soc.culture.usa
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa
soc.culture.usa@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Saudis getting poorer - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/892812f30856edeb
* FBI Spies on US Peace Activists, Vegetarians - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/24190cfa59f6b447
* BBC World Service - Commercial Free - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/a6deffd3f6c2c6c8
* IRAQIS ARE UNITING IN THEIR FAITH OF ISLAM - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/4f10fffd54f245dd
* ISRAEL WANTS YOUR KIDS TO DIE FOR ISRAEL! - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/42e5a83213afaee7
* Iran Plans On Ivading And Occupying The USA And Will Enslave Us All! We Must
Attack Them Before They Invade US!! - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/6113f636165294a4
* Should Hiroshima and Nagasaki bar US investment and merchandise ? - 2
messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/4ff4bcb10541ff10
* Some say Iran's weapons come from Russia - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/938d3d0d2a6b5e90
* US considers use of nuclear weapons against Iran - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/d7d436c7da18b227
* FACE THE WORLD YOU COWARDLY KILLERS - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/76ba4a6aaa76501d
* MEDICAL TRAINING FREE FOR ALL! - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/b36a3ddbf75b4f27
* Loser Kerry Speaks but no one is listening - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/8fe3d50a65bfb24a
* AID TO ISRAEL MAY BE CANCELLED! - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/9126bc5d0bc244ca
* I have to move to Russia, because taxes are so much lower in Russia than in
the EU ... - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/fb5e98da95202d68
* Bush Approved Security Leak to Smear Iraq War Critic - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/f08c3dd60c1f014e
* BUSH IMPEACHED!! - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/13cf3b5698549bd8
* Shias not loyal to their country says Mubarak - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/c309581c3203a04b
* Pimping Da Oscarz - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/f989acbec3d530be
* Sing Along With BITCH ("Itz Hard Out Here For A Pimp") - 1 messages, 1
author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/d050999ea1771c53
* It's Hard Out Here For Some Blacks To Understand OSCARZ Award For Pimp Song -
1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/3d457b28e7c423a1
* Web site exposes Air Force One Defenses - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/793f23f35c263db6
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Saudis getting poorer
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/892812f30856edeb
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 9 2006 11:41 pm
From: hi@anony (habshi)
With oil at $60 a barrel and hundreds of billions pouring in
each year , how can this be possible unless its Islam which
impoverishes
excerpt asianage.com
Of jobless young Saudi men in Jeddah
- By Siraj Wahab
Jeddah: For those who view Saudi Arabia as a country filled with
obscenely rich sheikhs with oil wells in their backyards, this is a
must-read.
One local English daily last week ran a story of a group of poor
Saudis looking for work. They stay in an informal camp site with a
variety of third-country nationals, most of whom are seeking money to
return to their homes after performing the pilgrimage.
According to the report, these poor Saudis live on one meal a day,
supplemented by a lot of tea, and are eager for any job that would pay
them a decent sum.
Mousawa Ali, 53, is a Saudi national. The report says he left his wife
and six children with his brother in Jizan, about 600 km south of the
holy city of Mecca, and took a bus to the glitzy metropolis of Jeddah
to look for work. That was six months ago.
He had hoped to have been employed somewhere making enough money to
pay for a small apartment in which his family could live. Instead,
Mousawa now lives alone in a two-man tent in Jeddahs industrial
district.
His friends and neighbours are two other young Saudis, Maher Naif
Al-Assaf, 36, and Ali Ibrahim Al-Asiri, 38. They too are unemployed
like Mousawa.
Maher had left Tabuk bound for Jeddah, three months ago, also hoping
to find work. Not finding a job within a month, he also bought a tent
and set up camp hoping to somehow make enough money to return home.
Maher was particularly pleased on the day of his interview with the
newspaper that ran the report because he was able to convince a truck
driver to angle a trailer closer to his tent. Now sandwiched between
two trailers, Maher can enjoy his bucket baths almost completely out
of sight.
Ali, from Jeddah, came to live at the makeshift camp three months ago
after losing his job. Today, the report says, he is considered the
luckiest among the three after landing a new job as a security guard
just last week. Eagerly awaiting his first paycheque in six weeks, he
looks forward to renting a room somewhere. The three Saudi young men
are almost always without money and must depend on charity for their
single daily meal, but they have to walk 2 km each way to get to it.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: FBI Spies on US Peace Activists, Vegetarians
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/24190cfa59f6b447
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 9 2006 4:50 pm
From: cyrakis@yahoo.com
Militant vegans and PETA members really are kind of scary. I think the
FBI keeping tabs on them is probably not a bad idea.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: BBC World Service - Commercial Free
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/a6deffd3f6c2c6c8
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 9 2006 11:57 pm
From: " torresD"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/
==============================================================================
TOPIC: IRAQIS ARE UNITING IN THEIR FAITH OF ISLAM
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/4f10fffd54f245dd
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 9 2006 11:59 pm
From: "captain."
"serwad" <serwad@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:td9_f.20750$Sf.7084@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>
> "captain." <spammersmustdie@now.net> wrote in message
> news:tM7_f.45571$Ph4.636@edtnps90...
>>
>> "serwad" <serwad@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>> news:AKNZf.4476$Mf.245@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
>>>
>>> "captain." <spammersmustdie@now.net> wrote in message
>>> news:rFMZf.68$Zl.45@edtnps89...
>>>> obvioulsy you are joking beacuse they just blew up 70 people in a
>>>> mosque today over there.
>>>
>>> The bands of professional killers did it paid by US taxpayer
>>
>> higly unlikely
> Iraqi society is completely integrated, intermarried and non sectarian,
> both sunnis ans Shia go to each others places of worship and have never
> persecuted each other, other than Saddam whi is a secular monster
i don't believe you. i bet a google search would "prove" otherwise.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: ISRAEL WANTS YOUR KIDS TO DIE FOR ISRAEL!
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/42e5a83213afaee7
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 9 2006 5:00 pm
From: "serwad"
Report: Israel pressuring U.S. over Iran attack
Yitzhak Benhorin - Y Net News.com April 9, 2006
The U.S. government is continuing to aspire for a diplomatic solution to the
Iranian nuclear problem, but doubts for chances of success are growing, a
Washington Post article published on Sunday said.
According to the paper, Israeli officials who visited Washington recently
gave the Americans an urgent message regarding Iran: The Islamic Republic
was closer to developing a nuclear bomb than Washington realizes, and the
moment of decision is approaching quickly.
On Saturday, a New Yorker article said that the U.S. government is planning
to massively bomb Iran, and even use nuclear bunker-busting bombs in order
to destroy Iranian facilities and development sites containing nuclear
weapons.
The Washington Post wrote that despite estimations by American officials
that Iran would need another decade before having the bomb, Israel believes
that the critical breakthrough could take place within a number of months.
Israeli representatives told the Americans that Iran has begun the most
advanced centrifugal experiments in a speedier manner than experts predicted
in the past.
'Israel preparing its own attack'
The newspaper said that Israel recently leaked its own attack plans, if the
United States does not act. The Israeli plan includes aerial attacks,
commando raids, a possibility of a missile attack, and even bombs carried on
the backs of dogs. The newspaper quotes Israeli newspapers which said that
Israel constructed an exact replica of the Natanz nuclear development
facility, but the United States does not believe that the operation can
succeed without using nuclear weapons.
The newspaper said that the Bush administration is studying the options for
a military attack in Iran, and is planning for this possibility in order to
pressure Iran by letting it know that such an option is getting closer.
Despite that, it does not appear that such an attack would take place in the
short term future, and many experts within the administration and outside of
it are highly doubtful of the effectiveness of a military operation.
The Post claims that the Pentagon and the CIA are examining the possible
targets for the operation, such as the facility at Natanz and the facility
for enriching uranium at Isfahan, although a ground operation is not being
considered
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3237839,00.html
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Iran Plans On Ivading And Occupying The USA And Will Enslave Us All! We
Must Attack Them Before They Invade US!!
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/6113f636165294a4
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 9 2006 4:59 pm
From: "rst0wxyz@yahoo.com"
>> "Militarism is perhaps the most striking similarity between Fascism >>and contemporary American conservatism. Of course, there are many >>liberals in America who support the military and even call for increased >>military spending.
We are bogged down in Afganistan and Iraq already. We don't need
another war in Iran!!! This gang of four (Bush, Rice, Cheney, and
Rumsfield) will ruin the country for sure.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Should Hiroshima and Nagasaki bar US investment and merchandise ?
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/4ff4bcb10541ff10
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 9 2006 7:01 pm
From: Cindy
Vernon North wrote:
> There have been many documentaries about the effects of the bombs on
> Hiroshima and Nagasaki on TV in North America. Just because you haven't
> seen them doesn't mean they haven't been telecast.
Wow, what did you see? Tell me what kind of effects did they show?
And, what did you think about it?
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 10 2006 12:42 am
From: Vernon North
In article <3uqdnUrXYKjSPaTZRVn-vg@comcast.com>, cindy15464973@att.net
says...
> Vernon North wrote:
>
>
> > There have been many documentaries about the effects of the bombs on
> > Hiroshima and Nagasaki on TV in North America. Just because you haven't
> > seen them doesn't mean they haven't been telecast.
>
> Wow, what did you see? Tell me what kind of effects did they show?
> And, what did you think about it?
This footage has been shown many times in the US, and I think it's shown
nearly every year in the US on PBS at the anniversary of the bombings.
What I've seen includes film shot a few days after the bombs were
dropped. It showed confused and dazed people wandering through the
streets, many suffering from terrible burns, walking helplessly like
zombies through areas where all buildings had been totally flattened by
the blast. Also, people in clinics and makeshift hospitals, horribly
disfigured -- noses and ears burned off, skin looking as though it had
been melted, lying helplessly on cots. Many looked as though they
didn't have a hope of surviving. It was heart-rending to watch. They
were clearly civilians, not a threat to anyone -- women, children and
old men.
I can't imagine anyone who would not be moved watching it. I felt the
same way watching footage of civilian slaughter due to the war in
Britain, Poland, USSR, France, Italy, and China; and watching film of
the emaciated survivors of concentration camps in Europe. The ethnicity
of the victims is irrelevant to me -- the wholesale slaughter of these
innocent people was terrible. It was like watching the towers fall on
9/11.
It's hard to imagine anything more hideous than the atomic bombs, but it
didn't seem any worse than the fire-bombing of Tokyo and Dresden. But
it lives on decades later due to the effects of radiation on people who
weren't even conceived at the time. And while the power of modern H-
bombs to vaporize hundreds of thousands at a time is more hideous in
some ways, I suspect those who were killed instantly were better off
than those who died prolonged, painful deaths.
But what could have been done to change it? Japan did start the war,
and refused to surrender. Japan's leaders used Japanese civilians as
pawns in an international power game. The civilians -- not the leaders
-- paid the price for this.
Verno
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Some say Iran's weapons come from Russia
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/938d3d0d2a6b5e90
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 10 2006 12:02 am
From: "captain."
"James H. Hood" <jhhoodDIESPAMMERDIE@urdirect.net> wrote in message
news:44396a1a$0$1008$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net...
>
> captain. <spammersmustdie@now.net> wrote in message
> news:lc8_f.45580$Ph4.6131@edtnps90...
>>
>> "James H. Hood" <jhhoodDIESPAMMERDIE@urdirect.net> wrote in message
>> news:4438c81e$0$1018$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net...
>> >
>> > Andrzej Adam Filip <anfi@priv.onet.pl> wrote in message
>> > news:87acaw6xfx.fsf@anfi.homeunix.net...
>>
>> >> Of course we all belive that these (potentially) "multipurpose
> cultures"
>> >> will never ever be used for other purposes that the one *currently*
>> >> *officially* stated.
>> >
>> > So show us where the production facilities are located.
>> >
>>
>> of course. if we can't easily find where they are located then they must
> not
>> exist.
>
> Prove they exist.
>
are you a communist? you're acting like one.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: US considers use of nuclear weapons against Iran
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/d7d436c7da18b227
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 9 2006 8:06 pm
From: "pkgojak"
"Dr. James Slaughter" <jslaughter@criswell.edu> wrote in message
news:Xns97A0BD70ABA67praisethelord@207.217.125.201...
> Andrzej Adam Filip <anfi@priv.onet.pl> wrote in
> news:87irpipcys.fsf@anfi.homeunix.net:
>
> > "Dr. James Slaughter" <jslaughter@criswell.edu> writes:
> >
> >> GW Chimpzilla's Eye-Rack Neocon Utopia <gw@hotmail.com> wrote in
> >> news:BXe_f.674863$084.289446@attbi_s22:
> >>
> >>> Dr. James Slaughter wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Better a mushroom cloud over Teheran than Telaviv
> >>>>
> >>> Why?
> >>
> >> I would not even want to think how God would punish the United States
> >> if we did not try and protect Israel.
> >
> > Which ONE?
> > You should know people may mean something different when they say THE
> > GOD. You have not heard anything about religious wars, have you?
> >
> > Have you heard THE VOICE yourself?
> >
> The God of the Bible is the true God. All others are false gods.
Troll.
>
>
> --
> Professor James Slaughter
> Criswell College, Dallas, Texas USA
> www.criswell.edu
>
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 9 2006 5:27 pm
From: "I_seek_the_truth@yahoo.com"
Dammit, you bunch of inbreds ruinned a good thread!
Certainly when one talks about the God of the Bible, they are referring
to the Judea/Christian faith. One can also argue that this is also the
God of the Muslims.
The only other God I can think of is the one that promotes homosexuals,
abortion, and perversion. Hell, it must be the God of the bedwetting
liberals!
pkgojak wrote:
> "Dr. James Slaughter" <jslaughter@criswell.edu> wrote in message
> news:Xns97A0BD70ABA67praisethelord@207.217.125.201...
> > Andrzej Adam Filip <anfi@priv.onet.pl> wrote in
> > news:87irpipcys.fsf@anfi.homeunix.net:
> >
> > > "Dr. James Slaughter" <jslaughter@criswell.edu> writes:
> > >
> > >> GW Chimpzilla's Eye-Rack Neocon Utopia <gw@hotmail.com> wrote in
> > >> news:BXe_f.674863$084.289446@attbi_s22:
> > >>
> > >>> Dr. James Slaughter wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Better a mushroom cloud over Teheran than Telaviv
> > >>>>
> > >>> Why?
> > >>
> > >> I would not even want to think how God would punish the United States
> > >> if we did not try and protect Israel.
> > >
> > > Which ONE?
> > > You should know people may mean something different when they say THE
> > > GOD. You have not heard anything about religious wars, have you?
> > >
> > > Have you heard THE VOICE yourself?
> > >
> > The God of the Bible is the true God. All others are false gods.
>
> Troll.
>
>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Professor James Slaughter
> > Criswell College, Dallas, Texas USA
> > www.criswell.edu
> >
>
>
>
> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
==============================================================================
TOPIC: FACE THE WORLD YOU COWARDLY KILLERS
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/76ba4a6aaa76501d
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 9 2006 5:10 pm
From: "serwad"
"Jim E" <YD652126@sea.edu> wrote in message
news:49t950FqcbjqU1@individual.net...
>
> "serwad" <serwad@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:b99_f.20744$
>
>
> Since the US does not recognize any foreign courts jurisdiction the entire
> issue is rather moot.
Neither did Hitler recognize them, nor does Saddam, nor did Milosevic!
==============================================================================
TOPIC: MEDICAL TRAINING FREE FOR ALL!
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/b36a3ddbf75b4f27
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 9 2006 8:12 pm
From: "serwad"
"Jim E" <YD652126@sea.edu> wrote in message
news:49t99lFqciaqU1@individual.net...
>
> "serwad" <serwad@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:G39_f.20741$Sf.7197@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>> Latin American School of Medical Sciences : free for all !
>> Housed on a former military base in Havana, the Latin American School of
>> Medical Sciences trains students from all over Latin America to be
>> doctors, free of charge.
>> Since the revolution in 1959, Cuba has had a long tradition of sending
>> doctors and other medical personnel to countries in Latin America, Africa
>> and the Caribbean in need of their services. The devastation in Central
>> America and the Caribbean caused by Hurricanes Mitch and Georges in 1998
>> increased this need exponentially, and the idea of creating a medical
>> school that would train motivated students from Central America and the
>> Caribbean who could otherwise not afford to go to medical school was put
>> into effect. Students were sought who would practice in underserved,
>> rural areas of their countries. All tuition, equipment, books,
>> supplies, housing and food are provided free to these students for a
>> full six years of medical study in Cuba.
>>
>> A school director, with translator Eddy Brown, uses maps of Central
>> American countries to illustrate the underserved, rural areas where her
>> students will practice.
>>
>> When applications were solicited from Central America and the Caribbean,
>> students from all over Latin America contacted Cuba to ask to be included
>> in the program. The school quickly expanded its vision to include all of
>> Latin America.
>>
>> ContinueD: http://hometown.aol.com/juliancindy/medschool2.html
>>
>> Text & Photos (c) 2001 C. O'Hara
>>
>> (Cuba has one of the best medical research facilities in the world)
>>
(Just shows how far ahead Cuba has advanced from United States after
shaking off the slavery of the jewish mob that used to run Cuba!)
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Loser Kerry Speaks but no one is listening
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/8fe3d50a65bfb24a
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 9 2006 8:11 pm
From: "John S." <___________@_______.___>
"Rat Senator Russ Slimemold" <Slimemold@senate.gov> wrote in message
news:443916c3$0$14944$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.com...
> >
Obviously you did, moron.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: AID TO ISRAEL MAY BE CANCELLED!
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/9126bc5d0bc244ca
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 9 2006 8:16 pm
From: "serwad"
"Jim E" <YD652126@sea.edu> wrote in message
news:49tfolFqi79mU1@individual.net...
>
> "Ben Cramer" <[remove]bencramer7@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e1a7v4$18ce$1@otis.netspace.net.au...
>>
>> "Jim E" <YD652126@sea.edu> wrote in message
>> news:49rhe0Fqbu2oU1@individual.net...
>>>
>>> "serwad" <serwad@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>>> news:xY%Zf.8006$yh.7558@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>>>>
>>>> "Jim E" <YD652126@sea.edu> wrote in message
>>>> news:49reo7Fq2j7iU1@individual.net...
>>>>>
>>>>> "serwad" <serwad@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:bl%Zf.7994$yh.2192@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Ben Cramer" <[remove]bencramer7@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:e19vj8$15ke$1@otis.netspace.net.au...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Jim E" <YD652126@sea.edu> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:49rdrpFpr093U1@individual.net...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Maybe after all the ragheads have been exterminated, and the free
>>>>>>>> democratic State of Israel is no longer threatened by insane
>>>>>>>> neighbors.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When does israel become a democracy?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> He meant "demoncracy" not democracy, he just misspelled the the name
>>>>>> of the ZioNzi state!
>>>>>>
>>>>> A State with free elections surrounded by tin pot despots.
>>>>> Israel is the first democracy in the ME.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jim E
>>>> Shit yeah! demoncracy that murdered 12 people in the past 24 hours!
>>>
>>> Killing islamizoid terrorists is not murder, its pest control.
>>
>> It's murder and it's terrorism.
>>
>>
>
> Oh poppycock, it is sound policy.
>
Sound my arse! it will bankrupt both Ameirca and the enclave.
> Jim E
>
==============================================================================
TOPIC: I have to move to Russia, because taxes are so much lower in Russia
than in the EU ...
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/fb5e98da95202d68
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 10 2006 12:19 am
From: "captain."
"Ronald J. Bartle" <bartle.berlin@remove-this.freenet.de> wrote in message
news:443920ae$0$30637$9b622d9e@news.freenet.de...
> The Brigadier schrieb:
>> I have to move to Russia, because taxes are so much lower in Russia
>> than in the EU ...
>>
>> http://www.worldwide-tax.com/index.asp#partthree
>
> Fine - and if you are not apparently of Russian origin - I suppose you are
> prepared for the risk of being knifed by some nationalist Skinheads.. and
> one or two other negative considerations when going to live in Russia.
> (Depends of course where you have been living up to now. Considering that
> you are posting in a whole number of s.c. newsgroups it is not clear where
> you are just now.)
>
> ron b.
he's a crazy finn.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Bush Approved Security Leak to Smear Iraq War Critic
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/f08c3dd60c1f014e
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 9 2006 8:22 pm
From: "Rat Senator Russ Slimemold"
There was nothing illegal or even particularly unusual about [Bush's
decision]; nor is this presidentially authorized leak necessarily comparable
to other, unauthorized disclosures that the president believes, rightly or
wrongly, compromise national security."
Instead, the paper says that, if anyone has behaved unethically in the
entire Leakgate fiasco, its Bush's accuser, former Iraq ambassador Joe
Wilson:
"Mr. Wilson originally claimed in a 2003 New York Times op-ed and in
conversations with numerous reporters that he had debunked a report that
Iraq was seeking to purchase uranium from Niger and that Mr. Bush's
subsequent inclusion of that allegation in his State of the Union address
showed that he had deliberately 'twisted' intelligence 'to exaggerate the
Iraq threat.'"
But as the Post notes: "The material that Mr. Bush ordered declassified
established, as have several subsequent investigations, that Mr. Wilson was
the one guilty of twisting the truth. In fact, his report supported the
conclusion that Iraq had sought uranium."
The Post says that Leakgate prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has provided
additional evidence of the Bush accuser's duplicity.
"Mr. Wilson subsequently claimed that the White House set out to punish him
for his supposed whistle-blowing by deliberately blowing the cover of his
wife, Valerie Plame, who he said was an undercover CIA operative . . . [But]
after more than 2 1/2 years of investigation, Mr. Fitzgerald has reported no
evidence to support Mr. Wilson's charge."
Predictably, the Post's dismissal of the latest Leakgate "bombshell" didn't
rate a single mention on the Sunday chat shows, which instead continued to
cover the development as earth-shattering news.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/08/AR2006040800895_pf.html
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 10 2006 12:41 am
From: GW Chimpzilla's Eye-Rack Neocon Utopia
Rat Senator Russ Slimemold wrote:
Reading today's Washington Post editorial, I had to double check to see if they
cropped the RNC logo off of the press release before publication. Throwing
facts to the wind (including investigations by its own reporters) the editorial
board calls the selective leaking of classified information as "a good leak"
meant to counter Ambassador Wilson's "twisting of the truth." Indeed, the
Washington Post is so proud and sure of the accuracy of these claims, it chose
to publish them in an unsigned editorial (come on, Fred Hiatt, even Ben
Domenech had the guts to put his name to his journalistic embarrassments).
I'd like to focus specifically on the first line of the piece:
PRESIDENT BUSH was right to approve the declassification of parts of a National
Intelligence Estimate about Iraq three years ago in order to make clear why he
had believed that Saddam Hussein was seeking nuclear weapons.
While the WaPo channels Scott McClellan, let me channel the facts. President
Bush did not selectively leak highly classified information to "set the record
straight." He wielded his executive power in a partisan, pointed way with a
singular purpose: to cover his ass, and to ensure a second term.
It is this simple fact that tends to get lost in the intricate discussions of
the Plame scandal. If the President wanted to clear the air, he would have
released the NIE in its entirety, to the entire press. Yet the selective
leaking allowed Bush to cherry-pick the intelligence (again). This time
around, it wasn't done to mislead us into war, but to mislead the nation into
believing the President was deserving of a second Bush term.
As Murray Waas detailed last month, the entire discrediting of Wilson and the
subsequent cover-up were centered around the pivotal task of insulating the
incumbent President:
Karl Rove, President Bush's chief political adviser, cautioned other White House
aides in the summer of 2003 that Bush's 2004 re-election prospects would be
severely damaged if it was publicly disclosed that he had been personally
warned that a key rationale for going to war had been challenged within the
administration.
Which is why, of course, the Executive Branch engaged in a massive, covert
campaign to silence Joe Wilson. This is why only parts of the NIE were leaked
to Judy Miller, so she could parrot away in the newspaper of record that the
poor President was just the victim of a failed intelligence apparatus. Never
mind the rest of the NIE--the parts where the Energy Department and the State
Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research said the tubes were "intended
for conventional weapons". No, the goal here again was to fix the facts around
the policy. The goal was to represent those leaked parts of the NIE as the
"key judgments" (even though they weren't) and to represent to Judy Miller that
the rest of the document bolstered those fundamentally wrong claims that the
uranium was for nuclear weapons. [UPDATE: Big thanks to Quicksilver for
pointing out that the NIE still remains classified--only the "key judgments"
were released to the public.] The goal was to shield the President--the
candidate--at all costs.
And this is why the President's actions are so revolting, so repulsive. His
abuse of power--and yes, selective leaking in this way is an abuse of
power--wasn't meant just to silence a war critic. It was to meant to silence
the American people, to assauge their doubts about his leadership, and to
portray himself as a competent Commander-in-Chief worthy of re-election.
This President cannot help himself. He is a habitual manipulator, a serial
cherry-picker of intelligence. From pre-war to pre-election, his goal has been
the personal interest, not the public interest. His legacy is one of a
Leaker-in-Chief, selectively leaking us into war, and into a second Bush term
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/4/9/183753/9094
--
There are only two kinds of Republicans: Millionaires and fools.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: BUSH IMPEACHED!!
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/13cf3b5698549bd8
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 9 2006 11:27 pm
From: K Lulay
That's what the headline that should have been on every front page today.
In a functional democracy, this would have been the case. However, with
the help of soviet-style media in the US today, it would be unlikely for
Bush to get impeached and tried for his treasonous crimes.
For those of us who are awake, it's obvious that the US isn't a
democratic nation. It's actually run by corporate America. ExxonMobil has
practically dictated Bush and Cheney to use the US military power to
capture oil wells all over the world. And they do this under the cover of
"democracy and freedom". It is also obvious that Bush is geniunely too
stupid to run a coffee shop, let alone a country as big as the US.
Exxon-Mobil and alike have posted record profit in the midst of a growing
chaos in Iraq and instability all over the world, directly or indirectly
caused by their unrelentless pursuit of oil and power. The world is
paying an ever increasing gasoline prices, which have direct global
impacts economically and socially.
So, while Bush and Cheney deserve the dark jail cells, we must not stop
there. The root of evil entrenched in our society represented by the oil
cartels must be extricated and destroyed permanently. We've seen how the
power of corrupt business giants like Enron could destroy hope and
livelihood of millions. The oil industry is thousands times worse than
Enron. They have practically conspired with the weapon industry and other
scum like Halliburton to commit one of the worst tragedies in human
history. In their attempt to take control of Iraq, the oil cartels have
cost the American tax payers hundreds of billions of dollars that could
have been used to strengthen the weakening infrastructure and national
security.
Speaking of national security, it's become clear that the American people
have been duped. The future may show that 9-11 was intentionally ignored
by the Bush adminstration to gain the support and power they would had
never received from the American people. Now, as we've seen how the Bush
administration has been exploiting 9-11 in almost everything it does,
including invading a country that had nothing to do with 9-11!
The lastest revelation showing Bush intentionally leaked secret identity
of a CIA agent is just a clear example of the Bush administration's
arrogant attitude toward the laws of this land. They behave like a bunch
of thugs. Lie, cheat, and steal are their true colors. And they have no
shame or self-respect to even acknowledge that they are nothing more than
a bunch of 21st century mafia.
So what are we waiting for? We need to work together and remove Bush and
Cheney and Company as if they are the deadliest plague the world is
confronted with.
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Shias not loyal to their country says Mubarak
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/c309581c3203a04b
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 9 2006 7:34 pm
From: "Surinder Singh"
"habshi" <hi@anony> wrote in message news:4438da48.1565631@news.clara.net...
> "There are Shiites in all these countries (of the region), significant
> percentages, and Shiites are mostly always loyal to Iran and not the
> countries where they live."
This is the most humorous charge. Non-Muslims have this feeling about
Muslims (all flavors). Pot calling the kettle black.
s
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Pimping Da Oscarz
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/f989acbec3d530be
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 9 2006 5:35 pm
From: Von Bailey
On Sun, 09 Apr 2006 12:14:48 -0400, 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.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>So the person who's job it was to grab the singing partner screwed up
>>>>>>>>>>>>his part. She didn't have control over what his hands did HE did. So
>>>>>>>>>>>>if anyone did something purposely wrong in the live performance it was
>>>>>>>>>>>>HIM.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Except that at rehersal time, she could have said "no".
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Which is only relevent if you have evidence that it was rehersed. You
>>>>>>>>>>don't. Just more stuff you 'believe' without a shred of evidence to
>>>>>>>>>>back it up, as usual.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>You really persist in wallowing in ignorance. It's sad, but not
>>>>>>>>>really surprising.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>So you don't have evidence to back up your claims. I didn't think so.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Wrong, the evidence is all over this thread. Open your eyes, and your
>>>>>>>mind, read carefully all that I have said, and start thinking this
>>>>>>>through.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>You lying about evidence doesn't make it so. You haven't presented
>>>>>>any evidence at all, just a bunch of assumptions based on your
>>>>>>bigotted notions about a black woman.
>>>>>
>>>>>What "bigotted assumptions" did I make here?
>>>>>
>>>>That she was responsible for the event and the white guy who actually
>>>>tore off her clothing isn't.
>>>
>>>In what way did I inject race into this? Specifics please.
>>>
>>I didn't say you did. Another one of your pitiful red herrings. But
>>your inability to give the white guy responsibility for what his hands
>>did (somehow Ms. Jackson controlled his hands in a way you can't
>>explain) shows a bias.
>
>Because in the end Jackson had veto power and she evidently failed to
>use it.
>
You still haven't explained how this 'veto power' was to control the
white man's hands who actually tore off the clothing. Was she
controling his mind? HE not she pulled the clothing off. HOW was she
to stop him from doing it?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>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. 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.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Liar. And what's so amazing is that all anyone has to do is read the
>>>>>>>>>>>>thread and they will see that you haven't done anything except put
>>>>>>>>>>>>forth that you BELIEVE she purposely had HIM pull off a part of her
>>>>>>>>>>>>garment. NO EVIDENCE just what you believe.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Wrong, I explained why all but the stupidest of performers would never
>>>>>>>>>>>do anything without working it out in advance during rehersals, which
>>>>>>>>>>>is what they are for. Well, OK, maybe these 2 clowns aren't the
>>>>>>>>>>>sharpest knives in the drawer, so maybe there is a long shot you might
>>>>>>>>>>>be right.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>You *claiming* you've 'explained' something is not "evidence". So we
>>>>>>>>>>are back to your baseless assumptions again.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Wrong, the evidence is in the explanation. Open your eyes, and your
>>>>>>>>>mind too, and go back and read again.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>An 'explanation' is not 'evidence'. Again you don't know the meaning
>>>>>>>>of the words you use thus confusing conversation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>In this case it is, since no performer worth more than a dime would
>>>>>>>ever go on national TV with rehearsing it beforehand. Ever.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>Which doesn't in the least make Ms. Jackson culpable for the actions
>>>>>>of another person tearing off her clothes.
>>>>>
>>>>>It does if she agreed to it ahead of time. And he *didn't* tear off
>>>>>here clothes, only loosened one strap.
>>>>>
>>>>You have evidence that she agreed to it ahead of time? No, you don't,
>>>>it's just another on of the many assumptions you base most of what you
>>>>say on.
>>>
>>>I gave you plenty of evidence on this already.
>>
>>That's a lie. You have given your *opinion* about Ms. Jackson and the
>>entertainment industry. You have given NO evidence related to the
>>event at all.
>
>Wrong twice. There is plenty of well-documented evidence about the
>kind of family that Ms Jackson comes from. And anyone who has even
>done one show for TV will tell you about rehersals.
>
Neither of which is evidence towards the event in discussion, just
stuff you wish to use to speculate. Speculation is not evidence.
>
>>>>>>>>>I have just
>>>>>>>>>dragged your butt to the water of truth, but alas I cannot make you
>>>>>>>>>drink from it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>You pollute water with your beliefs and assumptions and I'm supposed
>>>>>>>>to drink it on faith in your words. Sorry, that's stupid.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Nope, the pond I just dragged you to is filled with nothing but truth
>>>>>>>and reality. Sorry if it hurts sometimes. Now start sipping.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You sound like a cigarette or oil CEO lying before congress after you
>>>>>>refused to swear in.
>>>>>
>>>>>Still won't see the light, eh?
>>>>
>>>>In christian religious fables the devil will tell you a lie in order
>>>>to get you to do the wrong thing and promise enlightenment. Just like
>>>>the devil in the adam and eve fable. You remind me of that fable
>>>>quite frequently.
>>>
>>>Well it figures that you'd be reading fables, ya sure tell enough of
>>>them.
>>>
>>At least I identify them as fables. If you are agreeing that the adam
>>and eve story is a fable we have no argument.
>
>Nope, since the Adam and Eve story is not from a fable, but The Bible.
Yeah, right. That book full of fables.
von
---
There is no conversation that I can have that threatens my reality and I
don't see how anyone can live with such a precarious state of mind.
---
God isn't the problem, religion is. Something that doesn't exist
can't really be a problem. Worshiping something that doesn't exist
is an entirely different subect.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Sing Along With BITCH ("Itz Hard Out Here For A Pimp")
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/d050999ea1771c53
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 9 2006 5:41 pm
From: Von Bailey
On Sat, 08 Apr 2006 22:47:23 -0400, in soc.culture.african.american
you wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Can anyone please explain WHY this "song" is nominated for an award??
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>At least someone had enough common sense to ensure a 5-second *delay*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>is in effect during the show.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Because it does a good job of representing the movie that it was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>scored for, which would be the reason any song is nominated in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>oscars.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Can ya show us where it says THAT is the main criteria for nomination?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Where did I say it was the 'main reason'? Again you misiterpret my
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>words and ask me to explain your misinterpretation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Yes you're right. You did say it was "the" reason for its nomination,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>not the main reason. So my question is even more relevant now.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>http://www.oscars.org/78academyawards/rules/rule16.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Read the rules and get informed before you get into discussions you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>know little about.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Where in the rules does it justify voting for a piece of trash.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I see. Everyone was supposed to start with the premise that YOUR
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>opinion is the only one that matters. Well, sorry to disappoint you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>but the people who voted obviously couldn't care less about your
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>opinion on the matter. Try to live with it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I can live with it just fine, because I realized many, many years ago
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that the Oscar awards committee was packed with folks who are way out
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>of the mainstream. Of course, I do keep hoping for a pleasant
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>surprise now and then, but it looks like I've got more waiting to do.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It's interesting that you consider yourself the definition of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>'mainstream' while the real thing moves further and further from you.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As I have said in the past, you will die off, just like all the old
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>people who ranted about how rock and roll, jazz and any other kind of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>music that moved into the mainstream was destroying something and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>never did. And Rap Music will still be here...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>cRap music will be still be here for a small group of knuckleheads,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>but just because the super-liberal Hollywood types saw fit to give it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>ONE award doesn't mean that it is now "accepted" by the mainstream,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>because it isn't.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>That's right. Stay in denial you serve a purpose there. An example
>>>>>>>>>>>>of a dying breed. First step, they deny the world is changing around
>>>>>>>>>>>>them, fail to adapt and die off.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Wrong, wrong and wrong. Now quit dreaming, get out of bed and go do
>>>>>>>>>>>something constructive. Like chase the pimps off your block.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>My neighborhood apprently doesn't share the same type of people as
>>>>>>>>>>yours. There are no pimps to worry about around here that I am aware
>>>>>>>>>>of.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Did you open your eyes after hitting the street?. But I can assure
>>>>>>>>>you there are NO pimps, gangs, etc, on my block.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Well, you're the one bringing them up so I guess we are again subject
>>>>>>>>to you speaking on a subject of which you are totally ignorant.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Yes, I plead guilty to having first-person experience with them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Well then I stand corrected. Given that you say that pimps aren't in
>>>>>>your neighborhood I guess you traveled somewhere to have this
>>>>>>'experience' with pimps. A new side of you comes out.
>>>>>
>>>>>Wrong, you stand incorrect as usual. I was talking about the
>>>>>assurance that there are no pimps, gangs, etc, on my block. Because I
>>>>>have a very good ongoing first-person experience with what goes on
>>>>>around here.
>>>>>
>>>>You didn't say you had a first person experience with "what goes on
>>>>around here" you said you had a first person experience with the
>>>>subject that was at hand, pimps and hoes. Now that you've been
>>>>discovered you're running from your words.
>>>
>>>Nope, you're just taking my words out of context. Something that's
>>>always given you problems.
>>>
>>So now you deny that you have personal experience with them. Your
>>going back on your word is not unusual but expected so feel free.
>
>Nothing to go back on. You quoted me out of context. Nothing more.
>
How is you saying you have first person experience with pimps and hoes
taking your words out of context when in response to a question about
them you responded, "Yes, I plead guilty to having first-person
experience with them."? It's not. You're just to disingenuous to
even admit to your own words.
>>>>>>> Nor does
>>>>>>>it change my conviction that under no circumstances do I want a pimp
>>>>>>>and his entourage of hos EVER to show up in my neighborhood.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>Yet you claim 'first-person experience'. Where'd the 'experience'
>>>>>>come from?
>>>>>
>>>>>Now I know you are confused.
>>>>>
>>>>So you didn't have the experience you claim above?
>>>
>>>I have what I claimed -- knowledge about what goes on in the streets
>>>around my house. Or in the case of pimps, hos, drugs, etc, what
>>>doesn't go on.
>>>
>>Really? What is this "knowledge" based on? How did you come about to
>>*know* this as factual?
>
>Getting out and about in the immediate vicinity where I live, day and
>night. Guess what, no sign of hos, pimps, dope dealers, etc. No
>graffiti, no nothing.
What makes you think that finding them would be as easy as "getting
out and about in the immediate vicinity"? Are you under the
assumption that they would be walking the streets? Don't you think
that they would be acting a bit less conspicuous than that?
>Boring? Yes. Which suits me just fine, as I
>wouldn't want to try to go to sleep every night to sounds of gunfire,
>stabbings, police sirens, cRap "music" blaring, drunkards and
>dopeheads screaming and pissing on the streets, etc.
>
Whose neighborhood do you think you're discribing?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Are you claiming
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that the song has nothing to do with the movie it was scored for? Are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>you claiming that such a criteria has nothing to do with it's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>nomination?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Virutally every movie made over the past 40 years has a soundtrack, so
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>the fact that this putrid film has a song that "represents" it is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>meaningless. I still have no idea, upon reviewing the lyrics, why on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>earth *this* song is worthy of an award.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>That's because, as you have already admitted, you haven't seen the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>film and you are a poor judge of whether or not it effectively
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>represents the film for just that reason.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Since nearly every movie made has at least one song that "represents"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>it at least as well as this one, I still don't see why *this* one has
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>to win the award.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You haven't seen the movie so you have no legitmate metric to make
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>your judgement from. Until then it's just you ranting your usual
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>uninformed opinion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Wrong, I DO have a "legitmate metric" -- it's called the lyrics, which
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I and others around here have referred to, including right here on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>this thread. Now grab some coffee, then open yer eyes, and yer mind
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>too.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Your "legitmate metric" is not the one that the oscars use so as far
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>as the "oscar winners" your metric is useless. Go find someone who
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>cares about the songs of old white men wishing for the past.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>You missed the point as usual. Of course the Oscar folks didn't take
>>>>>>>>>>>>>the lyrics into account when selecting the award -- if they did, they
>>>>>>>>>>>>>would have had to give the award to someone else.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>According to you who was not part of the process and as such has
>>>>>>>>>>>>nothing except your bigotted notiions to draw from.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Nothing except the words of the lyrics themselves, which were freely
>>>>>>>>>>>available to any interested party before the awards were decided, and
>>>>>>>>>>>thus could have (and should have) been reviewed by the members of the
>>>>>>>>>>>committee before the vote.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Well, if the words won by themselves you might have a point. But
>>>>>>>>>>unlike you, the people who voted have the ability not only to read the
>>>>>>>>>>words but listen to them with music and then associate them to the
>>>>>>>>>>movie in which it was written for. Thus, not suffering your apparent
>>>>>>>>>>ignorance they had the ability to vote in a way you couldn't.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Wrong. The association was clear enough, and it was all garbage.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Your ability to make the association to a movie you didn't see would
>>>>>>>>be miraculous if it was true. But since it isn't we have another
>>>>>>>>demonstration of you speaking of things of which you are ignorant,
>>>>>>>>again.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Wrong, because I know to read, and thus having read the lyrics of the
>>>>>>>"song" that was deemed worthy of an Oscar, I found out all I needed to
>>>>>>>know.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>No doubt. An ignorant superficial person such as yourself wouldn't
>>>>>>want to take into account the entire scope of criteria to judge the
>>>>>>song. Prejudging something without all the evidence is one of your
>>>>>>specialties.
>>>>>
>>>>>The lyrics are all the evidence I need, and you should read them too.
>>>>
>>>>True, you are of course the psuedo-great white man. Why should you
>>>>actually use the criteria for the award to judge the song? You, in
>>>>your infinate fake powers *believe* you know better.
>>>
>>>Guess what silly one, *I* didn't write those lyrics, some black guy
>>>did.
>>>
>>Guess what stupid one, *I* didn't say you did write them.
>
>But you said I believe I know better. Well, no, I don't have to
>"know", I just need to be able to read the lyrics.
Which is the most superficial way to judge a song writen for a movie
being judged on how it represents the movie. But then superficial is
your specialty.
von
---
There is no conversation that I can have that threatens my reality and I
don't see how anyone can live with such a precarious state of mind.
---
God isn't the problem, religion is. Something that doesn't exist
can't really be a problem. Worshiping something that doesn't exist
is an entirely different subect.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: It's Hard Out Here For Some Blacks To Understand OSCARZ Award For Pimp
Song
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/3d457b28e7c423a1
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 9 2006 5:45 pm
From: Von Bailey
On Sun, 09 Apr 2006 11:54:23 -0400, Voice Of Reason <> wrote:
>On Sat, 08 Apr 2006 15:29:32 -0700, Von Bailey
><ovbailey@noneofyourbusiness.com> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 04 Apr 2006 22:34:32 -0400, Voice Of Reason <> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"It was a struggle for us last night because we wanted to root for the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>blacks, but the blacks were pimps and hos on the Oscars, so it was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>confounding," she said. "Image is everything, and we have to be so
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>careful about the way we position ourselves in front of larger
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>audiences."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Image is not everything and anyone with such a superficial concept of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>reality really should try harder at accumulating some depth.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Well alas not everyone in the `hood is as "deep" a thinker as you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>believe yourself to be. Also some have at least a modicum of pride
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>and self-respect and don't wish to be associated in any way with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>street thugs, pimps and hos. Imagine THAT.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Now all you have to do is explain why they are being associated with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>such people simply because some people sang a song on the television.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Only bigots and racists would assume that black people are represented
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>by that song and why should they care what bigots and racists think?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>IOW, they should drop their pride and self-respect.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The pride and self'respect of individual black people don't depend on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>the songs picked at the oscars. That's stupid on it's face and yet
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>it's your usual best.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it's NOT stupid at all. What's there to be proud of when someone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>belonging to the same narrow demographic profile celebrates pimps and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>hos? It's just like the black lady above said: " `It was a struggle
>>>>>>>>>>>>>for us last night because we wanted to root for the blacks, but the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>blacks were pimps and hos on the Oscars, so it was confounding,` she
>>>>>>>>>>>>>said. `Image is everything, and we have to be so careful about the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>way we position ourselves in front of largeraudiences.`"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Yep, she gets it and you don't. Status quo for you.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Yes, she's worried about what white people will think and I'm not.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>IOW, she's not ignorant, but you *are* ignorant, and you're proud of
>>>>>>>>>>>it too.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>So according to you it's important what white people think of black
>>>>>>>>>>people and we should be concerned about it? Why?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>No, it's important what *black* people think of black people, and they
>>>>>>>>>*are* concerned about it, at least some are.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>There's nothing wrong with what black people think about black people.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>But some have concerns about some others, as evidenced by the quotes
>>>>>>>in the article I posted. Or as shown by concerns evidenced by some
>>>>>>>prominent blacks, like Bill Cosby and many others, for example.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>Those people you referenced weren't concerned about what black people
>>>>>>think about black people, they were concerned about what other will
>>>>>>think about black people. The article even says that.
>>>>>
>>>>>But *you* just finished raising the point about what black people
>>>>>think about other blacks, yes?.
>>>>>
>>>>Yes, and then you reference an article where black people are
>>>>concerned about what other people (non-blacks) would think of black
>>>>people.
>>>
>>>But THEY are thinking about the Oscar award that went to other blacks
>>>who celebrated pimping.
>>>
>>So what? Like I said, if there psyche is so fragile that they must
>>concern themselves with what other people would think of them because
>>a song won an oscar they need therapy. It's irrelevant to the vast
>>majority of blacks and anyone who has the ability to put the song and
>>the award into context isn't upset in the least. In fact, you seem to
>>be the only one in this NG concerned about it. It's a non-issue
>>that's bumped against your pitiful war against rap music.
>
>Maybe because most folks have long since accepted, as have I, that the
>stupid Oscars committee is totally out of touch with reality and has
>been for many decades now. Nevertheless, that doesn't I mean I can't
>be critical when they screw up, as they usually do, and did this time
>around
>
If they are what you describe then why is it an issue at all except
for something to give you gist to rant negatively about black people
and what they are doing again. Any old excuse to make a racist rant
you can certainly be counted on if Rap is involved.
>As for my "pitiful war" against cRap "music", that war has been joined
>by a long list of prominent and thoughful blacks. Show us the names
>of any prominent black leader who *likes* the messages that cRap puts
>out, as is. It is you who is starting to look pitiful.
What 'black leaders' are you talking about? I don't remember any
election putting any black people into positions of leadership for all
black people.
von
---
There is no conversation that I can have that threatens my reality and I
don't see how anyone can live with such a precarious state of mind.
---
God isn't the problem, religion is. Something that doesn't exist
can't really be a problem. Worshiping something that doesn't exist
is an entirely different subect.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Web site exposes Air Force One Defenses
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/793f23f35c263db6
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 9 2006 5:48 pm
From: Steve Fox
Has anyone found or seen the original documet? :-)
==============================================================================
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
