avin a borin day!!lol!! xXxlv ya xXx hevz n rhysxXxXxXxXxXxX
heva n rhys
USA - Thu Nov 25 9:56:04 2004 from 194.8.54.249
It seems rampant here but to give you an idea how bad comment spam **really** is, the script monitoring my blog has held 191 comments for me to approve/remove and has denied the posting of 8,717 comment spams.
Mike <mike@akacooties.com>
Hamilton, On Canada - Thu Nov 25 9:55:02 2004 from 24.36.1.75
Joyless, I guess John really told you off. Way to go, Buddy! Don't mess with John, he's da-MAN! He's a stud. He's had sex with the same woman for 15 years!!!...15 years!!! and his wife didn't even find out. (I wonder if he took time our for meals and potty breaks?)
Poultricide <pcide@sorryeverybody.com>
Louisville, KY - Wed Nov 24 19:29:56 2004 from 205.188.116.138
Joy, great article. Ben Shapiro is on my reading list every week!
Aaron
USA - Wed Nov 24 18:01:54 2004 from 207.224.91.206
rofl... I knew THAT was coming. ***** For those of you who enjoy good articles, this one is really good.
Joy (click!)
USA - Wed Nov 24 17:43:59 2004 from 68.113.38.11
My…but it seems I have offended Madam Joy, as seen by her outspoken irreverence to my namesake. Madam, if I offend let me say I am truly regretful that such offense interrupted your second coming. And let me also say to you, and to the entire world, your newly found chasteness is still intact Madam. For myself, and dare I say the whole of modern civilization, would commend you Madam for your abstinence, and that we are truly in your debt. For with your fruit still resting on the vine, we can rest in the solace of knowing that we are in a far better place. And the sanctity we so desperately avoid can finally be reckoned with as we are now free to pursue our sinful acts without fear that we may cross your path, or despoil your sacred innocence. An act which would surely lead us into oblivion. Thank you Madam…thank you.
John
On vacation but felt it necessary, Texas USA - Wed Nov 24 17:27:17 2004 from 69.151.135.93
Want to have your turkey without the fear of litigation?........ Sign your own Thanksgiving Guest Liability Indemnification Agreement……. (that’s a mouthful)
Lem
Pearl River, NY USA - Wed Nov 24 14:22:13 2004 from 63.250.35.179
girly... Your Finite Existence is rapidly coming to a close. Two paths. THIS url leads to Heaven --- Don't be ignorant. Repent. Join this sinful mortal Upstairs after our lifelong demise for the ultimate, DHTML experience.
Catalyst4Christ <ergo@yawn.kom>
usDa, Moo USA - Wed Nov 24 12:00:04 2004 from 65.141.167.161
Ukrop's: a so-called "Christian" grocery chain based out of Richmond. Help raise awareness about their hateful policy of racial inequity and BOYCOTT THEIR STORES (the two Ukrop properties: Ukrop's and "Community Pride" [sic]). We will be conducting an informal strategy session at Babes Restaurant (3166 S. Cary St.) at 7:30 pm, Dec. 23rd. If you are personally unable to attend, spread the word to someone who can! The 1992-1997 boycott of PepsiCo to get them to divest from Burma was a success. BOYCOTTS WORK !
Tina Buck <tsharon802@bikerider.com>
Richmond, VA USA - Wed Nov 24 10:37:18 2004 from 164.106.235.109
Who should replace Rather?..... See Barbara Streisand – CBS
Lem
NY USA - Wed Nov 24 8:23:03 2004 from 63.250.35.179
"Rad - you don't want Canada. Too many Liberals here." That's ok Sass we'll capture them and store the prisoners in New Jersey
Rad
USA - Tue Nov 23 23:24:28 2004 from 65.69.50.13
Could we have a ceremony like an opening of the parliament or something like that? I like ceremonies. Cspan has it on right now.
Lem
NJ USA - Tue Nov 23 20:24:52 2004 from 138.89.179.167
Wow... so according to the gospel of tidy-john... as long as a lot of people are doing something, it makes it moral and ergo should be legal AND moral. I did not know that. ***** I guess when our children start demanding that they be able to eat cake for breakfast, lunch and dinner we should just change the rules and let them. After all, why wouldn't good parents just want their children to be 'happy'??? Telling them they need a balanced diet is just being old-fashioned, mean and cruel so totally un-HIP! It's amazing to me that we as children of our Heavenly Father can't understand that the rules were made for our benefit and that we enjoy life best and benefit most when we follow them. And when we ignore them and tell Him He should just adjust to the times, we end up with all kinds of awful side-effects such as STD's, unwanted pregnancy and broken hearts and many many more ills. ***** So, just let all children eat nothing but cake!!
Joy
USA - Tue Nov 23 19:53:43 2004 from 68.113.38.11
yeah, let's annex Alberta. It's great! Easily the most beautiful place I have ever been.
Adam
USA - Tue Nov 23 19:21:13 2004 from 64.236.245.243
The link to that Greatest Canadian contest.
Sass
- Tue Nov 23 19:07:05 2004 from 206.163.238.201
Oh boy...Russian online gaming spam! I think I liked those people better back when they were commies.
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Tue Nov 23 19:06:49 2004 from 152.163.100.138
Rad - you don't want Canada. Too many Liberals here. They'd have tipped the scales and elected Kerry. Maybe you'd want to selectively annex certain provinces, like Alberta. That might work for you and they might be agreeable to it (especially if Trudeau wins the "Greatest Canadian" contest - CBC's running it right now).
Sass
- Tue Nov 23 18:12:25 2004 from 206.163.238.201
You're a bitter tired old man, Gunga Dan. (My apologies to Rudyard Kipling)
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Tue Nov 23 13:17:39 2004 from 152.163.100.138
Looks like Dan Rather is getting booted. The first story that I found on it was from ABC. You'd figure Dan would want to be the first to break the story, once it has been confirmed and verified, of course.
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Tue Nov 23 13:15:08 2004 from 152.163.100.138
I was wondering who this "Chrsit" lady is and why I'd want to spend the millinium New Years party with her. Is she a whole lot of fun or something? Perhaps Lonnie could clarify.
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Tue Nov 23 13:00:26 2004 from 152.163.100.138
^^ If any of you or your kind think your going to celebrate the new millenium with Chrsit - YOU ARE S.O.L. Spiritually Out Of Luck. ^^// MY MY! All this time I thought God was in charge. How astonished I was to discover that a guy named Lonnie is in charge of who does and doesn't receive eternal life! Could have knocked me over with a feather. Then again, I am not sure I want to spend the millenium with Chrsit, so I guess it's ok that Lonnie runs the Universe.
Adam
USA - Tue Nov 23 12:14:48 2004 from 64.236.245.243
Yes, Lonnie, we pro lifers have absolutely no spiritual credibility. I mean. All we are doing is protecting life and trying to stop the killing of defensless unborn babies. NO spiritual credibility there. I'm gonna take a wild stab and say that your entire post was full fo crap. Your using the age old liberal tactic of branding anyone who disagrees with you as a bigot or a hateful person. Sorry but I don't buy it. And yes, it's a big deal that we are a political power now. Some 40 million babies have been killed since Roe v. Wade. someday the horror will stop. Oh, by the way, you should do some research or talk to Sass. The violence committed by the prochoicers far outnumbers those acts don'e by people who are against abortion.
Aaron
USA - Tue Nov 23 11:25:24 2004 from 67.41.223.34
Yo Sass methinks time for the U.S. to annext Canada
Rad
USA - Mon Nov 22 23:09:05 2004 from 65.69.50.13
A. Vlad, you can still be a strategically heightened individual for the holidays. -|- B. This latest fellow should read the link I left earlier for Beth.. the one about pro-choice violence. I somehow think though, that his whole post was really the means to an end. He wanted an opportunity to post the SOL line. Perhaps he thought it up today and was eager? Perhaps he'll come back and be willing to have a more substantial discussion? Tune in tomorrow for the answers. ;-)
Sass
- Mon Nov 22 21:33:08 2004 from 206.163.238.201
You're right, Sass. I've been a baaaaad boy. (snif)
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Mon Nov 22 21:22:47 2004 from 172.170.115.133
Don't take this the wrong way, Lonnie, but the problem, in my opinion, lies in the statement "churches AND connected political". Churches were never meant to be political. BTW...please don't draw your opinions of this site from a few of us going off course momentarily. This site has little to do with religion, but mostly abortion...which is not a political issue. Thanks.
Lothar
USA - Mon Nov 22 21:17:42 2004 from 168.103.50.187
I spent about 15 years in conservative christian churches and connected political movements. My revelation was that they were saturated with bigoted, prejudicial, and even hateful people. I can't believe you are actually surprised at any aggresiveness by liberals, pro-choice advocates, or whoever. Anti-abortionists have been mudering doctors, gassing clinics, and standing in front of doctor's offices screaming through bullhorns calling women sluts and whores for years. I realize there are some very loving and well-meaning people among the pro-life ranks...but....not enough to give the movement any true spiritual credibility. So you've become a political power. BIG DEAL! You are doing so at the cost of your own spirituality, i.e., "What does it profit a man to gain the world and lose his soul?" Enjoy your window of opportunity. It will be over soon! Oh...I almost forgot: If any of you or your kind think your going to celebrate the new millenium with Chrsit - YOU ARE S.O.L. Spiritually Out Of Luck.
Lonnie Pritzen <Pritzishonor@aol.com>
Dallas, Tx USA - Mon Nov 22 21:11:51 2004 from 152.163.100.138
I am not directing this at any one person, only to those for whom the shoe fits (and I'll leave it up to you to look in the mirror) but really! Why can't we have differences without resorting to calling each other nasty things? Honestly, save the nasty things for those individuals who spam, harass and abuse Carolyn through this book. As for each other, I have seen the good side of every single one of the "regulars" and I have also seen a bit of the bad. No one of us has claim to the "best person" award and so unless you want to tick off the very generous hostess of this book and force her to throw her hands into the air and close the dang book again, why doesn't everyone try to differ without the sheer nastiness that seems to be snowballing.
Sass
- Mon Nov 22 20:52:47 2004 from 206.163.238.201
I think John is angry. Was it something that I said? Hey, what's the deal? I'm all for getting those pesky rules changed. It would be great to have all that fun and not end up being Beelzebub's Cabana boy in the hereafter. (Although Tidey-John would certainly be good at it).
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Mon Nov 22 20:14:15 2004 from 64.12.116.138
Sass, again...percentages where not the issue. Can I say that MOST of the time, what you have sited is not the case? How about those are the exception, but not the rule? If that hubby was doing that to the woman's daughter, he should be in prison right now. Has he been reported?
Lothar
USA - Mon Nov 22 19:41:11 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Is there an echo in here?
Lothar
USA - Mon Nov 22 19:29:51 2004 from 168.103.50.187
OK, John, I'll be honest. When I switched names (at the same time I got a new ISP and IP), it was partly to start over. Of course, all the regulars know who I am, just as many know the true ID of Vlad and Rad. I decided a couple of days ago that I would give you another chance at meaningful discussion and you have proved ONCE AGAIN that you are uncapable. You cannot have one of these discussions with out telling the other side that they are basically morons for not thinking like you do. There is no room for the other side. You quickly jump to insults. Then when someone insults back, you call them a potty mouth (or whatever it was). I guess I was fooled again. Have a good week, John.
Lothar
USA - Mon Nov 22 19:28:00 2004 from 168.103.50.187
You can legislate abstinence. Adultery and fornication should, and indeed used to be, illegal. In some places, it still is. I never said sex was immoral. PREMERITAL sex is, however, immoral. I never said you have no faith...I was not referring to you specifically in that "faith in right" comment. But it is funny how you skate around the "what is your faith" question. I am trying to figure out what moral code does not call premarital sex immoral. Please provide me with one. Get ripped apart by you??? That is the second time you have threatened me on this guestbook. And you tell ME I'm hiding behind a fake name???
Lothar
USA - Mon Nov 22 19:23:59 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Ok, one more post then I am out of town for a week. For the record, I do not have a problem with people practicing abstinence. In and of itself, it's not a bad deal. Please, go, practice, enjoy. You said we can legislate morality, that we do it all the time...I clearly proved that we cannot legislate abstinence, that is all. You, among others said sex was somehow immoral...I proved sex is not immoral, some people are, (all this has to do with consenting adults, as if that were not obvious). You said I have no faith...as what, defined by you? That's pretty funny coming from a guy hiding behind a fake name. You, among others said abstinence would fix abortion...I said anything voluntary will, and has never, fixed abortion as we can see by the mere fact it is still legal and getting worse. Look, I'm tired of this...if ya'll want to live in a dream world go ahead, but watch who you call immoral, that is of course unless you feel like getting ripped apart again by yours truly. That is it...see ya'll in a week...peace.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Mon Nov 22 18:58:15 2004 from 69.151.134.127
Hey Andrew, The DU website is that way.
Aaron
USA - Mon Nov 22 18:49:07 2004 from 67.41.223.34
Reading the responses, I find that I can shake my head "yes, right you are" to some portion of what everyone has posted... which was part of my original posts on this subject, that none of us has *all* the answers. Thank you for understanding me John. Lothar, I would suggest that the percentages are much higher than your suggested 1%. Studies on abuse (of both genders since it does exist) are higher than 1% and in any of those cases, even marital sex in an abusive situation is immoral. I can agree with you about underlying issues causing problems between two people but I wasn't ever referring to those types of situations, I was always speaking to the situations like the examples I gave. Vlad, I wasn't commenting on unmarital sex at all, my comments were strictly to make the point that not all marital sex is moral or right, a point for which there is no logical argument to refute.
Sass
- Mon Nov 22 18:22:18 2004 from 206.163.238.201
What it does come down to is a faith problem. Not faith in God (but that helps), but faith in right. A lot of people are scared of right because we have gone so far from it. Here we are talking about when an abortion is right or wrong when that really isn't the issue. We have killed what? 30 million babies in the last 20 years? The 60's killed us as a country. Moral deprivity is the symptom...our moral plumbline is the issue.
Lothar
USA - Mon Nov 22 16:56:21 2004 from 168.103.50.187
My whole point is...when are we going to realize that we are not doing something right? When are we going to acknowledge that as a society we are quickly on the route to decay? What happened? How do we fix it? This whole discussion is like weeding a garden...you can pick weeds all day, but unless you get the root up, you will have to pick the same weed a couple of days later. You can pick weeds all day if you like. I have couples that I am meeting with with HUGE problems. Do I pick weeds? No, we go straight for the root. Usually, that root is bitterness and the cause of that bitterness must be found and dealt with. It's amazing how a lot of the surface problems then take care of themselves. Things are more simple than a lot of people make them.
Lothar
USA - Mon Nov 22 16:49:43 2004 from 168.103.50.187
John, don't equate NOT THINKING LIKE YOU to not thinking. I have put a lot of study, prayer, research, time, and thinking into these subjects. I know where my opinions come from. They are not from emotion and a series of "what if's". Contrary to whatever you might believe, there are absolutes. Just because something will not be passed into law does not make it right or wrong. Abortion is legal...is that right? Call your congressman about that.
Lothar
USA - Mon Nov 22 16:45:07 2004 from 168.103.50.187
John, I asked you a couple of questions earlier that I would like to see answered if you don't mind: You said you were confident in your faith...what is that faith? I didn't ask this earlier, but do you have kids? What are you going to tell them when they/he/she is a teenager? "As long as you love him"?
Lothar
USA - Mon Nov 22 16:37:25 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Sass, you are still misunderstanding me. Most here are against abortion and get sick of the rape arguement when it only accounts for less than 1% of abortion cases. I was only making the comparison that the cases you mention, where I would agree that sex IN marriage is not right, would be less than 1%. The comparison was only on the percentages, NOT on abortion and sex in marriage.
Lothar
USA - Mon Nov 22 16:34:37 2004 from 168.103.50.187
The only funny quote out of all of them was the one about al gore and the horse, and that was just comedy. You want to see some real dumb ass quotes look up a gw quote site. Im sure you knew that already though.
Andrew <Andrew@idealconsulting.net>
Bellmore, ny USA - Mon Nov 22 15:55:50 2004 from 67.100.49.191
One more reason the U.N. is becoming an irrelevant piece of political red tape. Not sure if we can link right now. Speaking of stem cells the U.N. has just abandoned efforts to ban human cloning. Can this body make anymore anti-Bush, anti-American rulings right about now? That one ought to set pro-lifers back a decade.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Mon Nov 22 12:58:46 2004 from 12.153.133.197
Also, for such a self described pious person you sure do seem to have a dirty mouth.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Mon Nov 22 12:49:58 2004 from 12.153.133.197
First of all Impaler, you have just given up any and all rights to say to me or anyone else, “he just resorts to name calling” type comments with that last one. Hypocrite. Secondly, obviously you don’t even understand the difference between biblical adultery and ordinary fornication. Lastly, when you do find the time to actually study an issue (I recall the time in the middle of a debate you actually admitted not knowing they throw away fertilized eggs during implantation procedures even though you argued for hours the ethics of the whole thing; again hypocrite), I will actually engage you in a real discussion. In the meantime you why don’t you just stick to irrelevant historical military adventures and leave the real thought to the rest of us.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Mon Nov 22 12:46:37 2004 from 12.153.133.197
I know that in your feeble little mind you think that you are being real deep and having some kind of thoughtful dicussion on religious dogma, but seriously...I doubt that there are too many serious Biblical scholars who are going; "Gee, this part about adultery being bad just really sucks. We could have alot more fun if we just crossed that part out." (Reverend Jesse Jackson being the obvious exception, but then again, I qualified it by saying "serious Biblical scholars". Sham religious hucksters don't count.)
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Mon Nov 22 12:33:45 2004 from 172.169.253.9
Yup, that's what it says, Boobie. If you go around killin' people, your probably going to spend eternity smoking a dogturd in hell while getting anally violated by Michael Landon. If that sounds good to you, then go knock yourself out, have fun. Hey, I didn't make up the rules. If you don't like it and think that it's so unfair, then just go discuss it with the big Guy and tell him that you don't like it. If you're real persuasive, maybe he'll change his mind. I'm all for you. Let him know that I'd much rather sleep late on Sundays. Why argue with me? They aren't MY rules.
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Mon Nov 22 12:27:36 2004 from 172.169.253.9
“Thou shalt not kill.” But, then again we do that anyway…war…self defense. Yeah, I guess I can see the benefits in not thinking. We wouldn’t want to contemplate ourselves to death. I guess this means we better get rid of all the biblical scholars wasting all of our time. I’m also supposing the abortion problem will fix itself because dare we spend anymore time thinking about it?
John
Houston, Texas USA - Mon Nov 22 12:18:24 2004 from 12.153.133.197
Wow, a diatribe to non-thinking. Seems that's what always gets the Palestinians in trouble. Well, I suppose all that has something to do with abortion, although I'm not quite sure what.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Mon Nov 22 12:13:56 2004 from 12.153.133.197
Oh gosh, you people and your legalistic hairsplitting. It's really amazing. Hey, if you are a religious person and profess to live by what the Bible says then, sex outside of the covenant of marriage is adultery (hey, I didn't make it up...go look). If you are agnostic, aetheist, pagan, (etc.), then don't worry about it. Just go have your fun, worship Bacchus or Ba'al and have your drunken orgies. If you any of the central tenets of Christianity don't appeal to you or are inconvenient, then tough-titties...go find another religion. Don't go trying to softsoap the facts by talking the subject to death and spewing a bunch of non sequiteurs and hypothetical psychobabble. If you think that the 10 Commandments should be retitled "The 10 Suggestions" than shutup and go become a Unitarian or something, then you can just make it up as you go along.
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Mon Nov 22 12:10:43 2004 from 172.169.253.9
Sass is 100% correct and you people need to listen to her. The physical act of sex, even in a marriage, can be an act of love, or it can be an act of greed, or selfishness, as is the case out of wedlock. Either way you cannot place morality on a physical act like sex. It is the same thing as guns don’t kill, people do. Just as a divorce was mentioned, many folks would say that is an immoral act. After all, if the marriage was sanctioned under God, certified by him, if you will, then should the act of divorce not be a SIN against God and the sanctity he instituted? I’m not saying that is what I believe; I’m saying some religious folks do. But my point was one relating to ABORTION. Now don’t get me wrong, I will jump on board with this abstinence solution. I mean, you guys seem to have been working on this one for a while so let’s think about this one. I suppose we can get a ban on sex; I’m up for it, do I need to contact my Congressman? Tell me where to write and I will get right on this one. It’s brilliant really. Here I’ve been all these years racking my brain thinking about the beginnings of life, the ethics of embryonic stem cell application, and the morning after pill, when it was “abstinence” all along. Ok, after the ban on sex, I’m thinking sex police. We could give them the right to search and seizure. They could bust in and catch people in the dirty act of sex. Come to think of it that might be kind of difficult; maybe we should take a look at micro-chip implantation at birth. One for male and one for female, that way an alarm would go off when the chips get too close and we could apprehend them. Awesome, it’ll be like “Minority Report”, no crime!!
John
Houston, Texas USA - Mon Nov 22 8:44:30 2004 from 12.153.133.197
Okay, no html and I still messed it up. I used arrows and it cut out everything between. I hope you scroll and then read backwards or this won't make sense at all. In the other post, after 'nightly', it should've read this: [yes, nightly regardless of whether or not she's exhausted], another who fights with her hubby because she does not want to participate in some of the kinds of sex he wants and thinks he's entitled to because they're married and I could go on but I've posted often enough tonight to get kicked off of here. Do I think I have the corner on the market for bad marriages in my circle of aquaintances? No. I can list lots of good marriages I know of too. The point is, I don't think these cases are so out of the norm, I think those with good marriages don't realize how thankful they should be. I think the world should wake up and realize that marriage is a blessing and a gift and not a license to abuse another person sexually; anyone who thinks marriage automatically makes the sex within it moral should have to switch places with one of the people I mentioned and I'll ask them the same question again afterwards. And I WISH I could bold this in 72 font: If it hurts someone else, it's not moral no matter what a law or a license says. (No exceptions to that for abortion, no exceptions to that because they're 'married'.)
Sass
- Mon Nov 22 3:22:25 2004 from 24.66.94.140
These cases are not the norm. I just thought I'd count (off the top of my head) the cases I know about. If we could use html, this would be a neat list with bullets but rather a messy list than the free-for-all that losers have in Carolyn's book when the html is allowed. So... I know personally three women who have been seriously abused, another one whose daughter was molested by the husband who then wanted to continue his 'right' marital sex with the mom, the one with the prostitute loving husband, another who has more than three kids (all close together) and the husband expects his 'rightful and moral because they're married' sex nightly )Again... if it hurts someone else it's not moral, no matter what a law or a license says.
Sass
- Mon Nov 22 3:11:51 2004 from 24.66.94.140
You've lost me now Lothar. So you're saying that to acknowledge that not all sex within marriage is moral is like trying to justify abortion because of the small %age of pregnancy by rape? That's a huge leap. It is a fact, not all sex within marriage is moral. It is not moral to have sex that will harm someone just because you can. This has nothing to do with abortion. This is simply about the fact that if a married person wants to be moral, they should fix whatever is the problem that may cause the other person harm BEFORE they expect sex from them. I think my point is more akin to why abortion (if you must try to meld the two together here) in the case of rape is wrong. The idea is that one cannot harm another and consider it a moral act. In the abortion, the child is harmed therefore it is not moral. In the case of the immoral marital sex, one party is being harmed, therefore it cannot be moral. Quite simply, it is not moral to hurt someone intentionally. In the case of the abortion, pro-lifers state that a law saying it's ok to abort does not make it right and I'm saying that a marriage certificate does not make it right to harm someone using sex just because the 'law' says it's ok to have that sex. Seems pretty cut and dried to me. Can't hurt someone and be a moral act no matter what 'law' seems to say you can.
Sass
- Mon Nov 22 2:51:51 2004 from 24.66.94.140
Lothar, I just reread your post and perhaps I'm misunderstanding you but it seems you are saying that if you're married, sex is right and that if you're doing right the outcome is irrelevant. So if I understand that, then it means that if you're married, sex is right and if the outcome is that one person is harmed... that is irrelevant. I don't agree. I think that marriage is considered to be real and Christian in certain definitive ways. If a couple's marriage is not being lived out as meant to be, then sex between them is no more moral according to Christian belief, than unmarried sex. To say that the marriage ceremony or certificate is what makes a marriage, morseso than how that marriage is lived out, is wrong. No person has a right to sex from another simply because they're married, that's why there's such a thing as marital rape laws. For example, what would you tell my friend (yes, it is a friend despite how often 'friend' really means 'me', I would *never* mention someone else's name with personal information like this) whose husband had a thing for prostitutes. They were married and so should she have sex with him because it's "right" and "moral" and not only be emotionally harmed but risk getting a disease or can you see that his expectation of sex from her is not moral despite a license that some people would say makes it alright? That's my point. If the world were perfect and all marriages good and right, then perhaps I'd agree that all sex in marriage is right. Sadly, there are those who live lives we should all be thankful are not ours and I simply can't pretend that their situations are irrelevant for the sake of a point I don't believe even God would dispute. After all, that's why my friend could (and did) seek an annulment - even the Catholic Church (those 'nasty' people who don't believe in Divorce ;-)) recognizes that.
Sass
- Mon Nov 22 2:42:22 2004 from 24.66.94.140
I also think you are misunderstanding mine. I also think that the cases you mention are akin to the arguement we see here about not stopping abortion if for no other reason than conception due to rape. It is less than 1%. There may be cases out there like you mention. But both of us would agree that the case is not the norm. The deeper issues need to be found and uprooted.
Lothar
USA - Mon Nov 22 2:38:28 2004 from 168.103.50.187
"I am not sure if I agree with you on the lack of sex in marriage thing, Sass. Intimacy issues usually stem from other ones...namely: bitterness." -|- You misunderstood my point. I wasn't referring to a *lack* of sex in a marriage, I was referring to the having of sex in a marriage where one party is harmed emotionally by that sex. See, if one watches someone close to them being mistreated in a marriage, and knows that that person is submitting to sex that hurts them because the whole situation is bad... it is obvious and clear that the fact the two people are married does not make the sex right. I can list more than one couple I know of where this was the case. The point is, there are times when marriage does NOT make sex right and yet we as a society continue to say sex is right if you're married. I doubt the party being abused and submitting to sex because everyone thinks "it's right since they're married" would appreciate your so easily chalking up their problems as "intimacy issues related to bitterness". Fact is, a marriage license does not make all things right. In the cases I know of, I would suggest the expectation of sex despite the fact it is emotionally harmful is not a moral thing regardless of the fact that a marriage license exists to hold up and say "look, it's moral, we're married." You won't get me to budge on this one, I've got too many people in my life providing me with real life examples of how bad marriages can be and how much harm can be done to a person within them. Sex belongs between people doing it for theexists to hold up and say "look, it's moral, we're married." You won't get me to budge on this one, I've got too many people in my life providing me with real life examples of how bad marriages can be and how much harm can be done to a person within them. Sex belongs between people doing it for the RIGHT reason, and that includes those who happen to be married.
Sass
- Mon Nov 22 1:34:01 2004 from 24.66.94.140
Like I've mentioned, before; Yassir Arafat was not even "Palistinian". He was born in Cairo, Egypt. His parents were from Yemen.
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sun Nov 21 19:27:09 2004 from 205.188.116.138
"Guess Who" is Steve Seeds. It's very easy to tell with an IP locator. Ancient Israel was inhabited by Jews long before the Babylonian, Egyptian, Greek, Roman, Greek, Arab, or Ottoman conquests of the area. Jews took the land in question from the Canaanites not Palistinians. The decendants of the Canaanites are most likely the people who currently inhabit Lebannon, but nobody is certain. The people who are presently referring to themselves as "Palistinians" are in fact Arabs, whose ancestors invaded the area in 671 under the Caliph Salidin. The term "Palistine" is a Roman mispronunciation of Philistine. Nobody can possibly claim Philistine lineage, as these people are lost to history being absorbed or killed by other civilizations. In fact, even if they COULD prove having Philistine ancestors, their origional homeland would be in Crete, not Judea (currently Israel). Guess who is obviously an ignorant troll.
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sun Nov 21 19:14:12 2004 from 205.188.116.138
"The lansd currently called Israel belongs to the Palistinian people." BZZZZZZZT wrong jewish people had the land LONG before the arabs did
Rad
USA - Sun Nov 21 18:24:08 2004 from 65.69.50.13
ADAM, I read your message re. the palistinians homeland. You are wrong, plain and simple. WRONG ! The lansd currently called Israel belongs to the Palistinian people. The land was given to the Jew at the insistance of the American. If Israel did not exist the Twin Towers would still be standing, several thousand American troops would still be alive, and the world would be at peace. The Jew is the primary reason for world unrest. The Jew must be removed from Israel and America should not provide them with weapons. The Jew is unfit to live among civilized people.
GuessWho - (think loser, think BIG LOSER, think idiot, think crying little woosie boy with no job or life....)
USA - Sun Nov 21 16:27:01 2004 from 67.68.35.2
Sass, I am not sure I am following you correctly. Right is right. Outcome is irrelevant. I just so happens that most of the time when right is done, right is the outcome. As for the circus...just because a standard is not being followed doesn't take away its relevancy. Most people in the US & Europe don't agree with your stance on abortion, John...does that make YOUR point of view irrelevant? What am I missing that is so hard to understand with...no sex, no pregnancy, no abortion? Do I need to draw pictures? I am not sure if I agree with you on the lack of sex in marriage thing, Sass. Intimacy issues usually stem from other ones...namely: bitterness.
Lothar
USA - Sat Nov 20 23:44:03 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Looks like killer Bushie got to open up a can'o Whup-@$$ on some tinhorn Chilean security guys. Bush walked back, reached through the Chilean security detail, grabbed his secret service guy and pulled him through. The deputy press secretary reported, later: "He told them they were with him and the issue was resolved."
Vlad (click here for the link) <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sat Nov 20 23:22:13 2004 from 67.174.169.121
Thought some of you might like to read what the ordinary Canadian has to say about Bush's visit here. Scroll down to find the soundoff links.
Sass
- Sat Nov 20 17:54:49 2004 from 206.163.238.201
"According to most moral codes, sex out of wedlock is immoral. Something that is right but done at the wrong time is still wrong." -|- If I've learned anything over the last several years, it's that I didn't know as much as I thought I knew. I can't support that being married makes having sex right; there are people who are married and having what part of society views as 'moral' sex while their personal circumstances *should* render the sex they have to be just as immoral as the out of wedlock sex that is condemned by that part of society. So how then, would anyone be able to know whether one married couple was having good 'moral' sex and another couple isn't? -|- "Something that is wrong cannot be done at the right time to be right. To be right, the right thing must be done at the right time." Exactly! Sometimes, due to circumstances, sex can be wrong even if you're married, yet we don't condemn those in a bad marriage for having sex, we still think it's ok to do something that is bad for emotional reasons because... they're married after all. I see that as no different from the unmarried who have sex that will harm them emotionally. Our moral codes are full of things that we shouldn't do because they will ultimately harm us emotionally (even if we don't think so at the time) so just because there is a marriage license, that doesn't mean that sex between two people married, isn't going to harm one of them emotionally. As any marriage therapist/minister/priest out there and they'll likely agree with that. I think John is just trying to say that he doesn't have all the answers and doesn't think any of us do either. I used to think I had all the answers but am now more inclined to agree that I don't. Watching people you care about go through bad situations makes one learn that in a hurry. Aside from that though, I do agree with Chuck that teenage sex causes heartbreak, is wrong and I've planted my feet firmly on that side of that issue. (Sorry, I've been really trying to refrain from long posts, didn't do so well this time.)
Sass
- Sat Nov 20 15:45:21 2004 from 206.163.238.201
They should legalize torturing spammers
Rad
USA - Sat Nov 20 15:13:50 2004 from 65.69.50.13
What a circus. Anyway I'm sure your abstinence answer should start taking into effect right about now...no, now...ok, 1,2,3, now...darn that embryonic stemm cell research keeps gettin in the way of my abstinence solution.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Sat Nov 20 11:52:46 2004 from 69.151.134.127
Chuck, he got personal with me when I AGREED with him. That's all that this site has devolved into is flameposts and personal attacks. This used to be an intellectual forum where real issues were discussed. Now that the clique has taken over, you can expect to be personally attacked.
Poultricide <pcide@stolenelection.org>
Louisville, KY - Sat Nov 20 8:25:55 2004 from 152.163.100.138
I tried to sign the guest book in the Marvin web site,but it will not work. Could you please check on this? Poor Marvin is missing out on a lot of guests leaving messages!! Thanks
Vince <vzip@flash.net>
Peachtree city, Ga. USA - Sat Nov 20 8:25:46 2004 from 4.154.8.64
Don't you just love how such a "beautiful thing" messes with young girls minds? Ever notice how teenager's beakups seem so much more devistating when they've been having sex? Lothar, John often gets personal when disagreed with. Don't take it personally. ;)
Chuck
USA - Sat Nov 20 6:25:21 2004 from 4.131.34.236
Didn't you mention earlier that you have faith and are confident in it. Do you mind if I ask what it is? According to most moral codes, sex out of wedlock is immoral. I did not condemn anyone for the act. Something that is right but done at the wrong time is still wrong. Something that is wrong cannot be done at the right time to be right. To be right, the right thing must be done at the right time. If we have no standard (this is right, this is wrong) we are lowered to emotion and opinion only. I am sure you would agree that child porn is wrong. There are groups out there that would tell you that it is a "beautiful thing". What makes their opinion any less valid than yours?
Lothar (the chicken, I guess)
USA - Sat Nov 20 0:00:28 2004 from 168.103.50.187
John, why do you attack me personally instead of talking about the issue? I read my posts and never attacked you personally.
Lothar
USA - Fri Nov 19 23:52:49 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Cats may talk back, but because we don’t talk cat and cats don’t talk human we can’t seem to have a ‘meaningful’ conversation. Witch is probably the reason why those friendships are so perfect.
Lem
NJ USA - Fri Nov 19 23:25:16 2004 from 141.150.39.35
Vlad, I think mike talks to his cats and we take him seriously. The issue is whether or not the cats talk back... now *that* would determine whether or not we should worry.
dirtfarmer
- Fri Nov 19 22:35:53 2004 from 206.163.232.93
How are we supposed to seriously consider the opinions of someone who posts messages to a chicken?
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Nov 19 21:05:10 2004 from 64.12.116.138
Now this... this is something everyone needs.
the dirtfarmer (sans dirt)
- Fri Nov 19 19:39:09 2004 from 206.163.238.201
Very interesting site! Your site looks great! Best of luck to you. Jennie
JMcTrey <JMcTrey@worldmail.com>
USA - Fri Nov 19 19:12:02 2004 from 213.145.45.41
Ok, stupid chicken...so you're saying everyone here who has sex out of wedlock is immoral. Interesting...somehow you have taken a beautiful act and made it a bad thing. Well there you have it folks...sex is out of wedlock is an ugly, bad, bad thing...immoral...not quite sure why because it seemed like it actually brought two people together...closer- more intimate, but nope, it's bad.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Fri Nov 19 18:29:47 2004 from 69.151.134.127
In my opinion, morality is the issue. As I discussed once before with Mike (Cooties), it was mentioned that we cannot legislate morality. Unfortunatly, ALL laws are legislated morality. ALL of them. We tend to call "legislated morality" those laws with which we disagree. Adultery, for instance, used to be illegal in this country. When you enter marriage, you enter a legal contract that that act breaks. This is simple an example of what I am talking about...not accusing anyone of adultery.
Lothar
USA - Fri Nov 19 15:39:56 2004 from 168.103.50.187
John, your last line proves Joy's point...there is a difference between sex and love. We live in a "if it feels good-DO IT" society. Look at Europe...I don't want a society like they have. If I remember right, you told us that we should not care what Europe thinks regarding the defense of our country...why is it now that you reference them? Do you agree with them on this issue so reference them...but don't when it comes to defense so don't reference them?
Lothar
USA - Fri Nov 19 15:35:33 2004 from 168.103.50.187
I would like to submit my website for inclusion in your web ring. Thank you.
Duane Roelands <disintegratorblog@gmail.com>
Paradise, PA USA - Fri Nov 19 14:13:58 2004 from 146.145.224.93
Also, I don't have a problem at all with abstinence- if for nothing else, disease control. But to think this will somehow fix the abortion problems is incredibly naive. I have been having sex with the same woman for nearly fifteen years now, but I would never chastise, or try and change, someone who has never been married, or is not married now, and chooses to have a sexual relationship with their partner. In fact I'm sure they call that love, which is a beautiful thing.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Fri Nov 19 14:00:08 2004 from 12.40.29.178
Joy. I’m glad you are not having sex out of wedlock…but then again you are not really the target audience are you. Sorry about the divorce. I’m also sorry more and more people are having sex and you cannot adjust your faith to fit reality. And for the record I knew I was talking to a chicken. I can tell by the simplistic writing style. Also you’re not obligated to respond to what I have to say. Moreover, unless I engage you directly why don’t you simply provide some links like you always do and prove it to me how people are having less sex…here and around the world, we are not an island. Lastly, I am confident in my faith as well as my opinions. And if you think slipping in veiled attempts to question my faith you are solidifying your own, you are not only fooling no one, you are placing yourself in a class of self-righteousness that makes me think you are lacking a true confidence in your own morality. Maybe you should stop seeing yourself as a liberator of souls and realize that is for God alone. Chickens are so stupid.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Fri Nov 19 13:35:43 2004 from 12.40.29.178
John is exactly right. You tell-em, buddy! Abstinence just doesn't work at all. I've tried, but the chicks just won't leave me alone.
Poultricide <pcide@stolenelection.org>
Louisville, KY - Fri Nov 19 12:41:11 2004 from 172.209.156.237
John - This is the only comment I'm going to make concerning this subject to you, but abstinence messages DO work and there are plenty of studies that show it. I personally know MANY young people who have, are and will continue to practice abstinence because it's a matter of FAITH to them. I don't expect someone like you to understand it, but just because you don't hang with those crowds doesn't mean they don't exist. And the young people don't even have to have 'faith', many of them are bright enough and care enough about themselves to be abstinent. It's a very wholesome and wonderful way to live. Many adults do too by the way... I'm one of them. Unless and until I marry, I will not have sex... PERIOD. And I was divorced YEARS ago. It's not that difficult. I'm sorry you're so jaded and your outlook so incredibly negative. And what Europe thinks... well... whatever! Although I know the abstinence message works wherever it is taught. Just because something doesn't reach 100% of the poplulation doesn't mean it shouldn't be taught, because it does work for a lot. And that is also why we 'religious' folks like to convert people... because it brings change to a person's heart and outlook that make them see themselves and others differently. And they find out what joy comes from living a wholesome life where you respect the other person too much to use them for sexual gratification alone. Anyway... maybe stop trying to prevent decent messages just because you personally don't understand them.
Joy
USA - Fri Nov 19 12:14:13 2004 from 68.113.38.11
Like I said…symbolism over substance. When was the last time you saw people having less sex? Go to Europe and ask them what they think about abstinence. I’m more interested in really addressing abortion issues instead of dreamy answers. The solution is yet again passing laws that protect people from themselves because they simply don’t do it on their own…especially something as primitive as the human sex drive. If you really want to send a message, send one that says, go ahead and have sex because we know you will, but oh, by the way, if you do and you want an abortion, you may be risking your life at the hands of a foreign abortion clinic
John
Houston, Texas USA - Fri Nov 19 9:52:36 2004 from 12.40.29.178
Sass,...Hey, I liked eighties big hair. (It was all Reagan's fault, by the way.)
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Nov 19 8:00:38 2004 from 152.163.100.138
Beth. Where did anyone from here make a claim of being all holy? I do wish you'd post something other than inflammatory generalizations that you've obviously not thought through. It's so late nineties/Leftgrll. Try real hard and I'm sure you can post *something* of substance that we can actually discuss because this is just plain silly. -|- Oh geez! I thought all the comments like those from 'Dawg' had gone the way of eighties big hair. Heck, that post could've been copy/pasted from the 1998 (or earlier) archives. Since ALL of those points have been addressed many times over at least as far back as then... I suggest Dawg spends time in the archive, reading up before posting more nonsense that has been explained/debated/refuted/laughed at *years* ago. -|- Chuck!! Get me a beer already, Vlad's busy sweeping. While you're at it, get one for Carolyn too. I think she deserves one for all that she's tolerated in her gb 'lo these many years! (Dammit woman, we've all told you to be more INtolerant);-)
Sass
- Fri Nov 19 3:01:50 2004 from 24.66.94.140
hey - i'm an eighth grader and am doing a persuasive speech in english about abortion. i am definitely pro-life. killing unborn children is pure cruelty, no excuses. i can't believe these women actually have such faith in themselves to do such a thing. jamming scissors onto a fetus's skull and prying it open is a total chaos. more support to pro-life. hopefully one day all these pro-choice people will realize that God will take away their lives and decline their forgiveness in agreeing to such a cruel thing all their life. pro-life forever. anti-abortion for life!
maria
USA - Thu Nov 18 23:35:10 2004 from 68.163.100.177
I am ready for 'Leaning Right' to be added to the ring. Tony McNorton
Tony McNorton <leaningright@gmail.com>
Cedar Rapids, IA USA - Thu Nov 18 16:29:12 2004 from 12.217.177.54
Don't HTML tags work on this guestbook? How do those advertizers make the text bold?
Lothar
USA - Thu Nov 18 16:18:14 2004 from 168.103.50.187
OVER-SIMPLIFIES??? It doesn't get more simple. Just because most people couldn't or don't do it doesn't mean that it is brain dead. Our society has become more and more immoral and abortion is the symptom, not the cause . Abstinence is not working because it isn't taught. If parents would be parents, this wouldn't be an issue. Let me state it again: I have seen it work 100's of times. I have seen couples wait until their wedding night. I have also seen the opposite...guess which one works and which one doesn't. But what we do is let our TV's rear our kids and wonder why they live like Hollywood's facade. Something difficult to do is usually worth the investment. Our divorce rate of those that GET married is over 50%. When will we realize that we are not doing something right???
Lothar
USA - Thu Nov 18 16:17:11 2004 from 168.103.50.187
While Lothar over-simplifies the issue of abstinence and abortion, he is correct on the rest of it. You cannot compare war with abortion, one is a defenseless killing. I do think the abstinence response is kind of brain dead. Everybody knows that already. We also know abstinence is not working and has never worked because it is impractical. It is fun to say- hard to apply, and that is about it. I would allow for rape, but the issue then becomes proving you were raped. Opponents would argue reporting the rape to receive an abortion would twice victimize the victim. But hey, the alternative is raising a child born out of rape so I would think it would fly. It would also serve as a type of check and balance against lying about a rape to get an abortion. The percentage of women who would do this would be very small in my opinion. At any rate abortion out of inconvenience is immoral- don’t see how this can ever change.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Thu Nov 18 15:44:57 2004 from 146.130.107.217
Oh, and Mr. Dawg, did you protest the war in Kosovo? Why not? What about the time we were in the Sudan? What about when we were about to land in Haiti? Why not? Answer: Because they were all military campaigns under Clinton and the MSM was FOR them. Keep the Kool-Aid coming!
Lothar
USA - Thu Nov 18 15:34:24 2004 from 168.103.50.187
Wow, Mr. Dawg, could you contradict yourself any more? First, there is no "true" feminism...yet she is a "feminist or she's a masochist". Don't get us wrong...we are for a woman's right to choose: Choose not to jump into the sack until she's ready to take responsibility. Tell that man "NO". As for rape, that accounts for less than 1% of all abortions. Women DO have rights to their own bodies. DON'T let that guy TOUCH you!! No, you are right, simply telling a kid "no" does no good...being a good parent will stop it, however. I've seen it work 100's of times. No one here is "for" war...but unfortunatly it is still necessary. I'll bet you would have protested WWII where we wiped out Nazism (just to come back in the Democrat party), freed thousands of Jews, and stopped three dictators bent on killing us. I'll bet you would have protested the first Gulf War where we freed thousands of Kuwait people. "Rightgrrl" is an oxymoron? How? I am sure you didn't do this, but before you reply with the typical liberal emotion-filled, fact-starved drivel, go and read all the other liberals that have posted here. You are all the same. Throw out a few ugly comments then expect us not to react. When we do, call us mean spirited...but STILL no facts.
Lothar
USA - Thu Nov 18 14:39:33 2004 from 168.103.50.187
First there is no "true" feminism, feminism is feminism is feminism. Either a woman is a feminist or she's a masochist. Second, I don't know when feminism became about "saving" or "valuing" life, not even the webster dictionary has that definition. Feminism is about equality between the two sexes. MEN have SO many choices when they impregnate a woman, why shouldn't the person who's going to go through 9 months of hell have to birth someone who's not going to be loved after the "father" leaves, or she raped. THAT'S WHY IT IS A CHOICE. I'm sure rapists think about contraception when they attack their victims. SO, until rape is none existant arbortion should be A CHOICE. I don't understand the logic behind women don't have rights to their own bodies, yet people like you do. Third, if your so prolife why would you want to make abortions illegal for women? Don't you know women die that way? I'ts really silly of you to think that'll stop abortions, just like it is silly of conservatives to think that telling their children "just say 'no'" is going to stop them from having sex. Third, how is a person who is so "pro life" makes fun of people who protest the war? IT IS A WAR! people are being killed, remember? Stick to your argument and don't use it to fit only certain situations. Fourth, "rightgrrl" is an oxymoron!!
G Dawg <semor_skinner@yahoo.com>
NYC, NY USA - Thu Nov 18 9:57:33 2004 from 129.22.33.43
Yo Bethie I NEVER claimed to be all holy
Rad
USA - Wed Nov 17 19:48:48 2004 from 65.69.50.13
Well yu claim to be all holy and stuff and when comment like that are made us "dumb" liberal get a little ticked. Practice what you preach.
Beth
USA - Wed Nov 17 19:13:45 2004 from 129.44.6.92
Hey Sass, I resemble that sexist remark!!
Chuck
USA - Wed Nov 17 16:26:31 2004 from 12.169.49.2
Vlad, you *must* have something better to do than actually view all the links at that sorryeverybody site... please tell me you do! Go clean the chat if you don't... Chuck seems to be too busy these days to keep a clean house, he could probably use your help. After all, pushing a broom is 'men's' work. :-D
Sass
- Wed Nov 17 15:42:38 2004 from 24.66.94.144
The internet can be a great thing, but spam is the worst of it...well, maybe porn is worse, but it is a close second. Kofi Annan is refusing to provide Congress with oil for food documents...mainly relating to the company his son worked for.
John
Houston, Texas USA - Wed Nov 17 12:36:11 2004 from 146.130.90.238
Goatboy has now been moved to the very top of page 452. Gee if, an anarchist pagan dressed in a goat suit opposes Bush, then what can I say? Hey, who wouldn't be convinced by THAT? Bush....Baaaaaaaaaad. (w00t!)
Vlad (click here for the link)
USA - Wed Nov 17 9:16:49 2004 from 64.12.116.138
I'm doing a school assignment and came across your site. personally I believe in a right to choose, but I like your site because you thought about the subject and aren't some fanatic, and don't try to impose your views. Um, yes. That's my speech for the day. thanks.
beck
Australia - Wed Nov 17 5:13:06 2004 from 139.168.225.85
...or scroll down to #8 from the top and take a look at Pat and her "friend" Chris. Eeeeeeeeewwwwwww!
Vlad (click here for the link) <vlad@notsorryatall.org>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Tue Nov 16 21:17:50 2004 from 205.188.116.138
BWWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA! Just take a look at some of the additions to sorryeverybody.com; especially, scroll down to the ninth picture from the top and look at the idiot in the goat suit.
Vlad (clickonthelink) <vlad@imnotsorryatall.com>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Tue Nov 16 20:48:59 2004 from 205.188.116.138
w00t!
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Tue Nov 16 20:44:01 2004 from 205.188.116.138
Spammers be CASTRATED!!
Lothar
USA - Tue Nov 16 18:22:42 2004 from 168.103.50.187
I don't mean to be ungrateful. I'm glad the guestbook is back. But can something be done about the spam? If not, that's ok.
Aaron
USA - Tue Nov 16 17:20:41 2004 from 67.41.223.34
If Beth really cared about finding the real killers, she would join forces with OJ Simpson, Scott Peterson, and the Ramseys and help them in their search, instead of accusing people on guestbooks who had nothing to do with it.
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Tue Nov 16 7:56:31 2004 from 152.163.100.138
Linkage for Beth (You other folk have probably read this long ago)
Sass
- Tue Nov 16 2:41:20 2004 from 24.66.94.144
Beth, odd that you think it's so out of line for someone to say you don't have a mind but you didn't see anything wrong with labeling us all doctor killers. Go figure. For the record, I have never killed a doctor and the pro-life site I used to run had a section speaking out against that kind of violence. I have never, ever yelled anything mean or threatening at an abortion supporter and yet as I've taken part in peaceful, silent protest of abortion, I've had some pretty nasty things yelled at me while friends have been physically accosted for merely holding a sign. Hmmm. Now you've got me recalling the article I wrote discussing pro-abortion violence against pro-lifers. There are lots of examples of that and strangely enough... we didn't label you guilty of the crimes of other stupid abortion supporting violence mongers, did we?
Sass
- Tue Nov 16 2:34:45 2004 from 24.66.94.144
Rad - I wasn't trying to reason, I was making a point (or even a promise??) about how it's a sure bet when someone shows up lumping us all into the 'doctor killer' box, they're bound to be treated with a lack of hospitality to equal their lack of common sense. -||- Adam, of *course* I think you're cool but to be fair to the rightful recipient of the 'cool' moniker, it's a given that Aaron is cool. Sheesh; you guys with your 'A' names... try remember how blonde I am. ;-)
Sass
- Tue Nov 16 2:17:08 2004 from 24.66.94.144
Yo-Yo, Pimpdog...maybe you would feel more at home at THIS site.
click on the link <click on the link>
USA - Mon Nov 15 20:05:05 2004 from 172.151.4.85
I WANT CHEESY-POOFS!
Eric Cartman
South Park, USA - Mon Nov 15 19:12:49 2004 from 168.143.113.5
Clay-dude...like you are sooo right. That is just so deep. Man, they just want to takeaway are freedom, man. Uncool! Bummer! Like, you know, the founding fathers all grew hemp, man. AND they had long hair, so man, this country was founded by stoners, man. Thomas Washington and George Jefferson used to get stoned all the time, dude. That's soo cool.
Rasta Vlad <vlad@goodtimes.net>
Cosmic Coyote Ranch, CA - Mon Nov 15 13:58:06 2004 from 172.143.123.20
Sass: to give credit where it is due, it was Aaron who was said to be cool, not I. But, maybe YOU think I'm cool. :)
Adam
USA - Mon Nov 15 13:27:57 2004 from 64.236.245.243
I'm sorry, but I just can't read all of your post because I smoked too much pot and I now have no attention span. Sorry.
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Mon Nov 15 2:09:28 2004 from 64.12.116.138
I find that drug prohibitionists like to use circular reasoning in supporting their viewpoint. I noticed that your section on the reason we need drug prohibition often uses statistics out of context as is also common with prohibitionists. For example you say that legzlizing drugs would not eliminate the black market. You site the legal status of alcohol and tobacco as an example. In that, you say that we limit the sale of alcohol and tobacco to minors, pilots, military personnel, police officers and pregnant women which creates a black market for those already legal drugs. My answer to that? Number 1: You take the anti prohibitionist position out of context when you say that we advocate selling legalized marijuana to minors. Noone is suggesting that. Like most prohibitionists,you're setting up a straw man to knock it down because that's one of your few defenses of your position. Number 2: None of those other people you mentioned a restricted from buying alcohol or cigarretes. That's an obvious lie on your part. We have warning labels for those people. We also have requirements that some those people do not consume such substances while on the job. But there is no law that says a Marine can't buy a pack of Marlboros or that a airline pilot can't have a martini on his day off. Number 3: Let's go the extra mile and assume that your imagined laws existed. I don't recall hearing of the Bloods doing turf warfare to sell packs of Kools on the street corners of Compton. I don't remeber ever hearing of the Bloods doing a drive by on the Crips,accidentally killing a 5 year old kid, because the Bloods accused the Crips of selling Colt 45 Malt Liquor on their turf. There are so many obvious clues that drug prohibition does not work. I've seen all of these reasons cited by people who argue against prohibition, that is with the exception of one. Many people who think drugs should be illegal seem to assume that drugs were always outlawed. I don't want to insult anyone's intelligence but is that what some of you seem to think? If you do think drugs have always been illegal though, I have news for you... they certainly haven't. This persons website conveniently omits that embarrassing truth. You say we tried drug prohibition for a few years in the early 1900's. That's not true. THE UNITED STATES HAD NO DRUG PROHIBITION IN ANY FORM FOR ITS FIRST 128 YEARS! Until 1914, there were no federal laws in this country that prohibited any drug whatsoever. Nor where there any federal laws that so much as even attempted to regulate any drug in any manner whatsoever. It wasn't until much later, in the 50's and 60's that the federal government started moving to actually illegalize drugs like cocaine, heroin and marijuana. On that note, I'd like to ask the drug prohibitionists a few questions... Most of today's common illegal drugs have been around for ages. Cocaine was widely known of and widely available in the 1800's. People have smoked marijuana for at least 400 years now. Hallucinogenic mushrooms have been used since prehistoric times. Opium dates back to ancient Greece. Why do we all of the sudden need laws against these drugs now when we didn't before. The underlying core reasoning behind many with your opinion is that a person's individual liberties could have a PERCEIVED ill effect on society as a whole. That's the same reasoning behind obesity laws, seat belt laws, gun control and a host of other socialist ideas such as your drug prohibition.
Clay Rains - I like to copy and paste things. <clay@clayrains.com>
Trenton, MO USA - Mon Nov 15 2:03:33 2004 from 216.139.101.136
Hey, all you Michael Moore fans. Check this out...
Vlad (click here for link) <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Mon Nov 15 0:41:14 2004 from 64.12.116.138
"The Israelis are always in the right; the Palestinians are always in the wrong”. Oh the unfairness of it all…….. Unfortunately we are not talking about (as the comment might suggest) the quibbles of the one son who as far as he can fathom is assigned all the house shores week after week while his brothers break Xbox world records………. We are instead talking about strapping a child (a son) with explosives and sending him to a horrific death to as public place as possible……… I think right and wrong doesn’t even begging to describe the matter between Israel and displaced refugees also known as Palestinians.
Lem
Jersey City, NJ USA - Mon Nov 15 0:11:26 2004 from 151.198.9.244
"The Israelis are always in the right; the Palestinians are always in the wrong. " Hey! Works for me!
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sun Nov 14 20:01:56 2004 from 64.12.116.138
The Israelis are always in the right; the Palestinians are always in the wrong. When Israeli children die as a result of Palestinian action, that's terrorism. When Palestinian children die as a result of Israeli action, that's simply defending the homeland. Killing abortionists is wrong, but killing people in a faraway land is a just and noble cause. By jove, I think I've got it! That's life and death according to
Gargaro's version of the right wing.
USA - Sun Nov 14 17:56:31 2004 from 168.143.113.5
please pardon any typos
Beth
USA - Sun Nov 14 17:40:49 2004 from 70.18.97.215
Do you think this is ok to say something like this that we do not have minds
Beth
USA - Sun Nov 14 17:39:50 2004 from 70.18.97.215
Well it is comments lik rads saying we do not have minds that is why we lash out at you!
Beth
USA - Sun Nov 14 17:38:08 2004 from 70.18.97.215
Whoa.....Carolyn thinks I'm cool. That just made my weekend. :)
Aaron
USA - Sun Nov 14 17:34:05 2004 from 67.41.223.34
Come-on and get your "w00t!" t-shirt, today. You can be the coolest in the dorm.
Vlad (get your "w00t!" t-shirt today) <vlad@bellnet.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sun Nov 14 15:10:10 2004 from 205.188.116.138
hey , i think you are a unique INDIVIDUAL with your own ideas about politics, i love rightgrrl, you rock!
Jo
USA - Sun Nov 14 13:26:17 2004 from 137.124.130.86
Sass Don't bother trying to rationalize with Liberals and 'bortheads it DOES NOT work Libs/'borts don't/can't think they "feel" 'sides you'd be fighting a battle of the wits with an unarmed "person"
Rad
USA - Sun Nov 14 5:51:45 2004 from 65.69.50.13
Beth, if you came here without your own preconceived ideas of the regular visitors, you might just find out that they're all as cool as Adam! Why don't you try a real discussion on the issues where you differ with people here instead of the inflammatory generalizations you came with? It's just so 'amazing' how coming here with the 'I'd like to have an intelligent debate' attitude makes *all* the difference in the world in how you get treated. -||- Hi to all, and to Melissa in Philly - It's good to see you back too!!
Sass
- Sun Nov 14 5:01:48 2004 from 24.66.94.144
"Sheeesh... libs can never make up their minds! " Joy I wasn't aware Libs had minds
Rad
USA - Sat Nov 13 23:46:24 2004 from 65.69.50.13
Why the election didn't really matter:
+ 0 >< ! (
USA - Sat Nov 13 23:13:38 2004 from 207.44.180.48
Vlad apparently the neon pink hairdye caused her brain to die
Rad
USA - Sat Nov 13 22:25:46 2004 from 65.69.50.13
Hey kids, you can get your OWN "w00t" t-shirt. Just like your hero on sorryeverybody.com wears all of the time. Think Geek! w00t!
Vlad (click on the link) <vlad@vladtv.net>
- Sat Nov 13 18:39:26 2004 from 64.12.116.138
AAAAKKKKKGGGGHHH! Take a look at 2nd from the top on page 34. The hair/eyes...was she conceived near Chernobyl? Those are not colours found in nature.
Vlad (click on the link) <vlad@vladtv.net>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Sat Nov 13 17:53:49 2004 from 205.188.116.138
The French have been using Iraq as cover to ‘in the middle of the night’ as it were, while the MSM (main stream media) scuppers (frustration release valve) Iraq, France has a free hand to compete with the US as a world power..... The French are more interested in elevating their image to the world and to themselves than in doing anything for, truly to help, the rest of the world...... ‘Prestige’ is the most important thing to them…… They know that right now we cannot afford to engage them in this popularity contest. Eventually they will get theirs.
Lem
NJ USA - Sat Nov 13 17:50:51 2004 from 138.89.176.249
Speaking of France...I don't remember THEM getting UN approval before attacking back in the Ivory Coast?????
Lothar
USA - Sat Nov 13 16:37:25 2004 from 209.180.232.163
Joy: I am a little confused by what you mean that we can not make up our mind! Carolyn: you might not remember me but I am glad to see that after all these years rightgirl is still telling young innocent women what to do with their bodies. I am glad to see you have decided to support all these un- wanted babies This was my entry in your "hate mail" page but I was calm compared to some of the people who sent you mail. if anyone threatens to hurt you, you should call the police. I do not have that aol address anymore Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 09:10:20 EDT From: H2474@aol.com Subject: Re: Entry to Rightgrrl Guestbook With people like you Sweetie things will get messed up two word describe you can we say Stuck UP Let say it boys and girls STUCK UP STUCK UP --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beth
USA - Sat Nov 13 15:41:35 2004 from 68.236.147.163
Sheeesh... libs can never make up their minds! One of the newer pics on the Crybaby site shows satan himself saying even he is sorry... (which seems to me irrefutable evidence that Bush is the good guy!) But, according to the Dems, Bush IS satan... So satan is their friend? Their enemy? France? I guess they voted FOR satan before they voted against him... or maybe it was the other way around. It must be all that nuance that normal thinking people just don't get. :oD
Joy
USA - Sat Nov 13 15:19:20 2004 from 68.113.38.11
Carolyn is awesome Just thought I'd mention that
Rad
USA - Sat Nov 13 14:51:22 2004 from 65.69.50.13
Carolyn I am sorry that I offended you about Killing abortion doctors.. but I am so sick Of people accusing Democrats of doing nasty things also
beth
USA - Sat Nov 13 11:00:39 2004 from 70.18.109.114
Hey Carolyn, I bought one of your Daffy suck cups, but it wasn't what I thought that it would be. I crawled into dumpsters for over a week to collect enough aluminum cans to buy it and I still ain't getting any action. I want my money back!
Ted P. <tedtheped@aol.com>
Columbus , Library Ohio - Sat Nov 13 9:35:52 2004 from 172.139.166.36
Rocks! Flash templates Flash intro download affordable Flash templates affordable Flash intro cheap flash intro free templates dreamweaver templates flash design templates flash site builder trendy flash flash design templates affordable flash design
Flash <suzy>
Alesund, Nikol USA - Sat Nov 13 5:53:41 2004 from 62.221.33.103
Levitra http://tramadol.pharmacy-online-center.com
Tramadol Pills <tovsuhov@mail.ru>
Russia, NA USA - Sat Nov 13 5:50:09 2004 from 203.197.234.177
Didrex http://www.pharmacy-online-center.com/german/index.html
Diet Pills <tovsuhov@mail.ru>
Russia, NA USA - Sat Nov 13 5:49:45 2004 from 203.197.234.177
Didrex http://www.pharmacy-online-center.com
Diet Pills <tovsuhov@mail.ru>
Russia, NA USA - Sat Nov 13 5:49:28 2004 from 203.197.234.177
Didrex http://www.pharmacy-online-center.com/english/index.html
Diet Pills <tovsuhov@mail.ru>
Russia, NA USA - Sat Nov 13 5:48:25 2004 from 203.197.234.177
Didrex http://www.pharmacy-online-center.com/spanich/index.html
Diet Pills <tovsuhov@mail.ru>
Russia, NA USA - Sat Nov 13 5:48:24 2004 from 203.197.234.177
Didrex http://www.pharmacy-online-center.com/russian/index.html
Diet Pills <tovsuhov@mail.ru>
Russia, NA USA - Sat Nov 13 5:48:18 2004 from 203.197.234.177
Didrex http://www.pharmacy-online-center.com/french/index.html
Diet Pills <tovsuhov@mail.ru>
Russia, NA USA - Sat Nov 13 5:48:18 2004 from 203.197.234.177
Didrex http://www.pharmacy-online-center.com/portugalian/index.html
Diet Pills <tovsuhov@mail.ru>
Russia, NA USA - Sat Nov 13 5:48:15 2004 from 203.197.234.177
Levitra http://viagra.pharmacy-online-center.com
Viagra Pills <tovsuhov@mail.ru>
Russia, NA USA - Sat Nov 13 5:48:15 2004 from 203.197.234.177
Didrex http://www.pharmacy-online-center.com/italian/index.html
Diet Pills <tovsuhov@mail.ru>
Russia, NA USA - Sat Nov 13 5:48:15 2004 from 203.197.234.177
This site rocks! Flash templates Flash intro download affordable Flash templates affordable Flash intro cheap flash intro free templates dreamweaver templates flash design templates
SWF <hi tech>
New York, Kansas USA - Sat Nov 13 5:38:25 2004 from 62.221.33.103
Here is one for the Sorry Everyone site.
Lothar
USA - Sat Nov 13 4:26:45 2004 from 209.180.232.163
MUGU IT IS A PINKY ONE.
Nwn Mugu <NGBA @HOTMAIL.COM>
FLRIDA, FLORIDA USA - Sat Nov 13 3:10:30 2004 from 80.179.102.213
Hey Carolyn you need Pinky and the Brain stuff in your store Btw John Kerry Resembles Pinky
Rad
USA - Fri Nov 12 23:53:43 2004 from 65.69.50.13
Hi CG.... I have good news and bad news. The good news the Jury system is working again in California the way it’s meant to work. A little too late for Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown, but who says you can have everything? The bad news is; proper credit will not go to Bush...... Yes Bush. The reelection of Bush is another example of the pendulum swinging our way. We are not going to get everything we want, we always seem to have a McCain or a Specter making sure we don’t (and they are supposedly on our side) but all the signs have been pointing in our direction........ The Main Stream Media, conservative’s loyal opposition, is in disarray, loosing audience almost as fast as its credibility....... We have once again a decent majority in the Senate, the senate has been acting as Bush’s daytime cell phone stalker; killing all his minutes...... Arafat is dead. Saddam is in jail and Afghanistan is a pseudo democratic state. Maybe it’s just me, but I’m a sucker for good news.
Lem
NJ USA - Fri Nov 12 22:47:24 2004 from 141.150.76.151
Hey kids! Here's a reminder to always PROOFREAD YOUR WORK. (nothing to do with this guestbook... I just found that my 'Daffy Duck Kids Cup' was listed as 'Daffy Suck Kids Cup'. Great. No wonder no one was buying it - DUH!!!)
Carolyn - Daffy suck cups and more!!
USA - Fri Nov 12 22:40:20 2004 from 68.46.174.45
"I imagine Carlyn could make an even nicer living than she does already if she added parking fees for all the brains that are left outside of her websites. Really Carolyn, it could be a nice add-on to your other business and after all, you've been good enough to let them park their brains outside your site for so many years now...." LOL!You're RIGHT! I could be making so much more $$$$ (of course, I'm a Republican so I must be making millions ALREADY) if I just implemented parking fees! And then if they don't pay, I could impose fees with interest. Wow, I can think of a few people who seem to wander back here for years... now I know why... it's my free brain parking! What kind of business woman am I???
Carolyn - phht! no looneystore! PARKING FEES! ;)
USA - Fri Nov 12 22:28:22 2004 from 68.46.174.45
"I remember rightgrril fromn a while back and Carolyn did not like me disagreeing with her either must be a pro-life thing" Sorry, I don't remember you actually. The rightgrrl site still has the guestbook up (I refuse to believe that it will be dormant forever!) so perhaps you could point me to one our discussions...if you feel like it. Anyway... if I disagree with you, it's some kind of problem, yet you can disagree with me and throw out wild accusations that have no basis in fact (killing abortion doctors, not caring about troops dying at war..) ... and that is somehow different?? Of course I just got back to reading things here after two days and I see many here have made similar points. Anyway, Beth sweetie, I'm so glad you came back after I was so intolerant. :-) How about you respond to one.. just ONE of my points and maybe I'll stop being so mean. :-) And you should like Aaron, he's pretty cool...
Ps - ok, hello everyone... I have to say I am enjoying reading the things here, and the pictures are cracking me up! (heh heh - who posted the ted thing? :) )
Carolyn
USA - Fri Nov 12 22:21:48 2004 from 68.46.174.45
aaron I like you stay cool:-)
Beth
USA - Fri Nov 12 18:22:18 2004 from 70.18.111.65
One other thing. In a war, innocent people can be killed but they are NEVER targeted by us. In abortion, a baby is killed on purpose. As late Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said "Even a dog can distinguish between being stumbled over and purposefully kicked."
Aaron
USA - Fri Nov 12 16:50:45 2004 from 67.41.223.34
Beth: I always have a problem with war deaths. I hate war. 50 million people were killed in WWII, many by the United States. But, there was no choice. It was a last resort. Abortion is only a last resort if the mother's life is in danger. //Loth: you are correct. I left out many things. I didn't want to overwhelm the guy so I gave him the briefest of sketches. You make a good point. If anything, Israel giving back the Sinai to Egypt proved they were and are serious about giving up land for peace. Now, if only the Palestinians felt the same.
Adam
USA - Fri Nov 12 16:43:51 2004 from 64.236.245.243
Beth, your innocence shines through. Troops are not innocent. They are trained soldiers who are trying to kill our guys. That is what happens in a war. To compare that with puncturing a hole in an innocent baby's head and sucking its brain out is the height of ignorance.
Aaron
USA - Fri Nov 12 16:41:18 2004 from 67.41.223.34
Basically what I am saying is that most likely everyone in the "board/guestbook" has no problem with the war innocent troops have been killed not to mention innocent people in iraq, but you say abortion is killing ,well war is killing also. am I right ?
Beth
USA - Fri Nov 12 16:38:56 2004 from 70.18.97.214
Adam, you didn't mention that in the 6-Day war of 1967...Israel was attacked by Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon. It was a Jewish holiday and Israel did nothing to provoke the attack except exsist. They fought back valiantly and won a lot of area. Explain to me why they had to give the Sinai back???
Lothar
USA - Fri Nov 12 16:22:24 2004 from 209.180.232.163
right again, Vlad. Arafat was a creation of the Soviet Union, who trained him as a terrorist to spread global marxism. He was no Palestinian Freedom Fighter.
Adam
USA - Fri Nov 12 14:29:40 2004 from 64.236.245.243
The "Palestine" charade is even more apparent by the fact the Arafat is not even from there. He was born in Egypt and his parents were Yemeni. He most likely refused the proposed Camp David settlement because he would have lost "the struggle" and would no longer be a leader of a revolution but a despot of a corrupt basketcase of a thirdworld country. Unable to blame the Jews for all their problems, he would have had to address and attempt to solve actual problems as a head of state. Even his backwards ignorant savage countrymen would have eventually realized that he was robbing them and that they had been conned by a swindler.
Vlad <vlad@vlad.tv>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Nov 12 14:17:23 2004 from 152.163.100.138
Check out this article on abortion and the movies: http://www.opinionjournal.com/taste/?id=110005887. Also, if you haven't already, see "Ray." Not only is it a great movie, there is a very good scene where Ray's mistress tells him she is pregnant. Ray mumbles something about "taking care of it" and his lover becomes so angry she hits him! Not very nice to hit a blind man, but Ray Charles, despite his brilliance, wasn't that nice of a person. The woman has the baby, but . . . well, I won't tell you the rest. Go see the movie!
Melissa In Philly
Philly where else?, PA USA - Fri Nov 12 14:13:24 2004 from 66.237.219.26
Oops. Try this one.
Aaron
USA - Fri Nov 12 12:19:46 2004 from 67.41.223.34
Hey guys! Pass this on!
Aaron (click)
USA - Fri Nov 12 12:18:04 2004 from 67.41.223.34
I did, yes. They have made every mistake imaginable.
Adam
USA - Fri Nov 12 12:12:09 2004 from 64.236.245.243
Adam, Did you know that the Palestinians aided the nazi's during world war two?
Rad
USA - Fri Nov 12 11:59:52 2004 from 65.69.50.13
Aaron: ugh! There was a performance artist (whose name i have thankfully forgotten) who had AIDs and would slash himself during his...uh...show. Then he would spell words in his blood onto paper towels. This guy reminds me of that guy.
Adam
USA - Fri Nov 12 11:59:22 2004 from 64.236.245.243
This is disgusting. The top picture.
Aaron (click)
USA - Fri Nov 12 11:44:54 2004 from 67.41.223.34
guess: allow me to give you a short synopsis. i think it might help you given your idea that the Palestinians are without a homeland due to Jews stealing it. There has never been a Palestinian homeland. Prior to WWI, the land in question (populated always by both Arabs and Jews) was controlled by the Turks (Ottoman empire). After the Central Powers lost WWI, the area came under the control of Britain under a League of Nations mandate. Both Arabs and Jews chafed at this colonial occupation and fought the British. After WWII, European colonial occupation was in retreat world wide. The British fought both the Arabs and the Jews and finally decided to leave this disputed area. The U.N. voted to create two nations there, an Arab nation and a Jewish nation. Both sides had wanted ALL the land so neither side was crazy about the formulation but the Jews accepted it. The Arabs did not. They, along with all the surrounding Arab countries, attacked Israel and tried to drive all the Jews out. The Jews fought back and expanded their territory to include more defensible borders. But, they still left the Arabs in control of both the West Bank and Gaza. Guess what? That Palestinian land was NOT accepted as a homeland by the arabs living there because they wanted ALL the land, including all of Israel. Not only that, it was stolen and occupied, not by Jews but by the nation of Jordan in the west bank and the nation of Egypt in Gaza. For the next 20 years, the Arab countries and the Palestinians used the West Bank and Gaza, not to declare a free Palestine, but to use the area as a launching pad to fight war after war against Israel. Finally, in 1967, the Israeli fought back well enough to occupy those lands. From that day to today it has been Israeli policy to give the land back so long as the Paletinians recogize Israel's right to exist and allow Israel defensible borders. Neither Jordan nor Egypt while they controlled this land ever offered the Palestinians a homeland. Indeed, Jordan forced all the Palestinians out of Jordan in a ruthless campaign. Israel offered them a homeland time and time again. But, the embezzling third-rate Hitler, Arafat, (along with all the Arab nations except finally Egypt and Jordan) have refused and stay in a declared state of war with Israel. The Palestinians do not want a two state solution.
Adam
USA - Fri Nov 12 10:09:41 2004 from 64.236.245.243
A freedom fighter
Anti Terrorist
USA - Fri Nov 12 9:53:50 2004 from 65.69.50.13
So Arafat is a terrorist and the Jew Sharron is what ?
GW
USA - Fri Nov 12 9:48:10 2004 from 65.92.127.147
No GuessWho the world has one less murdering slimebag terrorist May he rot in multiple pieces
Ant-Terrorist
USA - Fri Nov 12 9:43:02 2004 from 65.69.50.13
With the passing of Mr. Arafat the wqorld has lost a great leader. A man who could control the wild emotions of a people struggling to regain their homes that were stolen by the Jew. May he Rest-in-Peace in God's arms. Amen
GuessWho
USA - Fri Nov 12 9:31:14 2004 from 65.92.127.147
That Arafat "funeral" actually makes the Wellstona-Paulooza look solemn and dignified. It's disappointing that they didn't dump the corpse out of the coffin like they did with Ayatollah Khomeni. Geez! and the Euroweenies and liberals think that that crowd of freaks is going to create an actual country. Say g'bye to Yassir...flush twice.
Vlad <vlad@bellnet.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Fri Nov 12 8:37:06 2004 from 205.188.116.138
I love the caption on this one: At least the French military is good at something: Carrying out the trash.
Lothar
USA - Fri Nov 12 0:36:01 2004 from 209.180.232.163
Just go!
Liberals contemplate leaving the country (I wish these jackasses would just go already!)
USA - Thu Nov 11 23:25:18 2004 from 207.224.91.206
Yeah I see it now. What was that guy thinking? Or did he post that as a joke?
Aaron
USA - Thu Nov 11 23:16:37 2004 from 207.224.91.206
Aaron, it's back. Click on the link and scroll down.
Vlad (click here for link)
USA - Thu Nov 11 18:31:06 2004 from 152.163.100.138
How does one donate the space?
Aaron
USA - Thu Nov 11 17:32:30 2004 from 67.41.223.34
Brothers and sisters _aren't_ supposed to marry??? Whoops...
Ted P
Hiding in the Stacks of the Columbus Library, Ohio USA - Thu Nov 11 17:22:21 2004 from 24.36.1.75
The only thing with the site for people who are glad W got re-elected is that it would be boring having all normal people with jobs on it. Speaking of normal... click me! :o]
Joy (click!)
USA - Thu Nov 11 17:16:10 2004 from 68.113.38.11
Someone could have a lot of fun with those signs and a good photo editing program. If someone would donate the space, I'd be glad to put a site like that one together. Easy stuff.
Lothar
USA - Thu Nov 11 16:45:55 2004 from 209.180.232.163
Someone shouldcome up with a counter website. People who are glad Bush got reelected. I wish I knew how to do that sort of thing.
Aaron
USA - Thu Nov 11 16:31:02 2004 from 67.41.223.34
One more... now we can all rest easy. I feel so much better now that I know these two 'forgive' us... *hack*
Joy (click!)
USA - Thu Nov 11 16:30:05 2004 from 68.113.38.11
I think that I've seen this nice couple on an episode of COPS.
Vlad
USA - Thu Nov 11 16:16:53 2004 from 64.12.116.138
w00t!
Joy (click!)
USA - Thu Nov 11 16:16:08 2004 from 68.113.38.11
I'm having so much fun looking at these. rofl Check this 'human' out.
Joy (click!)
USA - Thu Nov 11 16:09:39 2004 from 68.113.38.11
This one appears to have borrowed Mom's pearls and nail polish. I'm sure that we just don't understand.
Vlad <vlad@vladtv.net>
- Thu Nov 11 16:07:05 2004 from 64.12.116.138
This one (see link) is living proof as to why brothers and sisters are not allowed to marry.
Vlad (click on the link) <vlad@bellnet.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canadada - Thu Nov 11 16:03:33 2004 from 64.12.116.138
Androgynous pimply-faced losers with man-boobs say "I'm very very sorry, world!"
Vlad <vlad@bellnet.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Thu Nov 11 16:00:10 2004 from 64.12.116.138
Yes, it was on page 128 THIS MORNING. Now it only goes up to page 110 and the layout is all different. They've changed the site completely! I'm so very very very very sorry. Pfffffft!
Vlad <vlad@bellnet.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Thu Nov 11 15:44:18 2004 from 64.12.116.138
ROFL!! And these people get offended when we accuse them of letting Europe govern us. Then they go off apologizing to them when.
Aaron
USA - Thu Nov 11 15:34:46 2004 from 67.41.223.34
Oh this one is rich... leave it to liberals to make their babies cry for their protest picture. Sheeeesh!
Joy (click!)
USA - Thu Nov 11 14:47:22 2004 from 68.113.38.11
Oh I see it!! LOL
Aaron
USA - Thu Nov 11 13:13:06 2004 from 67.41.223.34
Vlad, you sure that's page 128?? I don't see it.
Aaron
USA - Thu Nov 11 13:11:48 2004 from 67.41.223.34
Oh man Vlad! THAT is priceless!! w00t! (can anyone explain what w00t means?) :o]
Joy
USA - Thu Nov 11 10:56:04 2004 from 68.113.38.11
Hahaaa! Just look at page 128, fourth picture from the top...a picture of Neville Chamberlain holding up the Munich "Peace Agreement", with the usual apologetic caption. Someone slipped that past them. They really don't get it.
Vlad <vlad@bellnet.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Thu Nov 11 8:11:13 2004 from 64.12.116.138
The official explanation for cause of death for Yassir Arafat is "blood disorder". I guess coming right out and saying "Goat AIDS" would be just a tad insensitive.
Vlad <vlad@bellnet.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Thu Nov 11 7:53:29 2004 from 64.12.116.138
Klimo tells you: si rura Klimo tells you: echo $in_pkt $in_bytes > ${0}-inp zapise do filename-inp Klimo tells you: sorry, rura som ja viagra online order viagra online Time and tide wait for no man. viagra buy viagraAll husbands are alike, but they have different faces so you can tell them apart.
buy viagra online <Satchmo@gmx.com>
San Francisco, Ca USA - Thu Nov 11 6:50:16 2004 from 170.140.188.96
Man is killed for apparently making a film daring to question an influential religion……… Man makes a film questioning a war on the sanctioned killers of the above mentioned film maker and that filmaker makes millions of dollars……… For purveyors of irony and nuance how much more subtle can it get?
Lem
NJ USA - Thu Nov 11 0:40:35 2004 from 138.89.29.66
Arafat has assumed room temperature folks May the slug rot in pieces
Rad
USA - Wed Nov 10 23:53:24 2004 from 65.69.50.13
Here is how Hitchens put it....... "So here is what I want to say on the absolutely crucial matter of secularism. Only one faction in American politics has found itself able to make excuses for the kind of religious fanaticism that immediately menaces us in the here and now. And that faction, I am sorry and furious to say, is the left. From the first day of the immolation of the World Trade Center, right down to the present moment, a gallery of pseudointellectuals has been willing to represent the worst face of Islam as the voice of the oppressed. How can these people bear to reread their own propaganda? Suicide murderers in Palestine—disowned and denounced by the new leader of the PLO—described as the victims of "despair." The forces of al-Qaida and the Taliban represented as misguided spokespeople for antiglobalization. The blood-maddened thugs in Iraq, who would rather bring down the roof on a suffering people than allow them to vote, pictured prettily as "insurgents" or even, by Michael Moore, as the moral equivalent of our Founding Fathers. If this is liberal secularism, I'll take a modest, God-fearing, deer-hunting Baptist from Kentucky every time, as long as he didn't want to impose his principles on me (which our Constitution forbids him to do)". Amen to that.
Lem
Jersey City, NJ USA - Wed Nov 10 22:48:12 2004 from 138.89.29.66
It's just amazing that they actually believe that they are so enlightened and informed merely because they held up their little hand-scrawled "I'm Sorry" signs, just like 700+ other boobs on that site. (Such mindless conformity..."w00t"!)
Vlad <vlad@bellnet.ca>
Yellowknife, NWT Canada - Wed Nov 10 21:39:20 2004 from 172.158.185.2