soc.culture.usa
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa
soc.culture.usa@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Target pharmacist is fired over Plan B controversy - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/dd1000b60e2963f5
* Pro-Family Leaders Call Summit for Disgruntled 'Values Voters' - 3 messages,
2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/db24e375a7c4b15a
* BookTV On Sunday, March 26 at 12:15 am The Kurds: A People in Search of
Their Homeland - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/4c32193631cc6a12
* Racism still rife in US, says China - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/d9b7345c735cc004
* Illegals Are Hurting the United States! - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/cf258ecd92bdc054
* LONG LIVE KURDISTAN, PKK & LEADER ABDULLAH OCALAN - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/910e29a580bd2e5e
* Sen. Feinstein calls for Rumsfeld's removal, Iraq troop reduction - 1
messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/1fb7e02bfe656863
* Pakistan: Terror Workshop of the World - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/91c948fc45a53c60
* Iran, Iraq Crises Converge Despite U.S. Hardliners - 4 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/c2acc3e63af008fa
* Three Ways to Remember Rachel - 3 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/06f69fcc00c58349
* A Question "Pro-Life" Christians Are Too Cowardly to Answer - 4 messages, 1
author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/1f0d605fcbcefff0
* SEE THIS 911 TAPE - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/71e2881b39ed7bf8
* YOU CALL THIS "RAPE"????? - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/8256272973888002
* Pimping Da Oscarz - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/f989acbec3d530be
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Target pharmacist is fired over Plan B controversy
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/dd1000b60e2963f5
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 22 2006 9:24 pm
From: Paul Duca
in article 43dc5ae0.1102204@Newsgroups.Comcast.net, William Wingstedt at
William_Wingstedt@comcast.net wrote on 3/22/06 10:58 AM:
> On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 05:46:56 GMT, satyr <RsEaMtOyVrE@infidels.org>
> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 00:25:33 -0500, "J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Why does Planned Parenthood act as if the First Amendment doesn't apply to
>>> issues that are contrary to PPA's agenda? Freedom of speech, assembly, and
>>> to a lesser extent the press, are all brutally suppressed. Now, even the
>>> freedom to allow ones morals be their guide to living is being attacked; in
>>> effect forcing people to choose between their ability to earn a living and
>>> betraying their own conscience. Make no mistake, PPA used heavy persuasion
>>> on Target Stores to instill this policy.
>>
>> Well good for them. This woman's job was to fill prescriptions. If
>> she is refusing to fill a valid prescription then she is refusing to
>> do her job. Where wouldn't you get fired for such behavior?
>>
>
> In Fundy Neverland, where you never grow up, and it's pizza's, puppies
> & parties every night, twice on Sunday.
>
Because they don't have to go to church....
Paul
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Pro-Family Leaders Call Summit for Disgruntled 'Values Voters'
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/db24e375a7c4b15a
==============================================================================
== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 22 2006 9:30 pm
From: Paul Duca
in article 1143060078.773364.316360@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com, JohnN at
jnorris53@hotmail.com wrote on 3/22/06 3:41 PM:
> Why would Pro-Family leaders want to meet with voters who have
> disgruntled values?
>
Some of them MUST be stupid enough to let those leaders into their
pants...
Paul
== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 23 2006 2:43 am
From: Dionisio
Ninure Saunders wrote:
>Spirituality May Be Hot in America, But 76 Million Adults Never Attend Church
>
>
There's more to faith than the building one happens to be in. (Otherwise
folks in garages would be cars.)
(Yeah, I'm preaching to the choir. Sue me.)
--
"If Christians want us to believe in a Redeemer, let them act redeemed."
--Voltaire
== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 23 2006 2:44 am
From: Dionisio
JohnN wrote:
>Why would Pro-Family leaders want to meet with voters...
>
...when they could meet with Postal Voters?
--
"If Christians want us to believe in a Redeemer, let them act redeemed."
--Voltaire
==============================================================================
TOPIC: BookTV On Sunday, March 26 at 12:15 am The Kurds: A People in Search of
Their Homeland
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/4c32193631cc6a12
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 22 2006 6:31 pm
From: aozotorp@aol.com
http://www.booktv.org/General/index.asp?segID=6855&schedID=420
On Sunday, March 26 at 12:15 am
The Kurds: A People in Search of Their Homeland
Kevin McKiernan
Description: Kevin McKiernan discusses the plight of the Kurds who live
in Northern Iraq, Turkey, Iran and Syria. As part of his talk, Mr.
McKiernan looks at the atrocities committed against the Iraqi Kurds by
Saddam Hussein during the 1980s (with the support of the U.S.
government), the abandonment of the Iraqi Kurds after the 1991 Gulf
War, and the leading role that the Kurds are playing in Iraq today. He
also talks about the repression faced by Kurds living in Turkey and the
clashes between the Kurds of Turkey and the Kurds of Iraq. The talk was
hosted by MIT's Center for International Studies. Includes a slide show
and Q&A with the MIT audience.
Author Bio: Kevin McKiernan's work has appeared in the New York Times,
the Los Angeles Times, the Christian Science Monitor, Newsweek, and
Time. He has been reporting on the Kurds since 1991 and most recently
covered the Iraq War for ABC News. Mr. McKiernan is the writer/director
of the PBS documentary "Good Kurds, Bad Kurds." For more information,
visit his website at: kevinmckiernan.com.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Racism still rife in US, says China
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/d9b7345c735cc004
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 22 2006 9:31 pm
From: Voice Of Reason <>
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 16:42:54 -0800, Zuo Tung <ztjt@newdeal.org> wrote:
>White people are still living today. They are not all dead.
No kiddin'. Now, tell us about the white -slaveholders-, and how
they are responsible for "correcting" the consequences of their
behavior. And since every American who ever owned slaves IS dead,
long dead in fact. tell us how you propose to make this happen. Bring
`em back to life? Or just sue their descendants?
>Voice Of Reason wrote:
>> On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 12:07:09 -0800, Zuo Tung <ztjt@newdeal.org> wrote:
>>
>>> White people need to be responsible for their own sins. What is
>>> interesting about White people is that they like to tell other people
>>> what to do and how to be responsible, but never do the correct things
>>> themselves. That is the basis for 99.9% of US foreign policy problems.
>>
>> I'm still trying to figure out your "logic" that implied American
>> slave-holders are responsible for "correcting" the errors of their
>> ways, given that all are dead, nearly all of them for over 100 years
>> now. I'd love to see how you propose to do this. (This outta be
>> good).
>>
>>
>>> Voice Of Reason wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 15:57:13 -0800, Zuo Tung <ztjt@newdeal.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Africans are not hated universally because of their culture and actions.
>>>>> What has happened is that over the last couple of centuries the
>>>>> people have been put into social-economic situations which have caused
>>>>> generations to pass on the causatum of poverty, desperation, and
>>>>> anti-social behavior. Slavery, racism, the forced prevention of social
>>>>> class mobility, has its consequences. What I believe is that those
>>>>> responsible for its creation, must be responsible for its correction.
>>>> Well, since slavery in the US was abolished over 140 years ago, it's
>>>> gonna be a wee bit difficult to have the slave-owners make any
>>>> "corrections" today, unless ya know of a way to bring back the dead.
>>>>
>>>> In any event, the hypocrisy of Red China never ceases to amaze me,
>>>> given the treatment towards *their* minorities.
>>>>
>>
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 22 2006 6:39 pm
From: "n.t."
"... I think many Americans are fairly open minded - but only to a
certain
degree. ..."
I think the white folks are more open minded than the Asians, period.
I am Vietnamese, and I know Vietnamese people are racist as hell. I
think the Chinese are very much the same.
n.t.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Illegals Are Hurting the United States!
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/cf258ecd92bdc054
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 23 2006 2:35 am
From: "Michael Lehrman"
"Jim Higgins" <gordian238@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1223ffrjuqe2g41@corp.supernews.com...
> They came in the front door Frank, as did my wife in 1970. They did *not*
> come in the back door as thieves and robbers do. Those are illegal aliens
> Frank, they are thieves and lawbreakers, they should have *no* rights
> except the right to be exported back to Mexico ASAP Frank-or do you, and
> you alone, want to pay ALL of their expenses? Stuff it Frank, you and
> your do gooder buddies.
>
Both legals and illegals are LET IN, only on different conditions. The
latter are more like semi-voluntary slaves, and they would not be coming, if
not for the demand and encouragement from El Norte. Don't blame those poor
people, who are willing to live dozens per room and work 14 -16 hours a day
for a miserable pay, for something that is more a result of individualism
and weak national conscience among the US populace, where greed and
willingness to get ahead by any means are justified by the notion of
financial success.
ML
==============================================================================
TOPIC: LONG LIVE KURDISTAN, PKK & LEADER ABDULLAH OCALAN
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/910e29a580bd2e5e
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 22 2006 6:36 pm
From: "Ali Asker"
The General Assembly of KONGRA-GEL
STATEMENT ON MUTUAL CEASE-FIRE ARRANGEMENTS
The People's Congress of Kurdistan (KONGRA-GEL) is the legitimate
representative of the Kurdish people. Its political preference is to
solve existing conflicts among the peoples of the Middle East -
including the Kurdish issue - by democratic and peaceful means.
The People's Defense Forces (HPG) is the legitimate defense force of
the Kurdish people, whose human rights are not being recognized and
identity, culture and history are persistently being ignored. They are
positioned in all parts of Kurdistan within the framework of the Right
to Legitimate Self-defense, which is regulated in International Law.
The Kurdish question is one of the fundamental problems of the Middle
East. To this end it is not an internal question to be limited by any
one of the Middle-Eastern states: Turkey, Iran, Iraq or Syria. Many
Kurds have left the Middle East: many of them are now residing within
the European Union member states. This migration has also carried the
Kurdish question into these states. The US-led intervention in Iraq has
resulted in the USA being drawn directly into the Kurdish question,
making USA a new neighbor of the Kurds. Hence all these states have a
responsibility in solving the Kurdish question.
Today many peoples have benefited from the principles that have been
laid down within the framework of international agreements. But the
denial of Kurdish identity in Turkey continues. Iran and Syria,
although do not have an approach of denial and annihilation, do not
provide constitutional guarantees for political or national rights. The
member states of the European Union, by not recognising the Kurds as a
people, do not accept their political or cultural rights. US policies,
which aim to solve the issue by limiting it to South Kurdistan, provide
an inadequate approach.
KONGRA-GEL is founded on a principled approach which requires that it
should be on peaceful terms with all related powers that do not attack
and apply violence to the Kurdish people, their leader, fundamental
rights and freedom; as well as resolving problems through mutual
dialogue and democratic and peaceful methods. However if democratic and
peaceful methods are not adopted, and methods such as violence,
pressure and prohibitions are applied against the Kurds, the policy of
legitimate self-defense is a necessity.
During the war between theTurkish state and the Kurdish guerillas, tens
of thousands of people lost their lives. The efforts of the Kurdish
leader, Mr. Abdullah OCALAN, with requests for limited self defense
instead of a clash between peoples (as in the Israil-Palestine
conflict), have led to controlled warfare. But there is now potential
for increased armed conflict in the region.
In order to stop the bloodshed and give a chance for a peaceful
solution of the Kurdish issue, several unilateral cease-fires have been
declared and paths for dialogue have been sought since 1993. In
accordance with the decisions taken on the August 2 1999, guerrilla
actions had been brought to a standstill and guerrilla forces withdrawn
beyond the borders of Turkey. Two peace groups, one from the armed
guerilla forces and the other from the civilian members of the movement
in Europe, had been sent to demonstrate the sincerity of the search for
a resolution. However these steps have not been properly understood and
hence no positive response has been given.
The members of the two peace groups have been punished and are
imprisoned. Finally, calls for a solution made by the Kurdish leader
Mr. Abdullah Ocalan have been left unanswered. Despite all this, there
has been an insistence on the efforts for dialogue and compromise.
Instead of utilizing the efforts of the last five years for a solution,
these approaches have been considered by the government to be tactical
and temporary and an indication of weakness. Hence the isolation of Mr.
Öcalan at the prison Island of Imrali has been hardened, annihilation
operations against the guerilla forces has been widespread, prohibitive
and oppressive applications have been continued and historical
opportunities for a permanent peace have been missed.
In August 2003, the leadership of the Kurdistan Congress for Freedom
and Democracy (KADEK) published a Road-Map for a peaceful solution to
the Kurdish issue. No answer was given to this 'Road Map' and calls for
unilateral cease-fire to be transformed into bilateral cease-fire and
call for peace had been ignored. Despite all efforts of the People's
Defense Forces (HPG) to continue with the unilateral cease-fire
Turkish military operations continue to be widespread. The Turkish
state's assaults on the basis of denial has made the unilateral
cease-fire meaningless. Therefore the unilateral cease-fire for the HPG
has come to an end.
Notwithstanding this decision, a memorandum of understanding on mutual
steps to arrive at a peaceful solution can always put an end to the
bloodshed and defensive warfare that is now the only alternative. But
unless the Kurdish issue is seriously addressed as a political problem,
there will always remain conditions that justify incessant warfare.
Such war will inexorably affect Turkey, Iran and Syria. All the
concerned forces will have to cooperate to secure the conditions under
which a lasting, mutual cease-fire can be agreed upon. The People's
Congress of Kurdistan believes that such a mutual cease-fire can be
negotiated under the following conditions. If our insistent efforts are
reciprocated, and if an appropriate approach is shown to the
pre-conditions of a permanent peace, then KONGRA-GEL will be open to
all requests for peace and dialogue, including work on legal and
democratic grounds.
The conditions for a permanent peace are:
The aggravated isolation of the Kurdish leader, Mr. Abdullah OCALAN
must be brought to an end. His conditions of detention must be improved
and health problems be appropriately addressed.
The military operations against the People's Defense Forces must be
stopped. Any extralegal gangs and warmongering groups must be
disbanded.
Legal and democratic arrangements and civilian organizations must no
longer be met with repression and bans. Any form of violence against
civilians and counter-insurgency measures must be abandoned.
The governments concerned must undertake efforts to create an
atmosphere conducive to dialogue as a precondition for a peaceful
settlement.
The parties to the conflict must sign a mutual cease-fire and
reciprocal no-attack agreements for the maintenance of a permanent
peace.
Provided that these conditions are met and the warring parties position
themselves in a way that mutual attacks cannot be regarded as
absolutely necessary, the People's Congress of Kurdistan obliges itself
to acknowledge that the circumstances for a permanent peace have
evolved.
The General Assembly of
Kurdistan People's Congress (KONGRA-GEL)
19 May 2004
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Sen. Feinstein calls for Rumsfeld's removal, Iraq troop reduction
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/1fb7e02bfe656863
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 22 2006 9:38 pm
From: "serwad"
"DoD" <thecats@ss.mil> wrote in message
news:BJmUf.14025$Eg2.2473@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> SAN JOSE, Calif. - Sen. Dianne Feinstein called on President Bush to fire
> Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld over his handling of the Iraq war and
> reduce the number of U.S. troops in Iraq from the current 130,000 to
> 50,000 by year's end.
>
> Feinstein, D-Calif., said Monday that Bush should replace Rumsfeld and
> other senior Pentagon officials with new leaders who will start pulling
> American troops out of Iraq.
>
> "I say it's time to change course, to bring in another team," Feinstein
> said during a speech before the Silicon Valley Leadership Group. "We
> should not be putting American soldiers in the middle of a civil war with
> targets on their backs."
>
> Feinstein has been vilified by many California Democrats for her vote
> three years ago authorizing Bush to use military force in Iraq and for not
> calling for a full-scale pullout.
>
> "We all know we can't cut and run," she said. "What I'm talking about is
> changing the nature of this mission."
>
> Feinstein said American troops should be pulled out of a primary combat
> role, and their mission should largely be training and logistics.
>
> Her proposal follows those made by other congressional leaders, led by
> U.S. Rep. John Murtha, D-Penn., calling for a timetable for a phased troop
> withdrawal.
>
> "We have to say to Iraq that it's time for your soldiers and police forces
> to take over," she said.
>
> White House spokesman Blair Jones said the president continues to have
> confidence in Rumsfeld's leadership and makes decisions about troop levels
> based on military advice and not "artificial timetables set by politicians
> in Washington."
>
> "As the president has said, we are implementing a strategy that will lead
> to victory in Iraq," Jones said. "A victory in Iraq will make the country
> more secure and help lay the foundation of peace for a generation."
>
> http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/special_packages/iraq/14151671.htm
>
Democrats have been asleep at the wheel on the issue of removal of war
criminals from the government
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Pakistan: Terror Workshop of the World
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/91c948fc45a53c60
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 22 2006 6:38 pm
From: visualseeplus@yahoo.com
bobber wrote:
> GDP per capita @ $2400 ????? no way dude! Our neighbor is not even
> close to that. Look at per capita at real prices.
A better question to ask is what is their per capita income minus all
the welfare checks they are collecting in handouts, debt forgiveness &
soft loans for 'the war on terror'.
Theoratically, they should have gone bankrupt when they entered into a
debt trap back in 2000. The US has since been generously funding the
military coup in pakistan led by musharaff.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Iran, Iraq Crises Converge Despite U.S. Hardliners
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/c2acc3e63af008fa
==============================================================================
== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 23 2006 2:38 am
From: "DoD"
"Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns978EC9508158AVeebleFetzer@216.250.184.7...
> In news:61nUf.14027$Eg2.289@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com "DoD" <thecats@ss.mil>
> wrote:
>
>> [We better leave Iran alone. We have no business meddling in their
>> affairs]
>
> If Iran didn't want other countries "meddling" in its affairs, it should
> never have joined the UN, and then signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation
> Treaty.
In that you are correct. They should leave it at once. But we better not
attack them. They are a sovereign nation, just like Iraq was.
== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 23 2006 2:39 am
From: "DoD"
"Mark Donovan" <mdon@don.org> wrote in message
news:UxnUf.10208$TK2.6930@trnddc07...
>
> "DoD" <thecats@ss.mil> wrote in message
> news:61nUf.14027$Eg2.289@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com...
>> [We better leave Iran alone. We have no business meddling in their
>> affairs]
>>
>> WASHINGTON - The agreement last week between Washington and Iran to hold
>> direct talks on Iraq has forged a new linkage between the Iraq and Iran
>> crises.
>>
>
>
> The only linkage here is that the US is establishing the extreme
> ultra-fundamentalist islamic regimes in both countries.
You are correct in Iraq. But Iran is a democracy.
>> Hardliners in the George W. Bush administration are resisting any linkage
>> between the two crises, because they want to avoid pressure for a broader
>> settlement with Iran.
>>
>> But they have already lost the battle against talks with Iran on the
>> stabilisation of Iraq. Those negotiations are likely to increase the
>> pressure for bilateral negotiations on Iran's nuclear programme and
>> Iranian security concerns.
>>
>> The convergence of the two issues is being driven both by the need of the
>> United States and Iraqi political factions for Iranian help in resolving
>> the sectarian violence and political deadlock in Iraq, and by Iran's
>> desire to reach a broader settlement with Washington.
>>
>> The U.S. reactions to the Iranian acceptance of talks on Iraq reveal a
>> sharp contrast in the attitudes of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
>> and other administration officials toward the talks.
>>
>> Before flying to Australia, Rice said the talks with Iran on Iraq "could
>> be useful". The following day, however, some administration officials
>> began to denigrate the value of those talks. White House National
>> Security Adviser Stephen J. Hadley said they were "simply a device by the
>> Iranians to try to divert pressure that they are feeling in New York".
>>
>> Hadley suggested that there was no need for the United States to talk
>> with Iran at all, because, "We're talking to Iran all the time: We make
>> statements, they make statements."
>>
>> The same day a "senior U.S. official", speaking to reporters while
>> demanding anonymity, called the Iranian offer of talks "a stunt" and said
>> Washington would participate only to avoid "criticisms that it did not do
>> all it can do to defuse bloody tensions in Iraq". And a White House
>> official sought out reporters to say the Iranian offer was "almost
>> puffery".
>>
>> The attacks by those associated with the administration's hard-line
>> policy toward Iran revealed sharp differences over which is more
>> important -- isolating Iran diplomatically, or taking advantage of its
>> influence within the Shi'a political leadership in Iraq to help settle
>> the crisis there.
>>
>> The Dick Cheney-Donald Rumsfeld group, whose views were expressed by
>> Hadley and the anonymous officials minimising the importance of talks
>> with Iran, clearly care less about what happens in Iraq than they do
>> about maintaining the policy of implicit, if not explicit regime change
>> in Tehran.
>>
>> Rice and Khalilzad, however, are apparently willing to risk a weakening
>> or breach of the policy of isolating and threatening Iran, because they
>> recognise the desperation of the sectarian-political situation in Iraq
>> and believe Iran could help.
>>
>> Since late last year, Bush has sided with Rice and Khalilzad against
>> Cheney and Rumsfeld, when they prevailed on Bush to authorise talks with
>> Iran on the Iraq crisis. In late December or early January, Khalilzad
>> dispatched a message to Iranian authorities proposing cooperation on
>> Iraq, according to the London-based Arab-language newspaper Al-Hayat.
>>
>> The Cheney-Rumsfeld group did not attack the decision then, because they
>> were confident that Iran would reject an invitation for discussions
>> limited solely to Iraq. Iran's foreign minister quickly confirmed that
>> belief by declaring that Iran would not agree to those terms.
>>
>> Khalilzad has apparently repeated his proposal to Iran to discus the
>> stabilisation of Iraq more recently. According to a Mar. 12 article in
>> the London Sunday Times by Lindsey Hilsum, the international editor of
>> London's Channel 4 news, a senior Iranian intelligence official said that
>> the U.S. invitation of talks on Iraq had been "renewed" in late February.
>>
>> This time, the Iranians did not reject the U.S. proposal. Their
>> willingness to help stabilise the situation in Iraq without any
>> commitment to broader talks reflects the increased perception in Tehran
>> of a danger of military confrontation with Washington.
>>
>> Since the Iranian rejection of Khalilzad's earlier proposal for talks,
>> the Bush administration has stepped up its pressure on Tehran over the
>> nuclear issue and orchestrated a campaign to take the nuclear issue to
>> the Security Council.
>>
>> In agreeing to help the United States on Iraq, the Iranians are primarily
>> interested in the possibility of using talks on Iraq as a bridge to
>> broader diplomatic negotiations with Washington. The Iranian intelligence
>> official told Hilsum that Tehran would accept the U.S. offer for talks
>> but wanted them to be in a neutral country, hoping they would eventually
>> lead to a dialogue on the nuclear issue as well.
>>
>> In announcing Tehran's acceptance of U.S. terms for the talks, Ali
>> Larijani, Iran's chief negotiator on its nuclear programme, who is known
>> to be close to the supreme leader of the regime, Ayatollah Ali Khameini,
>> hinted at the desire to reach an accommodation with Washington on nuclear
>> and other issues.
>>
>> "If the Americans stop their troublemaking in the region and if they
>> examine their previous conduct and behaviour, a lot of things may
>> happen," he said.
>>
>> The hardliners in Washington are determined to avoid just such
>> negotiations on Iran's nuclear programme. No sooner had the Iranian
>> agreement to discuss Iraq been made public on Mar. 16 than Undersecretary
>> of State Nicholas Burns publicly ruled out any discussions with Iran on
>> the nuclear issue.
>>
>> He asserted that any such negotiations would be "futile in view of the
>> country's track record on the issue". But he also revealed that rejecting
>> negotiations on the nuclear enrichment is part of the administration's
>> strategy of pressure on Iran, referring to its "calculationàthat it is
>> better to isolate the Iranian regime."
>>
>> Although the administration seeks to keep cooperation with Iran over the
>> crisis in Iraq separate from its strategy of isolation of Iran, the
>> evolution of the Iraq crisis may make such separation impossible. The
>> discussions on Iraq will have to involve various political formulas which
>> the United States and Iran could both support. Iran would be asked to
>> help sell the militant Shiite parties on a settlement plan with
>> unpalatable compromises for those same parties.
>>
>> If the Iranians become more deeply involved in the internal negotiation
>> in Iraq, and the usefulness of their role becomes widely recognised, it
>> will certainly be more difficult for the United States to resist
>> political-diplomatic pressures to talk with Tehran about the larger
>> issues threatening the peace of the region -- Iran's nuclear programme
>> and the U.S. efforts to isolate and destabilise the regime.
>>
>> Ironically, Iran's assistance in brokering a Shiite-Sunni political
>> compromise has been sought by Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, the leader of SCIRI,
>> the largest party in the dominant Shiite alliance.
>>
>> Sunni political leaders, meanwhile, have rejected the idea of
>> U.S.-Iranian talks on a settlement, despite the fact that the Iranian
>> support is necessary to get the Shiites to agree on key Sunni demands.
>>
>> http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0322-02.htm
>>
>
>
== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 23 2006 2:42 am
From: Bert Hyman
In news:RSnUf.14034$Eg2.5565@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com "DoD" <thecats@ss.mil>
wrote:
>
> "Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns978EC9508158AVeebleFetzer@216.250.184.7...
>> In news:61nUf.14027$Eg2.289@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com "DoD"
>> <thecats@ss.mil> wrote:
>>
>>> [We better leave Iran alone. We have no business meddling in their
>>> affairs]
>>
>> If Iran didn't want other countries "meddling" in its affairs, it
>> should never have joined the UN, and then signed the Nuclear
>> Nonproliferation Treaty.
>
> In that you are correct. They should leave it at once. But we better not
> attack them. They are a sovereign nation, just like Iraq was.
As were Japan and Germany in the 1930s. If Iran continues on the path it's
started, Iran can expect the same treatment.
--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert@iphouse.com
== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 23 2006 2:45 am
From: "DoD"
"Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns978ED2CCB6BF0VeebleFetzer@216.250.184.7...
> In news:RSnUf.14034$Eg2.5565@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com "DoD" <thecats@ss.mil>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
>> news:Xns978EC9508158AVeebleFetzer@216.250.184.7...
>>> In news:61nUf.14027$Eg2.289@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com "DoD"
>>> <thecats@ss.mil> wrote:
>>>
>>>> [We better leave Iran alone. We have no business meddling in their
>>>> affairs]
>>>
>>> If Iran didn't want other countries "meddling" in its affairs, it
>>> should never have joined the UN, and then signed the Nuclear
>>> Nonproliferation Treaty.
>>
>> In that you are correct. They should leave it at once. But we better not
>> attack them. They are a sovereign nation, just like Iraq was.
>
> As were Japan and Germany in the 1930s. If Iran continues on the path it's
> started, Iran can expect the same treatment.
So you are going to invade a sovereign nation?
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Three Ways to Remember Rachel
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/06f69fcc00c58349
==============================================================================
== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 22 2006 6:40 pm
From: "serwad"
<islamsucks@techemail.com> wrote in message
news:1143074289.878249.243100@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> DoD wrote:
>> On the third anniversary of Rachel's killing in Gaza, here are three
>> things
>> that we urge you to consider doing today, or as soon as possible:
>>
> another thing you can do is borrow your neighbor's driving lawn mower,
> go find the most miserable loud mouth cunt in your entire neighborhood,
> and drive over top of the bitch until she shuts her ugly fucking face.
Just when I thought that all the idiots have expired you pop up!
== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 22 2006 9:42 pm
From: "serwad"
"DoD" <thecats@ss.mil> wrote in message
news:UDmUf.14024$Eg2.12518@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com...
>
> "Frank Arthur" <Art@Arthurian.com> wrote in message
> news:kfmUf.617$Pe.553@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>> Probably by instituting Sharia law and make sure the death penalty for
>> Muslims who want to become Christian face the death sentance?.
>
> We definately should be welcoming more Muslims to this country. If Europe
> can do it, then why can't we?
We do not have to bring more in, millions of locals are converting to Islam,
but it helps to replenish the DNA
>
>> "DoD" <thecats@ss.mil> wrote in message
>> news:nQlUf.17883$iR1.708@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com...
>>> On the third anniversary of Rachel's killing in Gaza, here are three
>>> things that we urge you to consider doing today, or as soon as possible:
>>>
>>> 1) From New York: "The "Rachel's Words" initiative is made up of a broad
>>> spectrum of groups and individuals who believe that Rachel's words and
>>> her message of human rights and justice should be heard. We hope that
>>> Rachel's Words will open the door for other equally important and
>>> silenced voices. We resist the pervasive climate of fear and challenge
>>> to free speech that is increasingly prevalent in our society. Rachel
>>> wrote about issues that concern us all. People must have the opportunity
>>> to hear her message and decide for themselves what they think. Nobody's
>>> agenda should stand in the way of that."
>>>
>>> To endorse this initiative, please go to Rachel's Words--and to the
>>> "About" or "Endorsement" links.
>>>
>>> If you, your family, or your group are spending any time today or in
>>> upcoming days returning to Rachel's e-mails and words, please list this
>>> under "Actions" at
>>>
>>>
>>> 2) The U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation held a day of action
>>> yesterday, March 16th. Please go to their website to learn about their
>>> Caterpillar campaign and more that you can do:
>>>
>>> 3) While the U.S. Government is on record stating that the report of the
>>> Israeli military investigation into Rachel's killing did not meet the
>>> standard of "thorough, credible, or transparent," the U.S. has taken no
>>> steps to investigate this killing of an American citizen by a foreign
>>> military. Our family's often frustrating efforts to demand
>>> accountability from both the U.S. and Israeli governments continue.
>>>
>>> This week, family members are in Washington DC meeting with members of
>>> Congress. Please help us.
>>>
>>> Pick up the telephone and call your representative and Senators in the
>>> U.S. Congress and tell them that more must be done and that after three
>>> years it is an outrage that members of the Corrie family must still walk
>>> the halls of Congress seeking support simply to learn the truth.
>>>
>>> If you live in Washington State, please make a special call to Senator
>>> Murray's office noting that for three years she and her staff have drug
>>> their feet and have refused to take any leadership whatsoever in this
>>> matter-leadership that other members of Congress tell us they look to a
>>> senior senator to provide when a citizen of their state is so gravely
>>> impacted.
>>> http://www.counterpunch.org/corrie03172006.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 23 2006 2:46 am
From: "DoD"
"Ed" <nesorde@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:jL2dnUyZR52Jn7_ZnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> "DoD" <thecats@ss.mil> wrote in message
> news:gjnUf.14030$Eg2.3902@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com...
>>
>> "Ed" <nesorde@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:QI2dnTjnB5F2YrzZRVn-gQ@comcast.com...
>>> The below is a forgery.
>>>
>>> Sorry, phony reverend, but you've been outted again.
>>>
>>> This post NNTP-Posting-Host: 72.129.237.119
>>>
>>> The REAL DoD NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.148.137.131
>>
>> Wrong, I turned liberal. Look at the whole path. kc.rr.com
>
> Sorry, phony rev, I don't buy it.
>
> You can't fake an NNTP Posting Host.
Check your email Ed. It is me.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: A Question "Pro-Life" Christians Are Too Cowardly to Answer
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/1f0d605fcbcefff0
==============================================================================
== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 23 2006 2:42 am
From: Ken Chaddock
Ray Fischer wrote:
> Ken Chaddock <chaddock@hfx.eastlink.ca> wrote:
>> I guess that would depend upon how your define "convenience". The
>>definition I recognize is the one that I find in the major dictionaries
>>of the English and American languages, like the Oxford English
>>Dictionary and Merriam Websters...since your "definition" seems to vary
>>from these, can you explain what *you* mean by "convenience" ?
>
> Since childbirth involves injury,
Sometimes it does, that doesn't mean that the *reason* that the woman
chose to have the abortion had anything to do with that, in fact more
than 93% of women who chose to have abortions do so for socio-economic
reasons...not because they're afraid of "injury"...it also doesn't stand
up as a credible argument since the majority of women who have abortions
eventually have children...making it less likely that fear of "injury"
was the reason she had the abortion...
> thousands of dollars in expenses
as does abortion...if the US had a decent medical system...but that's
*another* topic...
> pain,
Sometimes it does, that doesn't mean that the *reason* that the woman
chose to have the abortion had anything to do with that, in fact more
than 93% of women who chose to have abortions do so for socio-economic
reasons...not because they're afraid of "pain"...it also doesn't stand
up as a credible argument since the majority of women who have abortions
eventually have children...making it less likely that fear of "pain" was
the reason she had the abortion...
> and a real risk of death,
Yes, there is a small chance of death as a result of pregnancy, in the
US about 0.0043% or about 1 in 23,000 in the US...399 in 2001, or about
1/90th the chance she'll die in an automobile accident that year...I
wonder if she gave up driving in cars ?...which certainly IS a "body
rights issue" so I agree that this isn't a convenience issue however,
only about 1% of abortions are carried out because the pregnancy poses a
danger to the mother...
> your claim that it's merely inconvenient is an obvious lie.
Nice try, no cigar...
...Ken
== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 23 2006 2:49 am
From: Ken Chaddock
Ray Fischer wrote:
> Ken Chaddock <chaddock@hfx.eastlink.ca> wrote:
>> It's not my place (or yours) to "agree" with or to "disagree" with her
>>decision.
> And yet you do so regardless.
Do you have a reading comprehension difficulty ? I'm not disagreeing or
agreeing with her "reasons" I'm simply pointing out that the vast
majority of abortions are NOT carried out for so called "body rights"
reasons...
>>I support a woman's right to CHOOSE and if this "right to
>>choose" is to survive, it MUST come to be recognized as the exercise of
>>*REPRODUCTIVE* choice, not just "body rights" because terminating a
>>pregnancy for "body rights" reasons without automatically killing the
> So much for it not being your place to agree or disagree.
You know Ray, it's really really easy to sit here night after night
pounding the keyboards but I've personally been assaulted (more than
once) while escorting women into and out of abortion clinics, I continue
to do so...I don't recall *you* ever telling us of any of your exploits
while helping women "walk the line"...or are you just one of those who
"talk the talk" but don't "walk the walk" ?
...ken
== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 22 2006 6:53 pm
From: Ken Chaddock
Ray Fischer wrote:
> Ken Chaddock <chaddock@hfx.eastlink.ca> wrote:
>
>>Ray Fischer wrote:
>>
>>>Ken Chaddock <chaddock@hfx.eastlink.ca> wrote:
>
>
>>>>The USSC did NOT, however...now pay close attention...give women the
>>>>right to kill a fetus for the sole purpose of killing the fetus.
>>
>>>And nobody has ever asked for any such right, pro-liar.
>>
>> Yet over 93% of abortions are carried out exactly FOR that reason...
>
>
> You're a liar.
>
> You pro-liars can do nothing but spread hate. You're not happy unless
> people are suffering and dying for your lies and hate.
Can I expect your help the NEXT time I'm escorting a frightened women
into our local clinic through a picket line of angry pro-lifers ? Will
you be there to bandage my head the NEXT TIME some nutcase clobbers me
with a 2X4 ? Or are you just another one of those "talk the talk" but
don't "walk the walk" type guys ?
...ken
== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 22 2006 6:54 pm
From: Ken Chaddock
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
> In article <2OJSf.14$DO.10@edtnps89>,
> Ken Chaddock <chaddock@hfx.eastlink.ca> wrote:
>
>
>>Ray Fischer wrote:
>
>
>>>You're not a spokesman for PP.
>>
>> Don't need to be, their published research is fairly clear, so clear
>>that even you should be able to understand it when they say that over
>>93% of US abortions are carried out for socio-economic reasons...and
>>publish a list of those "reasons"...that these ARE NOT body rights
>>issues...for example, the following from the PP site:
>>
>> "The top three reasons cited by teenagers for choosing to have an
>>abortion are concern about how having a baby would change their lives,
>>feeling that they are not mature enough to have a child, and financial
>>problems"...none of which are "body rights" issues
> nor are they convenience issues, as you wrongly claimed.
I don't know, seems pretty damned "convenient" to make it all just "go
away" doesn't it ?
...Ken
==============================================================================
TOPIC: SEE THIS 911 TAPE
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/71e2881b39ed7bf8
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 22 2006 9:47 pm
From: "serwad"
"DoD" <thecats@ss.mil> wrote in message
news:4OlUf.17882$iR1.2049@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com...
>
> "serwad" <serwad@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:K1jUf.910$qe.823@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
>>
>> > serwad wrote:
>>>> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801&q=loose+change
>>>>
>>>> IT WILL QUICKLY CHANGE YOUR MIND ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT TALE!
>>
>> 911 WAS A PRODUCT OF ZIONAZI COOPERATION WITH BUSH AND COMPANY. THEY ARE
>> INTENT ON DESTROYING AMERICA, AND SO FAR THEY ARE WINNING
>
> No, it was not. But we didn't have to invade two countries because of it.
> We could have negotiated. Bush is a liar. He is the root of all our evils.
> I wonder what his REAL intentions were for killing 2000 of our soldiers.
Actually the numbers are much greater than that. Those who died on board or
in Germany are not counted by DOD!
Besides 18,000 limbless and invalids are even greater burden on the economy.
To say nothing about tyens of thousands of crazies that are coming back to
rape and murder here!
==============================================================================
TOPIC: YOU CALL THIS "RAPE"?????
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/8256272973888002
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 22 2006 6:49 pm
From: "G.Mack"
It's very simple, the law says that an adult having sex with an
underage person is rape. Don't like it, move to another country or
build a time machine, cause it's not going to change any time soon.
That said, any stright adult man would have loved to have boned her at
14 or 40. Most guys don't have the same emotional investment in sex
as women, so I doubt this kid is suffering any truama except for the
lack of XXX. But I do recall that other kid who fell in love with his
teacher and married her after she got out of prison. But he was
probably a functional retard to start with anyways.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Pimping Da Oscarz
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/f989acbec3d530be
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 22 2006 6:53 pm
From: Voice Of Reason <>
On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 07:06:23 -0800, Von Bailey
<ovbailey@noneofyourbusiness.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 23:09:10 -0500, Voice Of Reason <> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 10:31:37 -0800, Von Bailey
>><ovbailey@noneofyourbusiness.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 12:01:54 -0500, Voice Of Reason <> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 23:41:10 -0500, Voice Of Reason <> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Well, looks like the Oscar producers are going down to the `hood in a
>>>>>>>>>>>>miguided effort to pump up its ratings. Has ABC forgotten the Janet
>>>>>>>>>>>>Jackson debacle so soon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>That's where the white guy illegally tore off her clothes on national
>>>>>>>>>>>televeision and got away with it. What about it?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Geez, ya *really* are naive if ya don't think that stunt was scripted
>>>>>>>>>>in advance. Like pro wrestling. Nothing "illegal" about it (only
>>>>>>>>>>unethical and immoral), so there was nothing for the "white guy" to
>>>>>>>>>>"get away with".
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>You have some evidence besides your bigotted assumpitons that it was
>>>>>>>>>'scripted'?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Because these enterntainers are too disciplined after years of
>>>>>>>>training to do something spontaneous on national TV, especially
>>>>>>>>something risque. Does the term "rehersal" mean anything to ya?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>None of which is evidence, just more of your stupid assumptions being
>>>>>>>paraded as facts by you, the factually handicapped.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I think yer talking to the mirror now, as I have already given you the
>>>>>>most important *fact* you need to understand when dealing with
>>>>>>entertainers who make those fabulous buck$ -- they don't jeopardize
>>>>>>their acts by doing something that hadn't been planned and rehearsed.
>>>>>
>>>>>That isn't a fact, that's your opinion that you have decided referrs
>>>>>to an entire group of people. The usual habit of bigots, generalizing
>>>>>to support their stupid assumptions.
>>>>
>>>>You deny that entertainers reherse ahead of time what they are going
>>>>to do when the cameras are rolling?
>>>>
>>>Not relevant to whether something unrehersed could occur during the
>>>act, which is what everyone involved said. So whatever point you were
>>>attempting to make simply state it and back it up.
>>
>>Actually they claimed it was a "wardrobe malfunction", whatever THAT
>>is supposed to mean. Which is WHY entertainers always rehearse ahead
>>of time, in an attempt to minimize the unexpected.
>>
>Which makes the stupid assumption that things cannot happen that you
>don't rehearse for. That would be WRONG, but you have no problem
>making such stupid assumptions when black people are involved all the
>time so why stop now.
No, of course the unexpected can happen. Which is precisely WHY good
entertainers rehearse their acts frequently. Like hand movements,
for example, like reaching out and grabbing one's singing partner.
>>>>>>Not when on national TV, in this case, the Super Bowl half time show,
>>>>>>watched by possibly hundreds of millions world-wide.
>>>>>>
>>>>>And you have still not presented a shred of evidence that it was
>>>>>scripted. None. You assume and rant as usual.
>>>>
>>>>Now if I told ya there were 24 hours to a day, you would probably want
>>>>proof, even though you know it to be true.
>>>>
>>>Your irrelevant comparison has not changed the fact that you have not
>>>presented a shred of evidence that it was scripted.
>>
>>Can ya prove otherwise?
>>
>
>I don't have to.
Because ya can't.
>YOU are the one claiming specifics of which YOU have
>no evidence to back up. You are simply providing one of your
>pitifully sorry reflexive responses again when you have NOTHING to
>back up what you say, "CAN YOU PROVE OTHERWISE" as if not being able
>to demonstrate that your assumptions are wrong prove them.
Wrong I've provided all the evidence you need. Open yer eyes and yer
mind and see for yourself.
>>>>>>>> And
>>>>>>>>do you REALLY believe that in this day and age, a white man is going
>>>>>>>>to tug on a black woman's dress without her permission, especially on
>>>>>>>>TV?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Yes I do. Especially if he's famous and thinks he can get away with
>>>>>>>it which is apparently exactly what happened.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Well where's the *proof* to support yer wild-eyed belief of what
>>>>>>"apparently exactly" happened? Gawd yer living in a caricature world
>>>>>>that has long since been gone with the wind.
>>>>>>
>>>>>He tore off her clothing and you are blaming her for it. That's the
>>>>>'proof' that he got away with it. You're even to stupid to see the
>>>>>obvious.
>>>>
>>>>Because it was agreed to in advance. Considering her genes, there's a
>>>>good chance it was her idea to boot.
>>>>
>>>Where's the evidence that it was agreed to in advance? You don't have
>>>too [provide it]. Everyone should simply take you at face value because you have
>>>such a low regard for the people involved. That only makes sense in
>>>your mind.
>>
>>And in lots of other minds too.
>
>Lots of other people simply take you at face value? You have evidence
>of that?
Sure, every day, but that's because the folks I deal with on a daily
basis do NOT have a "low regard" for me. They know my Word is good.
>>Only the most naive of folks, like
>>you, believe that it was an "accident". Or that because the man was
>>white, he figured he could "get away" with sexually assaulting a black
>>woman, live on TV.
>>
>So your scenario of a black woman 'rehearsing' it with this same white
>man, (who if your scenario makes sense had to be part of the planning)
>makes more sense? Only if you're as stupid as you appear to be.
It makes plenty of sense once you open your head to realization that
top tier entertainers don't make unplanned moves on national TV. Toss
in the fact of just *who* the entertainer in question here is and in
mind, it's an open and shut case.
>>>>>>>>>And if there was nothing for the white guy to get away
>>>>>>>>>with just what is it your blaming on Janet Jackson?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Well, it was HER dress, yes, coving HER boobs, yes? Geez yer lost.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>None of which SHE took off. Watch the tape, HE pulls it off. How is
>>>>>>>SHE responsible for HIS actions?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>And if you think she didn't consent to this in advance, yer totally
>>>>>>delusional.
>>>>>
>>>>>As usual, you provide no evidence to back up your claims and I'm
>>>>>supposed to be delusional for not accepting your baseless claims.
>>>>>Typical psuedo-great white man behavior.
>>>>
>>>>You know nothing about how entertainers work. If ya were in "the biz"
>>>>ya wouldn't last 10 days.
>>>
>>>And just how long have you been in the industry?
>>
>>Who said I was?
>
>Just attempting to find out how you garnered all this knowledge of an
>industry you are not even a part of. Thanks for demonstrating that
>you are again, speaking out of ignorance.
The entertainment industry is a very open industry, one of the most
open ones around, if not THE most open one. What I said can be easily
gleamed by anyone without breaking a sweat. And in the case of
rehersing a show in advance, that's just plain common sense. Another
trait that you seem to need some boning up on.
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "soc.culture.usa"
group.
To post to this group, send email to soc.culture.usa@googlegroups.com or visit
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to soc.culture.usa-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/subscribe
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com
