JET
May 17 2003, 09:17 AM
Nuts shaken from same tree
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: May 17, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Henry Lamb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
You would think that Muslims everywhere would be horribly embarrassed that, in the name of their religion, a handful of criminals are running around the world slaughtering innocent civilians. Why is the Muslim world not rising up in a single voice to condemn these killings and demand that the criminals stop, or at the very least, stop defiling the name of the Muslim religion?
Suppose there were a band of Christian criminals, running around the world targeting Muslims with car bombs, and fully-loaded airplanes, demanding that the non-Christian-infidels vacate the planet. I can't imagine that the rest of the Christian world would be as quiet as is the Muslim world. I can't imagine that the leaders of the Christian world would look the other way, or send money to the families of the Christian-criminals whose sons and daughters died while committing murder. I can't imagine that the Christian community would allow a band of hate-filled, low-life criminals to paint for the world, the bloody picture of what their religion actually is.
Silence from the Muslim world is nothing less than approval of the criminals' actions.
Sure, there have been a few Muslim leaders who condemn the terrorists' actions. But there has been no organized, determined effort to put an end to the senseless slaughter by the Muslim religion. Muslims could stop the foolishness, if they chose to do so. Someone knows where Osama bin Laden is. Someone knows where every terrorists cell is located. Every terrorist has a family, friends, a source of money. Every Muslim terrorist – since they act in the name of the Muslim religion – is affiliated with a Muslim spiritual leader. Why is the Muslim community not tightening the noose around the necks of these criminals?
Come to think of it, why is the mainstream environmental community not tightening the noose around the necks of the domestic terrorists who perpetrate their crimes in the name of the environment? The Earth Liberation Front, and their sister organization, the Animal Liberation Front, are cut from the same hate-filled, low-life criminal cloth as the Muslim terrorists. Someone knows who burned the ski lodge in Vail, Colo. Someone knows the people who committed every act of eco-terrorism in this country. The mainstream environmental community could put an end to this foolishness, if they chose to do so. Why are they so silent? Why do they look the other way?
Terrorism is terrorism, whether committed by a religious nut, or an environmental nut. Both types of nuts have one thing in common: They are either too arrogant, or ignorant, to understand the first principle of civilized behavior. The principle is simply this: Any right that I claim for myself, I must freely grant to all others.
If Osama claims the right to embrace the religion he chooses, he must be willing to grant that same right to all others. Of course, he has not yet discovered that this principle is the basis of civilized behavior, and, therefore, his behavior is far from civilized. Osama is not alone in his failure to discover this principle. It is far too simple, too profound, for bomb-wielding, Molotov-cocktail-tossing criminals to notice or care about.
It is a principle that has escaped the notice of many people who claim the right to choose how they wish to live, but then insist that everyone else live as they dictate, denying to everyone else the right they claim for themselves. The nuts that congregate under the ELF/ALF tree have every right to choose not to drive SUVs. But to inflict terror on those who make a different choice, is at once, the height of arrogance, and the depth of ignorance.
Muslims who choose to embrace Islam have every right to do so. To refuse to grant to all others the same right to choose – even if their choice is different – may be the result of arrogance or ignorance, but it is certainly uncivilized.
If the Muslim world fails to rise above the image that Osama bin Laden, and his fellow criminals are painting, the rest of the world will eventually lose the great Muslim heritage. The rest of the world will continue to blunder its way toward civilization, leaving the eco-nuts and the religious-nuts to pretend they are martyrs in their backward-looking dreamworld.
The civilized world is eager to move forward, to find ways to cooperate, to expand friendship and commerce, to broaden educational horizons for everyone, and to elevate prosperity for every person on earth, to help all people everywhere know the individual freedom that the Creator intended for all creatures on this earth – even humans.
The eco-nuts and the religious nuts are trying to stop the unstoppable flow of civilized progress. Both Islam, and environmentalism need to remove the obstacles to progress, by cleaning the nuts from their midst.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Henry Lamb is the executive vice president of the Environmental Conservation Organization and chairman of Sovereignty International.
Bluesky
May 17 2003, 12:27 PM
| QUOTE |
| The eco-nuts and the religious nuts are trying to stop the unstoppable flow of civilized progress. |
I don't call uncontrolled mayhem of off-road recreation progress nor unstoppable.
Permagrin
May 17 2003, 01:34 PM
Thats just your Fanaticism
dezfan1
May 17 2003, 04:05 PM
| QUOTE |
| QUOTE | | The eco-nuts and the religious nuts are trying to stop the unstoppable flow of civilized progress. |
I don't call uncontrolled mayhem of off-road recreation progress nor unstoppable. |
[b][size=24]SUCKS TO BE YOU!
Derwud
May 17 2003, 05:41 PM
BlueNuts, wouldn't this best be addressed with Henry Lamb?
On that note FesteringPussSky, when are you going to come off your soap box and help find a solution instead of working so hard to piss people off!
Bluesky
May 17 2003, 07:10 PM
[quote]You would think that Muslims everywhere would be horribly embarrassed that, in the name of their religion, a handful of criminals are running around the world slaughtering innocent civilians. Why is the Muslim world not rising up in a single voice to condemn these killings and demand that the criminals stop, or at the very least, stop defiling the name of the Muslim religion? [/quote]You would think that Americans everywhere would be horribly embarrassed that, in the name of their nation, a handful of non-elected sycophants are running around the world slaughtering innocent civilians. Why is the Western world not rising up in a single voice to condemn these killings and demand that these brutish, profit-motivated bullies stop, or at the very least, stop defiling the name of the United States?
Permagrin
May 17 2003, 07:34 PM
a handful of non-elected sycophants
Get over it!
They WERE elected?
prove they were not
dezfan1
May 18 2003, 11:43 AM
[quote][quote]You would think that Muslims everywhere would be horribly embarrassed that, in the name of their religion, a handful of criminals are running around the world slaughtering innocent civilians. Why is the Muslim world not rising up in a single voice to condemn these killings and demand that the criminals stop, or at the very least, stop defiling the name of the Muslim religion? [/quote]You would think that Americans everywhere would be horribly embarrassed that, in the name of their nation, a handful of non-elected sycophants are running around the world slaughtering innocent civilians. Why is the Western world not rising up in a single voice to condemn these killings and demand that these brutish, profit-motivated bullies stop, or at the very least, stop defiling the name of the United States?[/quote]
I guess that the terrorist bombs that are being used to kill innocent civilians in Isreal today and in other areas of the Midle East are the work of saints? Funny how "we" and our "elected" leaders are deemed to be "sycophants". Yet not a word of protest comes from **** sky or his kind when "we" are attacked by these brutish, hate mongering bullies. Or at least they should protest the defiling of the name of the Muslim religion in the name of "peace"!
It's amazing how twisted the view of the world looks thru the eyes of these idiots like **** sky. :roll:
>:< >:< [b][size=24]Hypocrite! >:< >:<
Bansh88
May 18 2003, 01:22 PM
Those same "sychopants" protect YOUR right to call them murderers. Only in America can someone talk about how sh!ty their country is while sitting in a comfortable chair, full belly, warm and all well knowing you will wake up tomorrow to live another day. Until this country falls apart into complete anarchy and destruction, I will continue to appreciate the men and women who run this country and the manner in which they do it.
JET
May 18 2003, 03:53 PM
[quote][quote]The eco-nuts and the religious nuts are trying to stop the unstoppable flow of civilized progress.[/quote]
I don't call uncontrolled mayhem of off-road recreation progress nor unstoppable.[/quote]
That is what equates you with the religious nut balls.
Bluesky
May 18 2003, 06:30 PM
[quote]I guess that the terrorist bombs that are being used to kill innocent civilians in Isreal today and in other areas of the Midle East are the work of saints?[/quote]
the bombs you speak of most often kill those who set them off too. have you ever tried to conceive of the feelings that must go through the mind of a person willing to die for their cause?
[quote]Yet not a word of protest comes from **** sky or his kind when "we" are attacked by these brutish, hate mongering bullies. [/quote]
this statement is an unfounded LIE
All I say is, why don't our elected officials and their appointed and hired workers try to find out "why" we were attacked and try to address the reasons to try to protect our way of life. War is not something we can live with indefinitely, but that is what the current administration is settting us up for.
dezfan1
May 18 2003, 07:51 PM
[quote]the bombs you speak of most often kill those who set them off too.[/quote]
And I'm supposed to care about the whacko that straps a bomb to themselves in order to kill INNOCENT bystanders is the name of God? :roll: I don't think so! I call these people cowards! :x If they have a beef with our government or the government of another country, how is indiscriminately killing INNOCENT bystanders going to further their cause or gain them support or sympathy? It sure hasn't gained mine!
[quote]this statement is an unfounded LIE [/quote]
And yet not a word about the victims of this mornings unexcusable attacks. :x But we should feel sorrow for the bomber? :roll: How much of a "unfounded" falsehood is it? :?
JET
May 19 2003, 06:27 AM
Is anyone surprised that the environmentalist extremists whacko is defending the religious extremist whackos? It tends to show the point of this topic.
Derwud
May 19 2003, 06:32 AM
[quote]Is anyone surprised that the environmentalist extremists whacko is defending the religious extremist whackos? It tends to show the point of this topic.[/quote]
So it makes you wonder as to when some environmentalist extremists is going to strap a bomb to his Subaru Brat and drive into a camp at Glamis.
steveo
May 19 2003, 12:21 PM
i have no idea why i'm going to waste my time as i know the closed mind will not accept any different ideas but here goes.
first, regardless of your wacky conspiracy theories, NO ONE WANTS WAR. period. yes, the businesses that supply our defense will make money but without a defense industry in this county we wouldn't be free and you wouldn't have the freedom to flap your mouth. if we are to be free, someone has to make bullets. war has unfortunately been a part of the world since the beginning of history. we would all love to have no more war but as long as there are wackos willing to die for their insane causes it probably won't end. our leaders and military is trying to prevent more of these nuts from having the ability to carry out their acts.
second, we know very well why these nuts blow themselves up. they believe a paradise awaits them for killing "infidels." you cannot appease these people unless we all convert to extreme islam. we cannot possibly make everyone happy and someone not liking your religion is not a defensible excuse for trying to kill you.
you need some serious help if you're more concerned with the feelings of suicide bombers than their innocent victims.
The Pastor
May 19 2003, 12:55 PM
[quote]the bombs you speak of most often kill those who set them off too. have you ever tried to conceive of the feelings that must go through the mind of a person willing to die for their cause?[/quote]
I could give a rats ass what was going through some sicko's head as he blew himself up taking many innocent people with him. I don't give a crap WHAT his reason is there is NEVER... NEVER... N E V E R any reason to kill innocent men women and children.
He could claim all the "I'm a victim-isms" he wants he will NEVER justify the wholesale slaughter of innocent people.
Vor
realbadlarry
May 19 2003, 01:05 PM
Why you guys gotta bash the Subaru Brats, those things rock. Its not the cars fault some tree hugging dung eater likes it.
Derwud
May 19 2003, 02:21 PM
[quote]Why you guys gotta bash the Subaru Brats, those things rock. Its not the cars fault some tree hugging dung eater likes it.[/quote]
Sorry, it's the only non-WRX model I could come up with. Besides it's not just the Tree Huggers that love those things. I think a rainbow sticker is a standard feature on those things!
treshombre
May 19 2003, 07:19 PM
A thorough study of the Quran and Hadith reveal an Islam that is not being presented honestly by the Muslim propagandists and is not known to the majority of Muslims. Islam as it is taught in the Quran (Koran) and lived by Muhammad, as is reported in the Hadith (Biography and sayings of the Prophet) is a religion of intolerance, inequality, violence, discrimination, superstition, fanaticism, and blind faith. Islam advocates killing the non-Muslims, abuses the human rights of minorities and women. Islam expanded by Jihad (holy war) and forced its way by killing the non-believers and the dissidents. Apostasy in Islam is the biggest crime, punishable by death. Muhammad was a fundamentalist himself therefore fundamentalism cannot be separated from true Islam. Islam, which means submission, demands from its followers to submit their wills and thoughts to Muhammad and his imaginary Allah, a deity that despises reason, democracy, freedom of thought and freedom of expression. Read More ........
http://main.faithfreedom.org/Articles/sina...na/prologue.htm
It Gets worse.....
Warning* Graphic content
http://www.twin-towers.net/muslims.htm
Bluesky
May 19 2003, 08:01 PM
[quote] there is NEVER... NEVER... N E V E R any reason to kill innocent men women and children. [/quote]
tell that to the present administration in WASH who claimed we needed to kill people in Iraq in order to protect the US from weapons of mass destruction, even though the UN inspectors ( and now the US inspectors) couldn't turn them up. If these weapons existed wouldn't they have been used against the invading "coalition" forces?
Or is there some reason why it's OK for us and the Israelis to kill their innocents, but the Palestinians are on the wrong side of a double standard in the VOR book of ethics?
JET
May 19 2003, 09:16 PM
Our purpose was not to go and specifically kill innocent civilians. Might have happened here and there but we did not specifically target them. Can't quite say the same for your buddies' motives.
JET
May 19 2003, 09:20 PM
Then again, when you think about it, their holy men have issued orders for a jihad against non muslims by muslims. That would mean there are no innocent on their side any more. Only good ones and those we haven't gotten to yet.
And the point is that a religious nut is a religious nut regardless of the head of lettuce that he worships. You can't reason with them.
Fireballsocal
May 20 2003, 05:22 AM
[quote][quote] there is NEVER... NEVER... N E V E R any reason to kill innocent men women and children. [/quote]
tell that to the present administration in WASH who claimed we needed to kill people in Iraq in order to protect the US from weapons of mass destruction, even though the UN inspectors ( and now the US inspectors) couldn't turn them up. If these weapons existed wouldn't they have been used against the invading "coalition" forces?
Or is there some reason why it's OK for us and the Israelis to kill their innocents, but the Palestinians are on the wrong side of a double standard in the VOR book of ethics?[/quote]
We gave him fair warning. He wouldn't stoop to running away and hiding so as a last resort, Bush smoked his ais or did his best trying. I also believe the key word is innocent and I wouldn't call Saddam innocent.
Bansh88
May 20 2003, 07:12 AM
Muslims want a holy war? Let's give em one! Bring back the Crusades. I'm not religious but I will fight on the side of God to destroy the enemies of Christianity. Armageddon! I'll be there. :twisted:
steveo
May 20 2003, 08:44 AM
"tell that to the present administration in WASH who claimed we needed to kill people in Iraq
Or is there some reason why it's OK for us and the Israelis to kill their innocents, but the Palestinians are on the wrong side of a double standard in the VOR book of ethics?[/quote]"
KOOK, can your little brain not tell the difference between INTENTIONALLY TARGETING innocent civilians and accidental victims of war? many of the civilian victims in iraq were killed because saddam used them as human shields or used schools, hospitals and mosques for military purposes against your supposedly cherished international law. any comment on this?
as far as the israeli/palestinian situation, palestinian terrorists do not even pretend to attack military targets, they blow themselves up in public places, attempting to kill as many innocent civilians as possible. are you actually trying to defend this or can you not tell the difference?
The Pastor
May 20 2003, 01:51 PM
[quote]Or is there some reason why it's OK for us and the Israelis to kill their innocents, but the Palestinians are on the wrong side of a double standard in the VOR book of ethics?[/quote]
Double standard? Yeah, I have a double standard. The Iraqi war was UNPRECIDENTED in that one of our MAIN MISSION OBJECTIVES was to PROTECT the Iraqi civilians. We actually got OUR OWN MEN AND WOMEN KILLED trying to meet this objective. In otherwords OUR OWN SOLDIERS DIED to protect the lives of Iraqi's.
On the other hand, Saddams plan was actually to acrue AS MANY CIVILIAN CASUALITIES, IRAQI CIVILIAN CASUALITIES as he could so as to try to gain support from the International community.
Should I have a double standard? YOU BET YOUR ASS!
As for the Israeli/Palastine issue... Let's see... They send state supported terrorists with bombs strapped to their asses into Israel to kill as many innocent civilians as possible. The Israelis, on the other hand, strike back with state controlled army firepower at the terrorist cells.
If the Israelis were using terrorism or if the Palastinians were abiding by INTERNATIONALLY accepted rules of war then there may be something to what you said. BUT THEY ARE NOT!
Your blatant hatred of all things Republican or all things Conservative is blinding you to the truth. Pull your head out of your ass and breath some fresh air for a change.
dezfan1
May 20 2003, 08:51 PM
| QUOTE |
| QUOTE | | there is NEVER... NEVER... N E V E R any reason to kill innocent men women and children. |
tell that to the present administration in WASH who claimed we needed to kill people in Iraq in order to protect the US from weapons of mass destruction, even though the UN inspectors ( and now the US inspectors) couldn't turn them up. If these weapons existed wouldn't they have been used against the invading "coalition" forces?
Or is there some reason why it's OK for us and the Israelis to kill their innocents, but the Palestinians are on the wrong side of a double standard in the VOR book of ethics? |
**** sky must get out of bed every day and study how he can slant every possible topic in the headlines to fit his narrow little view of the world. :roll: So it's the Israelis who are at fault for the whackos strapping bombs to themselves and they are forcing them into public areas and then pulling the trigger on the bombs killing the innocent people around them. :dis: All they are trying to do is defend themselves from terrorist! :x If the Palestinian people really want peace, then all they have to do is stop the terrorist attacks! That seems pretty simple to me. :| How you can be on the side of terrorism is beyond me! Oh wait, I forgot who I was referring to! :shock: Terrorism is a tool that ALL extremist orgs use! :dis: Be it eco-terrorist or religious terrorist! :shocked:
BTW **** sky, still waiting to hear you condemn the attacks from the last few days and to hear you mourn the death of all those innocent people. :cry: Or do they not count because they are victims of an org that YOU support! :x
>:< >:< [b][size=24]HYPOCRITE! >:< >:<
Bluesky
May 21 2003, 04:07 AM
International politics under both Democrats and Republicans has favored the support of dictators that will cooperate with the "free market economy" of the US. when this backfires, as is the case with Saddam, the Shah of Iran, Somoza in Nicaragua, Pinochet in Chile, Noriega in panama etc, we respond with our armed might, killing civilians as "collateral damage".
This is the status quo that supports our inflated lifestyles. Can we at least acknowledge it?
steveo
May 21 2003, 12:03 PM
This is the status quo that supports our inflated lifestyles. Can we at least acknowledge it?[/quote]
if you want anyone to acknowledge anything, you need to start acknowledging some things (many points made in this post alone) too.
the reason no one wants to waste any time with you is because you clearly don't want any two-way intelligent dialog here. you just spout your nonsense, then stick your fingers in your ears and yell "na-na-na-na" when anyone rebuts your crap or asks you a straight question.
dezfan1
May 21 2003, 08:34 PM
| QUOTE |
| we respond with our armed might, |
What would you have us respond with? :roll: A truck load of whining ass liberals like yourself who don't think that strapping a bomb to yourself, walking into a public place and killing in the name of your cause is a bad thing! :x But military strikes carried out with surgical precision are! :shock: As always **** sky YOU seem to find praise for our enemys and distain for our troops, leaders and lifestyle! :dis: If this country is so bad, why don't you leave? :dozey:
Bluesky
May 22 2003, 05:12 AM
[quote]If this country is so bad, why don't you leave?[/quote]
This is my country. I was born here. I have voted in every election since I was legally able to vote. I can do more good for the rest of the people in our country and in the world by informing myself and others and voting in US elections. Unlike many others, I don't live for constant entertainment. I don't mind accepting the responsibility of reading and learning and discussing issues in order to form my opinions. I have visited other countries and have gained knowledge from the perspective that gave me.
The specter of armed force imposing the will of the US elites on the citizens of any country in the world can best be countered by resistance within the US and working through political channels here.
JET
May 22 2003, 05:37 AM
[quote]I can do more good for the rest of the people in our country and in the world by informing myself and others...[/quote]
In typical elitist fashion you feel it is your job to correct and help everyone else. Whether they ask or not.
Bluesky
May 22 2003, 08:19 AM
[quote]In typical elitist fashion you feel it is your job to correct and help everyone else. Whether they ask or not. [/quote]
I am not aware of "typical" elitist behavior. Can you refer to some documentation to describe this phenomenon?
I would consider the outpouring of worldwide protests over the US-backed invasion of Iraq to be the equivalent of them "asking for help".
SailAway
May 22 2003, 08:27 AM
Non sequitar: An inference that does not folllow from the premises; an irrelevant conclusion; any spoken or written comment marked by a lack of relevance to what has preceded it.
Apparently The Troll never tires of such nonsense. What a waste of time.
Vicki
Derwud
May 22 2003, 08:37 AM
How about them Dodgers?
The Pastor
May 22 2003, 10:14 AM
Back on subject:
[quote]Or is there some reason why it's OK for us and the Israelis to kill their innocents, but the Palestinians are on the wrong side of a double standard in the VOR book of ethics?[/quote]
Double standard? Yeah, I have a double standard. The Iraqi war was UNPRECIDENTED in that one of our MAIN MISSION OBJECTIVES was to PROTECT the Iraqi civilians. We actually got OUR OWN MEN AND WOMEN KILLED trying to meet this objective. In otherwords OUR OWN SOLDIERS DIED to protect the lives of Iraqi's.
On the other hand, Saddams plan was actually to acrue AS MANY CIVILIAN CASUALITIES, IRAQI CIVILIAN CASUALITIES as he could so as to try to gain support from the International community.
Should I have a double standard? YOU BET YOUR ASS!
As for the Israeli/Palastine issue... Let's see... They send state supported terrorists with bombs strapped to their asses into Israel to kill as many innocent civilians as possible. The Israelis, on the other hand, strike back with state controlled army firepower at the terrorist cells.
If the Israelis were using terrorism or if the Palastinians were abiding by INTERNATIONALLY accepted rules of war then there may be something to what you said. BUT THEY ARE NOT!
Your blatant hatred of all things Republican or all things Conservative is blinding you to the truth. Pull your head out of your ass and breath some fresh air for a change.
(didn't want this to get lost on the other page)
steveo
May 22 2003, 11:52 AM
come on, pull your panties up and respond to vor's post! prove you are capable of intelligent debate and aren't just here to antagonize.
Bluesky
May 22 2003, 12:32 PM
[quote] Palestinians are on the wrong side of a double standard in the VOR book of ethics?[/quote]
by bluesky
[quote]Yeah, I have a double standard. [/quote]
by vor
[quote]respond to vor's post[/quote]
what's to respond?
steveo
May 22 2003, 01:23 PM
well.... at least you appear to have a sense of humor. but thank you for proving the whole point of this post painfully corrent.
dezfan1
May 22 2003, 08:36 PM
That is the biggest problem with the "elitist" is that they are not "aware" of the fact that we don't need, much less want to be told how to live our :roll: If you want to drink granola cola, smoke pot, wear sandles, and say peace at your little love in. That's just frigging great! But! DON'T TREAD ON ME! I will live my life in the manor that I deem to be appropriate! :x And if some "elitist" little pissant, or hollier than thou organization, terrorist, or anyone else for that matter want's to mess with my life style!!! They better be ready for a fight! :x :hit: :grenade: :X: :skull[/quote]
dezfan1
May 22 2003, 08:36 PM
Errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr! >:<
dezfan1
May 22 2003, 08:37 PM
DOH! :shock: Had a little problem with that post! :roll2:
dezfan1
May 22 2003, 08:53 PM
:cheese: :shock: :roll2:
JET
May 23 2003, 06:45 AM
Yeah what he said. :mrgreen: :roll:
JET
May 26 2003, 01:23 PM
[quote][quote]In typical elitist fashion you feel it is your job to correct and help everyone else. Whether they ask or not. [/quote]
I am not aware of "typical" elitist behavior. Can you refer to some documentation to describe this phenomenon?
[/quote]
<yawn> Oh man am I bored today.
Let's see; Most of your posts, the behavior and words of most Democrat politicians and some Republicans, the Clintons, hippies, smelly hippies (oops that is redundant), the french, smelly french, french hippies

,
everyone at CNN, the New York Times, anyone who ever read the communist manifesto and thought it could work if only the right people were running things, your buddy at the extremist organization that sued the BLM and caused the closures and all the other extremists in the green antieverything movement, most of Hollywood and anybody else that thinks they know how other people should live their lives and have no problem forcing that decision upon them under the threat of governmental force or just force in general.
Of course you wouldn't be aware of "elitist" behavior. Your arrogance prevents self reflection. Your fragile house of cards cannot withstand the winds of truthful introspection blowing through it.
Blue, I have in the past written many hateful things toward and about you. Understand, if you can fragile one, it was out of frustration. I don't hate you, I pity you.
Bluesky
May 27 2003, 05:34 AM
well. let's see, I asked for descriptions of behavior, you reply with epithets.
You write hateful things to me and then expect me to be sensitive to
[quote] the winds of truthful introspection [/quote]
You call me fragile, yet I am the one who is able to stand alone against the terrible wrath of the off-roader in his own cyber-lair.
My desire is to discuss the issues. Some of the off-roading posters here are confidant enough in their own powers of perception that they can post thoughtful rebuttals to what I write. I learn from these posters. Of course, I learn from all posters. What I learn from posters like you is that you have no patience for any other view contrary to your own. You would be happy in the military or in a police state that supported the type of language, race and culture you are a part of. However, you are in the US. Our Constitution provides legal protection to those of divergent opnion.
The whole argument on this board is about the rights of a few (off-roaders) to permanently impact the lands of the many (the US public lands). Try focusing on the issues instead of personalities and puerile name-calling.
SailAway
May 27 2003, 06:13 AM
I recognize this pattern...
Now the Troll will get increasingly hostile, crawling to the brink of being banned, maybe halting just before being permanently booted, although not always, as exhibited by its being banned from numerous other message boards.
Then it will go away for a short time. Regroup.
When returns it will be lucid at first, even friendly, conversational and may exhibit a spark of humor. But it will begin to slowly revert to the same tired routine we've all come to expect.
And then the cycle will be in full bloom.
It's been this way, here and on other boards, at least for the couple of years that it's been enamoured with off-roaders. If we went away it would find another group to do this to...
This is a game that it very much enjoys and it is a classic Internet Troll strategy.
Vicki
JET
May 27 2003, 06:28 AM
Oh gee, ya got me there. :dozey:
I can tell you were typing slow. Thanks, it makes it easier for me to keep up.
| QUOTE |
I am the one who is able to stand alone against the terrible wrath of the off-roader in his own cyber-lair.
|
I admire your bravery, sitting there at your monitor, isolated from reality, all alone, using a fake name. :kitty:
As for your right to speak here; Slappy owns this board and we are allowed to post our opinions here by his good graces not by the constitution. He pays for it. He could throw you off this board and your "rights" would not be violated. You are still free to go out, dip into your own funds and put up a discussion board and rant all you like.
The rest of your argument is the same old diatribe you always drag out. That straw man is about out of stuffing though. When OHV areas and wilderness areas are at the 50/50 balance your side loves to drag out, maybe then we can talk about equity.
You always refer to the public and OHV users as if we are something separate. Go on any street, any town and look in the garages. In many of them you will find OHVs. We are the public.
Derwud
May 27 2003, 10:08 AM
Blue-Bee,
I'm willing to share this planet with everyone that wants to enjoy it, why can't you? When are you going to start being part of the soultion and not just wanting to be a thorn in everyones side!
steveo
May 27 2003, 10:11 AM
"My desire is to discuss the issues."
that is the absolute most hilarious statement of all time. try reading this entire thread. how many times were you asked a straight question and instead of a straight answer you wandered off into left field muttering nonsense?