D
dallow_bg
Guest
Re: You never appear when there are bad news stories for Bush to discuss.
This had nothing to do with Bush.
This had nothing to do with Bush.
- Forums
- Archives
- Archive
- General Discussion archive (read-only)
- General Discussion 1999-2009 archive (read-only)
- General Discussion archive 2006 (read-only)
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
P
puddle.
Guest
yes but theo we all want to know what oyu think of the new album
except the first song which i know you hate for obvious reasons. what do you think of stepfathers?
> Ohhh, that was nice one, blowing up a Hindu temple full of worshippers.
> Remember: Don't dare disrespect Islam by drawing a cartoon of Muhammad.
> But of course they can blow up any Hindu temple they like. All the better
> if it's full of infidels!
> Religion of peace, my ass.
except the first song which i know you hate for obvious reasons. what do you think of stepfathers?
> Ohhh, that was nice one, blowing up a Hindu temple full of worshippers.
> Remember: Don't dare disrespect Islam by drawing a cartoon of Muhammad.
> But of course they can blow up any Hindu temple they like. All the better
> if it's full of infidels!
> Religion of peace, my ass.
T
Theo van Gogh Martyrs Brigade
Guest
Wow, Pie! you must REALLY want Dick Cheney to be President!!
T
Theo van Gogh Martyrs Brigade
Guest
Re: I demand Italy respect Oriana Fallaci's freedom of speech!!
> Taken one at a time, America wasn't really founded on that idea. It took
> quite a while for all people to get free speech or even be considered
> fully human. It was life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for white
> male landowners. There should never have been a need for the civil rights
> movement for instance, if we really all had free speech.
America has taken time in living up to the principles it was founded upon. However, our founders were on the side of the angels when they laid those ideas down as the basis upon which America was created. What they put down in writing created the obligation of America to struggle to live up to those principles. One notices that the civil rights movement was a challenge to America to live up to the principles of its founding.
The First Amendment is considered sacred in America. This is because we believe that all people are born with certain rights, one of the most important being the right to free expression. The idea behind "inalienable rights" is that government doesn't GIVE us these rights; LEGITIMATE government must PROTECT and RESPECT those rights that all people have by simply existing in this world. I'm sure you know this, but I'm not sure you fully appreciate it. My government did not give me a present by passing the First Amendment. What they did was acknowledge what they (and all legitimate governments) are obligated to respect.
> Sentence two apparently is incorrect, as it would seem to be the right of
> different countries to inact laws regarding religious intolerance.
Yes, state the obvious that the First Amendment doesn't apply to Italy. Duh. And Italy is the worse for not cutting and pasting our First Amendment into their constitition. Every country would be better off with our First Amendment etched into stone. Instead, well...Austria just locked up Holocaust-denier David Irving because they didn't like his views. I think he got 3 years in prison for a speech he made years ago. In so doing, they have made a scummy Nazi a martyr for free speech. Austria has violated his rights as a human being.
My point is, even though Italy is its own country, this doesn't change the fact that Italy is obligated to respect Italians' inalienable rights in order to be a legitimate government. All Italians have the right to express their ideas freely, as do all people on this earth, no matter what laws their governments pass.
>To get
> back to the first amendment, it guarantees the right to assembly, a free
> press, free speech, and freedom of religion. Again, this is the United
> States Constitution, and it really has no bearing on Italian law.
Again, everyone knows it has no bearing on Italian law. Except that the American Revolution was seeking to be an example to the world. It matters to me when people's rights are being violated elsewhere, and I am merely voicing my opinion that Falacci should not have to stand trial for merely putting her opinions into a book and publishing it.
>Even in
> the US though we have laws about "hate speech", so some
> exemptions to Free Speech are commonly recognized.
Well, actually, you have to be careful here when you're talking about "hate speech." It's quite different in America than in Europe. There can be no content-based punishing of certain viewpoints in America under our Constitution, and statutes that have tried to do so have been struck down. An example of what would be constitutional is when a defendant is convicted of a battery against someone and a statute requires an increase the sentence because the victim was chosen by his race. That's a somewhat controversial can of worms, IMO, but it's quite different from statutes designed to punish VIEWPOINTS, because the focus is instead on CONDUCT rather than speech content.
> What if one person is practicing his freedom of religion, and another uses
> his freedom of the press to write that the religion should be wiped out?
> Then he uses the right to assemble to gather a mob and the freedom of
> speech to chant "kill the Methodists" or something like that? I
> guess that's why we have laws that would make that a hate crime.
The question would be whether they are inciting IMMINENT lawless action. If they aren't, it's protected, but your hypothetical is too vague.
For example, one Supreme Court case held that Nazis are allowed to march through a predominately Jewish town, and the burden was on the residents to avoid the offensive and hateful speech. There's a whole line of cases on matters like this, but I don't see why we should get into it when the topic is Falacci, who merely published a book stating her views about Islam.
If views you disagree with can be silenced, well then so can your views, Pie. I'm sure you understand this, despite your continuing and strange sympathy with Muslims who are always try to censor everyone who has a negative thing to say about their pathetic death cult.
> Taken one at a time, America wasn't really founded on that idea. It took
> quite a while for all people to get free speech or even be considered
> fully human. It was life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for white
> male landowners. There should never have been a need for the civil rights
> movement for instance, if we really all had free speech.
America has taken time in living up to the principles it was founded upon. However, our founders were on the side of the angels when they laid those ideas down as the basis upon which America was created. What they put down in writing created the obligation of America to struggle to live up to those principles. One notices that the civil rights movement was a challenge to America to live up to the principles of its founding.
The First Amendment is considered sacred in America. This is because we believe that all people are born with certain rights, one of the most important being the right to free expression. The idea behind "inalienable rights" is that government doesn't GIVE us these rights; LEGITIMATE government must PROTECT and RESPECT those rights that all people have by simply existing in this world. I'm sure you know this, but I'm not sure you fully appreciate it. My government did not give me a present by passing the First Amendment. What they did was acknowledge what they (and all legitimate governments) are obligated to respect.
> Sentence two apparently is incorrect, as it would seem to be the right of
> different countries to inact laws regarding religious intolerance.
Yes, state the obvious that the First Amendment doesn't apply to Italy. Duh. And Italy is the worse for not cutting and pasting our First Amendment into their constitition. Every country would be better off with our First Amendment etched into stone. Instead, well...Austria just locked up Holocaust-denier David Irving because they didn't like his views. I think he got 3 years in prison for a speech he made years ago. In so doing, they have made a scummy Nazi a martyr for free speech. Austria has violated his rights as a human being.
My point is, even though Italy is its own country, this doesn't change the fact that Italy is obligated to respect Italians' inalienable rights in order to be a legitimate government. All Italians have the right to express their ideas freely, as do all people on this earth, no matter what laws their governments pass.
>To get
> back to the first amendment, it guarantees the right to assembly, a free
> press, free speech, and freedom of religion. Again, this is the United
> States Constitution, and it really has no bearing on Italian law.
Again, everyone knows it has no bearing on Italian law. Except that the American Revolution was seeking to be an example to the world. It matters to me when people's rights are being violated elsewhere, and I am merely voicing my opinion that Falacci should not have to stand trial for merely putting her opinions into a book and publishing it.
>Even in
> the US though we have laws about "hate speech", so some
> exemptions to Free Speech are commonly recognized.
Well, actually, you have to be careful here when you're talking about "hate speech." It's quite different in America than in Europe. There can be no content-based punishing of certain viewpoints in America under our Constitution, and statutes that have tried to do so have been struck down. An example of what would be constitutional is when a defendant is convicted of a battery against someone and a statute requires an increase the sentence because the victim was chosen by his race. That's a somewhat controversial can of worms, IMO, but it's quite different from statutes designed to punish VIEWPOINTS, because the focus is instead on CONDUCT rather than speech content.
> What if one person is practicing his freedom of religion, and another uses
> his freedom of the press to write that the religion should be wiped out?
> Then he uses the right to assemble to gather a mob and the freedom of
> speech to chant "kill the Methodists" or something like that? I
> guess that's why we have laws that would make that a hate crime.
The question would be whether they are inciting IMMINENT lawless action. If they aren't, it's protected, but your hypothetical is too vague.
For example, one Supreme Court case held that Nazis are allowed to march through a predominately Jewish town, and the burden was on the residents to avoid the offensive and hateful speech. There's a whole line of cases on matters like this, but I don't see why we should get into it when the topic is Falacci, who merely published a book stating her views about Islam.
If views you disagree with can be silenced, well then so can your views, Pie. I'm sure you understand this, despite your continuing and strange sympathy with Muslims who are always try to censor everyone who has a negative thing to say about their pathetic death cult.
P
pie.
Guest
your response seems to indicate that you realize he is a worse criminal than Bush.
No, in a perfect world his hunting accident would have had the shotgun aimed at his fascist face.
No, in a perfect world his hunting accident would have had the shotgun aimed at his fascist face.
T
Theo van Gogh Martyrs Brigade
Guest
Re: yes but theo we all want to know what oyu think of the new album
> except the first song which i know you hate for obvious reasons. what do
> you think of stepfathers?
I've only listened to three songs from the new album, and I've posted my very preliminary, first impression reaction to them. I thought the lead-off single "You Have Killed Me" was the worst single of Morrissey's entire career, however I also felt it might be a decent album track if surrounded by much more inspired material. When Codreanu posted the album the other day, I decided to only sample two songs to hopefully relieve my worried about the album. I absolutely LOVE "In The Future" and I quite like "Streets." I felt happy that Morrissey had not lost it, and now I'm awaiting the proper release of the CD so my first full listen can be in all its glory on my righteous stereo equipment (and with the full package of album art, liner notes, etc. to accompany it) rather than through very sub-par quality MP3s downloads.
I haven't heard the first song, but while Morrissey in interviews is clearly sympathetic with the terrorists and on the side of the enemies of civilization, in song he keeps things vague enough so it shouldn't bug me too much.
As it happens, I feel awful that American bombs have killed innocent people as well. However, when Morrissey states that he cares so much about Iraqis and seems to think the London homicide/suicide bombers are somehow outraged about deaths in Iraq, I can only feel sad for how stupid that is. The London bombers are on the same page as the Sunni-Saddamist and al Qaeda insurgancy in Iraq, who are the people doing the vast majority of killing of civilians in Iraq, and unlike America and Britain, they are killing civilians on purpose. I've already posted the February Brookings Institute polling data on Iraqis, which shows that over 90% of both Kurdish Iraqis and Shiite Iraqis feel the toppling of Saddam was worth it. The London suicide bombers are on the side of the people who just blew up that Shia golden-domed mosque in Iraq.
It was also ridiculous for Morrissey to think that London only became a target of Islamo-fascists in 2003, when in fact the city has been targeted for many years before that.
> except the first song which i know you hate for obvious reasons. what do
> you think of stepfathers?
I've only listened to three songs from the new album, and I've posted my very preliminary, first impression reaction to them. I thought the lead-off single "You Have Killed Me" was the worst single of Morrissey's entire career, however I also felt it might be a decent album track if surrounded by much more inspired material. When Codreanu posted the album the other day, I decided to only sample two songs to hopefully relieve my worried about the album. I absolutely LOVE "In The Future" and I quite like "Streets." I felt happy that Morrissey had not lost it, and now I'm awaiting the proper release of the CD so my first full listen can be in all its glory on my righteous stereo equipment (and with the full package of album art, liner notes, etc. to accompany it) rather than through very sub-par quality MP3s downloads.
I haven't heard the first song, but while Morrissey in interviews is clearly sympathetic with the terrorists and on the side of the enemies of civilization, in song he keeps things vague enough so it shouldn't bug me too much.
As it happens, I feel awful that American bombs have killed innocent people as well. However, when Morrissey states that he cares so much about Iraqis and seems to think the London homicide/suicide bombers are somehow outraged about deaths in Iraq, I can only feel sad for how stupid that is. The London bombers are on the same page as the Sunni-Saddamist and al Qaeda insurgancy in Iraq, who are the people doing the vast majority of killing of civilians in Iraq, and unlike America and Britain, they are killing civilians on purpose. I've already posted the February Brookings Institute polling data on Iraqis, which shows that over 90% of both Kurdish Iraqis and Shiite Iraqis feel the toppling of Saddam was worth it. The London suicide bombers are on the side of the people who just blew up that Shia golden-domed mosque in Iraq.
It was also ridiculous for Morrissey to think that London only became a target of Islamo-fascists in 2003, when in fact the city has been targeted for many years before that.
T
Theo van Gogh Martyrs Brigade
Guest
> Absolutely right, they'd like to rule the whole goddam world, and f***
> anyone else who doesn't tow the line, its the most assbackward religion
> out there.
> Time to evolve people.
I saw one commentator make a good observation: The Islamic-freako-fascists don't exactly have the smartest strategy. They seem to wanna tick of the entire world all at once. One day they'll shoot up a school in Russia. Another day they'll blow up a Hindu temple in India. Etc Etc. Not too good a strategy from their perspective, but then they're barbarians so what do ya expect.
> anyone else who doesn't tow the line, its the most assbackward religion
> out there.
> Time to evolve people.
I saw one commentator make a good observation: The Islamic-freako-fascists don't exactly have the smartest strategy. They seem to wanna tick of the entire world all at once. One day they'll shoot up a school in Russia. Another day they'll blow up a Hindu temple in India. Etc Etc. Not too good a strategy from their perspective, but then they're barbarians so what do ya expect.
P
pie.
Guest
Re: I demand Italy respect Oriana Fallaci's freedom of speech!!
> America has taken time in living up to the principles it was founded upon.
> However, our founders were on the side of the angels when they laid those
> ideas down as the basis upon which America was created. What they put down
> in writing created the obligation of America to struggle to live up to
> those principles. One notices that the civil rights movement was a
> challenge to America to live up to the principles of its founding.
> The First Amendment is considered sacred in America. This is because we
> believe that all people are born with certain rights, one of the most
> important being the right to free expression. The idea behind
> "inalienable rights" is that government doesn't GIVE us these
> rights; LEGITIMATE government must PROTECT and RESPECT those rights that
> all people have by simply existing in this world. I'm sure you know this,
> but I'm not sure you fully appreciate it. My government did not give me a
> present by passing the First Amendment. What they did was acknowledge what
> they (and all legitimate governments) are obligated to respect.
> Yes, state the obvious that the First Amendment doesn't apply to Italy.
> Duh.
Then try to write paragraphs that aren't composed of conflicting sentences. Duh. I mean, you're still going on about America in your response because you somehow feel it has something to do with the point you are making, and then you write below, "but I don't see why we should get into it when the
topic is Falacci, who merely published a book stating her views about
Islam. "
> My point is, even though Italy is its own country, this doesn't change the
> fact that Italy is obligated to respect Italians' inalienable rights in
> order to be a legitimate government. All Italians have the right to
> express their ideas freely, as do all people on this earth, no matter what
> laws their governments pass.
Here's the deal. We agree about the Nazi holocaust denier being made a martyr. I wrote it in almost those exact terms on another forum. And I do understand what inalienable rights are. I think laws about hate speech are well intended, but ultimately foolish, if not dangerous. I agree with you about all of that.
Where I disagree is with your bigotry and hatred of Muslims, the way you group a huge number of people and label them according to the actions of a very small percentage, one that probably is statistically so small as to probably read as a zero in most mathematical measures. I mean if it's .00000000000009, that's 0, isn't it?
The real threat to liberty in America doesn't come from Muslims. It comes from the people that are running our country. Don't confuse the people with the office they hold or with the Constitution. Bush doesn't care about your Constitutional rights as has been amply demonstrated. They are in favor of torture, they have secret prisons in other countries, they hold people for years in other countries without charge... Come on, and you're worried about the rights of people in Italy to incite hatred against Muslims?
Your real agenda is clear and you really have no right to be taken seriously after writing "piss on the Koran" or however you stated it. That is the same as "piss on the Constitution", because the Constitution gives us freedom of religion. You use it when it suits your purposes. You are really just a propagandist. You want everyone to hate Muslims and support a religious war, while at the same time I'm sure you would want us to overlook any human rights violations by Israel.
The truth is that it is Anti-American to call for a war on Muslims. As far as the laws in Italy regarding inciting religious intolerance, I don't know much about it. I don't really care. I can't fix the entire planet and if I could that isn't where I would start. Using Morrissey's professed love for Italy and hatred for growing fascist tendencies in America to justify starting yet another thread bashing Muslims is pretty transparent.
> America has taken time in living up to the principles it was founded upon.
> However, our founders were on the side of the angels when they laid those
> ideas down as the basis upon which America was created. What they put down
> in writing created the obligation of America to struggle to live up to
> those principles. One notices that the civil rights movement was a
> challenge to America to live up to the principles of its founding.
> The First Amendment is considered sacred in America. This is because we
> believe that all people are born with certain rights, one of the most
> important being the right to free expression. The idea behind
> "inalienable rights" is that government doesn't GIVE us these
> rights; LEGITIMATE government must PROTECT and RESPECT those rights that
> all people have by simply existing in this world. I'm sure you know this,
> but I'm not sure you fully appreciate it. My government did not give me a
> present by passing the First Amendment. What they did was acknowledge what
> they (and all legitimate governments) are obligated to respect.
> Yes, state the obvious that the First Amendment doesn't apply to Italy.
> Duh.
Then try to write paragraphs that aren't composed of conflicting sentences. Duh. I mean, you're still going on about America in your response because you somehow feel it has something to do with the point you are making, and then you write below, "but I don't see why we should get into it when the
topic is Falacci, who merely published a book stating her views about
Islam. "
> My point is, even though Italy is its own country, this doesn't change the
> fact that Italy is obligated to respect Italians' inalienable rights in
> order to be a legitimate government. All Italians have the right to
> express their ideas freely, as do all people on this earth, no matter what
> laws their governments pass.
Here's the deal. We agree about the Nazi holocaust denier being made a martyr. I wrote it in almost those exact terms on another forum. And I do understand what inalienable rights are. I think laws about hate speech are well intended, but ultimately foolish, if not dangerous. I agree with you about all of that.
Where I disagree is with your bigotry and hatred of Muslims, the way you group a huge number of people and label them according to the actions of a very small percentage, one that probably is statistically so small as to probably read as a zero in most mathematical measures. I mean if it's .00000000000009, that's 0, isn't it?
The real threat to liberty in America doesn't come from Muslims. It comes from the people that are running our country. Don't confuse the people with the office they hold or with the Constitution. Bush doesn't care about your Constitutional rights as has been amply demonstrated. They are in favor of torture, they have secret prisons in other countries, they hold people for years in other countries without charge... Come on, and you're worried about the rights of people in Italy to incite hatred against Muslims?
Your real agenda is clear and you really have no right to be taken seriously after writing "piss on the Koran" or however you stated it. That is the same as "piss on the Constitution", because the Constitution gives us freedom of religion. You use it when it suits your purposes. You are really just a propagandist. You want everyone to hate Muslims and support a religious war, while at the same time I'm sure you would want us to overlook any human rights violations by Israel.
The truth is that it is Anti-American to call for a war on Muslims. As far as the laws in Italy regarding inciting religious intolerance, I don't know much about it. I don't really care. I can't fix the entire planet and if I could that isn't where I would start. Using Morrissey's professed love for Italy and hatred for growing fascist tendencies in America to justify starting yet another thread bashing Muslims is pretty transparent.
T
Theo van Gogh Martyrs Brigade
Guest
> A bit like Bush and his pals then eh? right wing Christians suck as much
> ass as well.
I'd like to see you try and support this idea that Christians of the 21st century are as bad as, and as threatening to the world as, Islamo-fascists. You seem to have a deep need to put forth this notion, which of course bears zero resemlance to reality.
> ass as well.
I'd like to see you try and support this idea that Christians of the 21st century are as bad as, and as threatening to the world as, Islamo-fascists. You seem to have a deep need to put forth this notion, which of course bears zero resemlance to reality.
T
Theo van Gogh Martyrs Brigade
Guest
Re: Another day....another US led atrocity
> how many Afghan & Iraqi kids have your troops murdered today Thicko
> van Gob?
Zero.
Next question?
> how many Afghan & Iraqi kids have your troops murdered today Thicko
> van Gob?
Zero.
Next question?
T
Theo van Gogh Martyrs Brigade
Guest
Re: You never appear when there are bad news stories for Bush to discuss.
> When are you going to do some cut and pastes about how Bush is extremely
> unpopular now in the US (and of course elsewhere) and how a marjority
> think the Iraq war was a mistake and that Bush lied about Iraq`s non
> existent WMD.
I don't engage in opinion poll politics, and I actually don't much care about Bush outside of rightfully considering him a better fit for the job than John Kerry. If you think the Iraq liberation was a "mistake," I'd dearly love to hear what YOUR policy towards Iraq would've been in 2003. I heard all through the 1990s that 100,000 Iraqi children were dying each year under sanctions. So do tell. It was my view that Saddam should've been toppled right after the Gulf War by Bush Sr., but that by 2003 there was really no better option left. Fortunately, there's no way in hell anyone can put Saddam back in power, and he will soon be executed. Maybe you'll cry when he hangs?
> You dont appear then do you?...Only when favourable stories to your point
> of view crop up do you show your face.
My interest is in defeating the Islamo-fascists (an enemy that represents EVERYTHING I despise in this world), seeing democracy take root in the Muslim world, eliminating the threat of state-sponsored terrorism, and seeing the Kurds of Iraq liberated from the genocide they suffered under Saddam.
You, being a small person, are focused only on your hatred for Bush, and you're a reactionary.
There has never been a president of the USA I have liked all that much. But if you want me to focus on every stupid partisan bit of bullshit about Karl Rove this or that or whatever the latest DailyKos hype is, sorry, I have bigger fish to fry.
> When are you going to do some cut and pastes about how Bush is extremely
> unpopular now in the US (and of course elsewhere) and how a marjority
> think the Iraq war was a mistake and that Bush lied about Iraq`s non
> existent WMD.
I don't engage in opinion poll politics, and I actually don't much care about Bush outside of rightfully considering him a better fit for the job than John Kerry. If you think the Iraq liberation was a "mistake," I'd dearly love to hear what YOUR policy towards Iraq would've been in 2003. I heard all through the 1990s that 100,000 Iraqi children were dying each year under sanctions. So do tell. It was my view that Saddam should've been toppled right after the Gulf War by Bush Sr., but that by 2003 there was really no better option left. Fortunately, there's no way in hell anyone can put Saddam back in power, and he will soon be executed. Maybe you'll cry when he hangs?
> You dont appear then do you?...Only when favourable stories to your point
> of view crop up do you show your face.
My interest is in defeating the Islamo-fascists (an enemy that represents EVERYTHING I despise in this world), seeing democracy take root in the Muslim world, eliminating the threat of state-sponsored terrorism, and seeing the Kurds of Iraq liberated from the genocide they suffered under Saddam.
You, being a small person, are focused only on your hatred for Bush, and you're a reactionary.
There has never been a president of the USA I have liked all that much. But if you want me to focus on every stupid partisan bit of bullshit about Karl Rove this or that or whatever the latest DailyKos hype is, sorry, I have bigger fish to fry.
T
Theo van Gogh Martyrs Brigade
Guest
Re: You never appear when there are bad news stories for Bush to discuss.
> This had nothing to do with Bush.
Exactly right. A bunch of Hindus were worshipping in a temple in India and they got blown up.
For some people, all they care about is hating Bush. What does Bush have to do with Muslims blowing up a Hindu temple?
It's a crime against humanity.
> This had nothing to do with Bush.
Exactly right. A bunch of Hindus were worshipping in a temple in India and they got blown up.
For some people, all they care about is hating Bush. What does Bush have to do with Muslims blowing up a Hindu temple?
It's a crime against humanity.
T
Theo van Gogh Martyrs Brigade
Guest
Re: "no free speech". Morrissey should go talk to some Tottenham fans
> I've heard a lot worse from Red Sox fans about Derek Jeter and A-Rod and
> they certainly weren't arrested.
> I've seen shirts worn by Red Soxs fans saying Derek wants Randy's Big unit
> and they weren't arrested.
> However in Morrissey's own beloved country you make a homophobic chant at
> a football game you get arrested.
ahahaha You should hear how cocky the Red Sox fans still are in MLB chat. You know, I was kinda touched when Boston got a World Series, but now I see they clearly never deserved it.
> I've heard a lot worse from Red Sox fans about Derek Jeter and A-Rod and
> they certainly weren't arrested.
> I've seen shirts worn by Red Soxs fans saying Derek wants Randy's Big unit
> and they weren't arrested.
> However in Morrissey's own beloved country you make a homophobic chant at
> a football game you get arrested.
ahahaha You should hear how cocky the Red Sox fans still are in MLB chat. You know, I was kinda touched when Boston got a World Series, but now I see they clearly never deserved it.
T
Theo van Gogh Martyrs Brigade
Guest
I hope it's not lost in this thread that this was a crime against humanity
Some people just wanna obsess about Bush this Karl Rove that. In India, a bunch of innocent people were massacred. All politics aside, this is an atrocity.
America is not the world. People blown up in India is a BIG DEAL. Human beings, folks. We're all the same.
Some people just wanna obsess about Bush this Karl Rove that. In India, a bunch of innocent people were massacred. All politics aside, this is an atrocity.
America is not the world. People blown up in India is a BIG DEAL. Human beings, folks. We're all the same.
P
puddle.
Guest
Re: yes but theo we all want to know what oyu think of the new album
i would think it would be hard to conduct an accurate poll in iraq at the present time.
hope you enjoy the rest of the album, i like it although i relly wish i never heard it first through the crappy downloads. i should have waited.
that's the difference between liberals and conservatives. we need everything now, conservatives could wait. shit, it was obvious the gay marraige was 10 to 15 years too early but a bunch of naive liberals wanted it now without realizing the current climate of US society.
likewise, Planned Parenthood is going to challenge in the courts the new South Dakota Law which is going to end up in a Supreme court that may very well, and probably likely, ban all abortions. wouldn't it jsut make sense to wait it out and see what happens with other states and the Supreme court, next elections, etc. i mean South Dakota only had one abortion clinic to begin with. is it worth risking the entire country just for that one clinic. see, although i'm a liberal, i always felt the conervative groups were better at strategy mainly because the liberals are just plain too naive when it comes to strategy (and i'm strictly talking about strategy and the politcal groups...not the beliefs and core values)
sorry, got off subject. i just hate reading this shit about South Dakota and Planned Parenthood's misplaced head.
> I've only listened to three songs from the new album, and I've posted my
> very preliminary, first impression reaction to them. I thought the
> lead-off single "You Have Killed Me" was the worst single of
> Morrissey's entire career, however I also felt it might be a decent album
> track if surrounded by much more inspired material. When Codreanu posted
> the album the other day, I decided to only sample two songs to hopefully
> relieve my worried about the album. I absolutely LOVE "In The
> Future" and I quite like "Streets." I felt happy that
> Morrissey had not lost it, and now I'm awaiting the proper release of the
> CD so my first full listen can be in all its glory on my righteous stereo
> equipment (and with the full package of album art, liner notes, etc. to
> accompany it) rather than through very sub-par quality MP3s downloads.
> I haven't heard the first song, but while Morrissey in interviews is
> clearly sympathetic with the terrorists and on the side of the enemies of
> civilization, in song he keeps things vague enough so it shouldn't bug me
> too much.
> As it happens, I feel awful that American bombs have killed innocent
> people as well. However, when Morrissey states that he cares so much about
> Iraqis and seems to think the London homicide/suicide bombers are somehow
> outraged about deaths in Iraq, I can only feel sad for how stupid that is.
> The London bombers are on the same page as the Sunni-Saddamist and al
> Qaeda insurgancy in Iraq, who are the people doing the vast majority of
> killing of civilians in Iraq, and unlike America and Britain, they are
> killing civilians on purpose. I've already posted the February Brookings
> Institute polling data on Iraqis, which shows that over 90% of both
> Kurdish Iraqis and Shiite Iraqis feel the toppling of Saddam was worth it.
> The London suicide bombers are on the side of the people who just blew up
> that Shia golden-domed mosque in Iraq.
> It was also ridiculous for Morrissey to think that London only became a
> target of Islamo-fascists in 2003, when in fact the city has been targeted
> for many years before that.
i would think it would be hard to conduct an accurate poll in iraq at the present time.
hope you enjoy the rest of the album, i like it although i relly wish i never heard it first through the crappy downloads. i should have waited.
that's the difference between liberals and conservatives. we need everything now, conservatives could wait. shit, it was obvious the gay marraige was 10 to 15 years too early but a bunch of naive liberals wanted it now without realizing the current climate of US society.
likewise, Planned Parenthood is going to challenge in the courts the new South Dakota Law which is going to end up in a Supreme court that may very well, and probably likely, ban all abortions. wouldn't it jsut make sense to wait it out and see what happens with other states and the Supreme court, next elections, etc. i mean South Dakota only had one abortion clinic to begin with. is it worth risking the entire country just for that one clinic. see, although i'm a liberal, i always felt the conervative groups were better at strategy mainly because the liberals are just plain too naive when it comes to strategy (and i'm strictly talking about strategy and the politcal groups...not the beliefs and core values)
sorry, got off subject. i just hate reading this shit about South Dakota and Planned Parenthood's misplaced head.
> I've only listened to three songs from the new album, and I've posted my
> very preliminary, first impression reaction to them. I thought the
> lead-off single "You Have Killed Me" was the worst single of
> Morrissey's entire career, however I also felt it might be a decent album
> track if surrounded by much more inspired material. When Codreanu posted
> the album the other day, I decided to only sample two songs to hopefully
> relieve my worried about the album. I absolutely LOVE "In The
> Future" and I quite like "Streets." I felt happy that
> Morrissey had not lost it, and now I'm awaiting the proper release of the
> CD so my first full listen can be in all its glory on my righteous stereo
> equipment (and with the full package of album art, liner notes, etc. to
> accompany it) rather than through very sub-par quality MP3s downloads.
> I haven't heard the first song, but while Morrissey in interviews is
> clearly sympathetic with the terrorists and on the side of the enemies of
> civilization, in song he keeps things vague enough so it shouldn't bug me
> too much.
> As it happens, I feel awful that American bombs have killed innocent
> people as well. However, when Morrissey states that he cares so much about
> Iraqis and seems to think the London homicide/suicide bombers are somehow
> outraged about deaths in Iraq, I can only feel sad for how stupid that is.
> The London bombers are on the same page as the Sunni-Saddamist and al
> Qaeda insurgancy in Iraq, who are the people doing the vast majority of
> killing of civilians in Iraq, and unlike America and Britain, they are
> killing civilians on purpose. I've already posted the February Brookings
> Institute polling data on Iraqis, which shows that over 90% of both
> Kurdish Iraqis and Shiite Iraqis feel the toppling of Saddam was worth it.
> The London suicide bombers are on the side of the people who just blew up
> that Shia golden-domed mosque in Iraq.
> It was also ridiculous for Morrissey to think that London only became a
> target of Islamo-fascists in 2003, when in fact the city has been targeted
> for many years before that.
T
Theo van Gogh Martyrs Brigade
Guest
Re: Did anyone see Howard on Hannity and Colmes last night
> Sean and Howard were having a love fest last night and Howard touched upon
> this very point. Part 2 tonight!
> But I guess in Morrissey land it doesn't matter just as long as you can
> get Gucci loafers for 100 euros'
> I can't help but wonder why after his speedy interview with the FBI he
> wasn't grateful that he owns property in a country were he is protected by
> his 4th amendment rights.
I saw Part 1! God Damn is CBS a bunch of dicks. At the end of the day, though, all they'll succeed in doing is getting more people to sign up to Sirius!
I told you David Lee Roth was a bomb!
Remember that Morrissey hates consumer culture and sympathizes with terrorists who wanna destroy capitalism. It's hard to remember sometimes in all the statements about his top-shelf vodkas, overpriced high-fashion clothes, sports cars he keeps in a garage like that dad on Ferris Beuller's Day Off, yuppie beers, plasma TVs, etc etc etc.
His biggest complaint seems to be that the British courts were unwilling to go along with his lies on the witness stand when he didn't wanna pay bandmates what they were owed! Three cheers to the British courts for backing the victims of greedy pop stars!
> Sean and Howard were having a love fest last night and Howard touched upon
> this very point. Part 2 tonight!
> But I guess in Morrissey land it doesn't matter just as long as you can
> get Gucci loafers for 100 euros'
> I can't help but wonder why after his speedy interview with the FBI he
> wasn't grateful that he owns property in a country were he is protected by
> his 4th amendment rights.
I saw Part 1! God Damn is CBS a bunch of dicks. At the end of the day, though, all they'll succeed in doing is getting more people to sign up to Sirius!
I told you David Lee Roth was a bomb!
Remember that Morrissey hates consumer culture and sympathizes with terrorists who wanna destroy capitalism. It's hard to remember sometimes in all the statements about his top-shelf vodkas, overpriced high-fashion clothes, sports cars he keeps in a garage like that dad on Ferris Beuller's Day Off, yuppie beers, plasma TVs, etc etc etc.
His biggest complaint seems to be that the British courts were unwilling to go along with his lies on the witness stand when he didn't wanna pay bandmates what they were owed! Three cheers to the British courts for backing the victims of greedy pop stars!
P
puddle.
Guest
oh for f***'s sake
> Don't forget Morrissey hating on America for all the deeds of its
> "corrupt" government which is pretty rich coming from a man who
> has chosen Italy as his new home. Yes, the Italy of the new
> "Duce" Silvio Berlusconi, the man who makes Bush look like a
> modest guy, Cheney like a benevolent man and Tom DeLay like a poster boy
> of political ethics. I suppose Morrissey would be familiar with these
> things if he actually had any knowledge of world affairs and didn't just
> embarrass himself with his comments.
yes morrissey hates bush... many people do. and yes he went to rome, because he likes Rome. he didn;t say he went there because he likes the government. all he said is he left LA becasue he got sick of the US government and just because he found ROme.
didn;t he say he liked how people are relax, he can walk the streets without being noticed, he likes the architecture.
i mean, who's the current leader of Italy? who knows. all i know is he's a fascist. and morrissey probabaly knows that.
personally, i can;t stand the values of the Polish government, but i love going to poland to have a good time, i like the people (more or less, depends where), and i like how it looks.
why do conservatives care mrorissey doesn;t like bush. you realize if you attempt to stop watching liberal actors and listenning to liberal musicians, you'll end up with tobe keith, dennis miller and viewing the movie Omega Man over and over again.
get over it, Bush is an easy target for people like morrissey. damn this is nothing new. you seem like you never knew morrissey. i can;t even imagine a morrissey that would support someone like Bush. it would be scary.
> Don't forget Morrissey hating on America for all the deeds of its
> "corrupt" government which is pretty rich coming from a man who
> has chosen Italy as his new home. Yes, the Italy of the new
> "Duce" Silvio Berlusconi, the man who makes Bush look like a
> modest guy, Cheney like a benevolent man and Tom DeLay like a poster boy
> of political ethics. I suppose Morrissey would be familiar with these
> things if he actually had any knowledge of world affairs and didn't just
> embarrass himself with his comments.
yes morrissey hates bush... many people do. and yes he went to rome, because he likes Rome. he didn;t say he went there because he likes the government. all he said is he left LA becasue he got sick of the US government and just because he found ROme.
didn;t he say he liked how people are relax, he can walk the streets without being noticed, he likes the architecture.
i mean, who's the current leader of Italy? who knows. all i know is he's a fascist. and morrissey probabaly knows that.
personally, i can;t stand the values of the Polish government, but i love going to poland to have a good time, i like the people (more or less, depends where), and i like how it looks.
why do conservatives care mrorissey doesn;t like bush. you realize if you attempt to stop watching liberal actors and listenning to liberal musicians, you'll end up with tobe keith, dennis miller and viewing the movie Omega Man over and over again.
get over it, Bush is an easy target for people like morrissey. damn this is nothing new. you seem like you never knew morrissey. i can;t even imagine a morrissey that would support someone like Bush. it would be scary.
P
puddle.
Guest
i mean, being against bush and the us government doesn't mean he supports whatver bad governemts...
he didn't mention.
> yes morrissey hates bush... many people do. and yes he went to rome,
> because he likes Rome. he didn;t say he went there because he likes the
> government. all he said is he left LA becasue he got sick of the US
> government and just because he found ROme.
> didn;t he say he liked how people are relax, he can walk the streets
> without being noticed, he likes the architecture.
> i mean, who's the current leader of Italy? who knows. all i know is he's a
> fascist. and morrissey probabaly knows that.
> personally, i can;t stand the values of the Polish government, but i love
> going to poland to have a good time, i like the people (more or less,
> depends where), and i like how it looks.
> why do conservatives care mrorissey doesn;t like bush. you realize if you
> attempt to stop watching liberal actors and listenning to liberal
> musicians, you'll end up with tobe keith, dennis miller and viewing the
> movie Omega Man over and over again.
> get over it, Bush is an easy target for people like morrissey. damn this
> is nothing new. you seem like you never knew morrissey. i can;t even
> imagine a morrissey that would support someone like Bush. it would be
> scary.
he didn't mention.
> yes morrissey hates bush... many people do. and yes he went to rome,
> because he likes Rome. he didn;t say he went there because he likes the
> government. all he said is he left LA becasue he got sick of the US
> government and just because he found ROme.
> didn;t he say he liked how people are relax, he can walk the streets
> without being noticed, he likes the architecture.
> i mean, who's the current leader of Italy? who knows. all i know is he's a
> fascist. and morrissey probabaly knows that.
> personally, i can;t stand the values of the Polish government, but i love
> going to poland to have a good time, i like the people (more or less,
> depends where), and i like how it looks.
> why do conservatives care mrorissey doesn;t like bush. you realize if you
> attempt to stop watching liberal actors and listenning to liberal
> musicians, you'll end up with tobe keith, dennis miller and viewing the
> movie Omega Man over and over again.
> get over it, Bush is an easy target for people like morrissey. damn this
> is nothing new. you seem like you never knew morrissey. i can;t even
> imagine a morrissey that would support someone like Bush. it would be
> scary.
P
puddle.
Guest
damn you absolutley hate morrissey. theo and lets go devils
lets face it, you two are the exact oppistie of morrissey and his fans. what makes you two stick around? listenning to the posts you two put up bashing him, i can;t imagine how you can listen to his music without feeling hatred toward the guy. for someone you disrespect, you'f just be stealing from him if his music does something good for you. i mean you do realize you hate morrissey. not mentin you blow things way out of perspective when it comes to the guy and when it comes to the court case i am on morrissey side after reading what morrissey had to say on true-to-you. soon after mike joyce said he'll make a statemnt but never did. why? because he had nothing. he didn;t know mrorrissey would come out with the truth. he took advantage of morrissey being a private man as he attempted to steal from him
guys really, it's weird that you can still be here and accept from morrissey his music when you disrespect and hate him so much.
> I saw Part 1! God Damn is CBS a bunch of dicks. At the end of the day,
> though, all they'll succeed in doing is getting more people to sign up to
> Sirius!
> I told you David Lee Roth was a bomb!
> Remember that Morrissey hates consumer culture and sympathizes with
> terrorists who wanna destroy capitalism. It's hard to remember sometimes
> in all the statements about his top-shelf vodkas, overpriced high-fashion
> clothes, sports cars he keeps in a garage like that dad on Ferris
> Beuller's Day Off, yuppie beers, plasma TVs, etc etc etc.
> His biggest complaint seems to be that the British courts were unwilling
> to go along with his lies on the witness stand when he didn't wanna pay
> bandmates what they were owed! Three cheers to the British courts for
> backing the victims of greedy pop stars!
lets face it, you two are the exact oppistie of morrissey and his fans. what makes you two stick around? listenning to the posts you two put up bashing him, i can;t imagine how you can listen to his music without feeling hatred toward the guy. for someone you disrespect, you'f just be stealing from him if his music does something good for you. i mean you do realize you hate morrissey. not mentin you blow things way out of perspective when it comes to the guy and when it comes to the court case i am on morrissey side after reading what morrissey had to say on true-to-you. soon after mike joyce said he'll make a statemnt but never did. why? because he had nothing. he didn;t know mrorrissey would come out with the truth. he took advantage of morrissey being a private man as he attempted to steal from him
guys really, it's weird that you can still be here and accept from morrissey his music when you disrespect and hate him so much.
> I saw Part 1! God Damn is CBS a bunch of dicks. At the end of the day,
> though, all they'll succeed in doing is getting more people to sign up to
> Sirius!
> I told you David Lee Roth was a bomb!
> Remember that Morrissey hates consumer culture and sympathizes with
> terrorists who wanna destroy capitalism. It's hard to remember sometimes
> in all the statements about his top-shelf vodkas, overpriced high-fashion
> clothes, sports cars he keeps in a garage like that dad on Ferris
> Beuller's Day Off, yuppie beers, plasma TVs, etc etc etc.
> His biggest complaint seems to be that the British courts were unwilling
> to go along with his lies on the witness stand when he didn't wanna pay
> bandmates what they were owed! Three cheers to the British courts for
> backing the victims of greedy pop stars!
T
Theo van Gogh Martyrs Brigade
Guest
Re: yes but theo we all want to know what oyu think of the new album
> i would think it would be hard to conduct an accurate poll in iraq at the
> present time.
Do you read the Brookings Institute reports about Iraq? It's extremely valuable information. Click on the PDF file here: http://www.brookings.edu/fp/saban/iraq/indexarchive.htm
You'll be surprised at how serious and non-partisan these reports are.
And the poll question I mentioned cuts both ways, actually. It does show that the Shia and Kurds are overwhelmingly feeling that all the hardships with the toppling of Saddam have been worth it, and another question shows they feel the country is heading in the right direction. However, it's disturbing to see how few Sunnis agree with them, which is something that has to be addressed if Bush's policy can work out in the long run. It doesn't point to Iraq succeeding as a unified country. Iraq was an arificial country to begin with, of course, so it's pretty complicated.
> hope you enjoy the rest of the album, i like it although i relly wish i
> never heard it first through the crappy downloads. i should have waited.
I was very excited by "In the Future When All's Well."
I have no problem listening to "America Is Not The World," even though when I break down the lyrics there's a few lines that I'd really love to argue out with Morrissey. But I dunno...I mean....I know at the end of the day that Morrissey has a good heart. I don't need to agree with him about everything. And I know some of his views represent the views of a lot of people in the world, so for that it's worth hearing.
> likewise, Planned Parenthood is going to challenge in the courts the new
> South Dakota Law which is going to end up in a Supreme court that may very
> well, and probably likely, ban all abortions.
Hmm. Well you know that even if the Supreme Court overturned Roe, that wouldn't ban abortion. It would revert it back to the states to work out, which is actually more democratic.
If that happened, I think you'd see a lot fo Republicans thrown out of office.
But I doubt that Roe will be overturned. The opponants of Roe are still at least one Justice short of that (we don't actually know how Roberts or Alito will rule yet - I'm old enough to remember how Dems tried to say Justice Souter would overturn Roe and he's turned out to be extremely liberal on the Court!). I would be an opponant of Roe, except it's been the law for so long that the precedent should be respected.
> to wait it out and see what happens with other states and the Supreme
> court, next elections, etc. i mean South Dakota only had one abortion
> clinic to begin with. is it worth risking the entire country just for that
> one clinic. see, although i'm a liberal, i always felt the conervative
> groups were better at strategy mainly because the liberals are just plain
> too naive when it comes to strategy (and i'm strictly talking about
> strategy and the politcal groups...not the beliefs and core values)
The best thing that could every happen to the Democratic Party would be for Roe to be overturned!
I'm not really read up on this matter, but if I were an abortion opponant...for now I'd try and concentrate on chipping away at abortion on issues like partial-birth abortions, because it doesn't look to me like there's a majority on the Court that would actually overturn Roe. I think it's bad strategy for those opposed to abortion! But we shall see.....
> i would think it would be hard to conduct an accurate poll in iraq at the
> present time.
Do you read the Brookings Institute reports about Iraq? It's extremely valuable information. Click on the PDF file here: http://www.brookings.edu/fp/saban/iraq/indexarchive.htm
You'll be surprised at how serious and non-partisan these reports are.
And the poll question I mentioned cuts both ways, actually. It does show that the Shia and Kurds are overwhelmingly feeling that all the hardships with the toppling of Saddam have been worth it, and another question shows they feel the country is heading in the right direction. However, it's disturbing to see how few Sunnis agree with them, which is something that has to be addressed if Bush's policy can work out in the long run. It doesn't point to Iraq succeeding as a unified country. Iraq was an arificial country to begin with, of course, so it's pretty complicated.
> hope you enjoy the rest of the album, i like it although i relly wish i
> never heard it first through the crappy downloads. i should have waited.
I was very excited by "In the Future When All's Well."
I have no problem listening to "America Is Not The World," even though when I break down the lyrics there's a few lines that I'd really love to argue out with Morrissey. But I dunno...I mean....I know at the end of the day that Morrissey has a good heart. I don't need to agree with him about everything. And I know some of his views represent the views of a lot of people in the world, so for that it's worth hearing.
> likewise, Planned Parenthood is going to challenge in the courts the new
> South Dakota Law which is going to end up in a Supreme court that may very
> well, and probably likely, ban all abortions.
Hmm. Well you know that even if the Supreme Court overturned Roe, that wouldn't ban abortion. It would revert it back to the states to work out, which is actually more democratic.
If that happened, I think you'd see a lot fo Republicans thrown out of office.
But I doubt that Roe will be overturned. The opponants of Roe are still at least one Justice short of that (we don't actually know how Roberts or Alito will rule yet - I'm old enough to remember how Dems tried to say Justice Souter would overturn Roe and he's turned out to be extremely liberal on the Court!). I would be an opponant of Roe, except it's been the law for so long that the precedent should be respected.
> to wait it out and see what happens with other states and the Supreme
> court, next elections, etc. i mean South Dakota only had one abortion
> clinic to begin with. is it worth risking the entire country just for that
> one clinic. see, although i'm a liberal, i always felt the conervative
> groups were better at strategy mainly because the liberals are just plain
> too naive when it comes to strategy (and i'm strictly talking about
> strategy and the politcal groups...not the beliefs and core values)
The best thing that could every happen to the Democratic Party would be for Roe to be overturned!
I'm not really read up on this matter, but if I were an abortion opponant...for now I'd try and concentrate on chipping away at abortion on issues like partial-birth abortions, because it doesn't look to me like there's a majority on the Court that would actually overturn Roe. I think it's bad strategy for those opposed to abortion! But we shall see.....
Similar threads
- Replies
- 12
- Views
- 1K
- Replies
- 4
- Views
- 998
- Replies
- 15
- Views
- 1K
U
- Replies
- 0
- Views
- 435
U
Share:
- Forums
- Archives
- Archive
- General Discussion archive (read-only)
- General Discussion 1999-2009 archive (read-only)
- General Discussion archive 2006 (read-only)
