Filed under: Political Activism
Question:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Thursday, Nov. 04, 2004 Recently, the Supreme Court made a saddening announcement: Chief Justice William Rehnquist is battling thyroid cancer. The news came as a surprise in the midst of an intense presidential campaign. Rehnquist plans to get back to work as soon as he can, but this very serious illness underlines the chance that he – and/or other Justices – may leave the Court over the next four years, with President Bush nominating a successor, or successors. That is a tremendous responsibility. http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20041104.html Hamilton is a former SCOTUS clerk. There’s a certain collegiality there. Rehnquist should die in the most painful manner possible. Why, because he and Hamilton were collegial? Indeed it is, as well as an historic opportunity. We’ve seen a trend towards the liberal minority interests using the courts to legislate what they cannot win at the ballot box. So-called gay marriage comes most readily to mind, but it is from from the only issue. I anticipate that should the vacancies appear that are expected we can see this trend stopped dead in its tracks. To be replaced with conservative activism, which insulates government and corporate interests from any and all responsibility for tortious conduct. This is a good thing? We can only hope for a diminishing of business bankrupting lawsuits awarded by naive juries, led by the nose by John Edwards and co. We can only hope for a restoration of manufacturing that could result from businesses actually being able to afford to function and profit. Edwards likes to tell us how his daddy worked at a mill to support him. When Johnny grew up, *he* closed the mill, and a lot of dads didn’t have the chance to support their families by working in one. can u send us to url’s showing how he closed mills ? thank u
its interesting how the christians seem sometimes to lie and yet none of them have any problem with it. and these are supposed to be the christians. — Love is all u need.
Response:
Rehnquist should die in the most painful manner possible. That’s my line, counseler. You’re welcome to it.
How magnanimous of you to offer me something which is already mine. How Repugnikkkan, eh? Feel free.
Not in this U$$A. Do you?* *Without of course using the Ted Kaldis Thoroughly Fucked Dictionary definition of "free".
Response:
Rehnquist should die in the most painful manner possible. That’s my line, counseler. You’re welcome to it. How magnanimous of you to offer me something which is already mine. How Repugnikkkan, eh?
Just like Karl Rove — you take the literal and make if figurative, and take the figurative and make it literal. Feel free. Not in this U$$A. Do you?*
Not any more. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – *Without of course using the Ted Kaldis Thoroughly Fucked Dictionary definition of "free".
Response:
Rehnquist should die in the most painful manner possible. That’s my line, counseler.
You’re welcome to it. Feel free.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Thursday, Nov. 04, 2004 Recently, the Supreme Court made a saddening announcement: Chief Justice William Rehnquist is battling thyroid cancer. The news came as a surprise in the midst of an intense presidential campaign. Rehnquist plans to get back to work as soon as he can, but this very serious illness underlines the chance that he – and/or other Justices – may leave the Court over the next four years, with President Bush nominating a successor, or successors. That is a tremendous responsibility. http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20041104.html Hamilton is a former SCOTUS clerk. There’s a certain collegiality there. Rehnquist should die in the most painful manner possible. Why, because he and Hamilton were collegial?
It’s more a matter of political correctness than anything else. Marci Hamilton is a member of the SCOTUS Bar, and judges have this nasty habit of forgetting their legal obligations. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Indeed it is, as well as an historic opportunity. We’ve seen a trend towards the liberal minority interests using the courts to legislate what they cannot win at the ballot box. So-called gay marriage comes most readily to mind, but it is from from the only issue. I anticipate that should the vacancies appear that are expected we can see this trend stopped dead in its tracks. To be replaced with conservative activism, which insulates government and corporate interests from any and all responsibility for tortious conduct. This is a good thing? We can only hope for a diminishing of business bankrupting lawsuits awarded by naive juries, led by the nose by John Edwards and co. We can only hope for a restoration of manufacturing that could result from businesses actually being able to afford to function and profit. Edwards likes to tell us how his daddy worked at a mill to support him. When Johnny grew up, *he* closed the mill, and a lot of dads didn’t have the chance to support their families by working in one.
I would be among the first to agree that a lawsuit claiming damages because a McDonald’s actually served hot coffee is not just frivolous but staggeringly so. But truth be told, tort liability law in other countries isn’t *that* far behind ours, as far as the envelope being pushed. Where Herr Rehnquist and the like have done a grave disservice to the law is in sheltering government officials from responsibility for their intentionally tortious actions. Rehnquist has done everything he could to disenfranchise individuals, thereby transforming citizenship into an empty promise. For this, he deserves as much misery as life can bestow upon him.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Thursday, Nov. 04, 2004 Recently, the Supreme Court made a saddening announcement: Chief Justice William Rehnquist is battling thyroid cancer. The news came as a surprise in the midst of an intense presidential campaign. Rehnquist plans to get back to work as soon as he can, but this very serious illness underlines the chance that he – and/or other Justices – may leave the Court over the next four years, with President Bush nominating a successor, or successors. That is a tremendous responsibility. http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20041104.html Indeed it is, as well as an historic opportunity.
An historic opportunity to remove the last vestiges of the checks and balances established by our constitution. Congratulations, you’ve voided the document. — Denis Loubet http://www.io.com/~dloubet
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Thursday, Nov. 04, 2004 Recently, the Supreme Court made a saddening announcement: Chief Justice William Rehnquist is battling thyroid cancer. The news came as a surprise in the midst of an intense presidential campaign. Rehnquist plans to get back to work as soon as he can, but this very serious illness underlines the chance that he – and/or other Justices – may leave the Court over the next four years, with President Bush nominating a successor, or successors. That is a tremendous responsibility. http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20041104.html Hamilton is a former SCOTUS clerk. There’s a certain collegiality there. Rehnquist should die in the most painful manner possible. Indeed it is, as well as an historic opportunity. We’ve seen a trend towards the liberal minority interests using the courts to legislate what they cannot win at the ballot box. So-called gay marriage comes most readily to mind, but it is from from the only issue. I anticipate that should the vacancies appear that are expected we can see this trend stopped dead in its tracks. To be replaced with conservative activism, which insulates government and corporate interests from any and all responsibility for tortious conduct. This is a good thing?
one of his comments a year or so ago was that it was ok for the u s to have a holy war aginst the muslims because the chrisitans did it in the past. very strange and interesting man. of course if he dies bush will appoint who he feels best in the court. it comes with the territory. i dont think people can complain. bush did win his second term by 51 percent of the vote. this is part of our system at work. i do find it interesting though that the republicans smile and are happy when they can through our system what they want. they dont seem to believe that our free system is the strongest we can have though. the church is not a democratic system. i would look to see more laws that limit freedom and instead put church law more in our country. i would expect more laws passed to strengthen and in addition to the patriot act. i believe reinquit will die soon. lets see what happens — Love is all u need.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Thursday, Nov. 04, 2004 Recently, the Supreme Court made a saddening announcement: Chief Justice William Rehnquist is battling thyroid cancer. The news came as a surprise in the midst of an intense presidential campaign. Rehnquist plans to get back to work as soon as he can, but this very serious illness underlines the chance that he – and/or other Justices – may leave the Court over the next four years, with President Bush nominating a successor, or successors. That is a tremendous responsibility. http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20041104.html Hamilton is a former SCOTUS clerk. There’s a certain collegiality there. Rehnquist should die in the most painful manner possible. Why, because he and Hamilton were collegial? Indeed it is, as well as an historic opportunity. We’ve seen a trend towards the liberal minority interests using the courts to legislate what they cannot win at the ballot box. So-called gay marriage comes most readily to mind, but it is from from the only issue. I anticipate that should the vacancies appear that are expected we can see this trend stopped dead in its tracks. To be replaced with conservative activism, which insulates government and corporate interests from any and all responsibility for tortious conduct. This is a good thing? We can only hope for a diminishing of business bankrupting lawsuits awarded by naive juries, led by the nose by John Edwards and co. We can only hope for a restoration of manufacturing that could result from businesses actually being able to afford to function and profit. Edwards likes to tell us how his daddy worked at a mill to support him. When Johnny grew up, *he* closed the mill, and a lot of dads didn’t have the chance to support their families by working in one.
can u send us to url’s showing how he closed mills ? thank u — Love is all u need.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Thursday, Nov. 04, 2004 Recently, the Supreme Court made a saddening announcement: Chief Justice William Rehnquist is battling thyroid cancer. The news came as a surprise in the midst of an intense presidential campaign. Rehnquist plans to get back to work as soon as he can, but this very serious illness underlines the chance that he – and/or other Justices – may leave the Court over the next four years, with President Bush nominating a successor, or successors. That is a tremendous responsibility. http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20041104.html Hamilton is a former SCOTUS clerk. There’s a certain collegiality there. Rehnquist should die in the most painful manner possible.
That’s my line, counseler. Indeed it is, as well as an historic opportunity. We’ve seen a trend towards the liberal minority interests using the courts to legislate what they cannot win at the ballot box. So-called gay marriage comes most readily to mind, but it is from from the only issue. I anticipate that should the vacancies appear that are expected we can see this trend stopped dead in its tracks. To be replaced with conservative activism, which insulates government and corporate interests from any and all responsibility for tortious conduct. This is a good thing?
For the morons and idiots that are the average ‘murrikun … Re: REHNQUIST, CANCER and KARMA ! Die a slow painful death you fascist shitsucker!
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Thursday, Nov. 04, 2004 Recently, the Supreme Court made a saddening announcement: Chief Justice William Rehnquist is battling thyroid cancer. The news came as a surprise in the midst of an intense presidential campaign. Rehnquist plans to get back to work as soon as he can, but this very serious illness underlines the chance that he – and/or other Justices – may leave the Court over the next four years, with President Bush nominating a successor, or successors. That is a tremendous responsibility. http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20041104.html Hamilton is a former SCOTUS clerk. There’s a certain collegiality there. Rehnquist should die in the most painful manner possible.
Why, because he and Hamilton were collegial? Indeed it is, as well as an historic opportunity. We’ve seen a trend towards the liberal minority interests using the courts to legislate what they cannot win at the ballot box. So-called gay marriage comes most readily to mind, but it is from from the only issue. I anticipate that should the vacancies appear that are expected we can see this trend stopped dead in its tracks. To be replaced with conservative activism, which insulates government and corporate interests from any and all responsibility for tortious conduct. This is a good thing?
We can only hope for a diminishing of business bankrupting lawsuits awarded by naive juries, led by the nose by John Edwards and co. We can only hope for a restoration of manufacturing that could result from businesses actually being able to afford to function and profit. Edwards likes to tell us how his daddy worked at a mill to support him. When Johnny grew up, *he* closed the mill, and a lot of dads didn’t have the chance to support their families by working in one.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Thursday, Nov. 04, 2004 Recently, the Supreme Court made a saddening announcement: Chief Justice William Rehnquist is battling thyroid cancer. The news came as a surprise in the midst of an intense presidential campaign. Rehnquist plans to get back to work as soon as he can, but this very serious illness underlines the chance that he – and/or other Justices – may leave the Court over the next four years, with President Bush nominating a successor, or successors. That is a tremendous responsibility. http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20041104.html
Hamilton is a former SCOTUS clerk. There’s a certain collegiality there. Rehnquist should die in the most painful manner possible. Indeed it is, as well as an historic opportunity. We’ve seen a trend towards the liberal minority interests using the courts to legislate what they cannot win at the ballot box. So-called gay marriage comes most readily to mind, but it is from from the only issue. I anticipate that should the vacancies appear that are expected we can see this trend stopped dead in its tracks.
To be replaced with conservative activism, which insulates government and corporate interests from any and all responsibility for tortious conduct. This is a good thing?
Response:
Thursday, Nov. 04, 2004 Recently, the Supreme Court made a saddening announcement: Chief Justice William Rehnquist is battling thyroid cancer. The news came as a surprise in the midst of an intense presidential campaign. Rehnquist plans to get back to work as soon as he can, but this very serious illness underlines the chance that he – and/or other Justices – may leave the Court over the next four years, with President Bush nominating a successor, or successors. That is a tremendous responsibility. http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20041104.html
Response:
Thursday, Nov. 04, 2004 Recently, the Supreme Court made a saddening announcement: Chief Justice William Rehnquist is battling thyroid cancer. The news came as a surprise in the midst of an intense presidential campaign. Rehnquist plans to get back to work as soon as he can, but this very serious illness underlines the chance that he – and/or other Justices – may leave the Court over the next four years, with President Bush nominating a successor, or successors. That is a tremendous responsibility. http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20041104.html
Indeed it is, as well as an historic opportunity. We’ve seen a trend towards the liberal minority interests using the courts to legislate what they cannot win at the ballot box. So-called gay marriage comes most readily to mind, but it is from from the only issue. I anticipate that should the vacancies appear that are expected we can see this trend stopped dead in its tracks.
Response:
Question:
isn’t loosing
don’t worry k.p. i know. s.w.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – my main question, is what the f*ck is so wrong with humanity that we will just sit back and watch as our world and its future are stamped remorselessly under the boot of this secretive, doublespeaking, avaricious, unenlightened and morally vapid misadministration? what will it take for people to get angry and bring the whole corrupt mess down? isn’t loosing half of your life savings enough, or has the media indoctrination cowed us that much? is it necessary for wwiii to erupt and for everything we know to be demolished before we’ll admit something is going terribly wrong with the world? for your own good, as well as for everyone’s future, dare to think for yourself, and écrasez l’infâme
As long as people get brainwashed by the mass media barons that we’re fighting for our freedom and security in Iraq, that the economy is strong and that everything is OK and just clicking along "we" will be content to just sit back and watch Friends. From where I am sitting this picture is not gonna change anytime soon. Note also that in order to keep the illusion going government will have to become progressively more "secretive, doublespeaking, avaricious, unenlightened and morally vapid" and if I may add, more oppressive too. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -’evolution today READING: http://news.com.com/2010-1071-979276.html http://chblue.com/artman/publish/printer_1123.shtml http://www.studentsfororwell.org/ good one http://www.lexinformatica.org/cybercrime/articles/latimes_021117.html http://www.washtimes.com/national/20021115-70231.htm http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2002/07/28/IN2441… http://www.commondreams.org/views01/0922-07.htm ACTION: http://irregulartimes.com/oiaaction.html "If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face–forever."
wpf
Response:
Oh there is movement. But this new activism being world wide, takes longer to start. In a few days a mass demonstration will be taking place in Washington will be the opening shot. The snowball effect has started its movement down the slippery political slope. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – isn’t loosing don’t worry k.p. i know. s.w.
Response:
Republicans were frustrated by the moderate policies and the extraordinary success of Clinton. Bush offered them the power they lost under Clinton. The republicans are not really stupid…they are just mesmerized by the power. When they think….when they look at Bush in daylight they will throw up like a Texas drunk waking up on Sunday morning with a hangover and a whore in bed with them. We can’t force a republican to think. They think for themselves. They are an independent lot and resist any such force. They must drink until they pass out and then wake up with the whore, Bush, in bed with them. They must see him for what he is in the morning light. When I was young I fell in love with a girl that was not right for me…and I was not right for her. My parents and hers tried to keep us apart. So long as they worked against us, we found ways to get together. Finally, her dad said, "Okay, you want her; you got her!" He walked away and left us to do whatever we wanted to do. I rented her an apartment….but the very first night we both realized how unsuited we were for each other. We split…but we did it on our own. No one could have kept us apart. We had to make our own minds up. I remember back when the Religious right had their contract with America and had just won control of congress. They had been talking for years about getting the right to pray in schools. They whined and whined and whined, never answering questions about how they felt about witchcraft and Satanism prayers in the same schools where they wanted to pray. Finally, they had the power. The really dumb ones continued to whine…but the wiser ones suddenly realized the problem with unchecked prayer that they hadn’t dealt with before. They just shut up! They stopped talking about it. There was no solution to their problem….so they did nothing. Some still whine….but they do not act, because most of them know they don’t really want what they say they want. So they do not act. Sometimes, I think we just have to let Bush have his way. Maybe we should just get out of his way and let him destroy without holding him back. I have faith in America. I believe if we just get out of the way….the republicans will grab him, hold him down, then throw him out of office. For the next two years, we can shine light on his darkness, but other than that there is not much we can do. Republicans, themselves, must stop him. He belongs to them. Like a mad dog. It is best to let the owners shoot it! Republicans don’t naturally give up freedoms. Republicans don’t naturally spend, spend, spend. Republicans don’t naturally quote Keynes. Republicans don’t naturally ignore deficit spending. These things are unnatural. If we shove they shove. If we push, they push. In Judo, one learns to use the opponents moves against them. When they shove, instead of shoving back we should help them. We should pull with them so that they fall while we keep our footing, because they were not expecting this. Give them their tax cuts……Give them whatever they want…..and more, but tell them what we are doing. They will be confused and will stop the madness like the Texas Drunk that finally wakes up and sees the beauty of the night before is a witch or even worse maybe even a drag queen. more. They are on a rampage. Maybe it is better to just climb to higher ground and get out of their way. Randy R.Cox
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – my main question, is what the f*ck is so wrong with humanity that we will just sit back and watch as our world and its future are stamped remorselessly under the boot of this secretive, doublespeaking, avaricious, unenlightened and morally vapid misadministration? what will it take for people to get angry and bring the whole corrupt mess down? isn’t loosing half of your life savings enough, or has the media indoctrination cowed us that much? is it necessary for wwiii to erupt and for everything we know to be demolished before we’ll admit something is going terribly wrong with the world? for your own good, as well as for everyone’s future, dare to think for yourself, and
Question:
Before any of you start voicing opinions that make the world wonder if you are truly in control of your faculties, please consider this situation from the officers’ perspective. [...]
I enjoyed your thought provoking post; its perhaps the most sensible post in this thread, or on this topic. I’m beginning to see your point of view. I appreciate the mission of law enforcement officers and the things they endure, but I believe there is a problem in Cookville. With so little data, I’m not about to debate this event. I do wonder if the dog would have survived, if he had been secured by a harness. Perhaps the police would have chosen to kill it, in order to remove it from the car. I can see that happening. In Chicago today, Anna Cieslewicz saw two aggressive pit bulls, as they were killing her. I can’t help wondering if that is what the officer saw in Cookville that night–or thought he saw. Aside from the misfortune of this incident, I’m sure of only one thing: when I exit my vehicle, I will shut the door behind me. Yes, I might be shot, even killed, but there is no doubt of what would happen to my two friendly, black Chow Chows. Michael — Percussion: a masterful mix of speed, force and finess. ||
Response:
Bravo!!! The voice of reason speaks. I wonder if there would be this much outcry if the officer had been bitten or if there is so much anger voiced when an officer is shot. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Before any of you start voicing opinions that make the world wonder if you are truly in control of your faculties, please consider this situation from the officers’ perspective. What if this really WAS a felony? What if the dog really WAS vicious and attempted to attack? What if that attack resulted in the officers being distracted to the point where the alleged felons were able to pose serious bodily harm or death to the officers? Now, what if one of those officers who was injured/killed was one of your family? You have to understand that they were responding to a potential felony stop. How would you suggest they handle the situation based on the information they were presented? The death of this dog, horrible as it is, could have been prevented had the owners confined them some way inside the car (seatbelt harnesses, crates) or if the officer(s) or family had closed the door as supposedly requested by the family. I believe that the family is entitled to some form of reimbursement, but PLEASE realize that we don’t know all the details. If I was unable to understand all of the verbal content of the video, it is reasonable to believe that others had difficulty as well. And if I felt that the video quality was sufficiently poor as to make breed identification impossible, as well as the posture of this dog after exiting the car, then others probably would have to admit that they really couldn’t tell either. While it is extremely unfortunate that this has happened, please don’t join the list of people whose perceptions have been formed merely by their love of animals and not by the facts. jav For those of use that love animals that watched in horror as a beloved family dog of a family on vacation was gunned down by police in Tennessee – we want to take action!!! We can!!! Here are the web addresses and e-mails that you can use to POUND Cookeville’s police and media with! Let them know that this type of police action is unacceptable in a free country. Our highways are not shooting zones for police ! This cop is on administrative leave – HE SHOULD BE FIRED and barred from ever carrying a gun AGAIN!!! This Cookeville cop is a threat to the public – as well as for four-legged family members! POUND ‘EM!!! Here are the web addresses and e-mails that you can use to POUND Cookeville’s police and media with! Cookeville Homepage http://www.cookeville.com/ Cookeville Police Department http://www.usacops.com/tn/p38503/ and http://www.cookevillepolice.com/ NOTE – that both of these pages are down. So wait until they come back up. The shame must be getting to them!!! Wait and them pound them – or call and/or write letters! Let them know that you appreaciate that they protect the community from overly-friendly family dogs by shooting them in the head. . . Cookeville Police Department Chief of Police Robert E Terry 10 E Broad St Cookeville, Tennessee 38503 (931)526-2125 Putnam County Sheriff’s Office Sheriff Jerry Abston 421 E Spring St Cookeville, Tennessee 38501 (615)528-8484 NOTE that the forum of the Cookeville Homepage http://www.cookeville.com/forums is not allowing for more accounts "due to national controversity." City of Cookeville homepage www.ci.cookeville.tn.us/ Could the shame be too much for them and Cookeville Police?! You can watch this tragedy and act of police brutality on "Patton" – the four legged member of the Smoaka family http://www.tennessean.com/video/dogshooting0103/doglg.rm POUND ‘EM!!!
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If you read the petition you will note the following: "We, the CITIZEN’S OF TN and sign this petition you could invalidate the petition. Please just let the matter drop. The family has already said that they will sue the parties involved in this horrendous act. Don’t jeopardize their law suite by carrying this any further. Nan There is a petition going around for the removal of the Cookeville cop that brutally murder Patton, the four-legged Smoaka family member: — ‘The following petition was sent to me by an anonymous user and requested me to post it on this site. The petition does fit within our political activism policies and I am happy to oblige. The petition will run for one week, after which it will be sent to Chief Terry of the Cookeville Police Department. "We, the citizen’s of Cookeville, Tennessee call for either the immediate removal (snipped)
Good, Then I will surely sign the petiton
Response:
I live that cop!! All pitbull type dogs should be shot!!!
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – There is a petition going around for the removal of the Cookeville cop that brutally murder Patton, the four-legged Smoaka family member: — ‘The following petition was sent to me by an anonymous user and requested me to post it on this site. The petition does fit within our political activism policies and I am happy to oblige. The petition will run for one week, after which it will be sent to Chief Terry of the Cookeville Police Department. "We, the citizen’s of Cookeville, Tennessee call for either the immediate removal of Eric Hall as a police officer or his immediate resignation from that same position. This is in response to the recent incident in which Mr. Hall shot a family pet while involved in a felony stop on Interstate 40. We consider this an unwarranted and highly volatile reaction to the situation. This conduct reflects very badly on Mr. Hall, Cookeville Police, and the city of Cookeville. Mr. Hall’s sworn duty to uphold the law, and protect citizens from the same type of thuggish behavior that he is now guilty of.’ http://www.cookevilletalks.com/viewtopic.php?t=139 — The citizens of Cookeville are thourgly ashamed – let’s help them out and give them support in the removal of this crazy cop!
Response:
No – you can voice you concerns – and anger – over the message board! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If you read the petition you will note the following: "We, the CITIZEN’S OF Cookeville, TN and sign this petition you could invalidate the petition.
Response:
Before any of you start voicing opinions that make the world wonder if you are truly in control of your faculties, please consider this situation from the officers’ perspective. What if this really WAS a felony? What if the dog really WAS vicious and attempted to attack? What if that attack resulted in the officers being distracted to the point where the alleged felons were able to pose serious bodily harm or death to the officers? Now, what if one of those officers who was injured/killed was one of your family? You have to understand that they were responding to a potential felony stop. How would you suggest they handle the situation based on the information they were presented? The death of this dog, horrible as it is, could have been prevented had the owners confined them some way inside the car (seatbelt harnesses, crates) or if the officer(s) or family had closed the door as supposedly requested by the family. I believe that the family is entitled to some form of reimbursement, but PLEASE realize that we don’t know all the details. If I was unable to understand all of the verbal content of the video, it is reasonable to believe that others had difficulty as well. And if I felt that the video quality was sufficiently poor as to make breed identification impossible, as well as the posture of this dog after exiting the car, then others probably would have to admit that they really couldn’t tell either. While it is extremely unfortunate that this has happened, please don’t join the list of people whose perceptions have been formed merely by their love of animals and not by the facts. jav
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – For those of use that love animals that watched in horror as a beloved family dog of a family on vacation was gunned down by police in Tennessee – we want to take action!!! We can!!! Here are the web addresses and e-mails that you can use to POUND Cookeville’s police and media with! Let them know that this type of police action is unacceptable in a free country. Our highways are not shooting zones for police ! This cop is on administrative leave – HE SHOULD BE FIRED and barred from ever carrying a gun AGAIN!!! This Cookeville cop is a threat to the public – as well as for four-legged family members! POUND ‘EM!!! Here are the web addresses and e-mails that you can use to POUND Cookeville’s police and media with! Cookeville Homepage http://www.cookeville.com/ Cookeville Police Department http://www.usacops.com/tn/p38503/ and http://www.cookevillepolice.com/ NOTE – that both of these pages are down. So wait until they come back up. The shame must be getting to them!!! Wait and them pound them – or call and/or write letters! Let them know that you appreaciate that they protect the community from overly-friendly family dogs by shooting them in the head. . . Cookeville Police Department Chief of Police Robert E Terry 10 E Broad St Cookeville, Tennessee 38503 (931)526-2125 Putnam County Sheriff’s Office Sheriff Jerry Abston 421 E Spring St Cookeville, Tennessee 38501 (615)528-8484 NOTE that the forum of the Cookeville Homepage http://www.cookeville.com/forums is not allowing for more accounts "due to national controversity." City of Cookeville homepage www.ci.cookeville.tn.us/ Could the shame be too much for them and Cookeville Police?! You can watch this tragedy and act of police brutality on "Patton" – the four legged member of the Smoaka family http://www.tennessean.com/video/dogshooting0103/doglg.rm POUND ‘EM!!!
Response:
I’d rather fill out a petition to gas all pitbulls!!!
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – There is a petition going around for the removal of the Cookeville cop that brutally murder Patton, the four-legged Smoaka family member: — ‘The following petition was sent to me by an anonymous user and requested me to post it on this site. The petition does fit within our political activism policies and I am happy to oblige. The petition will run for one week, after which it will be sent to Chief Terry of the Cookeville Police Department. "We, the citizen’s of Cookeville, Tennessee call for either the immediate removal of Eric Hall as a police officer or his immediate resignation from that same position. This is in response to the recent incident in which Mr. Hall shot a family pet while involved in a felony stop on Interstate 40. We consider this an unwarranted and highly volatile reaction to the situation. This conduct reflects very badly on Mr. Hall, Cookeville Police, and the city of Cookeville. Mr. Hall’s sworn duty to uphold the law, and protect citizens from the same type of thuggish behavior that he is now guilty of.’ http://www.cookevilletalks.com/viewtopic.php?t=139 — The citizens of Cookeville are thourgly ashamed – let’s help them out and give them support in the removal of this crazy cop!
Response:
http://www.state.tn.us/safety/thp/districtsix.htm Tennessee Department of Safety Tennessee Highway Patrol District Six Bledsoe, Cannon, Clay, Cumberland, Dekalb, Fentress, Jackson, Macon, Overton, Pickett, Putnam, Smith, Trousdale, Van Buren,Warren, White Counties THP District Six Headquarters P.O. Box 826 1291 Bunker Hill Rd Cookeville, Tenn. 38501 Office: (931) 528-8496 Draw a Map from Mapquest for this Location Captain: Randy Hoover Administrative Lieutenant: Marvin Ricketts
Response:
Welcome to my killfile you pointlessly inflammatory innacurate twerp. I’ve agonized over this enough without you rubbing salt in everyone’s wounds who cared enough to evaluate and try to find out the truth. Beating us with a club will only alienate your cause.
Response:
If you read the petition you will note the following: "We, the CITIZEN’S OF TN and sign this petition you could invalidate the petition. Please just let the matter drop. The family has already said that they will sue the parties involved in this horrendous act. Don’t jeopardize their law suite by carrying this any further. Nan
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – There is a petition going around for the removal of the Cookeville cop that brutally murder Patton, the four-legged Smoaka family member: — ‘The following petition was sent to me by an anonymous user and requested me to post it on this site. The petition does fit within our political activism policies and I am happy to oblige. The petition will run for one week, after which it will be sent to Chief Terry of the Cookeville Police Department. "We, the citizen’s of Cookeville, Tennessee call for either the immediate removal (snipped)
Response:
View the posts on the Cookeville forum of the police brutality on Patton – the four-legged member of the Smoaka family gunned down by police ;-} "You ass backwards hick cops" http://www.cookeville.com/forums/general/thread_view?threadID=00001988
Response:
There is a petition going around for the removal of the Cookeville cop that brutally murder Patton, the four-legged Smoaka family member: — ‘The following petition was sent to me by an anonymous user and requested me to post it on this site. The petition does fit within our political activism policies and I am happy to oblige. The petition will run for one week, after which it will be sent to Chief Terry of the Cookeville Police Department. "We, the citizen’s of Cookeville, Tennessee call for either the immediate removal of Eric Hall as a police officer or his immediate resignation from that same position. This is in response to the recent incident in which Mr. Hall shot a family pet while involved in a felony stop on Interstate 40. We consider this an unwarranted and highly volatile reaction to the situation. This conduct reflects very badly on Mr. Hall, Cookeville Police, and the city of Cookeville. Mr. Hall’s sworn duty to uphold the law, and protect citizens from the same type of thuggish behavior that he is now guilty of.’ http://www.cookevilletalks.com/viewtopic.php?t=139 — The citizens of Cookeville are thourgly ashamed – let’s help them out and give them support in the removal of this crazy cop!
Response:
For those of use that love animals that watched in horror as a beloved family dog of a family on vacation was gunned down by police in Tennessee – we want to take action!!! We can!!! Here are the web addresses and e-mails that you can use to POUND Cookeville’s police and media with! Let them know that this type of police action is unacceptable in a free country. Our highways are not shooting zones for police ! This cop is on administrative leave – HE SHOULD BE FIRED and barred from ever carrying a gun AGAIN!!! This Cookeville cop is a threat to the public – as well as for four-legged family members! POUND ‘EM!!! Here are the web addresses and e-mails that you can use to POUND Cookeville’s police and media with! Cookeville Homepage http://www.cookeville.com/ Cookeville Police Department http://www.usacops.com/tn/p38503/ and http://www.cookevillepolice.com/ NOTE – that both of these pages are down. So wait until they come back up. The shame must be getting to them!!! Wait and them pound them – or call and/or write letters! Let them know that you appreaciate that they protect the community from overly-friendly family dogs by shooting them in the head. . . Cookeville Police Department Chief of Police Robert E Terry 10 E Broad St Cookeville, Tennessee 38503 (931)526-2125 Putnam County Sheriff’s Office Sheriff Jerry Abston 421 E Spring St Cookeville, Tennessee 38501 (615)528-8484 NOTE that the forum of the Cookeville Homepage http://www.cookeville.com/forums is not allowing for more accounts "due to national controversity." City of Cookeville homepage www.ci.cookeville.tn.us/ Could the shame be too much for them and Cookeville Police?! You can watch this tragedy and act of police brutality on "Patton" – the four legged member of the Smoaka family http://www.tennessean.com/video/dogshooting0103/doglg.rm POUND ‘EM!!!
Response:
Question:
We’re going to die one day anyway, so why don’t you try to find some happiness and spread some warmth in your life, instead of obsessing on psychiatric controversies that won’t do you one bit of good anyway. Trust me, you’re wasting your life if you think that political activism is going to change any kind of medical treatment. Nobody cares about you personally in this business – it’s a business. Squiggles Did you know that anti-psychiatrist Peter Breggin was trained by the original old timey anti-psychiatrist, Thomas Szasz? I found this out today…very interesting. Now a lot of things make a lot of sense. Two anti-psychiatry assholes, one asshole trained by the other asshole. Damn the world makes sense now. Eric Basic course in logic 101: Psychiatry is bullshit…psychiatrists are full of shit
– Truth has become a commodity. - Squiggles
Response:
Yes, if you fail to see the points squigglie is making and substitute you own… I think that squiggie will agree that sometimes one person can make a difference, and that sometimes doctors do care about patients. On the other hand the advent of profit based health care, all kinds of health care, and the rapacious behavior of the most profitable sector of the stock market, the pharmaceutical sector tend to support squiggles points. I wish it were not so, Lin!
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Dead wrong on all counts of this post, Squiggles. One person CAN make a difference. And doctors actually sometimes DO care about their patients. We’re going to die one day anyway, so why don’t you try to find some happiness and spread some warmth in your life, instead of obsessing on psychiatric controversies that won’t do you one bit of good anyway. Trust me, you’re wasting your life if you think that political activism is going to change any kind of medical treatment. Nobody cares about you personally in this business – it’s a business. Squiggles Did you know that anti-psychiatrist Peter Breggin was trained by the original old timey anti-psychiatrist, Thomas Szasz? I found this out today…very interesting. Now a lot of things make a lot of sense. Two anti-psychiatry assholes, one asshole trained by the other asshole. Damn the world makes sense now. Eric Basic course in logic 101: Psychiatry is bullshit…psychiatrists are full of shit
Response:
Question:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Berkeley conservatives tell of death threats for criticism By Ellen Sorokin THE WASHINGTON TIMES A conservative student group at the University of California at Berkeley has become a target of death threats after the group printed a story criticizing a Hispanic campus group’s call for revolutionary liberation from white people. Members of the Berkeley Conservative Foundation said the current issue of California Patriot, the conservative monthly magazine, included a story that challenged statements made by members of a student group called "Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan (MECha )" who, in a flier, used the word "gringo" to describe white people and called for a revolt against them. The conservative students said once the critical report on MECha was published in the Patriot last week, some of them were harassed by the group’s members and a few of them received death threats. The next day, someone broke into their on-campus office and stole all 3,000 copies of the magazine. Damages are estimated at $2,000. Campus police are now investigating the incident. Thefts and harassment against politically conservative students have been a part of a longstanding problem at Berkeley. Copies of the Patriot were reported stolen twice in the last year, and several copies were burned after the publication of stories that some campus groups deemed controversial. Speeches on campus sponsored by the College Republicans and the Patriot have been cut short twice when audience members became rowdy during the talks. http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20020305-21028866.htm Unfortunately, nothing new here – the same shit went on when I attended Cal. The Lefty Liberals who cover themselves with self-congratulation about their supposed "open-minded" and "tolerant" outlook, become rather INTOLERANT (and violent as well) when others dare express their views. Given the foaming hysteria exhibited by many left-of-center actvists on college campuses, it’s clear why they are scared of dissent. Clearly, their arguments are based on appeals to emotionalism and resentment, because they have never been sufficiently challenged on their ideas, and had to justify them on the basis of facts or logic…
Can you imagine if this were the other way around? Say a lefty paper printed something similar, only opposite. And the same thing happened, only the conservatives stole the papers and made the threats. Hell, we’d be hearing shouts from all the typical sheeple and lefty whiner hypocrites. The Feds would be on campus "investigating". THAT’S why these lefty jerk-offs are losing ground and what little credibility they might have once had.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I agree that breaking into a publication’s offices and stealing a bunch of copies of that publication and causing damage to the office is lame and prosecutable. As a side note, I do make a distinction between stealing copies of a free paper out of an office (bad) and taking many copies of a free paper out of newspaper boxes (lame, but a hazard of putting out a free paper). The latter’s been done by both sides of the political coin locally- on the left the anti-Horowitz people taking mass copies of the Daily Cal. On the right, S.F. Police Chief Hongisto did the same thing to the S.F. Bay Times when they lampooned him on their cover- I think he utilized off-duty cops, and he eventually lost his job over that part of the flap. Do I think that taking mass copies of free papers is lame? Yes. Do I shudder at the symbolism of people burning publications? You bet. Is either actionable? Not really. Dumb and counter-productive? Yes. Do I cringe when people I otherwise stand with chant "No Free Speech for Nazis"? Good god yes. It’s one of the most grating blind spots of the campus-based activists. Most of them cool out and become much more reasonable after going through the ‘purist’ phase of their political evolution, and since we’re in a college town that ‘purist’ phase grabs the most headlines locally and, thanks to the Daily Cal’s conduit to the reactionary Wall Street Journal via Max Boot et al, nationally. And it’s not as if right-wingers in the same ‘purist phase’ aren’t as obtuse and intolerant. Born Again evangelicals? Yep, real tolerant folks there…
However, there aren’t a bunch of evangelical types running around threatening others for articulating views that So do you support an investigation and prosecution of the people who flooded Rep. Lee and the Berkeley City Council with death threats?
Sure. Those threats certainly poured in, and they were certainly vociferous. Would you support prosecuting people like Limbaugh, Horowitz, and Michael Savage for encouraging such death threats for incitement or some other charge?
NO, because they didn’t tell anyone to make such threats, or encourage them to do so. Even if someone said, "call this guy up and tell him he’s an asshole", it might be in poor form, but it’s not infringing on the rights of others. [Personally, I probably wouldn't since I think that freedom of speech covers even threats, but I'm a weirdo that way and not many people agree]
There’s a difference between expressing a point of view, and threatening a criminal act. One is expressly protected, one is not. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Since you seemed to miss my question to you, here it is again: "But seriously, did you post the same message every time Rep. Barbara Lee got a death threat? Or when every member of the Berkeley City Council got death threats when they voted to ask the U.S. government to end the bombing of Afghanistan "as soon as possible"? (which, if you think about it, is what anyone concerned about U.S. military personnel would ask for as well). " I wouldn’t defend anyone issuing death threats to people expressing their POV, would denounce them if they did, and support criminal prosecution as well. Would you be as equally willing to denounce the La Raza types and call for their criminal prosecution, as well as removal from the Cal campus? If not, don’t bother lecturing me about behavior I don’t support, and that you are not willing to denounce.
Response:
Since you seemed to miss my question to you, here it is again: "But seriously, did you post the same message every time Rep. Barbara Lee got a death threat? Or when every member of the Berkeley City Council got death threats when they voted to ask the U.S. government to end the bombing of Afghanistan "as soon as possible"? (which, if you think about it, is what anyone concerned about U.S. military personnel would ask for as well). " – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Go back to your homework. "liberals" don’t issue death threats.. Lefty Liberals do, and you know it. What is a "liberal", Stan? Since you’re new around here, It’s not because I’m "new", as you might think. I’ve been reading the newsgroup for a few months. I just wanted to make sure that *you* knew. I’ll indulge you by explaining the difference between "liberals" (with a lowercase ‘L’) and Lefty Liberals: Lefty Liberals are people who are so convinced of their (assumed) moral and intellectual superiority that they are convinced that they are the only people with good intentions and wisdom, This is different from any other political leaning in what way? How is it even different from, say, you? I base my views on facts, logic, and personal experience, and certainly have demonstrated that in this NG. and that they are justified in using force and intimidation on anyone that deviates from the PC party line. Pick any group of radicals, left or right wing, and you will find that this is true. But you don’t find many conservatives defending or making excuses for fringe types like the American Nazi Party or the KKK. Yet, you will find plenty of liberal apologists for communists like Castro, racists like Al Sharpton, and nutcases on college campuses who use violence and intimidation to get their way. By PC, I’ll assume you mean "politically correct." Do you know what that term means? I’ll assume by your narrow and slanted use of the term that you don’t. Been around a lot longer than you have, newbie. Came from a family of liberal sympathizers in the SF Bay Area, was involved in left-of-center activism at a younger age (before I caught on to the hypocrisy and inconsistency of the left), graduated from Cal Berkeley… seen it all.
Response:
between "liberals" (with a lowercase ‘L’) and Lefty Liberals: Lefty Liberals are people who are so convinced of their (assumed) moral and intellectual superiority that they are convinced that they are the only people with good intentions and wisdom, This is different from any other political leaning in what way? How is it even different from, say, you? I base my views on facts, logic, and personal experience, and certainly have demonstrated that in this NG.
Of course, you’re an island to yourself, the only person able to see things clearly! Why didn’t I see it before? Oh, the shame. and that they are justified in using force and intimidation on anyone that deviates from the PC party line. Pick any group of radicals, left or right wing, and you will find that this is true. But you don’t find many conservatives defending or making excuses for fringe types like the American Nazi Party or the KKK.
Read again: any group of *radicals*. The american nazi party is a group of radicals. The KKK is a group of radicals. The Black Panthers are a group of radicals. The Animal Liberation Front is a group of radicals. I don’t think you’ll find a whole lot of people outside of these groups who are willing to defend send groups. By PC, I’ll assume you mean "politically correct." Do you know what that term means? I’ll assume by your narrow and slanted use of the term that you don’t. Been around a lot longer than you have, newbie. Came from a family of liberal sympathizers in the SF Bay Area, was involved in left-of-center activism at a younger age (before I caught on to the hypocrisy and inconsistency of the left), graduated from Cal Berkeley… seen it all.
Do you want a medal or something? — "Love by any name smells sweet." -Submission Hold
Response:
I agree that breaking into a publication’s offices and stealing a bunch of copies of that publication and causing damage to the office is lame and prosecutable. As a side note, I do make a distinction between stealing copies of a free paper out of an office (bad) and taking many copies of a free paper out of newspaper boxes (lame, but a hazard of putting out a free paper). The latter’s been done by both sides of the political coin locally- on the left the anti-Horowitz people taking mass copies of the Daily Cal. On the right, S.F. Police Chief Hongisto did the same thing to the S.F. Bay Times when they lampooned him on their cover- I think he utilized off-duty cops, and he eventually lost his job over that part of the flap. Do I think that taking mass copies of free papers is lame? Yes. Do I shudder at the symbolism of people burning publications? You bet. Is either actionable? Not really. Dumb and counter-productive? Yes. Do I cringe when people I otherwise stand with chant "No Free Speech for Nazis"? Good god yes. It’s one of the most grating blind spots of the campus-based activists. Most of them cool out and become much more reasonable after going through the ‘purist’ phase of their political evolution, and since we’re in a college town that ‘purist’ phase grabs the most headlines locally and, thanks to the Daily Cal’s conduit to the reactionary Wall Street Journal via Max Boot et al, nationally. And it’s not as if right-wingers in the same ‘purist phase’ aren’t as obtuse and intolerant. Born Again evangelicals? Yep, real tolerant folks there… So do you support an investigation and prosecution of the people who flooded Rep. Lee and the Berkeley City Council with death threats? Those threats certainly poured in, and they were certainly vociferous. Would you support prosecuting people like Limbaugh, Horowitz, and Michael Savage for encouraging such death threats for incitement or some other charge? [Personally, I probably wouldn't since I think that freedom of speech covers even threats, but I'm a weirdo that way and not many people agree] – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Since you seemed to miss my question to you, here it is again: "But seriously, did you post the same message every time Rep. Barbara Lee got a death threat? Or when every member of the Berkeley City Council got death threats when they voted to ask the U.S. government to end the bombing of Afghanistan "as soon as possible"? (which, if you think about it, is what anyone concerned about U.S. military personnel would ask for as well). " I wouldn’t defend anyone issuing death threats to people expressing their POV, would denounce them if they did, and support criminal prosecution as well. Would you be as equally willing to denounce the La Raza types and call for their criminal prosecution, as well as removal from the Cal campus? If not, don’t bother lecturing me about behavior I don’t support, and that you are not willing to denounce.
Response:
Since you seemed to miss my question to you, here it is again: "But seriously, did you post the same message every time Rep. Barbara Lee got a death threat? Or when every member of the Berkeley City Council got death threats when they voted to ask the U.S. government to end the bombing of Afghanistan "as soon as possible"? (which, if you think about it, is what anyone concerned about U.S. military personnel would ask for as well). "
I wouldn’t defend anyone issuing death threats to people expressing their POV, would denounce them if they did, and support criminal prosecution as well. Would you be as equally willing to denounce the La Raza types and call for their criminal prosecution, as well as removal from the Cal campus? If not, don’t bother lecturing me about behavior I don’t support, and that you are not willing to denounce.
Response:
A conservative student group at the University of California at Berkeley has become a target of death threats after the group printed a story criticizing a Hispanic campus group’s call for revolutionary liberation from white people. Go back to your homework. "liberals" don’t issue death threats..
Lefty Liberals do, and you know it.
Response:
Berkeley conservatives tell of death threats for criticism
What’s it like, Spammo….i.e. getting a taste of your own shit?
Response:
Berkeley conservatives tell of death threats for criticism What’s it like, Spammo….i.e. getting a taste of your own shit?
Never made death threats against others. You are a liar and a loser.
Response:
Go back to your homework. "liberals" don’t issue death threats.. Lefty Liberals do, and you know it.
What is a "liberal", Stan? — "Love by any name smells sweet." -Submission Hold
Response:
Berkeley conservatives tell of death threats for criticism What’s it like, Spammo….i.e. getting a taste of your own shit? Never made death threats against others. You are a liar and a loser.
How can I remain "marginal" if you persist in "recognizing" my talents in usenet, and by your total failure to "ignore" me? Consider yourself a loser on that account….as well as many others. Playing well with others is decidedly not your "forte." ":o}
Response:
Go back to your homework. "liberals" don’t issue death threats.. Lefty Liberals do, and you know it. What is a "liberal", Stan?
Since you’re new around here, I’ll indulge you by explaining the difference between "liberals" (with a lowercase ‘L’) and Lefty Liberals: Lefty Liberals are people who are so convinced of their (assumed) moral and intellectual superiority that they are convinced that they are the only people with good intentions and wisdom, and that they are justified in using force and intimidation on anyone that deviates from the PC party line. Liberals with a lowercase ‘L’ are merely people who I disagree with on certain political, social, and economic issues. If that goes over your head, stick to the far-left NG’s where the level of political sophistication (and reasoning) is much lower.
Response:
Go back to your homework. "liberals" don’t issue death threats.. Lefty Liberals do, and you know it. What is a "liberal", Stan? Since you’re new around here,
It’s not because I’m "new", as you might think. I’ve been reading the newsgroup for a few months. I just wanted to make sure that *you* knew. I’ll indulge you by explaining the difference between "liberals" (with a lowercase ‘L’) and Lefty Liberals: Lefty Liberals are people who are so convinced of their (assumed) moral and intellectual superiority that they are convinced that they are the only people with good intentions and wisdom,
This is different from any other political leaning in what way? How is it even different from, say, you? and that they are justified in using force and intimidation on anyone that deviates from the PC party line.
Pick any group of radicals, left or right wing, and you will find that this is true. By PC, I’ll assume you mean "politically correct." Do you know what that term means? I’ll assume by your narrow and slanted use of the term that you don’t. — "Love by any name smells sweet." -Submission Hold
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Go back to your homework. "liberals" don’t issue death threats.. Lefty Liberals do, and you know it. What is a "liberal", Stan? Since you’re new around here, It’s not because I’m "new", as you might think. I’ve been reading the newsgroup for a few months. I just wanted to make sure that *you* knew. I’ll indulge you by explaining the difference between "liberals" (with a lowercase ‘L’) and Lefty Liberals: Lefty Liberals are people who are so convinced of their (assumed) moral and intellectual superiority that they are convinced that they are the only people with good intentions and wisdom, This is different from any other political leaning in what way? How is it even different from, say, you?
I base my views on facts, logic, and personal experience, and certainly have demonstrated that in this NG. and that they are justified in using force and intimidation on anyone that deviates from the PC party line. Pick any group of radicals, left or right wing, and you will find that this is true.
But you don’t find many conservatives defending or making excuses for fringe types like the American Nazi Party or the KKK. Yet, you will find plenty of liberal apologists for communists like Castro, racists like Al Sharpton, and nutcases on college campuses who use violence and intimidation to get their way. By PC, I’ll assume you mean "politically correct." Do you know what that term means? I’ll assume by your narrow and slanted use of the term that you don’t.
Been around a lot longer than you have, newbie. Came from a family of liberal sympathizers in the SF Bay Area, was involved in left-of-center activism at a younger age (before I caught on to the hypocrisy and inconsistency of the left), graduated from Cal Berkeley… seen it all.
Response:
Yeah. There’s always a few stupid mofos in any movement. But seriously, did you post the same message every time Rep. Barbara Lee got a death threat? Or when every member of the Berkeley City Council got death threats when they voted to ask the U.S. government to end the bombing of Afghanistan "as soon as possible"? (which, if you think about it, is what anyone concerned about U.S. military personnel would ask for as well). Didn’t think so. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – A conservative student group at the University of California at Berkeley has become a target of death threats after the group printed a story criticizing a Hispanic campus group’s call for revolutionary liberation from white people. Go back to your homework. "liberals" don’t issue death threats.. — "Love by any name smells sweet." -Submission Hold
Response:
A conservative student group at the University of California at Berkeley has become a target of death threats after the group printed a story criticizing a Hispanic campus group’s call for revolutionary liberation from white people.
Go back to your homework. "liberals" don’t issue death threats.. — "Love by any name smells sweet." -Submission Hold
Response:
Berkeley conservatives tell of death threats for criticism By Ellen Sorokin THE WASHINGTON TIMES A conservative student group at the University of California at Berkeley has become a target of death threats after the group printed a story criticizing a Hispanic campus group’s call for revolutionary liberation from white people.
Most people know how to live in peace. They follow the Golden Rule. When people get a lot of power, they tend to forget this. That’s why we need to minimize government interference in the economy, everywhere. "Endeavor to persevere"
Response:
Berkeley conservatives tell of death threats for criticism By Ellen Sorokin THE WASHINGTON TIMES A conservative student group at the University of California at Berkeley has become a target of death threats after the group printed a story criticizing a Hispanic campus group’s call for revolutionary liberation from white people. Members of the Berkeley Conservative Foundation said the current issue of California Patriot, the conservative monthly magazine, included a story that challenged statements made by members of a student group called "Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan (MECha )" who, in a flier, used the word "gringo" to describe white people and called for a revolt against them. The conservative students said once the critical report on MECha was published in the Patriot last week, some of them were harassed by the group’s members and a few of them received death threats. The next day, someone broke into their on-campus office and stole all 3,000 copies of the magazine. Damages are estimated at $2,000. Campus police are now investigating the incident. Thefts and harassment against politically conservative students have been a part of a longstanding problem at Berkeley. Copies of the Patriot were reported stolen twice in the last year, and several copies were burned after the publication of stories that some campus groups deemed controversial. Speeches on campus sponsored by the College Republicans and the Patriot have been cut short twice when audience members became rowdy during the talks. http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20020305-21028866.htm Unfortunately, nothing new here – the same shit went on when I attended Cal. The Lefty Liberals who cover themselves with self-congratulation about their supposed "open-minded" and "tolerant" outlook, become rather INTOLERANT (and violent as well) when others dare express their views. Given the foaming hysteria exhibited by many left-of-center actvists on college campuses, it’s clear why they are scared of dissent. Clearly, their arguments are based on appeals to emotionalism and resentment, because they have never been sufficiently challenged on their ideas, and had to justify them on the basis of facts or logic…
Response:
Question:
Thank you, not half bad advice! Becky "I have seen the sea when it is stormy and wild; when it is quiet and serene; when it is dark and moody. And in all its moods, I see myself." -Martin Buxbaum
Response:
where did you find a cognitive therapist?
I had one allocated to me by the health service, my therapist thought I’d get a lot of it. It was free, which is good. (I’m in Australia). But if you’re analytical, even just a little, it’s worth seeing one… or getting a book on it.
Response:
where did you find a cognitive therapist?
Response:
Hey all. I used to suffer from really bad depression and schizophrenia. We’re talking drug addiction. We’re talking waking up after noon every day. We’re talking not enough energy to leave the house except to score… Thanks to cognitive behaviour therapy, a strict drug regime, and learning some self-discipline I am happy, content and fulfilled. I feel like I’ve discovered the panacea for living. It’s hard to explain, kinda like the Matrix in the movie the Matrix. You can’t understand it until you see it, and you can’t describe it to other people no matter how hard you try. So I’ve given up trying to describe it. But I will say it’s not hard as it sounds… Right now I’ve got so much going on. I’m going to study cinema studies, I’m involved in amateur theatre, political activism, stand up comedy… I have plans to go on a backpacking tour of somewhere… haven’t decided yet… might have to flip a coin, any suggestions are welcome. Anyway, my point is that happiness is not as hard as it sounds. Take a holistic approach. Listen to people’s advice, use the advice that works, throw the rest away. Take medication proscribed to you, but be prepared to ask for it to be changed if it isn’t working. Write yourself lists of things you want achieve, but don’t self-flagulate yourself when you only achieve 1 or 2 things off the list. And remember that humans are good at adapting to their environment as well as adapting their environment to suit. Take care all.
Response:
Question:
first class citizen - who knows laws of the nation rules of the organization he belongs to SS rules rules of political activism second class citizen - who knows laws of the nation rules of the organization he belongs to SS rules third class citizen - who knows laws of the nation rules of the organization he belongs to fourth class citizen - who knows laws of the nation only do you have different ideas?
Response:
On Sat, 6 Jan 2001 12:04:45 +0900, "HanJeong Lee" <ststs…@soback.kornet.nmkr> posted a message in news:alt.support.schizophrenia, which said: > fourth class citizen > - who knows > laws of the nation only > do you have different ideas?
fifth class citizen - who just knows ? Damaeus
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -HanJeong Lee wrote: > first class citizen > - who knows > laws of the nation > rules of the organization he belongs to > SS rules > rules of political activism > second class citizen > - who knows > laws of the nation > rules of the organization he belongs to > SS rules > third class citizen > - who knows > laws of the nation > rules of the organization he belongs to > fourth class citizen > - who knows > laws of the nation only > do you have different ideas?
First class citizen I would add: Feels responsibility for adapting current rules to maintain fairness as the society moves through the Technology Revolution. K
Response:
Question:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – And hopefully they won’t shoot you. This is hilarious; you can stereotype better than the rednecks & hippies combined back in the ’70s. Do you actually live in that paranoid little world where everything is so black & white and anyone different than you is *dangerous* ? I’ve learned (and gotten more assistance)10X more from hunters, ranchers, hermits & loggers than I have ever gotten from the snobbish gore-tex crowd out there. Hey, look everyone — it’s one of **T H O S E!!** — My father was a travelling auditor for a large bank in Arizona. He met lots of ranchers and others who told him about places to go. My family, as I was growing up, got a lot from this. There were the indian ruins far back on trail only that are in remarkably good condition because nobody goes there. We were exceptionally careful there to avoid damage to the site which as far as I know, is still not generally known. There was the cave we were told of. The rancher said it was full of guano but the condition was unknown. We hiked miles in and packed out several money bags full of guano. The guano was worthless but we all had a great time. We were once invited to a ranch that was almost inaccessible. It was a tough grind for a 4X4 and we walked some, waded to check crossings and finally made it to the ranch where we were expected and found a warm welcome. I take people as I find them. However, a lot of the "rednecks" out in the boonies seem to be really nice folks. Heck, my family once drove (4X4) to an obscure ghost town we found out about (my father’s connections). We found one house still in use and spent the afternoon talking with the old lady who still lived there. I think that my father did our family a great favor by finding obscure places through his connections with people all over Arizona. We sure put a lot of miles on our feet, a Jeep CJ5 and later a Wagoneer followed by a Bronco. All of this was inspired by what you call "rednecks." No, that’s inspired by what YOU call rednecks. You are presuming what *I* mean when I say "redneck". The people you refer to I call "country folk". Rednecks are reactionary, angry, separatist, gun-toting, beer-drinking, tobacco-chewing, intolerant, xenophobic, racist, patriotic, libertarian, buck-toothed, inbred freaks. I.e. not just country people, but country people who have become pathologically isolated from society. That’s quite an indictment. I can’t say I have ever met a person with all of those. A friend of mine once ran for the senate in Arizona as a libertarian but he didn’t chew tobacco. Frankly, I think you are a bigot. I know lots of people with opinions differing from mine. Heck, my brother and I don’t agree on many issues. What of it? does it hurt me? Does it hurt them? No, because we tolerate differences of opinion and differences in habit. Your statement is filled with hate. Hate that I cannot feel. People annoy me sometimes but that is life and hate is the wrong response. I am quite happy not hating people. It makes it easy for me to interact with people. It took many years for me to learn the simple fact that you take a person for what he is and live with it. 40 years ago, the likes of you would have been against blacks. As a white, have you lived in a black country? I have and many have. You learn to live with people. They are mostly nice wherever you go. I think you need to rethink your position. People are mostly better than you think.
Chuck, Yes, it’s a stereotype and it doesn’t apply perfectly to most individuals. My statement comes more from fear than hate. Rednecks can be vicious and mean. See my earlier post in this thread where I encounted one on a ride recently, gave him a friendly greeting, and he glared back at me with pure hate for no apparent reason. I find this attitude more prevalant among rednecks than city people. Sorry, but that’s been my experience. I also find that generally rednecks tend to be more racist and right-wing, suspicious of people they don’t know, and destructive to nature (see recent article about 4×4 and gun vandalism). I never hate any individual based on a stereotype or without a reason. I even tried to be friendly to this redneck a couple weeks ago. I maintain an open mind with every individual, but if they act like a redneck, then they earn the label in my mind, as well as my ire. You can’t label me a bigot because bigotry is based on race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, creed, skin color, sexual preference, gender. Redneck is none of these. Redneck is just somebody who has become pathologically isolated from society, and their limited interaction with society tends to be hateful and antagonistic. Anybody can be a redneck. It is an anti-social demeanor. Yes, I fear and hate sociopaths. That is not bigotry. You and others keep thinking by redneck I mean anybody who lives in the country. Not so. There are plenty of well-adusted, friendly, social people who live in the country and small towns. Those are not what I refer to as rednecks. Chris – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Chuck — … The times have been, That, when the brains were out, the man would die. … Macbeth
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Yes, it’s a stereotype and it doesn’t apply perfectly to most individuals. My statement comes more from fear than hate. Rednecks can be vicious and mean. See my earlier post in this thread where I encounted one on a ride recently, gave him a friendly greeting, and he glared back at me with pure hate for no apparent reason. I find this attitude more prevalant among rednecks than city people. Sorry, but that’s been my experience. I also find that generally rednecks tend to be more racist and right-wing, suspicious of people they don’t know, and destructive to nature (see recent article about 4×4 and gun vandalism). I never hate any individual based on a stereotype or without a reason. I even tried to be friendly to this redneck a couple weeks ago. I maintain an open mind with every individual, but if they act like a redneck, then they earn the label in my mind, as well as my ire. You can’t label me a bigot because bigotry is based on race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, creed, skin color, sexual preference, gender. Redneck is none of these. Redneck is just somebody who has become pathologically isolated from society, and their limited interaction with society tends to be hateful and antagonistic. Anybody can be a redneck. It is an anti-social demeanor. Yes, I fear and hate sociopaths. That is not bigotry. You and others keep thinking by redneck I mean anybody who lives in the country. Not so. There are plenty of well-adusted, friendly, social people who live in the country and small towns. Those are not what I refer to as rednecks. Chris
Bigotry can be any exclusion principle. The rednecks you are talking about are a rare breed. I have run across a few but went on. Your list of objectionable characteristics is debatable. Some of them I consider good. I think a broader view is required. Chuck — … The times have been, That, when the brains were out, the man would die. … Macbeth
Response:
Kind of like there are good Blacks, good Indians, good Hispanics, good whatever you choose to demean. Man, you’ve got issues. By the way, you can consider this solicited vitriol.
Response:
[snip] You can’t label me a bigot because bigotry is based on race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, creed, skin color, sexual preference, gender.
You have redefined bigot to suit your own purposes. If you check the dictionary (American Heritage 3rd ed). Bigot:. One who is stronly partial to one’s own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ. Sounds like it describes your position quite well. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Redneck is none of these. Redneck is just somebody who has become pathologically isolated from society, and their limited interaction with society tends to be hateful and antagonistic. Anybody can be a redneck. It is an anti-social demeanor. Yes, I fear and hate sociopaths. That is not bigotry. You and others keep thinking by redneck I mean anybody who lives in the country. Not so. There are plenty of well-adusted, friendly, social people who live in the country and small towns. Those are not what I refer to as rednecks.
Response:
Rednecks are reactionary, angry, separatist, gun-toting, beer-drinking, tobacco-chewing, intolerant, xenophobic, racist, patriotic, libertarian, buck-toothed, inbred freaks. I.e. not just country people, but country people who have become pathologically isolated from society.
hey,,you stop callin me a redneck right?
Response:
I started this thread as a joke, and as a response to the article about the illegal 4×4 and gun damage to public lands and property. That’s how it fits into this newsgroup. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Your statement is filled with hate. Hate that I cannot feel. People annoy me sometimes but that is life and hate is the wrong response. I am quite happy not hating people. Chuck, I appreciate your outlook on life, but just casting a jaundiced eye up on the ‘new’ subject list of this NG, I wonder if Miya’s plaintive call "WTF is this NG for?" might be food for thought about just "What is going on here?" Dogs on the trail (some mean spirited words here), Sharing trail sometimes…., The TRUTH about, ECONUTS Gore the west (smelling smoke), Stay Out of Wildlife Habitat…, Eco-Robin Hood, Granola Wrappers & Mountain Bikes (any subject with bikes as a verb, object, noun or adjective – I pass on), My Favorite Trail is being ruined…, Illegal-vehicle use tearing up forests, Earth First! Dissension And then we get to the fun stuff. Lightweight freestanding .. (not a lot of flames yet on this one – but if Ziggy made it?, Fun Stuff in the Pack (haven’t found a "YOU STUPID DINGBAT" post yet), Endurance the Shackelton Expedition (getting there maybe with one more tangent) Seems like the snuff stuff is leading at an 8:1 advantage(postings). Just another sign of the times, I suppose – or a testiment of the active posters.? I don’t mind political activism…it is fun to RATIONALLY discuss current events that might affect me/us/them. Maybe the kinds of kind people in rec.woodworking are there because that hobby really is relaxing. Think I’ll go out and get sunshined on today … low smog day. Will be nice to step up to a trail, bikes, horses ,dogs red(brown,green,yellow, orange,blue)necks allowed. Now if all would wear bells, I’d know when to duck and cover. Just don’t kick trail dust on my brand new boots. *Original joke was funny btw* "Seen any?" LOL (joke also works on management, golfers, etc.)
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Your statement is filled with hate. Hate that I cannot feel. People annoy me sometimes but that is life and hate is the wrong response. I am quite happy not hating people. Chuck, I appreciate your outlook on life, but just casting a jaundiced eye up on the ‘new’ subject list of this NG, I wonder if Miya’s plaintive call "WTF is this NG for?" might be food for thought about just "What is going on here?" Dogs on the trail (some mean spirited words here), Sharing trail sometimes…., The TRUTH about, ECONUTS Gore the west (smelling smoke), Stay Out of Wildlife Habitat…, Eco-Robin Hood, Granola Wrappers & Mountain Bikes (any subject with bikes as a verb, object, noun or adjective – I pass on), My Favorite Trail is being ruined…, Illegal-vehicle use tearing up forests, Earth First! Dissension
People have different agendas. Am I perfectly right? What does that mean? I’m different from you or Chris or whoever. For all my more than 50 years I have been stepping around cow plop and horse shit. Do I complain? If I don’t take conditions as I find them, I hurt myself. I make things bad for me. You can argue on all of the topics you mentioned but you have to put the people in context. I said I thought Chris is a bigot. I may be wrong but like the famous MV he stereotypes too strongly. I have 4X4′ed, mountain biked and backpacked. Some of this included dogs one way and another. Moreover, I have riden a horse. Neither the horse nor I had much enthusiasm. We made it back to the stable without injury to either of us but we definitely did not want a repeat performance. I think Chris is a bit shortsighted about both people and animals. He calls the fact that horses and burros often work for a living enslavement. He seems to be upset by a friendly dog on the trail. He seems to object to the occasional pile of horse shit. I think he is over sensitive. Chuck — … The times have been, That, when the brains were out, the man would die. … Macbeth
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – And hopefully they won’t shoot you. This is hilarious; you can stereotype better than the rednecks & hippies combined back in the ’70s. Do you actually live in that paranoid little world where everything is so black & white and anyone different than you is *dangerous* ? I’ve learned (and gotten more assistance)10X more from hunters, ranchers, hermits & loggers than I have ever gotten from the snobbish gore-tex crowd out there. Hey, look everyone — it’s one of **T H O S E!!** — My father was a travelling auditor for a large bank in Arizona. He met lots of ranchers and others who told him about places to go. My family, as I was growing up, got a lot from this. There were the indian ruins far back on trail only that are in remarkably good condition because nobody goes there. We were exceptionally careful there to avoid damage to the site which as far as I know, is still not generally known. There was the cave we were told of. The rancher said it was full of guano but the condition was unknown. We hiked miles in and packed out several money bags full of guano. The guano was worthless but we all had a great time. We were once invited to a ranch that was almost inaccessible. It was a tough grind for a 4X4 and we walked some, waded to check crossings and finally made it to the ranch where we were expected and found a warm welcome. I take people as I find them. However, a lot of the "rednecks" out in the boonies seem to be really nice folks. Heck, my family once drove (4X4) to an obscure ghost town we found out about (my father’s connections). We found one house still in use and spent the afternoon talking with the old lady who still lived there. I think that my father did our family a great favor by finding obscure places through his connections with people all over Arizona. We sure put a lot of miles on our feet, a Jeep CJ5 and later a Wagoneer followed by a Bronco. All of this was inspired by what you call "rednecks." No, that’s inspired by what YOU call rednecks. You are presuming what *I* mean when I say "redneck". The people you refer to I call "country folk". Rednecks are reactionary, angry, separatist, gun-toting, beer-drinking, tobacco-chewing, intolerant, xenophobic, racist, patriotic, libertarian, buck-toothed, inbred freaks. I.e. not just country people, but country people who have become pathologically isolated from society.
That’s quite an indictment. I can’t say I have ever met a person with all of those. A friend of mine once ran for the senate in Arizona as a libertarian but he didn’t chew tobacco. Frankly, I think you are a bigot. I know lots of people with opinions differing from mine. Heck, my brother and I don’t agree on many issues. What of it? does it hurt me? Does it hurt them? No, because we tolerate differences of opinion and differences in habit. Your statement is filled with hate. Hate that I cannot feel. People annoy me sometimes but that is life and hate is the wrong response. I am quite happy not hating people. It makes it easy for me to interact with people. It took many years for me to learn the simple fact that you take a person for what he is and live with it. 40 years ago, the likes of you would have been against blacks. As a white, have you lived in a black country? I have and many have. You learn to live with people. They are mostly nice wherever you go. I think you need to rethink your position. People are mostly better than you think. Chuck — … The times have been, That, when the brains were out, the man would die. … Macbeth
Response:
Here, now. I probably qualify as a redneck and *I* thought it was hysterical. Charley — Charles Hamilton, EIT Graduate Student Researcher Department of Civil and Phone: 949.824.8694 Environmental Engineering FAX: 949.824.2117
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – And hopefully they won’t shoot you. This is hilarious; you can stereotype better than the rednecks & hippies combined back in the ’70s. Do you actually live in that paranoid little world where everything is so black & white and anyone different than you is *dangerous* ? I’ve learned (and gotten more assistance)10X more from hunters, ranchers, hermits & loggers than I have ever gotten from the snobbish gore-tex crowd out there. Hey, look everyone — it’s one of **T H O S E!!** — My father was a travelling auditor for a large bank in Arizona. He met lots of ranchers and others who told him about places to go. My family, as I was growing up, got a lot from this. There were the indian ruins far back on trail only that are in remarkably good condition because nobody goes there. We were exceptionally careful there to avoid damage to the site which as far as I know, is still not generally known. There was the cave we were told of. The rancher said it was full of guano but the condition was unknown. We hiked miles in and packed out several money bags full of guano. The guano was worthless but we all had a great time. We were once invited to a ranch that was almost inaccessible. It was a tough grind for a 4X4 and we walked some, waded to check crossings and finally made it to the ranch where we were expected and found a warm welcome. I take people as I find them. However, a lot of the "rednecks" out in the boonies seem to be really nice folks. Heck, my family once drove (4X4) to an obscure ghost town we found out about (my father’s connections). We found one house still in use and spent the afternoon talking with the old lady who still lived there. I think that my father did our family a great favor by finding obscure places through his connections with people all over Arizona. We sure put a lot of miles on our feet, a Jeep CJ5 and later a Wagoneer followed by a Bronco. All of this was inspired by what you call "rednecks."
No, that’s inspired by what YOU call rednecks. You are presuming what *I* mean when I say "redneck". The people you refer to I call "country folk". Rednecks are reactionary, angry, separatist, gun-toting, beer-drinking, tobacco-chewing, intolerant, xenophobic, racist, patriotic, libertarian, buck-toothed, inbred freaks. I.e. not just country people, but country people who have become pathologically isolated from society. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Chuck — … The times have been, That, when the brains were out, the man would die. … Macbeth
Response:
I probably qualify as a redneck and *I* thought it was hysterical.
Wanna barrow my sunscreen? Ed Huesers http://www.grandshelters.com
Response:
Your statement is filled with hate. Hate that I cannot feel. People annoy me sometimes but that is life and hate is the wrong response. I am quite happy not hating people.
Chuck, I appreciate your outlook on life, but just casting a jaundiced eye up on the ‘new’ subject list of this NG, I wonder if Miya’s plaintive call "WTF is this NG for?" might be food for thought about just "What is going on here?" Dogs on the trail (some mean spirited words here), Sharing trail sometimes…., The TRUTH about, ECONUTS Gore the west (smelling smoke), Stay Out of Wildlife Habitat…, Eco-Robin Hood, Granola Wrappers & Mountain Bikes (any subject with bikes as a verb, object, noun or adjective – I pass on), My Favorite Trail is being ruined…, Illegal-vehicle use tearing up forests, Earth First! Dissension And then we get to the fun stuff. Lightweight freestanding .. (not a lot of flames yet on this one – but if Ziggy made it?, Fun Stuff in the Pack (haven’t found a "YOU STUPID DINGBAT" post yet), Endurance the Shackelton Expedition (getting there maybe with one more tangent) Seems like the snuff stuff is leading at an 8:1 advantage(postings). Just another sign of the times, I suppose – or a testiment of the active posters.? I don’t mind political activism…it is fun to RATIONALLY discuss current events that might affect me/us/them. Maybe the kinds of kind people in rec.woodworking are there because that hobby really is relaxing. Think I’ll go out and get sunshined on today … low smog day. Will be nice to step up to a trail, bikes, horses ,dogs red(brown,green,yellow, orange,blue)necks allowed. Now if all would wear bells, I’d know when to duck and cover. Just don’t kick trail dust on my brand new boots. *Original joke was funny btw* "Seen any?" LOL (joke also works on management, golfers, etc.)
Response:
As a foreigner (The Netherlands), I followed this discussion with interest. I didn’t know this was an issue in the states. Heh, Chuck.. I applaud you, sounds like you have a very healthy look on things… To stay on topic, where do you guys like to hike? Nico ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ http://www.hacom.nl/~nico/hiking.htm http://www.hacom.nl/~nico/dayhikes.htm
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – And hopefully they won’t shoot you. This is hilarious; you can stereotype better than the rednecks & hippies combined back in the ’70s. Do you actually live in that paranoid little world where everything is so black & white and anyone different than you is *dangerous* ? I’ve learned (and gotten more assistance)10X more from hunters, ranchers, hermits & loggers than I have ever gotten from the snobbish gore-tex crowd out there. Hey, look everyone — it’s one of **T H O S E!!** —
My father was a travelling auditor for a large bank in Arizona. He met lots of ranchers and others who told him about places to go. My family, as I was growing up, got a lot from this. There were the indian ruins far back on trail only that are in remarkably good condition because nobody goes there. We were exceptionally careful there to avoid damage to the site which as far as I know, is still not generally known. There was the cave we were told of. The rancher said it was full of guano but the condition was unknown. We hiked miles in and packed out several money bags full of guano. The guano was worthless but we all had a great time. We were once invited to a ranch that was almost inaccessible. It was a tough grind for a 4X4 and we walked some, waded to check crossings and finally made it to the ranch where we were expected and found a warm welcome. I take people as I find them. However, a lot of the "rednecks" out in the boonies seem to be really nice folks. Heck, my family once drove (4X4) to an obscure ghost town we found out about (my father’s connections). We found one house still in use and spent the afternoon talking with the old lady who still lived there. I think that my father did our family a great favor by finding obscure places through his connections with people all over Arizona. We sure put a lot of miles on our feet, a Jeep CJ5 and later a Wagoneer followed by a Bronco. All of this was inspired by what you call "rednecks." Chuck — … The times have been, That, when the brains were out, the man would die. … Macbeth
Response:
chris s redneck advice good advice bettern a hog stuck in the fence on a moonless night
-mary-outlook!!
Response:
Just 2 weeks ago I was on a 24 mile mountain bike ride near Mt. Hood Oregon. Part of my ride was on a 4×4 trail. I encountered a 4×4 truck coming the other way. I moved as far as I could to the side of the road and kept riding. I did not follow my own safety tips, as the truck passed me I looked up and gave a friendly nod to the driver. He glared back at me with pure hatred in his eyes. Man, if looks could kill.
Now see Chris if you were packing heat, like a SKS or even better a MP5 those d
Response:
[snip] own safety tips, as the truck passed me I looked up and gave a friendly nod to the driver. He glared back at me with pure hatred in his eyes. Man, if looks could kill. Now see Chris if you were packing heat, like a SKS or even better a MP5 those
"Now, squeal like a pig…" — Pat O’Connell Take nothing but pictures, Leave nothing but footprints, Kill nothing but vandals…
Response:
Besides the normal dangers of encountering bears, getting lost, rattlesnakes, etc., there is one additional danger one encounters in wildlands that are accessible by 4×4 trucks, such as national forests. These safety tips were given to me by the owner of a wilderness guiding service on what to do should you encounter a redneck on a 4×4 trail. 1) Do NOT make eye contact 2) Move to the side of the road and continue slowly along your way 3) As the truck passes, without making eye contact, say "seen any?" 4) Ignore any response and continue on your way
And hopefully they won’t shoot you. This is hilarious; you can stereotype better than the rednecks & hippies combined back in the ’70s. Do you actually live in that paranoid little world where everything is so black & white and anyone different than you is *dangerous* ? I’ve learned (and gotten more assistance)10X more from hunters, ranchers, hermits & loggers than I have ever gotten from the snobbish gore-tex crowd out there.
Response:
MARTHA STEWART’S TIPS FOR REDNECKS: 3.It’s considered tacky to take a cooler to church.
but tailgate parties before hand in the parking lot are o.k. REGARDING DATING (Outside the Family):
be sure the spitoon is accessible by your date (unless driving and the truck windows are rolled down).
Response:
And hopefully they won’t shoot you. This is hilarious; you can stereotype better than the rednecks & hippies combined back in the ’70s. Do you actually live in that paranoid little world where everything is so black & white and anyone different than you is *dangerous* ? I’ve learned (and gotten more assistance)10X more from hunters, ranchers, hermits & loggers than I have ever gotten from the snobbish gore-tex crowd out there.
I’m not paranoid, just experienced with rednecks. Just 2 weeks ago I was on a 24 mile mountain bike ride near Mt. Hood Oregon. Part of my ride was on a 4×4 trail. I encountered a 4×4 truck coming the other way. I moved as far as I could to the side of the road and kept riding. I did not follow my own safety tips, as the truck passed me I looked up and gave a friendly nod to the driver. He glared back at me with pure hatred in his eyes. Man, if looks could kill. Why? Probably resents all the "yuppies" out visiting "their" homeland, making them feel lazy by riding mountain bikes while they cruise in their big 4×4s. Or maybe he resented that I was out there spooking wildlife, reducing his chances of getting a shot. Maybe he felt I was an "outsider". I don’t know but I do know unsolicited hatred when I get it, and I got it. That’s not to say there are not some friendly rednecks, but those kind are not what I’d call a redneck.
Response:
One makes it or doesn’t, on one’s own power
Unless they’re on a horse or an ORV :-) Steve Silberberg Visit the Air Sickness Bag Museum http://www.airsicknessbags.com/ FACT: Buff Babes Dig Cut Dudes!
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’ve learned (and gotten more assistance)10X more from hunters, ranchers, hermits & loggers than I have ever gotten from the snobbish gore-tex crowd out there. IIRC, this newsgroup just had a large discussion about whether it’s worth telling ill-prepared hikers about hazards ahead (ie. lightening predicted for the ridge). The overwhelming response was that the ill-prepared wouldn’t be receptive to advice, and so one might as well just shut up and continue on. It’s not so much snobbery as independence. One makes it or doesn’t, on one’s own power and by one’s own smarts.
If these kinda thinkers ever get disabled in the outback, maybe search and rescue should play that paragraph back to them…
Response:
Besides the normal dangers of encountering bears, getting lost, rattlesnakes, etc., there is one additional danger one encounters in wildlands that are accessible by 4×4 trucks, such as national forests. These safety tips were given to me by the owner of a wilderness guiding service on what to do should you encounter a redneck on a 4×4 trail. 1) Do NOT make eye contact 2) Move to the side of the road and continue slowly along your way 3) As the truck passes, without making eye contact, say "seen any?" 4) Ignore any response and continue on your way
MARTHA STEWART’S TIPS FOR REDNECKS: 1.Never take a beer to a job interview. 2.Always identify people in your yard before shooting at them. 3.It’s considered tacky to take a cooler to church. 4.If you have to vacuum the bed, it is time to change the sheets. 5.Even if you’re certain that you are included in the will, it is still considered tacky to drive a U-Haul to the funeral home. REGARDING DINING OUT: 1.When decanting wine, make sure that you tilt the paper cup, and pour slowly so as not to "bruise" the fruit of the vine. 2.If drinking directly from the bottle, always hold it with your fingers covering the label. REGARDING ENTERTAINING IN YOUR HOME: 1.A centerpiece for the table should never be anything prepared by a taxidermist. 2.Do not allow the dog to eat at the table… no matter how good his manners are. REGARDING PERSONAL HYGIENE: 1.While ears need to be cleaned regularly, this is a job that should be done in private using one’s OWN truck keys. 2.Proper use of toiletries can forestall bathing for several days. However, if you live alone, deodorant is a waste of good money. 3.Dirt and grease under the fingernails is a social no-no, as they tend to detract from a woman’s jewelry and alter the taste of finger foods. REGARDING DATING (Outside the Family): 1.Always offer to bait your date’s hook, especially on the first date. 2.Be aggressive. Let her know you’re interested: "I’ve been wanting to go out with you since I read that stuff on the bathroom wall two years ago." 3.Establish with her parents what time she is expected back. Some will say 10:00 PM; Others might say "Monday." If the latter is the answer, it is the man’s responsibility to get her to school on time. REGARDING THEATER ETIQUETTE: 1.Crying babies should be taken to the lobby and picked up immediately after the movie has ended. 2.Refrain from talking to characters on the screen. Tests have proven they can’t hear you. REGARDING WEDDINGS: 1.Livestock, usually, is a poor choice for a wedding gift. 2.Kissing the bride for more than 5 seconds may get you shot. 3.For the groom, at least, rent a tux. A leisure suit with cummerbund and a clean bowling shirt can create a tacky appearance. 4.Though uncomfortable, say "yes" to socks and shoes for this special occasion. REGARDING DRIVING ETIQUETTE: 1.Dim your headlights for approaching vehicles; even if the gun is loaded & the deer is in sight. 2.When approaching a 4 way stop, the vehicle with the largest tires has the right of way. 3.Never tow another car using panty hose and duct tape. 4.When sending your wife down the road with a gas can, it is impolite to ask her to bring back beer
Response:
This is great!!!!!!! :=)
Besides the normal dangers of encountering bears, getting lost, rattlesnakes, etc., there is one additional danger one encounters in wildlands that are accessible by 4×4 trucks, such as national forests. These safety tips were given to me by the owner of a wilderness guiding service on what to do should you encounter a redneck on a 4×4 trail. 1) Do NOT make eye contact 2) Move to the side of the road and continue slowly along your way 3) As the truck passes, without making eye contact, say "seen any?" 4) Ignore any response and continue on your way MARTHA STEWART’S TIPS FOR REDNECKS: 1.Never take a beer to a job interview. 2.Always identify people in your yard before shooting at them. 3.It’s considered tacky to take a cooler to church. 4.If you have to vacuum the bed, it is time to change the sheets. 5.Even if you’re certain that you are included in the will, it is still considered tacky to drive a U-Haul to the funeral home. REGARDING DINING OUT: 1.When decanting wine, make sure that you tilt the paper cup, and pour slowly so as not to "bruise" the fruit of the vine. 2.If drinking directly from the bottle, always hold it with your fingers covering the label. REGARDING ENTERTAINING IN YOUR HOME: 1.A centerpiece for the table should never be anything prepared by a taxidermist. 2.Do not allow the dog to eat at the table… no matter how good his manners are. REGARDING PERSONAL HYGIENE: 1.While ears need to be cleaned regularly, this is a job that should be done in private using one’s OWN truck keys. 2.Proper use of toiletries can forestall bathing for several days. However, if you live alone, deodorant is a waste of good money. 3.Dirt and grease under the fingernails is a social no-no, as they tend to detract from a woman’s jewelry and alter the taste of finger foods. REGARDING DATING (Outside the Family): 1.Always offer to bait your date’s hook, especially on the first date. 2.Be aggressive. Let her know you’re interested: "I’ve been wanting to go out with you since I read that stuff on the bathroom wall two years ago." 3.Establish with her parents what time she is expected back. Some will say 10:00 PM; Others might say "Monday." If the latter is the answer, it is the man’s responsibility to get her to school on time. REGARDING THEATER ETIQUETTE: 1.Crying babies should be taken to the lobby and picked up immediately after the movie has ended. 2.Refrain from talking to characters on the screen. Tests have proven they can’t hear you. REGARDING WEDDINGS: 1.Livestock, usually, is a poor choice for a wedding gift. 2.Kissing the bride for more than 5 seconds may get you shot. 3.For the groom, at least, rent a tux. A leisure suit with cummerbund and a clean bowling shirt can create a tacky appearance. 4.Though uncomfortable, say "yes" to socks and shoes for this special occasion. REGARDING DRIVING ETIQUETTE: 1.Dim your headlights for approaching vehicles; even if the gun is loaded & the deer is in sight. 2.When approaching a 4 way stop, the vehicle with the largest tires has the right of way. 3.Never tow another car using panty hose and duct tape. 4.When sending your wife down the road with a gas can, it is impolite to ask her to bring back beer
Response:
Besides the normal dangers of encountering bears, getting lost, rattlesnakes, etc., there is one additional danger one encounters in wildlands that are accessible by 4×4 trucks, such as national forests. These safety tips were given to me by the owner of a wilderness guiding service on what to do should you encounter a redneck on a 4×4 trail. 1) Do NOT make eye contact 2) Move to the side of the road and continue slowly along your way 3) As the truck passes, without making eye contact, say "seen any?" 4) Ignore any response and continue on your way
Response:
Question:
Uhm. One reason people are shy is because they tend to see the world as ‘dangerous’, but dont go for what I say.I might be a wacko trying to put you off guard against my fellow brother wackos 
On 7 Sep 1999, Steph wrote: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Joe <j…@dfas.com> wrote in message news:37D4871D.7136121B@dfas.com… > > i often smile at a girl i pass on the sidewalk just > > because i think she’s pretty. > I tend to be suspicious of strangers who smile at me without any obvious > reason for doing so. > > to any women reading this: if a guy smiles at you on the sidewalk, > > be nice. smile back then look away and keep walking. is that > > so hard? > I smile when I have a reason to smile. I don’t believe in returning a smile > as one would a tennis serve. Besides, there are many weird people in the > world, some of whom like to smile at strangers, and I don’t want to > encourage any psychos. > Stephanie
– For info about this service, see http://www.twwells.com/anon/ or e-mail: h…@anon.twwells.com — for an automatically returned help message ad…@anon.twwells.com – for the service’s administrator ano…@anon.twwells.com — anonymous mail to the administrator
Response:
Steph wrote: > Joe <j…@dfas.com> wrote in message news:37D4871D.7136121B@dfas.com… > > i often smile at a girl i pass on the sidewalk just > > because i think she’s pretty. > I tend to be suspicious of strangers who smile at me without any obvious > reason for doing so.
that’s pretty sad. when somebody smiles at me, i interpret it as warmth and friendliness, and return it without hesitation, reflexively. > > to any women reading this: if a guy smiles at you on the sidewalk, > > be nice. smile back then look away and keep walking. is that > > so hard? > I smile when I have a reason to smile. I don’t believe in returning a smile > as one would a tennis serve.
you sound very selfish > Besides, there are many weird people in the > world, some of whom like to smile at strangers, and I don’t want to > encourage any psychos.
you live in fear. i feel sorry for you. you assume somebody is a psycho instead of just a warm friendly human being. do you really think a smile is going to cause somebody to abuct you and kill you? what could happen to you on a busy city street? i pity your warped view of people and the world joe – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Stephanie
Response:
Ben Grayson wrote: > On 7 Sep 1999 12:21:03 -0500, "Steph" <removereflo…@chickmail.com> wrote: > >Joe <j…@dfas.com> wrote in message news:37D4871D.7136121B@dfas.com… > >> i often smile at a girl i pass on the sidewalk just > >> because i think she’s pretty. > >I tend to be suspicious of strangers who smile at me without any obvious > >reason for doing so. > Me too and I’m a guy . I don’t trust women who smile too much at men they > don’t know myself, not to mention men too. Ofttimes, this is nothing but a deception > of one manner or another, as I have learned the hard way 
it’s sad that you view a smile as a manipulation to be feared. i pity you. > There are some people who go though life smiling all the time, but I have learned > that that does not always mean they are satisfied or happy. Oftentimes a smile is a > way to lower the defenses of another person, in order to deceive them or rip them off > in some manner or other.
that’s a pretty twisted outlook. how is smiling at somebody walking down the street going to get you deceived or ripped off? yeah, if they then stop me and try to engage me, i’d turn and walk away. but i have NOTHING to fear in smiling or returning a smile from somebody i pass in the street. you are a wimp. > A good point in case would be that b*stard, serial killer Ted Bundy, who killed at > least 25 (some say closer to 100 ) women, may he fry in hell forever. His well > rehearsed smiling, combined with his good looks allowed him to trick these poor > victims into his car… and to their deaths.
we’re not talking about getting into strangers cars, which is stupid. we’re talking about simply returning a friendly smile as you pass somebody on a busy city street. and statistically speaking you’re at LEAST 100 times more likely to get struck by lightening than to meet a ted bundy. by your logic you should stay inside all day for fear of being struck by lightening > >> to any women reading this: if a guy smiles at you on the sidewalk, > >> be nice. smile back then look away and keep walking. is that > >> so hard? > >I smile when I have a reason to smile. I don’t believe in returning a smile > >as one would a tennis serve. Besides, there are many weird people in the > >world, some of whom like to smile at strangers, and I don’t want to > >encourage any psychos. > I don’t blame you Stephanie. > Many men seem to think that a smile, any smile, from a woman is > a come-on.
i don’t at all. i interpret it as human warmth. nothing more, nothing less. i think you guys are very fearful, suspicious people, and i pity you. it’s no wonder your shy! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Too bad it doesnt work in reverse for shy guys like me > >Stephanie
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -yakima wrote: > In article <37D4871D.71361…@dfas.com>, Joe <j…@dfas.com> wrote: > > i often smile at a girl i pass on the sidewalk just because i think > > she’s > > pretty. it’s not that at all that i’m trying to fuck her or date her or > > even > > meet her. it hurts when they can’t even give me a smile. like i said, > > i mean nothing by it except, "nice to see you, have a nice day". > > usually they will look quickly away, or totally avoid eye contact > > in the first place. sometimes they’ll even give me a dirty look. > > and i don’t think i’m giving them a sexy smile. it’s just a friendly > > smile. i don’t get alot of dates, and i’m lonely alot. it would be > > wonderful if women could give me that much: a friendly smile. > > on the few occasions that they do return the smile, it makes me > > feel great. i don’t understand what the big deal is. i usually > > interpret > > it as they don’t find me in the least attractive. but i know if ANYBODY > > smiles at me, any gender, any age, beautiful or not, i would always > > return the smile just out of friendliness. it seems like a bare minimum > > people could do in civil society. sometimes our society seems so > > cold and selfish. sometimes i even smile at women i don’t find > > particularly attractive, just to be friendly, and the result is usually > > the same: coldness. > As edie has pointed out, a woman who doesn’t return your smile may be > shy. Or she may be preoccupied with a serious problem, or grieving over > the loss of the loved one. You don’t know that a random stranger means to > snub you, so what good does it do you to assume that’s what meant?
good point. but judging by the low response rate i get on smiles, just about every woman on the street must be preoccupied with serious problems. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > sometimes i even smile at guys or nod or > > say hi or something and even they can’t do ANYTHING in > > return to be friendly. i think our society is pretty fucked up, that > > strangers are not even willing to say "hi" or smile or even nod at > > strangers, even when the person has made a friendly gesture to > > them. > If we lived in a society in which rapists and stalkers didn’t use a > woman’s smile as encouragement ("I can tell she wants me/is in love with > me because she smiled at me"), I _might_ agree with you. I don’t let the > sickos control my actions, but then I’ve never been burned. Several > months ago a woman on this group made the mistake of making a few friendly > statements to a guy on this group. He interpreted this as "She’s in love > with me" and repaid her friendliness by posting sexually explicit > fantasies about her, posting her private email on the newsgroup, and by > going door-to-door (in the neighborhood she casually mentioned on the > group) in an attempt to meet her, despite her numerous requests that he > leave her alone. I don’t blame other people for being cautious around > strangers.
it’s a sad, sad day indeed when we’re all afraid to simply say "hi" or smile as we pass each other in the street. it’s a sad, sad day. joe – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> -yakima
Response:
i was swearing out of frustration. of course i don’t swear at people in the street! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Steph wrote: > Joe <j…@asdf.com> wrote in message news:37DB57FD.6556F4CE@asdf.com… > > i can’t change the world. i can do my part, and i have. but > > one of the biggest parts we can do is just FUCKING SMILE! > Or else what? > For someone who seems to be so willing to smile, you certainly seem to adopt > an aggressive posture. > > is that so fucking hard???? > Only when the person you’re facing is swearing at you. > Stephanie
Response:
that’s exactly how i view it steve. i’m not looking for attention. it’s just friendliness. and i’m not just talking about smiling. sometimes it’s just a quick "hi" or "how’s it going". or even quick eye contact and a nod. it’s just a way of being nice and trying to make the street place where we feel connected to each other as human beings, instead of a jungle where nobody’s allowed to look at each other or make any other form of contact. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Steve R. wrote: > In article <7rf8gv$3d…@goethe.tau.ac.il>, > "Oren Eilam" <o…@post.tau.ac.il> wrote: > > Smiling at strangers can be either healthy, or sick. It depends on > > context. > True, and for the most part the context is such that smiling at people > is healthy. It’s just that we have been trained to be highly > individualistic and in some ways distrustful of others in our culture, > that smiling may come across as suspicious. > Granted there are individuals who are disturbed and may misinterpret > friendly gestures and smiling as sexual advances (as our good friend > Robert Maas did here) but these people are in the minority. > Most people are quite OK, and would appreciate random acts of kindness > and simple friendly manners from others, including "strangers" (God I > hate that word) it’s just that they’ve been programmed by our society to > be overly individualistic. > One can build walls of theories about how > much > > our society is fucked and should be replaced by a better one, but that > > allowes not even the slightest release from being ought not to digress > the > > rules, as they are at present. > Sorry, but I don’t agree. First of all, the rules are not always > written down and even you mention that they contain some ambiguity. So > if we have ambiguous social rules that have some room for interpration, > then who’s to say that one doesn’t have the slightest release from them? > Secondly, there are those of us who are interested in norming the norms > of society, and changing the ‘rules’ to suit a more humane and > cooperative way of living. After all, how did the rules start? Who > made up the rules? Is there an alternative set of rules than can be > followed? > > Why being smiled at is annoying? Because it forces the other person to > turn > > his attention to a target person who wants nothing but attention. > You are making the assumption that the person who is iniatiating the > smilng is doing so out of self-interest. Not surprising in an overly > individualistic and competitive society, that so many people absorb > these memes. > Suppose that such a person view "strangers" as fellow human beings and > recognizes that we share similar life experiences – not to mention we > share the same planet. Thus, from such a community view, smiling at a > "stranger" would represent a genuinely friendly gesture of _giving_ > attention to somebody else. > Steve > — > "Keep track of every cent that comes into or goes out of your life" > – Joe D & Vicki R, "Your Money or Your Life" > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don’t.
Response:
Joe <j…@adsf.com> wrote in message news:37D983BA.F1739FE5@adsf.com… > that’s pretty sad. when somebody smiles at me, i interpret > it as warmth and friendliness, and return it without hesitation, > reflexively.
I’m too much of a realist to do that. > you sound very selfish
No, I’m just very sincere. I’m not an actress. > you live in fear.
No, I live in the real world. > i feel sorry for you. you assume somebody is a psycho > instead of just a warm friendly human being.
You need not feel sorry for me. I don’t feel sorry for myself. > do you really think a smile is going to cause somebody > to abuct you and kill you?
Hmm… who said anything about abductions and killing? > i pity your warped view of people and the world
I don’t require your pity, thanks. Stephanie
Response:
Joe <j…@asdf.com> wrote in message news:37DB57FD.6556F4CE@asdf.com… > i can’t change the world. i can do my part, and i have. but > one of the biggest parts we can do is just FUCKING SMILE!
Or else what? For someone who seems to be so willing to smile, you certainly seem to adopt an aggressive posture. > is that so fucking hard????
Only when the person you’re facing is swearing at you. Stephanie
Response:
Joe <j…@adsf.com> writes: > yakima wrote: > > As edie has pointed out, a woman who doesn’t return your smile may be > > shy. Or she may be preoccupied with a serious problem, or grieving over > > the loss of the loved one. You don’t know that a random stranger means to > > snub you, so what good does it do you to assume that’s what meant? > good point. but judging by the low response rate i get on smiles, just about > every woman on the street must be preoccupied with serious problems.
There’s also the question of how you do it, when you do it and where you do it. There’s more than one way to go about it, and there are some situations where it is less appropriate than others to smile randomly at someone. — For info about this service, see http://www.twwells.com/anon/ or e-mail: h…@anon.twwells.com — for an automatically returned help message ad…@anon.twwells.com – for the service’s administrator ano…@anon.twwells.com — anonymous mail to the administrator
Response:
In article <fPbB3.16426$E8.563…@newscene.newscene.com>, "Steph" <removereflo…@chickmail.com> wrote: > I tend to be suspicious of strangers who smile at me without any obvious > reason for doing so.
In our society, this is quite commonplace. There needs to be a reason for almost everything. Spontaneous acts of kindness and undirected gestures tend to be regarded as suspicious, and a ‘what is that person up to’ attitude prevails. While I’m not accusing you personally of holding this attitude, it is quite commonplace for people to think like this while living in a social climate of distrust towards others. — "Keep track of every cent that comes into or goes out of your life" – Joe D & Vicki R, "Your Money or Your Life" Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Share what you know. Learn what you don’t.
Response:
My apologies if this appears twice. Deja has been eating some of my posts lately. In article <37D98601.89767…@adsf.com>, Joe <j…@adsf.com> wrote: > yakima wrote: > > In article <37D4871D.71361…@dfas.com>, Joe <j…@dfas.com> wrote: > > As edie has pointed out, a woman who doesn’t return your smile may be > > shy. Or she may be preoccupied with a serious problem, or grieving over > > the loss of the loved one. You don’t know that a random stranger means to > > snub you, so what good does it do you to assume that’s what meant? > good point. but judging by the low response rate i get on smiles, just about > every woman on the street must be preoccupied with serious problems.
So that’s _their_ problem. Nowhere is it required that _you_ have to be dragged down with them. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > > strangers are not even willing to say "hi" or smile or even nod at > > > strangers, even when the person has made a friendly gesture to > > > them. > > If we lived in a society in which rapists and stalkers didn’t use a > > woman’s smile as encouragement ("I can tell she wants me/is in love with > > me because she smiled at me"), I _might_ agree with you. I don’t let the > > sickos control my actions, but then I’ve never been burned. Several > > months ago a woman on this group made the mistake of making a few friendly > > statements to a guy on this group. He interpreted this as "She’s in love > > with me" and repaid her friendliness by posting sexually explicit > > fantasies about her, posting her private email on the newsgroup, and by > > going door-to-door (in the neighborhood she casually mentioned on the > > group) in an attempt to meet her, despite her numerous requests that he > > leave her alone. I don’t blame other people for being cautious around > > strangers. > it’s a sad, sad day indeed when we’re all afraid to simply say "hi" or smile > as we pass each other in the street. it’s a sad, sad day.
Well, here’s something you can _do_ about it. If your local sex-abuse- prevention center is anything like the one here in Phoenix, they are in desperate need of volunteers and donations. They do great work. The local center sponsors educational programs at boys and girls clubs, and at one program this week, a young girl who had been molested by a counselor at the Boys and Girls club finally found the courage to tell someone. Because she did, there is one child molester who no longer has access to children–which makes this world a safer place for us all. Making the world a safer place makes it easier for people to be friendly to strangers, without fears of negative repercussions of doing so. -yakima
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Steve R. wrote:> > In article <37D4871D.71361…@dfas.com>, > > Joe <j…@dfas.com> wrote: > > <snipped stuff on smiling and eye contact> > > Well I gotta say kudos for being brave and making the effort. You > > should pat yourself on the back for this. I’ve just started smiling at > > women as I pass by them on campus – and for the most part the responses > > have been great (and boy is it a great feeling!) > > It took me awhile to get the courage to do this – last year I remember > > having an online "NLP" chat session with Marc M., and smiling at women > > was one of the goals I was working on. Turns out after months of > > rationalizing and excessive analyzing, I finally just said let’s drop > > the excuses and go out and smile at people and see what happens. > > Turns out the responses were positive – although not everyone smiles > > back I have noticed many women giving me signals, and it’s a great > > feeling. Also I have practiced striking up conversations in lineups > > and in classes – doing this is easy and fun for me now. It really > > isn’t that big of a deal. Shy people tend to get so worked up over how > > they’re coming across that they overhype really small things. The way > > out of this is through practicing social skills, thinking in new ways, > > and changing behaviors.
ok. but i have to be really amused to perform truly felt smiles and i have to be really stuck up to fake smiles on demand. thos just don’t happen often enough. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > I think that genuinelly smiling at people is a great iniatitive to > > change things around for the better – and show that you in fact care > > and look out for others. It’s too bad that not everyone smiles back, > > but then again maybe they’re too self-absorbed > > On another note – what really helped me with striking up conversations > > with strangers and smiling was reframing my belief from stranger –> > > fellow human being. Although not apparent in our culture, we really > > are in on life together, and just having this belief is enough to spill > > over into my behavior and take more social risks to get to know people. > > > sometimes i even smile at women i don’t find > > > particularly attractive, just to be friendly, and the result is > > usually > > > the same: coldness. > > Your society viewpoint is pretty bang on wrt the coldness. We are > > being shaped to be overly individualistic, hence the selfishness. > > i think our society is pretty fucked up, that > > > strangers are not even willing to say "hi" or smile or even nod at > > > strangers, even when the person has made a friendly gesture to > > > them.
———–== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==———- http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World! ——== Over 73,000 Newsgroups – Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==—–
Response:
In article <yakima-1109991636450…@user-38ldjb7.dialup.mindspring.com>, yak…@my-dejanews.com (yakima) wrote: > Making the world a safer place makes it easier for people to be friendly > to strangers, without fears of negative repercussions of doing so.
Yakima’s advice is pretty much bang-on here – what you (Joe) also might want to look into is volunteering for a homeless shelter, and help out by participating in preparing meals, setting up, talking to the people, whichever is right for your temperament. Or check out other volunteer opportunities in which to get involved and actively do something to make this world a better place. I do agree with you that our society is pretty messed up, but sitting around isn’t going to do much good in order to change it. Neither is complaining that women aren’t smiling at you. You need to get involved and do something – whether it’s small local acts or more politically oriented activism. Get involved with other like-minded people, and make friends and contacts through volunteer work. Steve — "Keep track of every cent that comes into or goes out of your life" – Joe D & Vicki R, "Your Money or Your Life" Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Share what you know. Learn what you don’t.
Response:
In article <7rf8gv$3d…@goethe.tau.ac.il>, "Oren Eilam" <o…@post.tau.ac.il> wrote: > Smiling at strangers can be either healthy, or sick. It depends on > context.
True, and for the most part the context is such that smiling at people is healthy. It’s just that we have been trained to be highly individualistic and in some ways distrustful of others in our culture, that smiling may come across as suspicious. Granted there are individuals who are disturbed and may misinterpret friendly gestures and smiling as sexual advances (as our good friend Robert Maas did here) but these people are in the minority. Most people are quite OK, and would appreciate random acts of kindness and simple friendly manners from others, including "strangers" (God I hate that word) it’s just that they’ve been programmed by our society to be overly individualistic. One can build walls of theories about how much > our society is fucked and should be replaced by a better one, but that > allowes not even the slightest release from being ought not to digress the > rules, as they are at present.
Sorry, but I don’t agree. First of all, the rules are not always written down and even you mention that they contain some ambiguity. So if we have ambiguous social rules that have some room for interpration, then who’s to say that one doesn’t have the slightest release from them? Secondly, there are those of us who are interested in norming the norms of society, and changing the ‘rules’ to suit a more humane and cooperative way of living. After all, how did the rules start? Who made up the rules? Is there an alternative set of rules than can be followed? > Why being smiled at is annoying? Because it forces the other person to turn > his attention to a target person who wants nothing but attention.
You are making the assumption that the person who is iniatiating the smilng is doing so out of self-interest. Not surprising in an overly individualistic and competitive society, that so many people absorb these memes. Suppose that such a person view "strangers" as fellow human beings and recognizes that we share similar life experiences – not to mention we share the same planet. Thus, from such a community view, smiling at a "stranger" would represent a genuinely friendly gesture of _giving_ attention to somebody else. Steve — "Keep track of every cent that comes into or goes out of your life" – Joe D & Vicki R, "Your Money or Your Life" Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Share what you know. Learn what you don’t.
Response:
Steve R. wrote: > In article <yakima-1109991636450…@user-38ldjb7.dialup.mindspring.com>, > yak…@my-dejanews.com (yakima) wrote: > > Making the world a safer place makes it easier for people to be > friendly > > to strangers, without fears of negative repercussions of doing so. > Yakima’s advice is pretty much bang-on here – what you (Joe) also might > want to look into is volunteering for a homeless shelter, and help out > by participating in preparing meals, setting up, talking to the people, > whichever is right for your temperament.
guess what? in college i organized a group of 20 people to prepare a huge meal for several nights at a homeless shelter. > Or check out other volunteer opportunities in which to get involved and > actively do something to make this world a better place. > I do agree with you that our society is pretty messed up, but sitting > around isn’t going to do much good in order to change it. Neither is > complaining that women aren’t smiling at you. You need to get involved > and do something – whether it’s small local acts or more politically > oriented activism.
guess what? i worked for 9 months for a progressive, grassroots political citizens lobby. > Get involved with other like-minded people, and make > friends and contacts through volunteer work.
guess what? i have done all that. and still people don’t want to smile at each other in public. i can’t change the world. i can do my part, and i have. but one of the biggest parts we can do is just FUCKING SMILE! is that so fucking hard???? joe – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Steve > — > "Keep track of every cent that comes into or goes out of your life" > – Joe D & Vicki R, "Your Money or Your Life" > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don’t. Steve R. wrote: > In article <yakima-1109991636450…@user-38ldjb7.dialup.mindspring.com>, > yak…@my-dejanews.com (yakima) wrote: > > Making the world a safer place makes it easier for people to be > friendly > > to strangers, without fears of negative repercussions of doing so. > Yakima’s advice is pretty much bang-on here – what you (Joe) also might > want to look into is volunteering for a homeless shelter, and help out > by participating in preparing meals, setting up, talking to the people, > whichever is right for your temperament. > Or check out other volunteer opportunities in which to get involved and > actively do something to make this world a better place. > I do agree with you that our society is pretty messed up, but sitting > around isn’t going to do much good in order to change it. Neither is > complaining that women aren’t smiling at you. You need to get involved > and do something – whether it’s small local acts or more politically > oriented activism. Get involved with other like-minded people, and make > friends and contacts through volunteer work. > Steve > — > "Keep track of every cent that comes into or goes out of your life" > – Joe D & Vicki R, "Your Money or Your Life" > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don’t.
Response:
In article <37D4871D.71361…@dfas.com>, Joe <j…@dfas.com> wrote: <snipped stuff on smiling and eye contact> Well I gotta say kudos for being brave and making the effort. You should pat yourself on the back for this. I’ve just started smiling at women as I pass by them on campus – and for the most part the responses have been great (and boy is it a great feeling!) It took me awhile to get the courage to do this – last year I remember having an online "NLP" chat session with Marc M., and smiling at women was one of the goals I was working on. Turns out after months of rationalizing and excessive analyzing, I finally just said let’s drop the excuses and go out and smile at people and see what happens. Turns out the responses were positive – although not everyone smiles back I have noticed many women giving me signals, and it’s a great feeling. Also I have practiced striking up conversations in lineups and in classes – doing this is easy and fun for me now. It really isn’t that big of a deal. Shy people tend to get so worked up over how they’re coming across that they overhype really small things. The way out of this is through practicing social skills, thinking in new ways, and changing behaviors. > sometimes our society seems so > cold and selfish.
This is quite a valid perception actually. In Canada it’s a little different than the U.S. (I’m assuming you’re from the States) in that our system is structured more towards a democratic-socialist model – which in turn affects social relations to be more positive and community-oriented. Best example is with our universal health-care system. But, sad to say, we are becoming more of a cold society with the changes in the political and economic structures *especially* the globalization process and its ‘business-friendly’ economic efficiency iniatitives. Western society, in general, trains people to be individualistic and competitive. Thus, we look out more for ourselves than for others. While it’s important to have a sense of individuality, we are still social beings and need a communal sense of ‘being in on life together’ to survive. Too much of an emphasis on the self can be dangerous however, and it leads to the creation of an overly cold society. I think that genuinelly smiling at people is a great iniatitive to change things around for the better – and show that you in fact care and look out for others. It’s too bad that not everyone smiles back, but then again maybe they’re too self-absorbed On another note – what really helped me with striking up conversations with strangers and smiling was reframing my belief from stranger –> fellow human being. Although not apparent in our culture, we really are in on life together, and just having this belief is enough to spill over into my behavior and take more social risks to get to know people. > sometimes i even smile at women i don’t find > particularly attractive, just to be friendly, and the result is usually > the same: coldness.
Your society viewpoint is pretty bang on wrt the coldness. We are being shaped to be overly individualistic, hence the selfishness. i think our society is pretty fucked up, that > strangers are not even willing to say "hi" or smile or even nod at > strangers, even when the person has made a friendly gesture to > them.
Yeppers. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that society is f*cked, but there are plenty of social conditioning factors that exacerbate shyness and shape people to be overly cold and selfish. What I’ve realized though, personally, is that lashing out against society is counterproductive because it doesn’t solve the problem. I even wrote about 20 or so posts called ‘Real Life System Stories’ which were to that effect. I’m still pretty much a social critic, but I’ve discovered that it’s preferable to hold a moderate stance, and come up with alternative styles of living, rather than just say society is fucked. It reminds me of an NLP quote of ‘You have to know what to think of in order to know what *not* to think of’. That is, by me rebelling against society I’m still as much a part of it as by championing it. What I’ve found useful is to transcend mere extremes (society is fine, society is not OK) into new and alternative ways of thinking and living. Here’s an example: I can choose to specialize in one field, get a job, get married, have two cars, a cat and a dog (the traditional "normal" life in society) if I want, or I can perhaps take more courses across the board, travel around the world, work multiple careers, get involved in volunteer work, and perhaps marry later. Instead of splitting life up into categories and treating each one as seperate, I can integrate all parts of my life into a whole. I can find people who share my values, and find my alternative niche in life. Anyways, hope that little spiel made some sense :- — "Keep track of every cent that comes into or goes out of your life" – Joe D & Vicki R, "Your Money or Your Life" Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Share what you know. Learn what you don’t.
Response:
yes, it made sense and was interesting. thanks for validating my viewpoint and yes, i am probably too cynical at times. it just is so frustrating that people can’t just be a little warmer and friendlier to each other. it doesn’t seem like such a stretch just to return a smile, a "hi", or a simple nod with eye contact, but my experience is by far the majority of people can’t or won’t. i guess we’re living in a jungle. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Steve R. wrote: > In article <37D4871D.71361…@dfas.com>, > Joe <j…@dfas.com> wrote: > <snipped stuff on smiling and eye contact> > Well I gotta say kudos for being brave and making the effort. You > should pat yourself on the back for this. I’ve just started smiling at > women as I pass by them on campus – and for the most part the responses > have been great (and boy is it a great feeling!) > It took me awhile to get the courage to do this – last year I remember > having an online "NLP" chat session with Marc M., and smiling at women > was one of the goals I was working on. Turns out after months of > rationalizing and excessive analyzing, I finally just said let’s drop > the excuses and go out and smile at people and see what happens. > Turns out the responses were positive – although not everyone smiles > back I have noticed many women giving me signals, and it’s a great > feeling. Also I have practiced striking up conversations in lineups > and in classes – doing this is easy and fun for me now. It really > isn’t that big of a deal. Shy people tend to get so worked up over how > they’re coming across that they overhype really small things. The way > out of this is through practicing social skills, thinking in new ways, > and changing behaviors. > > sometimes our society seems so > > cold and selfish. > This is quite a valid perception actually. In Canada it’s a little > different than the U.S. (I’m assuming you’re from the States) in that > our system is structured more towards a democratic-socialist model – > which in turn affects social relations to be more positive and > community-oriented. Best example is with our universal health-care > system. But, sad to say, we are becoming more of a cold society with > the changes in the political and economic structures *especially* the > globalization process and its ‘business-friendly’ economic efficiency > iniatitives. > Western society, in general, trains people to be individualistic and > competitive. Thus, we look out more for ourselves than for others. > While it’s important to have a sense of individuality, we are still > social beings and need a communal sense of ‘being in on life together’ > to survive. Too much of an emphasis on the self can be dangerous > however, and it leads to the creation of an overly cold society. > I think that genuinelly smiling at people is a great iniatitive to > change things around for the better – and show that you in fact care > and look out for others. It’s too bad that not everyone smiles back, > but then again maybe they’re too self-absorbed > On another note – what really helped me with striking up conversations > with strangers and smiling was reframing my belief from stranger –> > fellow human being. Although not apparent in our culture, we really > are in on life together, and just having this belief is enough to spill > over into my behavior and take more social risks to get to know people. > > sometimes i even smile at women i don’t find > > particularly attractive, just to be friendly, and the result is > usually > > the same: coldness. > Your society viewpoint is pretty bang on wrt the coldness. We are > being shaped to be overly individualistic, hence the selfishness. > i think our society is pretty fucked up, that > > strangers are not even willing to say "hi" or smile or even nod at > > strangers, even when the person has made a friendly gesture to > > them. > Yeppers. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that society is f*cked, but > there are plenty of social conditioning factors that exacerbate shyness > and shape people to be overly cold and selfish. > What I’ve realized though, personally, is that lashing out against > society is counterproductive because it doesn’t solve the problem. I > even wrote about 20 or so posts called ‘Real Life System Stories’ which > were to that effect. > I’m still pretty much a social critic, but I’ve discovered that it’s > preferable to hold a moderate stance, and come up with alternative > styles of living, rather than just say society is fucked. It reminds > me of an NLP quote of ‘You have to know what to think of in order to > know what *not* to think of’. That is, by me rebelling against society > I’m still as much a part of it as by championing it. > What I’ve found useful is to transcend mere extremes (society is fine, > society is not OK) into new and alternative ways of thinking and > living. Here’s an example: I can choose to specialize in one field, > get a job, get married, have two cars, a cat and a dog (the traditional > "normal" life in society) if I want, or I can perhaps take more courses > across the board, travel around the world, work multiple careers, get > involved in volunteer work, and perhaps marry later. Instead of > splitting life up into categories and treating each one as seperate, I > can integrate all parts of my life into a whole. I can find people who > share my values, and find my alternative niche in life. > Anyways, hope that little spiel made some sense :- > — > "Keep track of every cent that comes into or goes out of your life" > – Joe D & Vicki R, "Your Money or Your Life" > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don’t.
Response:
it just shows how sick our society is. you smile or say hi at somebody and they think you’re out to get them – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Steve R. wrote: > In article <fPbB3.16426$E8.563…@newscene.newscene.com>, > "Steph" <removereflo…@chickmail.com> wrote: > > I tend to be suspicious of strangers who smile at me without any > obvious > > reason for doing so. > In our society, this is quite commonplace. There needs to be a reason > for almost everything. Spontaneous acts of kindness and undirected > gestures tend to be regarded as suspicious, and a ‘what is that person > up to’ attitude prevails. > While I’m not accusing you personally of holding this attitude, it is > quite commonplace for people to think like this while living in a > social climate of distrust towards others. > — > "Keep track of every cent that comes into or goes out of your life" > – Joe D & Vicki R, "Your Money or Your Life" > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don’t.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Dr Art wrote: > edie <tues…@banet.net> wrote in message > news:37D3D4F0.5034515E@banet.net… > > I’ll smile back only if I’ve seen him around, i.e. office building, > gym, > etc. But no. > > Not a complete stranger on the street. Never. Well, never say > never but > *hugely* > > unlikely. Like I said, you just don’t do that in NYC. > I live in NYC too. And I have to say that I wouldn’t stare at a girl I > don’t > know unless I thought she was attractive or that she was noticing me. > [Staring at freaks is a sort of unkind] I don’t smile easily at > strangers > either. Usually, to smile at someone, I have to see something funny in > that > person or recall something funny from our mutual experiences in the > past. > But I guess that’s just me. > Dr Art
i often smile at a girl i pass on the sidewalk just because i think she’s pretty. it’s not that at all that i’m trying to fuck her or date her or even meet her. it hurts when they can’t even give me a smile. like i said, i mean nothing by it except, "nice to see you, have a nice day". usually they will look quickly away, or totally avoid eye contact in the first place. sometimes they’ll even give me a dirty look. and i don’t think i’m giving them a sexy smile. it’s just a friendly smile. i don’t get alot of dates, and i’m lonely alot. it would be wonderful if women could give me that much: a friendly smile. on the few occasions that they do return the smile, it makes me feel great. i don’t understand what the big deal is. i usually interpret it as they don’t find me in the least attractive. but i know if ANYBODY smiles at me, any gender, any age, beautiful or not, i would always return the smile just out of friendliness. it seems like a bare minimum people could do in civil society. sometimes our society seems so cold and selfish. sometimes i even smile at women i don’t find particularly attractive, just to be friendly, and the result is usually the same: coldness. sometimes i even smile at guys or nod or say hi or something and even they can’t do ANYTHING in return to be friendly. i think our society is pretty fucked up, that strangers are not even willing to say "hi" or smile or even nod at strangers, even when the person has made a friendly gesture to them. to any women reading this: if a guy smiles at you on the sidewalk, be nice. smile back then look away and keep walking. is that so hard? you’ll probably make his day alot brighter. joe
Response:
Mushie wrote: > Joe wrote: > > to any women reading this: if a guy smiles at you on the sidewalk, > > be nice. smile back then look away and keep walking. is that > > so hard? you’ll probably make his day alot brighter. > > joe > Done. Standard practice here. > [Marsha smiles at joe]
THANK YOU!
Response:
Joe wrote: > to any women reading this: if a guy smiles at you on the sidewalk, > be nice. smile back then look away and keep walking. is that > so hard? you’ll probably make his day alot brighter. > joe
Done. Standard practice here. [Marsha smiles at joe]
Response:
Joe <j…@dfas.com> wrote in message news:37D4871D.7136121B@dfas.com… > i often smile at a girl i pass on the sidewalk just > because i think she’s pretty.
I tend to be suspicious of strangers who smile at me without any obvious reason for doing so. > to any women reading this: if a guy smiles at you on the sidewalk, > be nice. smile back then look away and keep walking. is that > so hard?
I smile when I have a reason to smile. I don’t believe in returning a smile as one would a tennis serve. Besides, there are many weird people in the world, some of whom like to smile at strangers, and I don’t want to encourage any psychos. Stephanie
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -In article <37D4871D.71361…@dfas.com>, Joe <j…@dfas.com> wrote: > i often smile at a girl i pass on the sidewalk just because i think > she’s > pretty. it’s not that at all that i’m trying to fuck her or date her or > even > meet her. it hurts when they can’t even give me a smile. like i said, > i mean nothing by it except, "nice to see you, have a nice day". > usually they will look quickly away, or totally avoid eye contact > in the first place. sometimes they’ll even give me a dirty look. > and i don’t think i’m giving them a sexy smile. it’s just a friendly > smile. i don’t get alot of dates, and i’m lonely alot. it would be > wonderful if women could give me that much: a friendly smile. > on the few occasions that they do return the smile, it makes me > feel great. i don’t understand what the big deal is. i usually > interpret > it as they don’t find me in the least attractive. but i know if ANYBODY > smiles at me, any gender, any age, beautiful or not, i would always > return the smile just out of friendliness. it seems like a bare minimum > people could do in civil society. sometimes our society seems so > cold and selfish. sometimes i even smile at women i don’t find > particularly attractive, just to be friendly, and the result is usually > the same: coldness.
As edie has pointed out, a woman who doesn’t return your smile may be shy. Or she may be preoccupied with a serious problem, or grieving over the loss of the loved one. You don’t know that a random stranger means to snub you, so what good does it do you to assume that’s what meant? > sometimes i even smile at guys or nod or > say hi or something and even they can’t do ANYTHING in > return to be friendly. i think our society is pretty fucked up, that > strangers are not even willing to say "hi" or smile or even nod at > strangers, even when the person has made a friendly gesture to > them.
If we lived in a society in which rapists and stalkers didn’t use a woman’s smile as encouragement ("I can tell she wants me/is in love with me because she smiled at me"), I _might_ agree with you. I don’t let the sickos control my actions, but then I’ve never been burned. Several months ago a woman on this group made the mistake of making a few friendly statements to a guy on this group. He interpreted this as "She’s in love with me" and repaid her friendliness by posting sexually explicit fantasies about her, posting her private email on the newsgroup, and by going door-to-door (in the neighborhood she casually mentioned on the group) in an attempt to meet her, despite her numerous requests that he leave her alone. I don’t blame other people for being cautious around strangers. -yakima
Response:
On 7 Sep 1999 12:21:03 -0500, "Steph" <removereflo…@chickmail.com> wrote: >Joe <j…@dfas.com> wrote in message news:37D4871D.7136121B@dfas.com… >> i often smile at a girl i pass on the sidewalk just >> because i think she’s pretty. >I tend to be suspicious of strangers who smile at me without any obvious >reason for doing so.
Me too and I’m a guy . I don’t trust women who smile too much at men they don’t know myself, not to mention men too. Ofttimes, this is nothing but a deception of one manner or another, as I have learned the hard way There are some people who go though life smiling all the time, but I have learned that that does not always mean they are satisfied or happy. Oftentimes a smile is a way to lower the defenses of another person, in order to deceive them or rip them off in some manner or other. A good point in case would be that b*stard, serial killer Ted Bundy, who killed at least 25 (some say closer to 100 ) women, may he fry in hell forever. His well rehearsed smiling, combined with his good looks allowed him to trick these poor victims into his car… and to their deaths. >> to any women reading this: if a guy smiles at you on the sidewalk, >> be nice. smile back then look away and keep walking. is that >> so hard? >I smile when I have a reason to smile. I don’t believe in returning a smile >as one would a tennis serve. Besides, there are many weird people in the >world, some of whom like to smile at strangers, and I don’t want to >encourage any psychos.
I don’t blame you Stephanie. Many men seem to think that a smile, any smile, from a woman is a come-on. Too bad it doesnt work in reverse for shy guys like me – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Stephanie
Response:
Question:
I don’t like crossposting. The answer to your post is in alt.religion.christian. If you don’t want to read that group, why are you posting to it in the first place? Kjetil J
Response:
I don’t like crossposting. The answer to your post is in alt.religion.christian. If you don’t want to read that group, why are you posting to it in the first place?
1. I didn’t write the initial post in this thread 2. the initial poster crossposted it. 3. I reply to crossposts and rarely change group headers. Timothy Sutter wrote… Ok, let’s deal with each debate separately. First, I oppose the idea that this is a common rendering of creation. If it was, I would have heard it before. I have never read any official statements of faith in any christian or semi-christian group stating among other things that there was life on the moon and mars as well as ‘a million billion planets’. they aren’t as imaginative as I am. My point exactly. If the story hinges on your creativity it is not a ‘common rendering of the Genesis creation story’, is it?
NO, not your point. my imaginative thinking *allows* me to see the inferrence. I did not invent the things upon which the inferrence is based. it is *not* my "creativity" but my imaginitive insight. and imaginitive insight is an invaluable necessity in any logical endeavor. but God did not create darkness. The various authors of the Bible state repeatedly that God has created all things. Nothing exists that was not created by God. God even states himself (through the author of course) that he created darkness/evil.
absolutely not true. as I showed you, already, "you were perfect in all your creation until iniquity was *found* in you" God did *not* create the iniquity that was Found in this creation. God did not create the darkness, God found it. You’ll have to convince me that this darkness came from God. Logical deduction. If God created all things and nothing ever existed without his creating, he must also have created darkness. (Not to mention that he states this himself through th author)
"iniquity was *found* in you" you’re going to have a hurdle to jump from gen 1:1 to gen 1:2 No I dont. They are two different stories not intended to be read chronologically.
this does not take away from my statement that the darkness was not *in the beginning* I see your point but disagree. It is an accepted fact between biblical scholars that this "gap" is there because the author stiched together two stories. It is not chronologichally (or even factually) intended. it’s that way for a reason. I will not dip into a "corrupt" text theory. this would only serve to destroy the bible’s presumed authority. Congratulations you missed the point entirely. The text is not corrupt. Wether you believe in it or not, the text can not be corrupt because it is just a text. The corruption enters the picture when we here in Western culture ascribe our ideals and values to a time-period of over 1500 years. Several passages and chapters in the bible show an acceptance for slavery. This does not mean that slavery is correct or even suggested as acceptable in the bible, just an acceptance that that was the situation when the text was written. Don’t ascribe your idioms and values to the bible.
no *you* claimed that the genesis account was "stitched together from several stories" *you* said, "Pauline epistles were forged" this is an allusion to a corrupted textual format. now you are hand waving. In doing so, you make the text corrupt all by yourself.
*you* said, "stitched together from several sources" *you* said, "Pauline epistles were forged" *you* made the allusion to a corrupted text. you are making an attempt to step back from that statement. *these* statements speak of a corrupted text. Sure it does. That is, however, not my problem with the statement. I criticized the statement because: 1) Where is the evidence that the Earth was ‘restored’ or renewed in any way? yes, if it is rendered "the earth *became* void" then the act becomes one of restoration. You haven’t provided nearly enough proof that this is the correct interpretation.
but yet you agree that gen 1:1 to gen 1:2 has a time anomaly. and John says, "God is light and in him there is no darkness at all." and we see "darkness" in gen 1:2. and "iniquity" was *found* in something that was created. it doesn’t take "creative" logic to make the inferrence. perhaps "insightful" logic. but that is the cornerstone of many logical enterprises. and not just "this earth" but the entire material universe. That’s a stretch at best. Prove this.
it’s not a far stretch. it falls out as a consequence of my inferrence. Ephesians 6:12 For we are not fighting against human beings but against the wicked spiritual forces in the heavenly world, the rulers, authorities, and cosmic powers of this dark age. see, the bible implies that the darkness brought into the universe was brought by "evil spirits" It does nothing of the sort. It states that someone is fighting against something in a dark age. It says nothing about who brought about the dark age.
"wicked spiritual forces" means nothing? another translation has "evil spirits in heavenly places" and that’s why it’s a big book. not every detail is explained in a single sentence. I already showed verses that apply to the advent of this "darkness" The use of language in the post reminds me of the White-suited pastor(TM) selling audio tapes on some christian radio station. It is apocalyptic, doesn’t really say anything and does nothing in indicating evidence. more non-sequitur. your impression of me or the bible has no bearing on this matter. Then why do you insist that your impression does? Are you some sort of cosmological authority perhaps?
my impression of me? I certainly gave no "impression" of the bible. I simply read it in a comprehensive manner and came to a conclusion based on several key statements. my opinion of the bible has nothing to do with what i wrote. it is a perfectly reasonable inferrence. the "question" aksed for an explanation of dinosaurs pre-Adam. I supplied one. You did not. You supplied a hypothesis without offering evidence.
I gave an answer. I subsequently provided a subtext. Without knowing this and other things about the time, we would have to (by scientific process) throw out these Pauline letters on that fact alone. irrelevant No it isn’t. Without proper knowledge about the history of a text, you are incapable of discerning the intended information from it.
nope, I can make inferrence and draw conclusion based on the text alone. knowing Paul’s shoesize adds nil to the understanding of Paul. oh, and claiming "forgery" is definitely claiming a corrupt text, and not some corrupt "infusion of western ideals" so, stick to one side of your mouth, please. try not to say, "corrupted text" and then glaze over it with "corrupted reading" so, here’s you from above; "The text is not corrupt." so, you retract Pauline forgeries? and Mosaic piecework purloining of "other sources"? if so, you’ll find nothing in my rendering that involved any infusion of "corrupted western ideals" just a set of biblical statements that enabled inferrence. I provided an explanation. You provided a hypothesis. Not an explanation.
snore. The bible interpreted by modern man without knowledge about the author is a book seemingly full of fairy-tales and often direct contradictions. Psalms 18:25-26 With the loyal thou dost show thyself loyal; with the blameless man thou dost show thyself blameless; with the pure thou dost show thyself pure; and with the crooked thou dost show thyself perverse. you can read that any way you’d like. Oh the hint was obvious, thankyou. Now who’s doing the name-calling?
paranoia on your part, or you think the bible called you perverse. but the way *I* read it is like this; the opinion you have of the God of the bible says more about *you* that it does about the God of the Bible. yeah, I know, you, personally, are just discreditting the bible. and not necessarily the God of the bible. but, maybe some day, you’ll come to realize exactly where the so-called contradiction lies. I have. The contradiction lies with fanatics searching for verses to support their agenda. There is nothing wrong with the texts, just the so-called christians who are twisting them to support something they do not. I am not discrediting the bible, nor God, just close-minded fanatics.
ok, so now, we definitely have retraction of the corrupted text claim. you said, some of Paul’s letters were forgeries, and Moses "stitched together" various sources in genesis. this is no longer your stance? and *I* "twisted" nothing. I aaid it appears that gen 1:2 does not follow directly from gen 1:1, (which you agree) and then made a statement about the appearance of "darkness" and coupled that with, "you were perfect in all your creation until iniquity was found in you" along with references to various Sons of God which were not equivalent to sons of men. and drew the inferrence that "the darkness" was a consequence of the iniquity of Satan. which is quite reasonable and not twisted at all. I don’t appreciate your comments on my religious life. You know nothing about it. It is exactly that sort of assumptions that messes up your arguments.
huh? my comments? show me? you mean the Psalmist? as i said, you read that any way you like. you said "some people see th ebible as a book of fairy tales and contradiction" and I gave you the Psalmist. I don’t recall whether you said *you* see the bible that way. but you did make claims that the bible was a corrupt text. (yes you did) – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "abusenet" is tired and boring. what a pitiful waste of a nice piece of tech. Not at all. usenet
… read more »
Response:
Timothy Sutter wrote… Timothy Sutter wrote… it’s one of the common renderings of the genesis creation story. Oh is it now? yes, it is. there’s a bit of lead in. <Snip verses Ok, let’s deal with each debate separately. First, I oppose the idea that this is a common rendering of creation. If it was, I would have heard it before. I have never read any official statements of faith in any christian or semi-christian group stating among other things that there was life on the moon and mars as well as ‘a million billion planets’.
they aren’t as imaginative as I am. but God did not create darkness. and the Angelic rebellion brought death into the universe. "the darkness of the Pit." and I said the gen 1:1 gen 1:2 gap theory is common. not *my* "life abounded" embellishments. *but* if the universe was created *before* the Angelic rebellion, and the Angelic rebellion brought Death into the universe then it is *not* a far stretch to INFER that "life abounded" *before* the Angelic rebellion, and as such, being prevalent on an untold number of planets. It’s a moot point anyway and calls for some definitions before we continue. Now on to the interesting part.
1 John 1:5 Now the message that we have heard from his Son and announce is this: God is light, and there is no darkness at all in him. 2 Corinthians 4:6 The God who said, "Out of darkness the light shall shine!" is the same God who made his light shine in our hearts, to bring us the knowledge of God’s glory shining in the face of Christ. 2 Corinthians 4:4 They do not believe, because their minds have been kept in the dark by the evil god of this world. He keeps them from seeing the light shining on them, the light that comes from the Good News about the glory of Christ, who is the exact likeness of God. gen 1:2 says "darkness was on the face of the deep" You’ll have to convince me that this darkness came from God. seems that the darkness came from the "evil god of this world." I see a definite space between "created the heavens and the earth" and "now the earth _was_ void and darkness was over the face of the deep" you’ll have to convince me that it isn’t "now the earth *became* void…" they’re both forms of "to be" if you read it strictly your way; in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth, now *as yet* the earth did not exist, and darkness….. meaning, the first sentence speaks of the act of creation, followed by a back tracking to *before* the creation event. which by modern cosmological theory would be a must, seeing that heavy elements that the earth and earthlike "planets" are made of did not exist in the first second of "creation" meaning, the theory goes that there was an eruption or burst of a plasma that was both matter and energy, well neither, but some stuff called loosely a "plasma" where E = mc
Previous page