Toward death penalty reform
Euro
This interesting editorial was not signed. One more stone in
the garden of the retentionists: even in the US, death penalty can't be
reformed in a totally satisfactory way.
Euro
"The truth is that there is no cure-all for the ethical, moral and practical
problems capital punishment raises - that is, short of a Supreme Court
ruling finally abolishing the inherently cruel and unusual "machinery of
death", as Justice Harry Blackmun termed it."
-------------------------------------------
Toward death penalty reform
Even as Congress was advancing long-delayed US death penalty reforms last
week, the Supreme Court was moving in the opposite direction, lending tacit
approval to modern-day barbarism. The justices declined to review a lower
court ruling allowing a deranged prisoner to be forcibly medicated to make
him sane enough to be executed.
(note from Euro: this has been largely discussed on this group)
Americans' enthusiasm for the death penalty has been muted in recent years
as they learn more about how it is actually applied. And those stories
continue to surface, each more distressing than the next. A recent article
in the New York Times pointed to a growing debate among legal and medical
experts about the supposedly humane use of lethal injections to kill
condemned prisoners, noting that Tennessee recently outlawed use of one of
the chemicals for pet euthanasia.
The developments in Congress reflect the positive side of all these
disclosures - a desire even among supporters of the death penalty to
eliminate some of the most outrageous aspects of how it is applied. With
crucial help from the House Judiciary Committee chairman, F. James
Sensenbrenner Jr., and Representatives Ray LaHood and Bill Delahunt, a
coalition of congressional Republicans and Democrats has come up with a
compromise on combating wrongful convictions in death penalty cases, a
measure that has languished year after year.
The new legislation combines President George W. Bush's initiative to reduce
the backlog of biological evidence awaiting testing with a pale version of
Senator Patrick Leahy's Innocence Protection Act. This hybrid has cleared an
important hurdle, passing the House Judiciary Committee by a 28-to-1 vote. A
vote by the full House is expected shortly.
No one should be deluded into thinking the measure is a cure-all, however.
Plenty of factors that contribute to the risk of executing the innocent were
left unadressed, like coerced confessions and the faulty recollection of
eyewitnesses. Nor would the bill stop states from forcibly medicating
deranged prisoners to get around the Eighth Amendment ban on executing the
mentally incompetent - the serious constitutional issue sidestepped by the
justices.
The truth is that there is no cure-all for the ethical, moral and practical
problems capital punishment raises - that is, short of a Supreme Court
ruling finally abolishing the inherently cruel and unusual "machinery of
death", as Justice Harry Blackmun termed it. It could be a long wait. In the
meantime, the consensus reform bill now chugging through Congress is surely
preferable to the alternative, which is for Congress to do nothing.
Richard J
> From www.iht.org, Oct. 14th, 2003
>
> This interesting editorial was not signed. One more stone in
> the garden of the retentionists: even in the US, death penalty can't be
> reformed in a totally satisfactory way.
>
> Euro
> "The truth is that there is no cure-all for the ethical, moral and practical
> problems capital punishment raises - that is, short of a Supreme Court
> ruling finally abolishing the inherently cruel and unusual "machinery of
> death", as Justice Harry Blackmun termed it."
'One more stone', eh? In 1973, reports show support for the death
penalty was down to less than half the people (43% if memory serves me).
Since then, the support has been as high as 68% and is now around 60%.
It DOES seem that some of the stones were successfully used to build a
very nice garden wall, eh?
Teflon
Euro
"Richard J" <ric...@hotmail.com> ??????:3F943A0D...@hotmail.com...
> Euro wrote:
> > From www.iht.org, Oct. 14th, 2003
> >
> > This interesting editorial was not signed. One more stone in
> > the garden of the retentionists: even in the US, death penalty can't be
> > reformed in a totally satisfactory way.
> >
> > Euro
> > "The truth is that there is no cure-all for the ethical, moral and
practical
> > problems capital punishment raises - that is, short of a Supreme Court
> > ruling finally abolishing the inherently cruel and unusual "machinery of
> > death", as Justice Harry Blackmun termed it."
>
> 'One more stone', eh? In 1973, reports show support for the death
> penalty was down to less than half the people (43% if memory serves me).
> Since then, the support has been as high as 68% and is now around 60%.
> It DOES seem that some of the stones were successfully used to build a
> very nice garden wall, eh?
>
> Teflon
In France, support to death penalty was below 50% in 1970 and climbed to
more than 70% in the end of the 70s. It didn't prevent the Parliament to
vote its abolition in 1981, while support rates to death penalty were at
about 65%.
Besides, support rates are of little significance if the Supreme Court is to
declare the death penalty unconstitutional.
On the substance of the objections raised below, do you have any comment?
Euro
drdoody
> Toward death penalty reform
>
> Even as Congress was advancing long-delayed US death penalty reforms last
> week, the Supreme Court was moving in the opposite direction, lending tacit
> approval to modern-day barbarism. The justices declined to review a lower
> court ruling allowing a deranged prisoner to be forcibly medicated to make
> him sane enough to be executed.
> (note from Euro: this has been largely discussed on this group)
He's going to be medicated to death anyway.
Not to be blunt, but what's the fucking point? If I'm going to be
executed, I'd damned well want a bit of Happy Juice coursing through
my veins during my last walk. Hell, if I was given a choice, I'd fire
up a doobie and stroll down the Green Mile munching cheetos and
humming "I'm Burning For You".
Either that, or "Shock The Monkey"... but I'm not much of a Pete
Gabriel fan. Better stick with the BOC.
And I hardly find lethal injection to be "barbarism". Breaking on the
wheel, crucifixion, impalement... THAT'S barbarism, sonny. Giving
somebody a shot in the arm and watching them cruise on off to the
afterlife on a padded table is rather trite, IMHO. Yes, it is still
execution. Yes, lethal injection is still killing a human being who
would have otherwise lived a long, albeit incarcerated, life.
Big Deal.
Yes, I said it. Big fucking deal. The killing of one human being is
insignficant. Unless, of course, you're that one human being. The
killing of one THOUSAND human beings is insignificant. I liken the
situation to candy. If you're eating, say, M&M's and one falls on the
ground, do you cry? No. Why not? There are at most only a few hundred
M&M's in the package. You don't cry beause you know that M&M's aren't
all that rare. You can always go back to the store and buy thousands
more if you feel like it.
There are six BILLION humans on Earth.
How special can one of them be? Especially one who, through his or her
criminal stupidity has landed himself or herself in prison. I can't
tell you how many dead and dying humans I've seen. After this many
years, the number would have to be in the quadruple digits. Infants,
the elderly, middle-aged people, teenagers, people who deserved it and
people who didn't. Some went easily and some didn't. Some wanted to
die and most fought like hell if they could.
But none of them was special.
They all had about 206 bones, around thirty teeth and probably about
50 trillion cells apeice. They were all about 65% oxygen, 20% carbon,
10% hydrogen and 3%nitrogen, give or take. Their families (those who
had them, that is) cared for them and made sure their bodies were put
in the ground or baked and distributed about the countryside or some
idyllic section of waterway. But aside from these few scattered
gestures and familial relations, none of them was special.
You're not special.
I'm not special.
And some dipshit who's led a life of crime that ended up with him
visiting the Magic Needle sure as fuck isn't special, either. Stop
pining for people who would readily kill you for a pack of cigarettes
and realize that eliminating such people from our midst is nothing
more than the social equivalent of taking out the trash.
Doc
Richard J
> "Richard J" <ric...@hotmail.com> ??????:3F943A0D...@hotmail.com...
>
>>Euro wrote:
>>
>>>From www.iht.org, Oct. 14th, 2003
>>>
>>>This interesting editorial was not signed. One more stone in
>>>the garden of the retentionists: even in the US, death penalty can't be
>>>reformed in a totally satisfactory way.
>>>
>>>Euro
>>>"The truth is that there is no cure-all for the ethical, moral and
>>
> practical
>
>>>problems capital punishment raises - that is, short of a Supreme Court
>>>ruling finally abolishing the inherently cruel and unusual "machinery of
>>>death", as Justice Harry Blackmun termed it."
>>
>>'One more stone', eh? In 1973, reports show support for the death
>>penalty was down to less than half the people (43% if memory serves me).
>> Since then, the support has been as high as 68% and is now around 60%.
>> It DOES seem that some of the stones were successfully used to build a
>>very nice garden wall, eh?
>>
>>Teflon
>
>
> In France, support to death penalty was below 50% in 1970 and climbed to
> more than 70% in the end of the 70s. It didn't prevent the Parliament to
> vote its abolition in 1981, while support rates to death penalty were at
> about 65%.
Which means that in France, unlike the United States, the politicians do
not represent the people. That's no big surprise.
>
> Besides, support rates are of little significance if the Supreme Court is to
> declare the death penalty unconstitutional.
That's a big if. I believe it the only way abolition might occur in the
next two or three decades, but it is possible. Of course, given the age
of the justices, if Bush is reelected, you can look forward to a Court
full of younger and very conservative justices in the next five years.
Some of those serving now are bound to either retire or die in that time.
>
> On the substance of the objections raised below, do you have any comment?
>
> Euro
>
Not at all. I believe the death penalty has one purpose. It should be
used to forever eliminate the possibility, no matter how remote, that a
capital murderer will kill again. No other punishment short of a full
frontal lobotomy will accomplish this.
Taking that into mind, I think that dangerous psychotics who qualify as
capital murderers should be eliminated at the earliest possible chance.
If this guy is as nuts as they say he is, anytime he is off drugs, he
is a severe risk to kill again, in or out of prison, and psychotics tend
to not take their medication in the real world. If he killed when he
was taking his meds properly, he is even MORE of a risk, for he killed
while sane and then went off his drugs in prison as an excuse. If the
latter is the case, he's a proven danger either with or without the
drugs. I see him in the same light as a rabid dog. He might not be
able to help himself, but he's a danger to all concerned and needs to be
killed for the safety of us all.
That might be a cold blooded way to look at this thing, but there it is.
Teflon
j.rennie1
"drdoody" <drd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a050c062.03102...@posting.google.com..
snip
.
> I'm not special.
> Doc
It's a shame you don't think so.
Euro
"Richard J" <ric...@hotmail.com> ??????:3F94BEA7...@hotmail.com...
Your comment comes as a surprise to me.... Not so long ago, you were among
those who reproached Chirac with defending positions, on Iraq, that were
very popular in France. You couldn't claim that he didn't represent his
people then.
You will also observe that most human rights reforms in France took place
against the will, or with no support from a majority of the population, at
that time: declaration of human rights (1789), abolition of slavery (1793
and 1848), universal vote for men (1848) to name a few... All those reforms
are now overwhelmingly supported in France, and the same can be told about
abolition.
For politicians, being able to support necessary reforms that are not
popular is sometimes a sign of courage. French politicians don't always show
it (and this is particularly true nowadays), and American politicians are
hardly better.
> >
> > Besides, support rates are of little significance if the Supreme Court
is to
> > declare the death penalty unconstitutional.
>
> That's a big if. I believe it the only way abolition might occur in the
> next two or three decades, but it is possible. Of course, given the age
> of the justices, if Bush is reelected, you can look forward to a Court
> full of younger and very conservative justices in the next five years.
> Some of those serving now are bound to either retire or die in that time.
"If Bush is reelected"... That also seems, more and more, like a big "if".
Let's just wait and see...
> >
> > On the substance of the objections raised below, do you have any
comment?
> >
> > Euro
> >
>
> Not at all. I believe the death penalty has one purpose. It should be
> used to forever eliminate the possibility, no matter how remote, that a
> capital murderer will kill again. No other punishment short of a full
> frontal lobotomy will accomplish this.
>
> Taking that into mind, I think that dangerous psychotics who qualify as
> capital murderers should be eliminated at the earliest possible chance.
> If this guy is as nuts as they say he is, anytime he is off drugs, he
> is a severe risk to kill again, in or out of prison, and psychotics tend
> to not take their medication in the real world. If he killed when he
> was taking his meds properly, he is even MORE of a risk, for he killed
> while sane and then went off his drugs in prison as an excuse. If the
> latter is the case, he's a proven danger either with or without the
> drugs. I see him in the same light as a rabid dog. He might not be
> able to help himself, but he's a danger to all concerned and needs to be
> killed for the safety of us all.
>
> That might be a cold blooded way to look at this thing, but there it is.
Indeed... Comparing a murderer to a rabid dog falls somewhat short of
remembering that even murderers are humans and should be treated as such.
Euro
drdoody
It's a shame that people feel the need to dress up their own egos with
words like "unique" and "special".
Doc
Richard J
Which proves nothing except people are like sheep. They can be trained
to like something, even if it is originally against their basic nature.
>
> For politicians, being able to support necessary reforms that are not
> popular is sometimes a sign of courage.
Sometimes, and sometimes it is a show of tyranny. Or do you claim the
German population supported the acts of the Nazis?
French politicians don't always show
> it (and this is particularly true nowadays), and American politicians are
> hardly better.
This is true.
>
>
>>>Besides, support rates are of little significance if the Supreme Court
>>
> is to
>
>>>declare the death penalty unconstitutional.
>>
>>That's a big if. I believe it the only way abolition might occur in the
>>next two or three decades, but it is possible. Of course, given the age
>>of the justices, if Bush is reelected, you can look forward to a Court
>>full of younger and very conservative justices in the next five years.
>>Some of those serving now are bound to either retire or die in that time.
>
>
> "If Bush is reelected"... That also seems, more and more, like a big "if".
> Let's just wait and see...
>
I agree. The sheep,.......... er, people being what they are, if he has
a success such as finding bin Laden or Hussen or getting out of Iraq in
the next year or so after helping form a democratic government there,
might still support him, though. A lot also depends if the Democrats
can find one really viable candidate.
>
>>>On the substance of the objections raised below, do you have any
>>
> comment?
>
>>>Euro
>>>
>>
>>Not at all. I believe the death penalty has one purpose. It should be
>>used to forever eliminate the possibility, no matter how remote, that a
>>capital murderer will kill again. No other punishment short of a full
>>frontal lobotomy will accomplish this.
>>
>>Taking that into mind, I think that dangerous psychotics who qualify as
>>capital murderers should be eliminated at the earliest possible chance.
>> If this guy is as nuts as they say he is, anytime he is off drugs, he
>>is a severe risk to kill again, in or out of prison, and psychotics tend
>>to not take their medication in the real world. If he killed when he
>>was taking his meds properly, he is even MORE of a risk, for he killed
>>while sane and then went off his drugs in prison as an excuse. If the
>>latter is the case, he's a proven danger either with or without the
>>drugs. I see him in the same light as a rabid dog. He might not be
>>able to help himself, but he's a danger to all concerned and needs to be
>>killed for the safety of us all.
>>
>>That might be a cold blooded way to look at this thing, but there it is.
>
>
> Indeed... Comparing a murderer to a rabid dog falls somewhat short of
> remembering that even murderers are humans and should be treated as such.
>
> Euro
I believe it is an apt comparison in many cases, especially sociopathic
killers. In a case such as this guy, he might as well be rabid. I make
no apologies for feeling that way. Would you want to guess what I'd do
if someone killed a member of my family and I got to him before the police?
Teflon
Euro
"Richard J" <ric...@hotmail.com> ??????:3F9558B1...@hotmail.com...
Slippery subject... Historians might tell you that some measures taken by
the Nazis were actually supported by an important part of the German
population. They may not be the worst ones...
>
> French politicians don't always show
> > it (and this is particularly true nowadays), and American politicians
are
> > hardly better.
>
> This is true.
>
> >
> >
> >>>Besides, support rates are of little significance if the Supreme Court
> >>
> > is to
> >
> >>>declare the death penalty unconstitutional.
> >>
> >>That's a big if. I believe it the only way abolition might occur in the
> >>next two or three decades, but it is possible. Of course, given the age
> >>of the justices, if Bush is reelected, you can look forward to a Court
> >>full of younger and very conservative justices in the next five years.
> >>Some of those serving now are bound to either retire or die in that
time.
> >
> >
> > "If Bush is reelected"... That also seems, more and more, like a big
"if".
> > Let's just wait and see...
> >
>
> I agree. The sheep,.......... er, people being what they are, if he has
> a success such as finding bin Laden or Hussen or getting out of Iraq in
> the next year or so after helping form a democratic government there,
> might still support him, though. A lot also depends if the Democrats
> can find one really viable candidate.
Indeed. Much water can flow until 2004, and much will depend on who will be
running for the Democrats.
I guess you would commit an act of revenge that, however understandable
under given circumstances, would not be an act of justice. I don't know how
legislation stands in the US States on this, but in Europe you could be
punished (with mitigating circumstances) for this.
Euro
j.rennie1
Perhaps, but if you don't love yourself how can you expect others
to love you?
drdoody
> "drdoody" <drd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:a050c062.03102...@posting.google.com...
> > "j.rennie1" <j.re...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> news:<DQ6lb.156$gJ5.1...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>...
> > > "drdoody" <drd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:a050c062.03102...@posting.google.com..
> > >
> > > snip
> > > .
> > > > I'm not special.
> > > > Doc
> > >
> > > It's a shame you don't think so.
> >
> > It's a shame that people feel the need to dress up their own egos with
> > words like "unique" and "special".
> >
> > Doc
>
> Perhaps, but if you don't love yourself how can you expect others
> to love you?
Self love is masturbation.
I accept my place in the grander sceme of things as being quite
miniscule. I am one out of a species of billions. I am no more special
than you or any other human being. I am no more deserving of life or
death than any other human being.
That I understand and accept these facts does not mean that I have no
respect for myself. It simply means that I accept reality.
Doc
j.rennie1
"drdoody" <drd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a050c062.03102...@posting.google.com...
> "j.rennie1" <j.re...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:<%rvlb.1484$J34.8...@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net>...
> > "drdoody" <drd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:a050c062.03102...@posting.google.com...
> > > "j.rennie1" <j.re...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> > news:<DQ6lb.156$gJ5.1...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>...
> > > > "drdoody" <drd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:a050c062.03102...@posting.google.com..
> > > >
> > > > snip
> > > > .
> > > > > I'm not special.
> > > > > Doc
> > > >
> > > > It's a shame you don't think so.
> > >
> > > It's a shame that people feel the need to dress up their own egos with
> > > words like "unique" and "special".
> > >
> > > Doc
> >
> > Perhaps, but if you don't love yourself how can you expect others
> > to love you?
>
> Self love is masturbation.
OK just substitute love with respect then.
>
> I accept my place in the grander sceme of things as being quite
> miniscule. I am one out of a species of billions. I am no more special
> than you or any other human being.
You are unique - there's no one else like you. Your DNA
belongs to you and nobody else - that makes you special
just as we are all 'special'.
I am no more deserving of life or
> death than any other human being.
.
You are no more less deserving of life than
any other human being
>
> That I understand and accept these facts does not mean that I have no
> respect for myself. It simply means that I accept reality.
>
> Doc
To you, the bottle is half empty- to me it is half full The difference
is that between negativity and positivism.
Cerberus
"Des_The_Deathie_Destroyer" <fucko...@zeouane.org> wrote in message
news:0a8i61-...@zeouane.org...
: le Wed, 22 Oct 2003 14:16:14 +0100, dans l'article
<%rvlb.1484$J34.8...@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net>, j.rennie1
<j.re...@ntlworld.com> a dit ...
:
: { snip }
:
: >> It's a shame that people feel the need to dress up their own egos with
: >> words like "unique" and "special".
: > Perhaps, but if you don't love yourself how can you expect others
: > to love you?
:
: John, doody is an 'American' (sic) : he's not going to 'twig' that you're
: taking the piss. Using irony against one of them, isn't really fair.
Desmond, in defence of drdoody, I find him exceptionally tuned in and
pragmatic in his views. There is a small amount of megalomaniacal [1]
thought process apparent from time to time, but considering that he is not
from New York, but still a septic, eminently well read and adjusted.
Could he be the exception that proves the rule in your anti-American
paranoia?
Talking of things anti-American, I have just recently returned from a brief
visit to France and I have to say that I was very perturbed with the state
of things there. I refer in particular to the anti-Semitic goings on and the
apparent rise of the Arab nationalists and those Arabs who through their
children are determined to reap havoc over their real or imagined problems
in Algeria et al.
Is this just my imagination/area that I visited (Marseilles) or is this
situation more widespread?
I think I may have mentioned this or similar perceptions before, but I just
can't shake the feeling that 'there is something rotten in the state of
Denmark'.
I reckon that France could be largely of Arabic origin within 20 or 30
years?
I certainly feel that there is a fairly large risk of civil unrest or
insurrection in the not too distant future.
Have you noticed anything?
--
WooF w00f WooF
[1] Jiggy, megalomaniacal means that the afflicted has a delusional mental
disorder that is marked by infantile feelings of omnipotence and grandeur.
It is possible, although reasonably far fetched to apply this rule to a
national mentality.
If that is too hard for you to understand just go here url:www.disney.com
drdoody
> >
> > I accept my place in the grander sceme of things as being quite
> > miniscule. I am one out of a species of billions. I am no more special
> > than you or any other human being.
>
> You are unique - there's no one else like you. Your DNA
> belongs to you and nobody else - that makes you special
> just as we are all 'special'.
DNA? You're going to base the inherent worth of your own existence on
a molecule? Hell, my fingernail clippers belong to me and nobody else.
Does this make me special?
>
>
> I am no more deserving of life or
> > death than any other human being.
> .
> You are no more less deserving of life than
> any other human being
> >
> > That I understand and accept these facts does not mean that I have no
> > respect for myself. It simply means that I accept reality.
> >
> > Doc
>
>
> To you, the bottle is half empty- to me it is half full The difference
> is that between negativity and positivism.
I find my own personal philosophy to be neither positive or negative.
It simply is. It has been formulated by my life experience to date. I
have learned that aside from the obvious window dressing, there is no
fundamental difference that significantly separates myself from the
rest of the herd. I have learned to accept my own disposability. I
have learned to accept the transience of my own existence. As a
result, I have found an odd sort of peace and humility. I expect no
good from the world. I expect no "free ticket" or "hand up". I do not
feel that I "deserve" anything. I am fundamentally alone. Thirty years
ago, I did not exist.
Thirty years from now, I probably won't.
And very few people will actually notice.
I think that people need a label of uniqueness for the very same
reason they need a God. Beleiving that you are somehow special or that
some benevolent imaginary friend in the sky is looking down upon you
makes facing the abyss a much easier thing to do. To tell you the
truth, I feel myself gravitating towards such beliefs as well. But for
me to beleive that I am special and that "God has my back" would be
dishonest for me. Comforting, indeed. But very, very wrong. I have
seen what I beleive to be the truth and I have accepted the same. And
to lie to myself simply for comfort's sake would be wholly incorrect.
Doc
Cerberus
: "j.rennie1" <j.re...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:<Y7Elb.233
{philosophical hoo ha about the fluid level of bottles and other interesting
things snipped in the interests of brevity}
Thirty years ago, I did not exist.
:
: Thirty years from now, I probably won't.
:
: And very few people will actually notice.
I noticed Doc
There is a very good chance that if you keep spelling believe, beleive then
the spelling and punctuation czar will come around and rip your bloody arms
off, thereby reducing your life expectancy from 30 years to 30 minutes.
Remember the golden rule. I before E except after C and before D.
:
: I think that people need a label of uniqueness for the very same
: reason they need a God. Beleiving that you are somehow special or that
: some benevolent imaginary friend in the sky is looking down upon you
: makes facing the abyss a much easier thing to do. To tell you the
: truth, I feel myself gravitating towards such beliefs as well. But for
: me to beleive that I am special and that "God has my back" would be
: dishonest for me. Comforting, indeed. But very, very wrong. I have
: seen what I beleive to be the truth and I have accepted the same. And
: to lie to myself simply for comfort's sake would be wholly incorrect.
--
WooF w00f WooF
j.rennie1
<Cerberus> wrote in message news:3f97716d$1...@127.0.0.1...
>
> Remember the golden rule. I before E except after C and before D.
I had better give myself a little leisure before I have a seizure after
reading
the above.
j.rennie1
<Cerberus> wrote in message news:3f973...@127.0.0.1...
So what? You do reveal a racist twinge now and again. I really
don't think you are racist just that you don't examine your own
reactions that closely.
>
> I certainly feel that there is a fairly large risk of civil unrest or
> insurrection in the not too distant future.
>
> Have you noticed anything?
The world is faced with so many problems from natural
disasters to self inflicted ones like female infanticide (sic)
that the problems of unrest between races will seem
small beer in the 21st century.
dirtdog
<snip>
>Remember the golden rule. I before E except after C and before D.
You cheeky bastard, Cerby.
I should expect lecture's [sic] on spelling and grammar from the
intellectual eilite of this newsgroup, such as myself, QZD or Desmond.
I do not, however, expect to witness such outburst's [sic] from one of
the groups [sic] leading spelling fucker-uper's [sic] or apostrophe
misuser's [sic].
w00f
Cerberus
: le Thu, 23 Oct 2003 10:45:11 +0800, dans l'article <3f973...@127.0.0.1>,
Cerberus a dit ...
[snip]
: > Could he be the exception that proves the rule in your anti-American
: > paranoia?
:
: Actually, Cerberus, if I were to be anti-American, then doody would be the
: exception that proves the rule. Thankfully, as a Light Dweller, prejudice
: and what FuckWit amusingly refers to as 'hate' (sic [1]) are not part of
my
: make-up.
Actually I should have included an ironary (sic) meter.
:
: > Talking of things anti-American, I have just recently returned from a
: > brief visit to France and I have to say that I was very perturbed with
: > the state of things there. I refer in particular to the anti-Semitic
: > goings on and the apparent rise of the Arab nationalists and those Arabs
: > who through their children are determined to reap havoc over their real
: > or imagined problems in Algeria et al.
: >
: > Is this just my imagination/area that I visited (Marseilles) or is this
: > situation more widespread? I think I may have mentioned this or similar
: > perceptions before, but I just can't shake the feeling that 'there is
: > something rotten in the state of Denmark'.
: >
: > I reckon that France could be largely of Arabic origin within 20 or 30
: > years?
: >
: > I certainly feel that there is a fairly large risk of civil unrest or
: > insurrection in the not too distant future.
: >
: > Have you noticed anything?
:
: Yes. There is a debate raging as to the secularity of France's education
: system, and by extension, to France's tradition of excluding religion from
: schools and from the state sector [2]. I had to exclude a female pupil
: from my class in 1993, for refusing to remove her Muslim 'veil'. The same
: is happening today. The problem is that the 'militant' Muslims still make
: up a tiny proportion of France's Arab population, the overwhelming
majority
: of whom are law-abiding citizens whose integration into the secular
: Republic that is France, is not in doubt.
[snip excellent disquisition]
Thanks for the insight. Nothing like getting it from the horses mouth.
--
Woof woof WooF
Cerberus
:
: <Cerberus> wrote in message news:3f973...@127.0.0.1...
: >
: > "Des_The_Deathie_Destroyer" <fucko...@zeouane.org> wrote in message
: > news:0a8i61-...@zeouane.org...
: > : le Wed, 22 Oct 2003 14:16:14 +0100, dans l'article
: > <%rvlb.1484$J34.8...@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net>, j.rennie1
: > <j.re...@ntlworld.com> a dit ...
[snip]
: >
: > I reckon that France could be largely of Arabic origin within 20 or 30
: > years?
:
:
: So what? You do reveal a racist twinge now and again. I really
: don't think you are racist just that you don't examine your own
: reactions that closely.
What?
As my old mate Barry Sheen used to say, "do me a favour sunshine"
I would be eternally grateful if you could enlighten me as to how your
hypersensitive racist sniffer manages to come up with that one? Is it the
nuances of language or the subtleness of syntax that has given me away? You
dammned clever, coersive inquisitor you. Exposing me to the world for a
careless reaction examiner. Ok, Ok I admit it, I am a closet racist, forever
running scared of the heathen muslim, using every opportunity to think badly
of them. Not to mention the copious talking down that I indulge in, when the
'boys get together'. Wink, wink - know what I mean?
"Do me a favour sunshine"
Tell me, does being nauseating come naturally to you or is it an aquired
art?
Fucking old fossilised Fart. Consider yourself sent to Coventry.
[malodorous remnants of Johns latest flatulent emission, sprayed with Glen
60]
--
WooF w00f WooF
Cerberus
"dirtdog" <dirtdogF...@fruffrant.com> wrote in message
news:hudgpv0ii4jdgt5pi...@4ax.com...
"It's been so quite around here since we've been gone"
Just reading through the last 3 weeks postings reminds me of listening to
cicadas on a summer night. A dull background noise that stops and moves as
you approach.
Did you know that whilst you were away enjoying your holiday, that Nev
actually {gasp} impersonated you? And what's more, QZD got sucked in by him.
Oh the shame.
There, the truth is out, and I feel so much better now.
--
WooF w00f WooF
A Planet Visitor
One might well offer that it's a shame that you think you are. I
personally don't think it's a 'shame' either way. It's simply how we
view ourselves among others. If we presume we are BETTER than
others, we naturally believe we are special. I believe most murderers
have that perception of themselves. Obviously, that is a truism, in
respect to how the murderer views their victim. Of course, that is an
extreme, and I don't think it's anything to be ashamed of, if we feel
ourselves special among other human beings.
However; I'd personally, rather see someone else as special, seeing
that in them, rather than believe that I'm special. I don't think it can
be denied that a personal presumption that one is special, contains
a great deal of vanity. I'd just as soon not find that in myself.
BTW -- If drdoody is a doctor... he is the first doctor I've heard of
that does not presume he is God.... :-)
PV
A Planet Visitor
>
>"Richard J" <ric...@hotmail.com> ??????:3F9558B1...@hotmail.com...
>> Euro wrote:
>> > "Richard J" <ric...@hotmail.com> ??????:3F94BEA7...@hotmail.com...
>> >
>> >>Euro wrote:
>> >>
<rest clipped>
>> > For politicians, being able to support necessary reforms that are not
>> > popular is sometimes a sign of courage.
>>
>> Sometimes, and sometimes it is a show of tyranny. Or do you claim the
>> German population supported the acts of the Nazis?
>
>Slippery subject... Historians might tell you that some measures taken by
>the Nazis were actually supported by an important part of the German
>population. They may not be the worst ones...
What the hell does THAT mean??? Would that be the 'measures' of
kristallnacht? Talk about the 'slippery slopes' of slippery subjects.
<rest clipped>
PV
j.rennie1
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message
news:cngipv8h4uht00gt1...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 10:15:51 +0100, "j.rennie1" <j.re...@ntlworld.com>
wrote:
>
> >
> >"drdoody" <drd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:a050c062.03102...@posting.google.com..
> >
> >snip
> >.
> >> I'm not special.
> >> Doc
> >
> >It's a shame you don't think so.
>
> One might well offer that it's a shame that you think you are. I
> personally don't think it's a 'shame' either way. It's simply how we
> view ourselves among others. If we presume we are BETTER than
> others, we naturally believe we are special.
That maybe natural to you but not to me. The fact that we differ
makes us special.
A Planet Visitor
>"Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
>> Toward death penalty reform
>>
>> Even as Congress was advancing long-delayed US death penalty reforms last
>> week, the Supreme Court was moving in the opposite direction, lending tacit
>> approval to modern-day barbarism. The justices declined to review a lower
>> court ruling allowing a deranged prisoner to be forcibly medicated to make
>> him sane enough to be executed.
>> (note from Euro: this has been largely discussed on this group)
>
>He's going to be medicated to death anyway.
>
>Not to be blunt, but what's the fucking point? If I'm going to be
>executed, I'd damned well want a bit of Happy Juice coursing through
>my veins during my last walk. Hell, if I was given a choice, I'd fire
>up a doobie and stroll down the Green Mile munching cheetos and
>humming "I'm Burning For You".
>
>Either that, or "Shock The Monkey"... but I'm not much of a Pete
>Gabriel fan. Better stick with the BOC.
>
Way to go.... of course, Desmond has stated he would be shitting in
his drawers, as they dragged him down that 'green mile.' See --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/desmond_gimmick_65.html
A bit overboard for my taste, Doc... but it's certainly true that
WHINING about 877 murderers executed in more than 25 years,
given the real problems in the world today, is rather pathetic. I
get more choked up emotionally listening to Albinoni's 'Adagio,'
then I do about those 877 murderers, even given the fact that I
do not believe most of them actually 'needed' execution.
PV
>Doc
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:ldiipv0tsk7kghcp0...@4ax.com...
Do you know what "Kollektivschuld" means?
Euro
Dezi's_ugl...@anal.org
Has Dezi found a job again? Or has France decided to cover internet
access while their people are dying because they can't afford to run
their A/C due to the loss of cheap, Iraqi oil?
On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 11:12:11 +0200, Des_The_Deathie_Destroyer
<fucko...@zeouane.org> wrote:
>le Thu, 23 Oct 2003 11:30:22 +0100, dans l'article <A6Olb.250$uO2.5...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>, j.rennie1 <j.re...@ntlworld.com> a dit ...
>
>>> Remember the golden rule. I before E except after C and before D.
>
>> I had better give myself a little leisure before I have a seizure after
>> reading the above.
>
>'Leesure' (sic), of course ... heh ...
A Planet Visitor
Huh??? Why should we EXPECT others to love us, simply because
we love ourselves? Giving love to YOURSELF... is not actually
very productive in expecting others to love you.. regardless of the
very clear narcissist implication in loving yourself. GIVING love
to others might find you receive love from them. I believe that
Mother Teresa is an example of what I mean.
To bring it more on-topic... do you believe a murderer loves himself
more than his victim? I believe that is rather an axiom... since the
entire reason for murder is dependent upon self-interest over the
interest of the victim in respect to life. Do you expect his victim will
love him for that? And conversely, will the victim loving himself
more than the murderer, result in the expectation that the murderer
will suddenly love that victim?
Or have you suddenly become a troll to Drdoody?
PV
A Planet Visitor
That's absurd... that implies that every cockroach is 'special'
since their DNA 'belongs' to each of them, and no other cockroach.
The fact is we are all of the same SPECIES... which is the dividing
point in the Taxonomy of all organisms. We are of the Genus -
Homo (don't be afraid Desmond -- it's just a word) - Species -
Sapiens. And none of us are 'special' in the sense of being outside
of that Taxonomy classification.
>> I am no more deserving of life or
>> death than any other human being.
>.
>You are no more less deserving of life than
>any other human being
Naturally... deserving has no MEANING in the sense of 'life,'
or 'death,' thus both statements are true.
>>
>> That I understand and accept these facts does not mean that I have no
>> respect for myself. It simply means that I accept reality.
>>
>> Doc
>
>
>To you, the bottle is half empty- to me it is half full The difference
>is that between negativity and positivism.
>
Bottle...smottle... Ain't no meaning to life, other than what we give it.
Like Woody said -- "Mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to
despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us
pray that we have the wisdom to choose correctly."
Of course... Desmond believes life is lusting after barely legal young
teenagers.
A Planet Visitor
<fucko...@zeouane.org> wrote:
>le Thu, 23 Oct 2003 10:45:11 +0800, dans l'article <3f973...@127.0.0.1>, Cerberus a dit ...
>
>> : >> It's a shame that people feel the need to dress up their own egos
>> with : >> words like "unique" and "special".
>
>> : > Perhaps, but if you don't love yourself how can you expect others : >
>> to love you?
>
>> : John, doody is an 'American' (sic) : he's not going to 'twig' that
>> you're : taking the piss. Using irony against one of them, isn't really
>> fair.
>
>> Desmond, in defence of drdoody, I find him exceptionally tuned in and
>> pragmatic in his views. There is a small amount of megalomaniacal [1]
>> thought process apparent from time to time, but considering that he is
>> not from New York, but still a septic, eminently well read and adjusted.
>>
>> Could he be the exception that proves the rule in your anti-American
>> paranoia?
>
>Actually, Cerberus, if I were to be anti-American, then doody would be the
>exception that proves the rule. Thankfully, as a Light Dweller, prejudice
>and what FuckWit amusingly refers to as 'hate' (sic [1]) are not part of my
>make-up.
>
ROTFLMAO... Next to Earl... you are the most anti-American poster in
AADP... and you know it... all your denials cannot erase the words you
have written which conflict with those denials... and the others who have
recognized you are anti-American --
Mr D. -- "Desmond's tenor is usually fairly anti-American and stereotyped when it
comes to all things American." See -
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=jonathan-589598.14351921022003%40newsroom.utas.edu.au
Incubus -- "I have to confess that you anti american bigotry is begenning to piss me
off." See
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=Ti8u9.291%24OM6.20576%40newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net
John Rennie -- "Blind anti-American prejudice can lead you up some strange alleys,
Desmond." See --
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=_9xp9.1502%24345.70338%40newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net
John Rennie -- "Still as wildly anti-American as ever, still seizing on any
nonsensical ploy to promote that view."
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20020117212018.12097.00002164%40mb-fs.aol.com
GeneralZod -- "And Desi is too much of a class-A chicken shit to come here and spout
his anti-American venom in a public place." See --
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=9Qng9.11521%246e2.2616850566%40newssvr30.news.prodigy.com
Jigsaw -- "Recently, our resident Anti-American sage" See
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20020722185456.19336.00000127%40mb-mp.aol.com
And for just the quickest of a search for comments on your anti-Americanism.
1) "...Americans don't even know how to spell the word, let alone comprehend
the concept" See --
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=slrn984mij.8t.desmond%40gateway.voute.net
2) "one can hardly be surprised if all Americans are as stupid as you."
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=slrn917fca.3m3.desmond%40lievre.voute.net
3) "One can infer from this that either Americans are stupid, or sadistic bastards."
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20020723212934.02191.00000601%40mb-mq.aol.com
4) "Unfortunately, this sort of thinking is at present way beyond the reasoning power
of 99 % of Americans."
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=c%2Bka0dA9qOeyEwhf%40maudit.demon.co.uk
5) "Only to idiotic redneck Americans..."
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=RdX3t1AqeyvyEwrD%40maudit.demon.co.uk
6) "'spag /spAIG/ adj. & n. sl. "spastic", "stupid person", used to refer to
Americans..." See --
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20021120212944.28561.00001819%40mb-mv.aol.com
7) "typical dumbfuck American's ignorance" See--
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20021030212918.28561.00000610%40mb-mv.aol.com
8) "idiotic buffoons that are Americans," See -
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20020908212925.09987.00000590%40mb-fp.aol.com
9) Mark posted -- "Frankly, if a way could be found to select only knowledgeable and
rational individuals to make the decisions, both the criminal justice system and the
political system would be in far, FAR better shape! You replied --
"Yes, but American juries would be composed entirely of foreigners, Mark ..." See
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=slrn90i6nq.4lg.desmond%40lievre.voute.net
10) "If you're 'American by birth' (which no one believes you are), then all I can
say is that you're a damning indictment of the American (sic) education (sic) system.
Are they all as illiterate as you ?"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20030223212927.16280.00002535%40mb-mo.aol.com
11) "Considering the sorry state of the 'American [sic] education [sic]' system,
it's hardly surprising that it produces such classless idiots."
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20030223212940.16280.00002546%40mb-mo.aol.com
12) "one can hardly be surprised if all Americans are as stupid as you."
:http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=slrn917fca.3m3.desmond%40lievre.voute.net
13) "That sort of idiocy, one expects from the nation of fat, uncultured navel-
gazing halfwits that is the United States,"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=slrn8svbie.11gm.desmond%40lievre.voute.net
14) "the United States is one of the least educated nations on earth."
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=slrn89gnko.146.desmond%40lievre.voute.net
15) Poster said --"Cost-free abortions, perhaps? Maybe mandatory sterilization for
all people with IQ's below 125."
desi said -- "Damn you, man are you trying to wipe out 'America' (sic) ??!!"
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20030314212852.08747.00002694%40mb-cg.aol.com
<rest clipped>
PV
>--
>Desmond 'Don't call me anti-American just because I hate them all' Coughlan
Gentle reader... I have shed my hate for Desmond... I realize that all that is
left for me here in this imaginary medium is to be horrified by the horror of
his racism and the murderous instincts he expresses here, which have
horrified so many others, witness to the horror of his words, that they have
departed from reading or commenting to this group. See --
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=bmhgpm%24nvc%241%40mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com
Another reasonable poster, unable to any longer stomach Desmond, forced
to depart. Another one chased away by Desmond. But given Desmond's mental
decline now demonstrated by wishing to murder all retentionists, and the
very clear evidence that he is a racist, I can only hold pity for him. See --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/desmond_gimmick_150.html
drdoody
> that in them, rather than believe that I'm special. I don't think it can
> be denied that a personal presumption that one is special, contains
> a great deal of vanity. I'd just as soon not find that in myself.
Perhaps I should make this "I am nothing"-concept into a full-blown
religion and install myself as its defacto leader. Personally, I think
that would be absolutely beautifully cynical.
I'm sorry, but I simply can't pass up an opportunity to give religion
a good poke in the eye (or kick in the nuts) when it presents itself.
>
> BTW -- If drdoody is a doctor... he is the first doctor I've heard of
> that does not presume he is God.... :-)
>
> PV
EMT. Medic. Ambulanceman... depending upon your location. I suppose my
chosen line of work has done a great deal towards promoting my
misanthropy.
Doc
A Planet Visitor
Sometimes you can be so hardheaded. We are not DIFFERENT. We
are all of the species homo sapiens. We may have different ethnic
origins, different skin colors, different facial or physical features which
enhance our lives (I myself grew weary of so many girls gushing over
me when I was young, constantly commenting on how 'handsome' I
was, and how I resembled a young Robert Taylor so much). We may
have different facial or physical features which limit our lives, that
others may consider 'special' qualities if we are seen to have accepted
and overcome to the best of our abilities those limitations. But we are
only 'special' in how we perceive ourselves, and others.
Of course, there is no universal law that says you CANNOT perceive
YOURSELF as 'special,' and in fact there is a word in the English
language that describes that -- you are a Narcissist. I don't find that
particular label very appealing to me. You may do so if you wish,
but doing so you will lump you in with a group of those I consider
very unsavory in respect to their belief they were 'special.' I much
prefer to see 'special' qualities in others, rather than myself. None
of which makes any of us 'different' in respect to the role we are
given as human beings... all of us... homo sapiens.
PV
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:thfupvkme87u0cs38...@4ax.com...
(snipped)
> >That maybe natural to you but not to me. The fact that we differ
> >makes us special.
> >
> Sometimes you can be so hardheaded. We are not DIFFERENT. We
> are all of the species homo sapiens.
Though, while getting old, you somewhat tend to look like a very particular
species: the homo insaniens.
> We may have different ethnic
> origins, different skin colors, different facial or physical features
which
> enhance our lives (I myself grew weary of so many girls gushing over
> me when I was young, constantly commenting on how 'handsome' I
> was, and how I resembled a young Robert Taylor so much).
Grandeurs et décadence. Now you sure look like an old twat.
Euro
j.rennie1
Well that didn't last long, did it?
FitzHerbert
> > > >That maybe natural to you but not to me. The fact that we differ
> > > >makes us special.
> > > >
> > > Sometimes you can be so hardheaded. We are not DIFFERENT. We
> > > are all of the species homo sapiens.
> >
> > Though, while getting old, you somewhat tend to look like a very
> particular
> > species: the homo insaniens.
> >
> > > We may have different ethnic
> > > origins, different skin colors, different facial or physical features
> which
> > > enhance our lives (I myself grew weary of so many girls gushing over
> > > me when I was young, constantly commenting on how 'handsome' I
> > > was, and how I resembled a young Robert Taylor so much).
> >
> > Grandeurs et décadence. Now you sure look like an old twat.
> >
> > Euro
> >
> >
>
> Well that didn't last long, did it?
He's got a way with English, hasn't he?
I approve of this type of thing one-hundred percent.
Bravo, Euro.
Put the daft old duffer in his place before he does himsehn a
mischief, that's my advice.
Hope this assists,
Neville FitzHerbert, esq.
A Planet Visitor
Yes... I do... I'm also familiar with the frequently used 'nicht meine Schuld'...
what's your point?
PV
>Euro (alias Buridan's ass)
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:f033qvcbq1bb2gotj...@4ax.com...
actually supported by an important part of the German population". Isn't it
clear enough, or do you want me to write the same in German so you can
understand it?
Euro
A Planet Visitor
Perhaps you had better because you're not making much sense in English.
My point is you stated that the Nazis were "supported by an important
part of the German population." And THEN you go on to say -- "They
may not be the worst ones." Who exactly then... WERE THE WORST
ONES? Those who DID NOT support the Nazis? Perhaps you simply
had no idea what you wanted to say... and thus rambled on incoherently
as you usually do. But your words implied that those who supported the
Nazis were not the 'worst of the Germans.' And quite clearly... that is
ABSURD. And that is why I questioned with "What the hell does THAT
mean?" And you replied with the most meaningless "Collective fault."
And I replied with the comment often attributed to those who actually
supported the Nazis... but deny blame... the infamous words -- "Not
my fault."
PV
>Euro
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:m62hqvooe0pis8u26...@4ax.com...
I realize we have a misunderstanding here. To me, it was quite clear. In the
following sentence:
"Historians might tell you that some measures taken by the Nazis were
actually supported by an important part of the German population. They may
not be the worst ones"
the words "the worst ones" (as well as "they") refers to "some measures" and
not to the Germans. You will note, besides, that I referred to "the German
population" and not to the "Germans" - this only point should have made my
point clear.
In summary, I mean that an important part of the German population actually
supported some of the measures taken by the Nazis, though the worst measures
have (I hope, at least) not enjoyed such a support.
With his, I hope I have made it clear. I note that, in German, such a
misunderstanding would not have been possible (in English too, provided one
understands a bit of grammar).
Euro
A Planet Visitor
>
>"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>??????:thfupvkme87u0cs38...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 19:36:11 +0100, "j.rennie1" <j.re...@ntlworld.com>
>wrote:
>
>(snipped)
>
>> >That maybe natural to you but not to me. The fact that we differ
>> >makes us special.
>> >
>> Sometimes you can be so hardheaded. We are not DIFFERENT. We
>> are all of the species homo sapiens.
>
>Though, while getting old, you somewhat tend to look like a very particular
>species: the homo insaniens.
>
While you seem to have never entered puberty. You immature little shit.
If you could only recognize the difference between murderers and innocent
slaves.. you might shed that appearance of immaturity. But I imagine that is
hoping for too much.
>> We may have different ethnic
>> origins, different skin colors, different facial or physical features
>which
>> enhance our lives (I myself grew weary of so many girls gushing over
>> me when I was young, constantly commenting on how 'handsome' I
>> was, and how I resembled a young Robert Taylor so much).
>
>Grandeurs et décadence. Now you sure look like an old twat.
>
I can't help it if God took favor on me... and you seem jealous that
he did. Remember -- the kernel of all jealousy, is lack of love, so
has mommy been avoiding you?
Don't worry... I'm sure that someday, you'll manage to get laid.
Maybe.... :-(
PV
>Euro
>
A Planet Visitor
God... you can be disgusting.. insulting 'the German population' in such
a manner.
>the words "the worst ones" (as well as "they") refers to "some measures" and
>not to the Germans. You will note, besides, that I referred to "the German
>population" and not to the "Germans" - this only point should have made my
>point clear.
>
It would have been clear, if you had said 'those measures,' rather than 'they'
which leaves the perception of 'people,' rather than 'objects.' But you're still
rather screwed up... since 'the German population' is certainly 'the Germans.'
THEY -- being 'the German population' in your meaning.
----------------------------------------------
they [thay]
pron
1. people in general: used to refer to people in general when making statements
about the things people do, think, or say
As people and businesses move out of inner cities, bank branches follow, they say.
2. he or she: used instead of “he” or “she” to refer to a person without specifying
gender (informal)
A friend phoned the other day and they told me what you had said.
3. those: an archaic word for “those” (archaic)
[12th century. Old Norse þeir . Ultimately from an Indo-European word meaning “the,
that,” which is also the ancestor of English the, this, that, and there.]
Because English is deficient in that it lacks a gender-neutral third person singular
pronoun, they, together with associated words such as their, is often used in this
role and is a revival of an older use that was once well established in English. In
more formal contexts, and when the individuality of the subject is significant, it is
necessary to use he or she, but this phrase is too cumbersome to provide a solution
in informal conversational usage such as in the sentence Everyone taking the test
should do the best they can.
Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2004. © 1993-2003 Microsoft Corporation. All
rights reserved.
---------------------------------------------------------------
>In summary, I mean that an important part of the German population actually
>supported some of the measures taken by the Nazis, though the worst measures
>have (I hope, at least) not enjoyed such a support.
>
That's what you SHOULD have said... not what you DID say. As usual,
you are simply befuddled.. which is excusable in this case, given that your
English is quite adequate, but failed you miserably in this particular instance.
I overlook many of your clumsy constructions because I understand that
English is not your mother-tongue. I hardly ever have a problem in
deciphering your meaning, which has always worked AGAINST you, since
your clear meaning contains some rather monsterous conclusions, IMHO.
But in this particular case, your construction led to a totally different
conclusion, other than the meaning you now expand upon and impart to it.
>With his, I hope I have made it clear. I note that, in German, such a
>misunderstanding would not have been possible (in English too, provided one
>understands a bit of grammar).
>
Actually, you are completely WRONG in respect to English. The fact is
a full understanding of English grammar would have provided you the ability
to understand that the use of 'they' refers more generally to 'people' unless
quite a bit more clear than your offering. When 'they' refers to 'objects'
in the possessive sense, it should be abundantly clear as to the reference.
Quit making EXCUSES, and simply admit that your words were unclear, but
you have now clarified them in a form more understandable. Your last
words in a connected meaning were -- "supported by an important part of
the German population. They may not be the worst ones..." "They" much
more clearly refers to "the German population" than anything else in your
sentence. Directly following that use of 'population.'
PV
>Euro (the clone of Goebbels)
The difference, euro... the difference you find between murderers and
innocent slaves? Since you complained when I stated that you found no
difference between them. I'm still waiting for you to tell me the difference
you find between them, and why this difference
My question is -- what 'difference,' not 'similarity,' do you find
between murderers and innocent slaves, if they are 'different' to you? And
obviously given any differences you might state...which of them -- irrespective
of your clumsy claim that they 'both' hold exactly the same Easter Bunny
imaginary 'human rights' -- do you find more valuable for mankind, because
of such a difference? Or is there no 'value' whatsoever to any of us?
I believe this question is directly on-topic in respect to any argument of the DP.
If you believe it is not... all you have to say are the words -- 'finding any
difference between murderers and slaves is not a topic connected
to the DP.'
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:i9hoqvc9e0pd5k9e4...@4ax.com...
I refer you back to one question I already raised: do you know what
Kollektivschuld means?
Of course you don't. Maybe you should learn what you are talking about
before writing posts.
As for insulting the German population, I never bring about Germany's nazi
past when I reply to a German. I wish you had the same deontology when you
reply to Juergen.
Euro
j.rennie1
The trouble is that Juergen will insist on criticising America from
a moral standpoint and does use historical events to justify
attacks on American policy. It's difficult not to draw on
Germany's past when responding to such posts. Of course,
PV overdoes it as he overdoes everything. The attacks
quickly become deeply personal as I notice yours do and
he ends up by suggesting that Juergen would have been
a concentration camp guard if born in a previous era. Silly
isn't it? But then chiding PV about the death of the GIs
in Iraq is petty, nasty and mean, isn't it?
Euro
"j.rennie1" <j.re...@ntlworld.com>
??????:IxKrb.286$W%.224945@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net...
>
> The trouble is that Juergen will insist on criticising America from
> a moral standpoint and does use historical events to justify
> attacks on American policy. It's difficult not to draw on
> Germany's past when responding to such posts. Of course,
> PV overdoes it as he overdoes everything. The attacks
> quickly become deeply personal as I notice yours do and
> he ends up by suggesting that Juergen would have been
> a concentration camp guard if born in a previous era. Silly
> isn't it? But then chiding PV about the death of the GIs
> in Iraq is petty, nasty and mean, isn't it?
I'd like to see how you react after having spent days and weeks being
personally attacked. Your past reactions with other posters don't lead me to
conclude that you would turn much more virtuous than I did.
Euro
JIGSAW1695
>From: "Euro" vs...@hotmail.com
>Date: 11/10/2003 6:43 AM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <17e92a59020667b0...@news.meganetnews.com>
Euro, stay out of the kitchen if you cant stand the heat.
j.rennie1
Have you worked out why I am rarely personally attacked by
PV (none of us escape scot free) when I hardly agree with
anything he writes with one or two important exceptions?
The reason is simple - I don't make personal attacks on him.
You and he remnd me of that famous Laurel and Hardy film
where they turn up in their automobile to see a client in his
bungalow. Stan attempts to use the door knocker, it sticks;
he gives it a vicious pull; it comes away in his hand. Client
(famous Scottish comedian whose name I can't recall) opens
door, sees knocker in Stan's hand. He calmly walks over
to the automobile and kicks in a front light. Stan and Oliver
promptly rip down the gutttering from the front of the
bungalow. Scot demolishes the running board of auto.
S and O kick down door and smash front windows. Scot
picks up sledge hammer and begins to demolish auto.
S amd O nod solemnly to one another, walk inside the
bungalow and start knocking it down. The film ends
with our heroes without an automobile and the Scot
homeless. I would play this film, which is much funnier
than my rather truncated bland description, in front of every
UN meeting especially that involving Palestinians and
Israelis. However it also has a message for you and PV -
'you reap what you sow'.
dirtdog
I hate to burst your bubble, John, but you largely escape from
personal attacks from PV because you make pandering apologies for him
such as that which I have mercifully snipped below. PV needs to keep
some posters sweet in order to obtain the approval that he so
desperately craves in his infantile rants against other posters.
PV is an aggressive and hopelessly insecure liar, and I think that if
you actually examine the euro/PV, Jurgen/PV, etc threads, the person
reaping what is sown is actually The Insane One himself.
w00f
Euro
"j.rennie1" <j.re...@ntlworld.com>
??????:voPrb.877$zT1...@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net...
>
> "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:17e92a59020667b0...@news.meganetnews.com...
> >
> > "j.rennie1" <j.re...@ntlworld.com>
> > ??????:IxKrb.286$W%.224945@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net...
> >
> > >
> > > The trouble is that Juergen will insist on criticising America from
> > > a moral standpoint and does use historical events to justify
> > > attacks on American policy. It's difficult not to draw on
> > > Germany's past when responding to such posts. Of course,
> > > PV overdoes it as he overdoes everything. The attacks
> > > quickly become deeply personal as I notice yours do and
> > > he ends up by suggesting that Juergen would have been
> > > a concentration camp guard if born in a previous era. Silly
> > > isn't it? But then chiding PV about the death of the GIs
> > > in Iraq is petty, nasty and mean, isn't it?
> >
> > I'd like to see how you react after having spent days and weeks being
> > personally attacked. Your past reactions with other posters don't lead
me
> to
> > conclude that you would turn much more virtuous than I did.
> >
> > Euro
> >
>
>
> Have you worked out why I am rarely personally attacked by
> PV (none of us escape scot free) when I hardly agree with
> anything he writes with one or two important exceptions?
> The reason is simple - I don't make personal attacks on him.
> (remaining snipped)
Mind the "rarely", John. In the past, I also was "rarely" personally
attacked by PV and, after several calls to PV to end that, calls that
remained ignored, I finally reached to the decision to answer on the same
level - though with much reluctance. I consider that there is no reason why
one should stay silent in front of PV's outrages. He boasts around on
bringing others to light but, by attacking me personally, he brings himself
to light: his insults reveal more about himself than about me, especially
when they are based on twisted quotes and intentionally misinterpreted
statements, taken out of their context.
You will notice that my case is far from being isolated. PV is verbally
violent with several posters here (refer to my post "PV surrounded with
murderer lovers?"). Dirtdog mentioned several posters who have had (and
still have) painful exchanges with PV, and he didn't mention them all.
So, why are you "rarely" (this word is _very_ important, isn't it?) the
object of personal attacks from PV? Well, I'd say, like Dirtdog, that it's
because you stay quiet and occasionally give PV some credit he probably
doesn't deserve. I have never seen you (but I may have missed, apologies if
I did) asking PV to stop his personal attacks and his intolerant, ad hominem
rantings.
Euro
Euro
"JIGSAW1695" <jigsa...@aol.com>
??????:20031110113039...@mb-m13.aol.com...
Jigsaw, aren't yo the one who asked me to try a truce with PV? Well, I did
make a try, and it didn't work. As another poster observed, PV is obsessed
with years old arguments. _He_ keeps trying to rewrite history. _He_ is the
one that keeps dragging old matters up, when anyone else would have got over
it.
And I'm not the kind of person to stay quiet in front of this. In the end of
the day, we'll see who is going to be burned. But, seeing your recent
history with Desmond, I'm sure you'll agree that unpleasant things should
have an end.
Euro
A Planet Visitor
<fucko...@zeouane.org> wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>j.rennie1 <j.re...@ntlworld.com> wrote ...
>
>>> I refer you back to one question I already raised: do you know what
>>> Kollektivschuld means?
>>>
>>> Of course you don't. Maybe you should learn what you are talking about
>>> before writing posts.
>>>
>>> As for insulting the German population, I never bring about Germany's
>>> nazi past when I reply to a German. I wish you had the same deontology
>>> when you reply to Juergen.
>
>> The trouble is that Juergen will insist on criticising America from a
>> moral standpoint and does use historical events to justify attacks on
>> American policy. It's difficult not to draw on Germany's past when
>> responding to such posts. Of course, PV overdoes it as he overdoes
>> everything. The attacks quickly become deeply personal as I notice
>> yours do and he ends up by suggesting that Juergen would have been a
>> concentration camp guard if born in a previous era. Silly isn't it?
>> But then chiding PV about the death of the GIs in Iraq is petty, nasty
>> and mean, isn't it?
>
>As FuckWit is a supporter of his country's presence in Iraq, no it is not
>'petty, nasty and "mean" [sic]'.
No one would have ever expected you to believe it is... in the first place
euro is one of your ugly little goblins -- see
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Goblin.htm
And in the most essential sense you LAUGH at murder, yourself -- see
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/desmond_gimmick_100.html
Chee...know yourself, Desmond... that mirror... buy a mirror.
> Throwing Germany's past in Jürgen's face,
>would only be justified if he has or had at any time, expressed support for
>the actions of H*****. He hasn't.
>
When a German demonstrates anti-Semitism.. he cannot HIDE behind the
fact he is German. That is absurd. And it is equally absurd to argue that
one cannot point out seeing that anti-Semitism, simply because it comes
from a German. As if... shhhh...he's a German...don't mention that he appears
anti-Semitic. Essentially your point seems to be that belongingto the
country of the Tätervolk [perpetrators of the holocaust] that provides them
PROTECTION from recognizing anti-Semitism in what they say. A more
convoluted 'protection' argument I cannot imagine. I find Jürgen to be an
anti-Semite for WHAT HE SAYS... not WHO HE IS. But the fact that he
is a German, makes it much more necessary for him to remember the past
and its connection to any negative comments in respect to the Jews, IMHO.
Just as being an American, makes it much more necessary for me to remember
the past and its connection to slavery in any negative comments in respect to
Black Americans (of course... this means not spitting in the face of MLK,
as you've done - but then... you're too redneck ignorant to be an American).
While you've argued that the holocaust SHOULD BE FORGOTTEN.!!
I mean -- your words in speaking of the holocaust -- "but ... 60 years après ?"
See --
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20020825212921.27149.00000788%40mb-cg.aol.com
Apparently INCREDULOUS that anyone would speak of events in such a
'distant past.' But you have no problem in speaking of slavery in the U.S, which
ended 138 years ago. Does the word 'hypocrite' ring a bell in that
pea-size brain of yours?
PV
>- --
>Des Coughlan
Questionnaire --
PART ONE --
Question A --
[ ] The holocaust should be remembered for 1000 years.
[ ] The holocaust should still be remembered today.
[ ] We should 'forget' about the holocaust... it's been 60 years.
[ ] There was no holocaust
I choose the first answer.
Question B --
[ ] Germans committed the acts of that holocaust
[ ] Germans did not commit the acts of that holocaust
[ ] There was a holocaust, but it was minor
[ ] There was no holocaust
I choose the first answer.
Question C --
[ ] Germans still bears a burden for the holocaust
[ ] Germans bears no burden for the holocaust
[ ] There was no holocaust
I choose the first answer
Question D --
[ ] Anti-Semitism is still strong in Germany
[ ] Anti-Semitism has been mostly eliminated in Germany
[ ] There has been no anti-Semitism in Germany following the holocaust
[ ] There was no holocaust.
I choose the first answer.
Question E --
[ ] The murder of Jews took place in Dachau
[ ] Dachau was only a concentration camp
[ ] There was no holocaust.
I choose the first answer.
PART TWO --
Question F --
[ ] Slavery took place in the U.S. It should not be forgotten
[ ] Slavery took place but it should be forgotten.
[ ] No slavery took place in the U.S.
I choose the first answer.
Question G --
[ ] Americans engaged in that slavery.
[ ] Americans did not engage in that slavery.
[ ] Slavery occurred but it was insignificant.
[ ] There was no slavery in the U.S.
I choose the first answer.
Question H --
[ ] Americans still bear a burden for that slavery in the past
[ ] Americans do not bear a burden for slavery in the past.
[ ] There was no slavery in the U.S.
I choose the first answer.
Question I --
[ ] Racism is still strong in the U.S.
[ ] Racism has been mostly eliminated in the U.S.
[ ] There has been no racism after slavery ended in the U.S.
[ ] There was no slavery in the U.S.
I choose the first answer.
Question J --
[ ] Racist murders of Blacks occurred after slavery ended
[ ] No racist murders of Blacks occurred after slavery ended.
[ ] There was no slavery in the U.S.
I choose the first answer.
Care to make your choices, Desmond?
j.rennie1
snip
> So, why are you "rarely" (this word is _very_ important, isn't it?) the
> object of personal attacks from PV? Well, I'd say, like Dirtdog, that it's
> because you stay quiet and occasionally give PV some credit he probably
> doesn't deserve. I have never seen you (but I may have missed, apologies
if
> I did) asking PV to stop his personal attacks and his intolerant, ad
hominem
> rantings.
>
> Euro
>
You have 'missed' and I accept your apologies. However, I rarely intervene
in other people's flame fests believing that folks should look after
themselves.
I am careful to jump heavily on PV when he annoys me with the odd
'socialists
are shit' insult (obviously doggie agrees with him here and doesn't think
that's
an insult) or when I am called a fanatic for merely expressing a point of
view
that PV doesn't agree with. I would like to see him more engaged with the
likes of Dr Doody and Richard especially with their rather basic views on
race and that's why I deplore thse silly flame fests.
Euro
"j.rennie1" <j.re...@ntlworld.com>
??????:LC3sb.76$Ra3.2...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net...
Point understood. I have one more question to you, though: you wrote that
you rarely intervene in other people's flame fests, and yet you intervened
several times, on the last weeks, in my flame fests with PV - usually asking
us to stop, or, more precisely, asking me to stop as PV didn't hear calls
for moderation (that's not exactly the way you put it but that's roughly
what I recall). Why those interventions?
Euro
dirtdog
<fucko...@zeouane.org> wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>j.rennie1 <j.re...@ntlworld.com> wrote ...
>
>>> So, why are you "rarely" (this word is _very_ important, isn't it?) the
>>> object of personal attacks from PV? Well, I'd say, like Dirtdog, that
>>> it's because you stay quiet and occasionally give PV some credit he
>>> probably doesn't deserve. I have never seen you (but I may have missed,
>>> apologies if I did) asking PV to stop his personal attacks and his
>>> intolerant, ad hominem rantings.
>
>> You have 'missed' and I accept your apologies. However, I rarely
>> intervene in other people's flame fests believing that folks should look
>> after themselves. I am careful to jump heavily on PV when he annoys me
>> with the odd 'socialists are shit' insult (obviously doggie agrees with
>> him here and doesn't think that's an insult) or when I am called a
>> fanatic for merely expressing a point of view that PV doesn't agree with.
>
>Yes, exactly.
>
>So let's see ... _you_ reserve the right to 'jump heavily' on FuckWit when
>he calls you a fanatic for daring to disagree with him, but the _rest_ of
>us aren't supposed to react when he calls us 'racist', or 'anti-Semitic',
>or 'mental', or 'revisionist', simply because that's the only response of
>which he is capable, when we thrash him daily on this newsgroup ?
*applause*
I'd say that's just about bang on.
<snip>
w00f
dirtdog
<fucko...@zeouane.org> wrote:
<snip>
> when reading
>FuckWit's posts, I could be forgiven for thinking that I'm reading words
>written by a twelve year old.
'Liar, liar, pants on fire'
No further questions.
w00f
j.rennie1
Because I wanted the flamefests to stop or at least be reduced. I tried
not to take sides.
j.rennie1
"dirtdog" <dirtdogCHOCO...@fruffrant.com> wrote in message
news:b6f2rvsn323okdlqs...@4ax.com...
Actually doggie you have this flamefest nonsense taped. You tend to react
the
once and leave it at that. That's all I recommend to others. They should
react
sharply and decisively to insults and lies just the once and ignore the
nonsense
repetitions.
A Planet Visitor
What nonsense.. excusing a behavior of your own that goes to your
very character... a character which casts only a very sad shadow of
lies... deceptions... and denials. You consider my pointing out those
lies... deceptions... and denials, as being insults... but they are simply
my observations of your comments which contain those lies...deceptions...
and denials. What you responded to, after my exposing your lies...
deceptions... and denials... are those insults. And might I point out,
about the most juvenile, and paedomorphic insults imaginable. Dredged
up from "Tasteless and gross jokes for the infantile, Volume 5." Does
the word "diarrhea" ring a bell, euro? You've used it in respect to
your childish comments on posts of mine that you are unable to
address intelligently FORTY-SEVEN times!!! Could you please
find another forum for your intense interest in the bowel movements
of a poster? Or at least, flip the page of that 'Tasteless Jokes..."
book, to find something else to use as a 'rote' insult.
>I consider that there is no reason why
>one should stay silent in front of PV's outrages. He boasts around on
>bringing others to light but, by attacking me personally, he brings himself
>to light: his insults reveal more about himself than about me, especially
>when they are based on twisted quotes and intentionally misinterpreted
>statements, taken out of their context.
>
I attack only your words, euro. And that's what bothers you intensely.
Words of yours that you NEVER address intelligently. Words that turn
my stomach in the disrespect you show to our species, while attempting
to place murderers on some 'moral pedestal.' If only you could address
that single issue. The issue of you finding no difference between murderers
and innocent slaves. The issue of you arguing that John Wayne Gacy
loses no 'human rights' whatsoever, by murdering over 30 children,
and can claim the same 'human right' to freedom that all innocent
slaves should have. Presuming that he 'should have' that same right
to freedom, regardless of how many he murders.
>You will notice that my case is far from being isolated. PV is verbally
>violent with several posters here (refer to my post "PV surrounded with
>murderer lovers?"). Dirtdog mentioned several posters who have had (and
>still have) painful exchanges with PV, and he didn't mention them all.
>
That is because they hold views similar to yours. Majorities.. the arguments
of fools, that most insidious enemy of truth and individual thought.
The fascist intent to stifle independent thought, claiming such thought
belongs only to the majority. Usually led by the nose by some rabble-rouser,
they see as their MESSIAH. Tocqueville said it best in the shortest number
of words -- 'Tyranny of the Majority." It lives and breathes here, in this
magnet for those hoping to exert such tyranny. Why is it not possible
for you to have an independent thought without 'relying' on the presumed
majority?
>So, why are you "rarely" (this word is _very_ important, isn't it?) the
>object of personal attacks from PV? Well, I'd say, like Dirtdog, that it's
>because you stay quiet and occasionally give PV some credit he probably
>doesn't deserve.
ROTFLMAO... DIRTDOG!!! That racist swine. An object of pity..
if there ever was one.
>I have never seen you (but I may have missed, apologies if
>I did) asking PV to stop his personal attacks and his intolerant, ad hominem
>rantings.
What a bunch of rubbish. John and I agree on practically nothing, except
civility, between us. Which does not mean that I must extend civility to
others who do not extend it to me. And he never calls on 'others' to support
his arguments with me, nor do I in my arguments with him. Which makes
us both far, far superior to YOU. I take his criticisms of me, and he has
frequently offered them, far more seriously than I do from the nitwits that have
insults as their only weapon. And you are among them, since I've never seen
you actually challenge me intellectually, while John does so frequently. When
I encounter non-civility I respond in kind. You may feel that you are the
aggrieved party here, euro... but you are unable to fight your own battles, and
have went begging to others to gain support for positions you cannot defend.
And in that process, surrounded yourself with some evil people, one who
laughed at murder, that you find as your MESSIAH here in AADP. You
attempted to protect him from having exposed that laughing, by calling it
'sarcasm.' But I am reminded of another time when you said "Sarcasm is a
good way out after having said stupidities." In other words, you recognized
the stupidity in his laughing, and tried to offer him a 'good way out,' of that
laughing. You do not see me doing that. You do not see me PROTECT
ANYONE here. But you presume by seeking such support, and finding
others who will trade their support for your support, you will find yourself in
that most 'glorious' majority, where you stupid views, and ignorant conclusions
suddenly become not so stupid and ignorant, because of the 'robotic obeisance'
that majority demonstrates. But, believe me.. those views and conclusions are
still stupid and ignorant. Nothing can change that. Don't take that as a 'personal
insult,' but simply my observation of your views and conclusions in respect to
various aspects of our human existence on this insignificant planet.
PV
>
>Euro
A Planet Visitor
Now, if you could only explain -- What difference do you find between murderers
and innocent slaves?
PV
>
>Euro
A Planet Visitor
wrote:
Looking for that 'majority support, for your racism, fuckhead? Too bad..
it's been tried and failed before... when Desmond begged the group to
_vote_ for his racism... See
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/desmond_gimmick_166.html
Once again... you're a day late, and a dollar short.
PV
>w00f
A Planet Visitor
You will NEVER find me 'gloating' over events of that nature.
You will only find me expressing intense disapproval of ANYONE
who does LAUGH or 'gloat' about deaths. To me, you are no
better than those who chanted 'Burn Bundy burn,' at the execution
of Ted Bundy, using that execution for their own pitiful agenda.
Supporting the execution of Bundy, as I did, leaves me no less
revolted by those who would make such a spectacle of the
killing of a human being.
Such use, and such gloating and such laughing to argue an agenda,
is more disgusting to me, than you could possibly imagine. Find
something else besides your 'macabre attraction' to death to provide
a source for your arguments Instead of as you do now.. trying to
excuse that 'macabre attraction'... apologize for doing so in this
particular instance, rather than pathetically whining, in the fashion
of Desmond, that you were 'driven to it.'
PV
>Euro
A Planet Visitor
in his frustration because PV keeps pointing out that Desmond LAUGHS
at murder -- See
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/desmond_gimmick_100.html
How necessary it has become to pity him more and more, as the
vile poison continues to spring from his festering and infected soul.
PV
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 12:59:32 +0100, Des_The_Deathie_Destroyer
<fucko...@zeouane.org> wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>j.rennie1 <j.re...@ntlworld.com> wrote ...
>
>>> So, why are you "rarely" (this word is _very_ important, isn't it?) the
>>> object of personal attacks from PV? Well, I'd say, like Dirtdog, that
>>> it's because you stay quiet and occasionally give PV some credit he
>>> probably doesn't deserve. I have never seen you (but I may have missed,
>>> apologies if I did) asking PV to stop his personal attacks and his
>>> intolerant, ad hominem rantings.
>
>> You have 'missed' and I accept your apologies. However, I rarely
>> intervene in other people's flame fests believing that folks should look
>> after themselves. I am careful to jump heavily on PV when he annoys me
>> with the odd 'socialists are shit' insult (obviously doggie agrees with
>> him here and doesn't think that's an insult) or when I am called a
>> fanatic for merely expressing a point of view that PV doesn't agree with.
>
>Yes, exactly.
>
>So let's see ... _you_ reserve the right to 'jump heavily' on FuckWit when
>he calls you a fanatic for daring to disagree with him, but the _rest_ of
>us aren't supposed to react when he calls us 'racist', or 'anti-Semitic',
>or 'mental', or 'revisionist', simply because that's the only response of
>which he is capable, when we thrash him daily on this newsgroup ?
>
>The scariest thing about FuckWit isn't his quite obvious (to everyone else,
>even if you do seem to be (willfully ?) blind to it) hatred of Jews, Arabs,
>the French, and the Germans, but his apparently heartfelt belief that he
>comes in for so much stick from _almost every_ poster here, because he's
>the greatest debater that news:alt.activism.death-penalty has ever seen,
>and that we can't respond any other way. In short, he really does think
>that he emerges 'victorious' from his arguments. Now apparently you think
>the same way. How sad.
>
>If you cast your mind back to when I started taking issue with his tripe,
>it was just after he had called another poster 'mental', for having had the
>temerity to defeat him in a debate. Then he called another postal 'mental'
>for the same reason ... then another ... then another. Since then, he has
>degenerated to the stage where he calls others 'racist', when they don't
>have a racist bone in their bodies. His 'proof' of this is a)
>misinterpreted posts, or b) simple fabrications, which his enemies have
>never, _ever_ said. His only possible response to being beaten, is to
>'demonise' the person who thrashed him, by calling him or her 'racist' (or
>'anti-Semitic' etc.), hoping that others on news:alt.activism.death-penalty
>will _believe_ his words, whilst at the same time he vigorously claims that
>he 'doesn't care' if anyone reads his words or not. Quite obviously not
>true, as _he_ knows that dirt, euro, I, Peter, Hugh, Fitz etc., are not
>racist, and that we have never uttered a single word in here, which would
>allow a reasonable person to arrive at the conclusion that we are. If he
>posts these lies, it's quite obviously for the benefit of others.
>
>The 'flamefests' will stop (at least, I'll give him a break) when he stops
>lying, twisting others' words, throwing accusations of 'racism' etc.
>around. I don't think that he will do so, however, for that is the only
>response of which he is capable. If he stops that, then he might as well
>leave news:alt.activism.death-penalty, for he is without a doubt the
>weakest poster on the group, insofar as 'debating horsepower' is concerned.
>He can't react any other way, and whereas others here will simply refrain
>from entering a thread where those aspects of law or science outwith our
>ken are being discussed, FuckWit's insecurity _obliges_ him to enter the
>thread, post a long ream of inane waffle that he got from google after
>searching for the subject being discussed, and in the process, making it
>painfully obvious to everyone reading his words, that he doesn't know what
>he's talking about. But hey, FuckWit thinks that he looks educated, so who
>are we to burst his bubble, eh ?
>
>> I would like to see him more engaged with the likes of Dr Doody and
>> Richard especially with their rather basic views on race and that's why I
>> deplore thse silly flame fests.
>
>A 'flamefest' generally involves two people flaming each other and by
>implication, both doing a similarly good (or bad) job of it. I can't speak
>for the other people on news:alt.activism.death-penalty, but when reading
>FuckWit's posts, I could be forgiven for thinking that I'm reading words
>written by a twelve year old.
>
>- --
>Des Coughlan
>http://www.zeouane.org/
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/gimmicks/
>
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use
>Charset: noconv
>
>iQA/AwUBP7DBEmiD+5zjSqyTEQKwXACgmf1XhhTj6YgP42YLJ5nY88QKJPUAn3iv
>Ezl5y9C8LX52VrI7PDB4F4po
>=wr4x
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Cerberus
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message
news:1up3rvs99dr9q6q6k...@4ax.com...
: Poor Desmond, the murderer lover, lashes out in rage at John Rennie,
: in his frustration because PV keeps pointing out that Desmond LAUGHS
: at murder -- See
: http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/desmond_gimmick_100.html
:
: How necessary it has become to pity him more and more, as the
: vile poison continues to spring from his festering and infected soul.
:
: PV
It's very unusual to see _you_ top posting PV?
[stuff snipped]
--
WooF w00f WooF
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:u9b3rvc8i9pe83fvm...@4ax.com...
Not at all. What I consider as insults, is your continuous name calling,
ranging from "murderer lover" and "spastic" till "anti-semitic", "racist"
and, more recently, "Goebbels". Those name callings are based on conclusions
you draw from twisted quotes so as to forge lies. It doesn't show anything
as to my character.
I actually find it quite funny that, though you know nothing about me, you
call me an anti-Semite, without even thinking that I could be born Jew.
Likewise, you called me a racist while you actually don't know if I'm a
Black, or a metis. You called me Goebbels while you don't know anything of
my roots and of the past of my family. Obviously, insulting someone you know
nothing about makes you appear as a fool, more than it shows anything of my
character - one more subject you like to write about while being patently
ignorant.
Euro
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:9th3rvkefdgr39pkc...@4ax.com...
You should stop smoking that stuff, PV. Abolitionists have no 'macabre
attraction' to death. Else, they would argue for more executions to take
place.
Euro
A Planet Visitor
What can I say about Dr. Doody, other than his views do express some
concepts that I disagree with strongly, in respect to racism in the U.S. but I do
not have the time or energy to argue with him? I deplore those who would
excuse racism as a source of violence of Black Americans, because it is
so obvious to me. I will say that trying to 'rationalize' the reasons for Black
violence in the U.S., outside of the parameters of White racism, can be a
dangerous path, sometimes more dangerous than the out and out racism
expressed by Desmond, which at a glance is recognized as disgusting.
While with Richard, I do believe I have explored how I feel about his
opinions to some lengths. I find it hard to believe he is a racist, although
there is much in his words that frightens me, if that is the thinking of
present day educators at the primary school level Given the entire
body of Richard's post, I rather attribute his views to burnout, in
frustration more than anything else, thus lashing out because he has
found himself in the position of trying so hard, and finding little results
from those efforts, because of peer pressure in the school system, an
abdication of the parental role, and the proliferation of drugs, etc.. Yet,
each of those forces, if one examines them... find their roots in White
racism toward Blacks, IMHO. The ghettoization factor, not only
economically and socially, but an attempt to ghettoize the mind of
young Blacks. He looks back on a career now ended, and he feels
empty, and his efforts in a lifetime, unrewarded in their expectations.
Thus, he needs to justify the fact that he 'tried' but could not succeed.
And since he himself is not a racist, and is White, he tries to rationalize
that since he could not succeed, it cannot be the result of Whites, or
racism. But to me, fully recognizing that I have not been in the
battleground as deeply as Richard, I find racism more insidious than
imaginable as the source of Black violence in the U.S.
PV
A Planet Visitor
(1) They speak to your character, euro. While you demonstrates that you
are a liar, in the use of that particular word, as you ignore your MESSIAH'S
use of it three times this month alone --
Thread - "Did you receive your invitation yet Jon? - 11/8/2003 8:17 AM
Thread - "Cardinal of Paris -11/1/2003 2:21 PM
Thread - "Insects Prove to be Good Crime Witnesses - 11/9/2003 4:00 AM
If you argue that they may not appear in google, simply tell me which one you
cannot find, and I will gladly insure it appears in google, since they are in my
archive called 'desmond disgusting discourses,' now that Dolly no longer archives
them. I have already insured that one of them, previously not in google, will
appear there.
Don't take this as an insult, euro, but in all honesty, what these demonstrate with
great force is that you are a hypocrite, since you have not given them even a
passing glance, yet you salivate over every word of your MESSIAH. And your
comment demonstrates that you enjoy spreading propaganda, just as your good
friend, Goebbels, since I have not used that word in a great length of time, ever
since it was asked that it not be used. Which makes me far, far superior to both
you and Desmond. Because you seem to demonstrate a 'gloat factor,' each time
you use it. As if you ENJOY repeating the sound of that hateful word. Does
it give you a 'sexual rush' when you type it, euro? Do you believe it makes any
kind of a sound other than the same propaganda that Goebbels spewed out?
Can't you see your use of that word... in that lie... is the exact method previously
employed by Herr Goebbels? The big lie!
(2) While, in addition -- you have displayed some other nasty characteristics of
that man, Goebbels... a distinct anti-Semitism. If Cardinal Lustiger had stated that
he was French, and I had remarked that he had stated he was French, you would have
certainly found nothing amiss with my doing so. Instead, I believe you would have
argued that being French went hand in hand with his 'moral' plan to beatify a
murderer. But the moment I remarked that he had stated he was Jewish by birth...
MY GOD... the fucking anti-Semitic fireworks exploded from you...because you find
something 'dirty' about the Jews...and you feel it is DISGUSTING to mention that
someone is a Jew So in the most hysterical and raging insult imaginable you said
that by my mentioning what Cardinal Lustiger had himself proudly stated I (and I
quote you) -- "endorse the opinion of those who argued that there was a "Jewish race"
based on their genetic or genealogic history." In other words... you called me a
Nazi... and you don't presume that is an insult!!! Then in continuation of your
nasty methods of Goebbels, you stated that my mention of Cardinal Lustiger being of
Jewish birth, was the SAME as 'reporting him to the Gestapo.' You evil shit. You
don't see that as an INSULT to me?
Then you go on to say that the mention that someone is Jewish is DISGUSTING
to you!!! You have nailed the coffin of your anti-Semitism shut as tight as possible
in your own words. And if you can presume that my mentioning that Cardinal
Lustiger is a Jew, makes me a Nazi... then it is a mild rebuke for me to state that
your methods follow those of Goebbels.
(3) Of course both you and Desmond are murderer lovers... you are clones off
the assembly line of murderer lovers.
(4) And while Desmond has proved he is a racist, having spit in the face of Martin
Luther King Jr. in a thread to this group, See --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/desmond_gimmick_1.html
I have no evidence that you have expressed any racism, thus I certainly cannot even
imply you are a racist. Simply that your affection for murderers exceeds your caring
about victims.
>I actually find it quite funny that,
You shouldn't find it funny, euro.. you really shouldn't. Your MESSIAH
finds murder to be funny, but you shouldn't find that you demonstrate some
very deep anti-Semitic feelings, and your style of 'argument' (sic) is quite
similar to Goebbels is funny. You really shouldn't find that 'quite funny.'
I certainly don't.
>though you know nothing about me,
Of course I know nothing about you personally. What I KNOW are the
words you put here. You know nothing about ME personally. We are
only words here, euro. And your words are the words of a liar, a
murderer lover, an anti-Semite, and one who uses the methods of Goebbels
in his arguments. Whether any of those are the 'real' you, is totally immaterial
to me. Because you are ONLY the words you post to this group. You
are no more than that here... not one jot more. And if you presume to
contend you are MORE than the words you put here... it is simply a
continuation of that propaganda that I speak of. WHO you are, cannot
protect you from WHAT you demonstrate you are here.
>you
>call me an anti-Semite, without even thinking that I could be born Jew.
Would that matter? It would only demonstrate that you hold a consuming
self-loathing of who you are, because of your anti-Semitic comments. Or
are you presuming that a Jew can express anti-Semitic remarks and hide
behind the fact that he is Jewish? Of all the ignorant words you have posted
here, that seems to me to be within the top ten, at least. WHO you are...
CANNOT excuse WHAT you are. Frame that simple slogan, and remember
that you cannot EXCUSE anything you say here, simply because you
presume you are 'special.'
>Likewise, you called me a racist while you actually don't know if I'm a
>Black, or a metis.
I don't recall calling you a racist. Perhaps you can refresh my memory by
providing the URL to where I have called you a racist. And I will apologize
for doing so, if I examine the words and find I cannot justify them. But, euro,
again you express the most ignorant and hypocritical of ideas. You are
contending that a Black CANNOT be a racist!! Get real. This is the
point == one cannot protect themselves from being a racist, because they
are of ANY 'race.' Just as one cannot protect themselves from being
an anti-Semite, because of ANY ethnic descent. It's WHAT you are,
my son... not WHO you are.
>You called me Goebbels while you don't know anything of
>my roots and of the past of my family.
I don't give a shit about you or your family here in AADP. Nor do I for
one instant believe you care about mine. Which makes you again a
hypocrite. Since you seem to imply that your 'family' can PROTECT
you from the evil in your words here. I care only about confronting
and disproving the paedomorphic comments you make, and the insulting
methods in which you offer those comments. I deplore your ideas that
murderers hold some 'special' place in our hearts and minds, and need
to be treated so compassionately, presuming that they are 'no different'
from anyone who has never murdered, contending that John Wayne
Gacy has the 'same human rights' as any non-murderer. I literally cringe
in pity for you, when I see the ignorance you display here, in just about
every dialog held, such as your pathetic argument that 'legal' is not a 'legal
concept.' I stand aghast at the depraved indifference you express for
humanity, claiming 'why should we provide a benefit for each other?'
Insulting all of the humanity that has gone before who have provided the
benefits we now reap. I am appalled at your arguments which suggest that
40,000 deaths every year, is an "irrelevant comparison" to a few proven
murderers executed each year. I am revolted by your hypocrisy, that
shows you standing as Buridan's ass, unable to choose between murderers
and innocent slaves, while in that hypocrisy arguing that they are not the
same to you. I am disgusted by your contention that a RC Cardinal is
'moral' for attempting to elevate a murderer to a position in that church
that would require millions of followers of that religion to refer to that
murderer as BLESSED!!! I am offended that you would AGREE
with your MESSIAH in his laughing at murder, attempting to justify it,
by calling it 'sarcasm,' after having already admitted that "Sarcasm is
a good way out after having said stupidities." I am shocked at the
often odious insults you provide in your clear Mussolini style posed
anti-American posturing. I am nauseated... my stomach turning... at the
very clear anti-Semitism you express, which has in recent days only
heightened, as you attempt to JUSTIFY that anti-Semitic sentiment.
And I loath your lies and distortions of arguments, and am outraged
by your methods of argument, which clearly DO follow the same
propaganda patterns of Goebbels.
You may not like what I see... and think you can get away with anything,
now using an implied excuse of the "past of my family." But it's been done...
your MESSIAH has already used that excuse. So that's tough shit, euro.
Since it is what I see of you.... your WORDS. That's all you are here...
an assembly of words that I find thoroughly repulsive.
> Obviously, insulting someone you know
>nothing about makes you appear as a fool, more than it shows anything of my
>character - one more subject you like to write about while being patently
>ignorant.
>
What I KNOW about you... is the words you put here, euro. That is
all we know about any of us here, and all that should concern us here.
Do not contend that you are someone 'special' in 'real life' that PERMITS
you to utter the most absurd, insulting, degrading to the human spirit, and
mind-boggling ignorant comments imaginable. If you are so 'great' in
'real life,' why is that fact not DEMONSTRATED here? Or are you
contending that the face you present here... is not your 'real face'?
PV
>Euro
A Planet Visitor
Clearly another pathetic excuse from you. Your ego, and disgusting
character simply prevent you from seeing that you USED those deaths
in a sickening expression of support for your particular agenda, without
the slightest concern for the victims. Your 'macabre attraction to death'
was most certainly demonstrated in YOUR WORDS.
And your insult in respect to presuming I'm on drugs, because I recognized
your 'macabre attraction to death' in your words... is simply another of
the pile of excuses you invariably offer. And it's a wonder that the word
'virtuous' you used, did not cause you to gag as you typed it.
PV
>
>Euro
A Planet Visitor
>
>"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>??????:i9hoqvc9e0pd5k9e4...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 13:59:05 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>> >??????:m62hqvooe0pis8u26...@4ax.com...
>> >> On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 17:17:27 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>> >> >??????:f033qvcbq1bb2gotj...@4ax.com...
>> >> >> On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 05:52:32 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>> >> >> >??????:ldiipv0tsk7kghcp0...@4ax.com...
>> >> >> >> On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 23:41:40 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >"Richard J" <ric...@hotmail.com>
>> >> >??????:3F9558B1...@hotmail.com...
>> >> >> >> >> Euro wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> > "Richard J" <ric...@hotmail.com>
>> >> >> >??????:3F94BEA7...@hotmail.com...
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >>Euro wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> <rest clipped>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> > For politicians, being able to support necessary reforms
>that
>> >are
>> >> >not
>> >> >> >> >> > popular is sometimes a sign of courage.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Sometimes, and sometimes it is a show of tyranny. Or do you
>> >claim
>> >> >the
>> >> >> >> >> German population supported the acts of the Nazis?
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >Slippery subject... Historians might tell you that some measures
>I refer you back to one question I already raised: do you know what
>Kollektivschuld means?
>
Jesus... you are utterly...utterly ignorant. I well know what it means... and
it would simply pander to your pathetic drivel to presume I should play your
silly game. That word is an EXCUSE.. plain and simple. Intending to
deny 'individuals' actually committed the atrocities. Spread the blame... so
it ends up that 'no one was to blame.' It is actually a very 'ugly' word,
with some very evil implication when used in certain arguments, just as
the word Tätervolk has taken on a very specific meaning far beyond its
natural German translation. It is COLLECTIVE (GUILT-FAULT-
RESPONSIBILITY). Take your choice. I like 'fault,' personally.
>Of course you don't. Maybe you should learn what you are talking about
>before writing posts.
>
Maybe you should stop hating the Jews.
>As for insulting the German population, I never bring about Germany's nazi
>past when I reply to a German. I wish you had the same deontology when you
>reply to Juergen.
>
That is as absurd as arguing that slavery in the U.S. past cannot be brought up
to an American. We cannot HIDE from our past. And in any case, you are a liar.
Since you certainly brought up an even more distant past of the U.S. in presuming
you could be smarmy... while exposing your own evil... your words -- "In spite of
that, in the 19th century, many slaves and Indians who didn't enjoy civil rights
were murdered without trial by the US state. Sadly enough, the US didn't
need to wait the example of Europe for such practices." See --
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=3eb24e40%241_4%40news.meganetnews.com
Does the word hypocrite... ring a bell? You presume that I cannot bring
up the more near past to a German... while you can bring up the 19th
Century to an American. spank...spank...spank....
Further, I would never 'throw it in the face' of a German, regarding that past, if
that German did not provide a comment which forced me to recognize that he
was STILL an anti-Semite. No German can HIDE behind being an anti-Semite
by claiming he is a German. No American can HIDE behind being a racist by
claiming he is an American.
The clear fact is, I hold substantial evidence that Jürgen is an anti-Semite. Thus,
I do not care if he is from the Planet Pluto. He IS an anti-Semite, IMHO. And
I have a 'right' to voice that opinion. You will not silence me from that opinion,
nor can Jürgen be 'excused' from that opinion because he is a German. You
are cast from the same mold as Desmond, presuming that because I attack
Jürgen for what I see as his anti-Semitism, it means I am attacking ALL Germans,
and that's rubbish. I will provide you, as I did Jürgen, one of my life experiences
to demonstrates that far from believing Germans are anti-Semites or evil, I
hold quite the opposite view. Which only means that when I encounter someone
such as Jürgen, who I feel does a DISSERVICE to the Germans, with his
anti-Semitism, I become more vocal than if that person were not a German,
because he IS a German. He must hold to a higher standard, as far as I'm
concerned, and any denial of that responsibility I see as only an excuse. See --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Gaststube.htm
You must excuse my German... as I am not a polyglot, and I have not been
in Germany for over ten years now. I was, in fact, more upset by Jürgen's
comment, because he was a German, then by any hate for the Jews that you
express. You're simply a silly twit, and your views are so twisted and
distorted that you hating the Jews almost seems to fit you. While I could
not help but place greater emphasis on Jürgen, because he is a German,
than I could possibly give a shit about what you think.
Now... to the crucial linchpin of why I find him to be an anti-Semite, in addition
to his various ravings that presume Israel should be turned over to the Arabs,
is that he has stated that a 'star' should be added to the U.S. Flag to indicate
its domination by Jewish influence, indicating that the Jewish state of Israel is
simply another state of the U.S. Given the very clear meaning of a 'star' in
respect to the Jews... in respect to 'Israel'... in respect to Germans... in respect
to the holocaust... I am led to no other possibility than what my opinion has
determined. Obviously, if he was NOT a German, the comment would not
have carried near the import that it did. Since the use of 'star' has a most
diabolical meaning in respect to the Jews and the Germans. All the excuses
in the world cannot deny this connection. He fits the definition of an anti-Semite,
which is defined as "theory, action or practice against the Jews. One who is
hostile or opposed to the Jews... For the OED definition of anti-Semitism... see -
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/OED%20Online%20-%20anti-Semitism.htm
But clearly, euro. My opinion of him being an anti-Semite, doesn't have
anything to do with my opinion that you are an anti-Semite.
PV
>Euro
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:aodbrvcsla8q6dssl...@4ax.com...
This word is one of the concepts on which West Germany was built. I didn't
invent it. It targets the whole German population, and was invented before
my birth. If you consider it insults the whole German population, then you
might reconsider invoking the Holocaust each time you have no other argument
to oppose to Juergen.
Euro
PS: By the way, do you deny, in your exercise to rewrite history, that
Hitler was actually elected as Germany's Reichskanzler in 1933?
A Planet Visitor
>
>"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>??????:aodbrvcsla8q6dssl...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 10:55:56 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>> >??????:i9hoqvc9e0pd5k9e4...@4ax.com...
>> >> On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 13:59:05 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
<no longer relevant past comments clipped>
>> >I refer you back to one question I already raised: do you know what
>> >Kollektivschuld means?
>> >
>> Jesus... you are utterly...utterly ignorant. I well know what it means...and
>> it would simply pander to your pathetic drivel to presume I should play your
>> silly game. That word is an EXCUSE.. plain and simple. Intending to
>> deny 'individuals' actually committed the atrocities.
>
>This word is one of the concepts on which West Germany was built.
Rubbish! Absolute rubbish. That word was used by the ACTUAL
perpetrators of the holocaust and those who embraced Nazism to 'spread
the guilt.' Most Germans recognized their own destruction when seeing what
they had brought about because of their apathy toward the Jews, and their
believing that Hitler was actually bringing a sense of fulfillment to that country.
It was not only the rubble that surrounded them... but the recognition of what
had been wrought. Those who felt otherwise following the war... those who
felt no such recognition... those who were truly GUILTY... as is usual in all
cases such as this... needed to find a scapegoat for their own true and deep
hate for the Jews, and their support, and often participation in the transport
and bureaucratic administration of the extermination of the Jews. And what
better scapegoat then their OWN COUNTRYMEN! Make it appear that
ALL Germans were the same... and thus INDIVIDUAL guilt could not be
spoken of. Making it appear that those deeply involved in the actual mechanics
of the holocaust were 'simply Germans.' No more a persönlichschuld
(personal guilty), but a kollektivschuld (collective guilt).
You insult every German, to presume that West Germany was BUILT on
the concept of kollektivschuld. In the sense of a collective guilt... because
that is your implication. West Germany was built on the concept of the
German work ethic, and the backbreaking labor of those who are now
almost all gone from the scene. Their legacy is left in the word
"Wirtschaftswunder."
Adversity brings out the best in humankind, IMHO. The crucible of WW II,
brought out the worst and best of us. The worst we know of readily.
While many of the best never saw the end of war. But that crucible also
forged a great strength in men who did see the end of that war. English,
American, Japanese, and Germans (at the risk of offending other nationalities).
England's recovery, while already the yardstick by which all civilized nations
are measured at the beginning of that conflict, was shaped in resolute
strength and determination. Americans, entering the war from an unworldly
largely agrarian nation of mainly farmers, transformed the U.S. into the most
powerful and successful industrial colossus in history. Many abandoning
those farms at the end of the war, and instead going on to become judges,
doctors, industrialists, entrepreneurs, builders, and teachers. And on the
way, perhaps we lost a bit of our moral compass, in our arrogance at our
success, truth be told. While overcoming the calamities of the total destruction
of Japan and Germany, faced by the Japanese and the Germans in
rebuilding those two nations into the economic giants that they are at
this moment, causes us to wonder at that success even today.
Nor is there a reason for any collective shame on the part of the Germans.
There is only the recognition of the past, and the shame would be in
denying that past, which no reasonable German would attempt to do.
> I didn't invent it.
Given that you don't even know what it means... I have no doubt you
didn't 'invent it.'
> It targets the whole German population, and was invented before
>my birth.
Quite right... Then quit presuming you know what you are speaking of.
>If you consider it insults the whole German population, then you
>might reconsider invoking the Holocaust each time you have no other argument
>to oppose to Juergen.
>
The word itself. CANNOT help but presume to 'insult the whole German
population.' That's why I have never invoked it. YOU DID! I speak
only of my opinion that as a German, there is a burden within that which
demands a higher respect to the principle of opposing anti-Semitism.
Just as an American has a higher burden within the idea of slavery as
in the past of the U.S., which demands a higher respect to the principles
of opposing racism. There is no GUILT IMPLIED. Nor is there any
SHAME implied in being a German. There is only the RECOGNITION
of the past. Guilt can only be applied in a personal sense. But a recognition
of the circumstances of one's birth is certainly relevant, in the sense of
an individual holding a weltanschauung, and recognizing where he fits
as a human being into that weltanschauung.
I do not feel guilt or shame about slavery, since I certainly wasn't a
part of it. But, IMHO, the past of my country DEMANDS that I hold
myself to a higher standard in respect to racism. Because of that
undeniable past, I would hope that I do try to hold myself to that higher
standard. I see a Black American, and I see a history of slavery in
the U.S. And this is what I expect from the Germans, and what I
do not find in an individual sense from Jürgen. Rather I find from him,
a firm denial that his birth as a German carries no responsibility to
the past whatsoever. He is certainly welcome to his belief. I find
it rather frightening to believe that we are not a part of the past, and
the present. With the past working to shape our present, even in an
individual sense. It's simply a difference of opinions, since I certainly
cannot say FACTUALLY that Germans bear a higher burden to
oppose anti-Semitism than others. I simply feel they do, as I feel
Americans bear a higher burden to oppose racism. Of course, right
now... I seem to be the only one in AADP who opposes anti-Semitism...
in respect to those I see, such as you, who are demonstrating it
on that side of the Atlantic. IMHO.
>Euro
>
>PS: By the way, do you deny, in your exercise to rewrite history, that
>Hitler was actually elected as Germany's Reichskanzler in 1933?
Whatever does that have to do with this dialog? I get the impression
that you're a bit anti-German, as well, euro. You don't seem to 'like
ANYBODY,' do you? Except murderers that is. The dynamics of
Hitler becoming Reichkanzler of Germany, are complex, and have
nothing to do with the dialog here. Nor would I even presume that
you have the intellectual capacity to understand those dynamics.
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:1pfgrv0ul7a1g7n8i...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 05:57:52 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
> >??????:aodbrvcsla8q6dssl...@4ax.com...
> >> On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 10:55:56 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
> >> >??????:i9hoqvc9e0pd5k9e4...@4ax.com...
> >> >> On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 13:59:05 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> <no longer relevant past comments clipped>
>
> >> >I refer you back to one question I already raised: do you know what
> >> >Kollektivschuld means?
> >> >
> >> Jesus... you are utterly...utterly ignorant. I well know what it
means...and
> >> it would simply pander to your pathetic drivel to presume I should play
your
> >> silly game. That word is an EXCUSE.. plain and simple. Intending to
> >> deny 'individuals' actually committed the atrocities.
> >
> >This word is one of the concepts on which West Germany was built.
>
> Rubbish! Absolute rubbish. That word was used by the ACTUAL
> perpetrators of the holocaust and those who embraced Nazism to 'spread
> the guilt.'
And of course the occupants, who judged the perpetrators of the holocaust,
did nothing to prevent them from "spreading the guilt"... Poor, pathetic PV.
(remaining heinous and ad hominem attacks snipped, though they actually
would do much to support a measure of confinement of PV in a psychiatric
institution).
Euro
A Planet Visitor
>
>"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>??????:1pfgrv0ul7a1g7n8i...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 05:57:52 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>> >??????:aodbrvcsla8q6dssl...@4ax.com...
>> >> On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 10:55:56 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>> >> >??????:i9hoqvc9e0pd5k9e4...@4ax.com...
>> >> >> On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 13:59:05 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> <no longer relevant past comments clipped>
>>
>> >> >I refer you back to one question I already raised: do you know what
>> >> >Kollektivschuld means?
>> >> >
>> >> Jesus... you are utterly...utterly ignorant. I well know what it means...and
>> >> it would simply pander to your pathetic drivel to presume I should play your
>> >> silly game. That word is an EXCUSE.. plain and simple. Intending to
>> >> deny 'individuals' actually committed the atrocities.
>> >
>> >This word is one of the concepts on which West Germany was built.
>>
>> Rubbish! Absolute rubbish. That word was used by the ACTUAL
>> perpetrators of the holocaust and those who embraced Nazism to 'spread
>> the guilt.'
>
>And of course the occupants, who judged the perpetrators of the holocaust,
>did nothing to prevent them from "spreading the guilt"... Poor, pathetic PV.
Whatever are you raving about, you evil little shit?
>(remaining heinous and ad hominem attacks snipped, though they actually
>would do much to support a measure of confinement of PV in a psychiatric
>institution).
Do you even know what 'ad hominem' MEANS? Of course not... thus
let me again REPEAT those words that YOU CANNOT ADDRESS
in a sensible or responsible manner, knowing that they have destroyed
your 'argument' TOTALLY.
And I enjoy repeating them... since they represent some very fundamental
truths of human character. Human character which is often forged and
tempered in a caldron which tests our very survival and our strength to
overcome the most devastating of calamities. We generally emerge
in smaller number, but STRONGER from such catastrophes, although
losing a great number of our species within those catastrophes. The Jews
most certainly are an example of having emerged much stronger. We
weep at the loss of humanity. We NEVER forget them. But we pick
ourselves up... and rebuild with a more resolute purpose. If only you
were as insightful as I am. But then, what can anyone expect from a
murderer lover, an anti-Semite, a liar, and someone who hates all
mankind (except for murderers) such as you. My words you clipped --
---------------------------------------------------------------
Rubbish! Absolute rubbish. That word [Kollektivschuld] was used by the
ACTUAL perpetrators of the holocaust and those who embraced Nazism to
'spread the guilt.' Most Germans recognized their own destruction when
....
The word [Kollektivschuld] itself. CANNOT help but presume to 'insult
the whole German population.' That's why I have never invoked it.
YOU DID! I speak only of my opinion that as a German, there is a
burden within that which demands a higher respect to the principle of
opposing anti-Semitism. Just as an American has a higher burden
within the idea of slavery as in the past of the U.S., which demands
a higher respect to the principles of opposing racism. There is no
GUILT IMPLIED. Nor is there any SHAME implied in being a
German. There is only the RECOGNITION of the past. Guilt can
only be applied in a personal sense. But a recognition of the circumstances
of one's birth is certainly relevant, in the sense of an individual holding a
weltanschauung, and recognizing where he fits as a human being into
that weltanschauung.
I do not feel guilt or shame about slavery, since I certainly wasn't a
part of it. But, IMHO, the past of my country DEMANDS that I hold
myself to a higher standard in respect to racism. Because of that
undeniable past, I would hope that I do try to hold myself to that higher
standard. I see a Black American, and I see a history of slavery in
the U.S. And this is what I expect from the Germans, and what I
do not find in an individual sense from Jürgen. Rather I find from him,
a firm denial that his birth as a German carries any responsibility to
the past whatsoever. He is certainly welcome to his belief. I find
it rather frightening to believe that we are not a part of the past, and
the present. With the past working to shape our present, even in an
individual sense. It's simply a difference of opinions, since I certainly
cannot say FACTUALLY that Germans bear a higher burden to
oppose anti-Semitism than others. I simply feel they do, as I feel
Americans bear a higher burden to oppose racism. Of course, right
now... I seem to be the only one in AADP who opposes anti-Semitism...
in respect to those I see, such as you, who are demonstrating it
on that side of the Atlantic. IMHO.
Thank you for the opportunity of permitting me to repeat my comment, euro.
PV
>
>Euro (hey... the Germans are ALL to blame)
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:61ijrvo7o5f3tdios...@4ax.com...
Still very much into scatology, PV? After all, if that's where your cultural
level is...
I must however warn you that _you_ are the one raving about "no one really
knows what". Probably not even you... Else, you wouldn't have clipped what
you called "no longer relevant past comments".
Let me thus refresh your memory:
Euro: For politicians, being able to support necessary reforms that are not
popular is sometimes a sign of courage.
Richard: Sometimes, and sometimes it is a show of tyranny. Or do you claim
the German population supported the acts of the Nazis?
Euro: Slippery subject... Historians might tell you that some measures taken
by
the Nazis were actually supported by an important part of the German
population. They may not be the worst ones...
At which stage I had to explain you that the pronoun "they", plural, could
not refer to "an important part of the German population", singular, and
that it thus could only refer to "measures".
Now, the point is: do you consider that the German population opposed
generally the measures taken by the Nazi? If so, how can you prove it? Do
you consider that there were many acts of resistance by the German
population against Hitler (not only in the last months of the regime, but
also, say, in the 30s)? Will you argue, like many Japanese (and German)
revisionists, that the (Japanese or German) people was victim of politicians
who deceited them, and that they are not responsible for the crimes
committed by their past governments?
I'd be interested in hearing what you have to say about this. The remaining,
i.e. many insults you provide everyday on this group, is useless and
therefore snipped.
Euro
> PV (is anyone to blame for the Holocaust?)
A Planet Visitor
what I have recognized as the 'euro method.' Utter some absolutely absurd
and irrelevant comment... usually meant to insult someone or something, or
instead make the most ridiculous claim of 'morality' or being 'polite' about
another... to hide from the bitter defeat you are tasting.
When you rave with that hysterical nonsense, there is little reason to suspect
that you are anything other than 'an evil little shit'? Your implication is that
the allies 'looked the other way,' when judging the perpetrators of the holocaust,
and nothing could be further from the truth. Many escaped... USING the
'excuse' of pointing the fingers at others, and claiming they were 'no different'
from those others. But summary executions of those actually INVOLVED
in the executions in those camps were rather commonplace, in the few days
that followed liberation of those plants. Retribution was often swift and
brutal. Many treated as war criminals on the spot, and simply executed on
the spot. Those who escaped were more commonly the lower level bureaucratic
functionaries... those who 'pushed the papers,' for those who dropped the
pellets. They are the ones who tried to benefit using the gruesome idea of
"Kollektivschuld." I'm beginning to believe that YOU are the one who is
unfamiliar with the meaning of that word... and expected to 'toss it out,' as
presuming you are making sense... while you certainly were not.
>I must however warn you that _you_ are the one raving about "no one really
>knows what". Probably not even you... Else, you wouldn't have clipped what
>you called "no longer relevant past comments".
>
I KNEW it!!! The very first time I've clipped any comment.. BECAUSE it was
no longer relevant. Being between you and Richard. And others complain that
I NEVER clip. Jesus.... this is monstrous.
>Let me thus refresh your memory:
>
>Euro: For politicians, being able to support necessary reforms that are not
>popular is sometimes a sign of courage.
>
>Richard: Sometimes, and sometimes it is a show of tyranny. Or do you claim
>the German population supported the acts of the Nazis?
>
>Euro: Slippery subject... Historians might tell you that some measures taken by
>the Nazis were actually supported by an important part of the German
>population. They may not be the worst ones...
>
>At which stage I had to explain you that the pronoun "they", plural, could
>not refer to "an important part of the German population", singular, and
>that it thus could only refer to "measures".
>
The reasons I clipped them, sport... Is because they are NOT RELEVANT
to OUR DIALOG. You must take them up with Richard. I do not intend
to argue YOUR side or RICHARD'S side in our argument. And I was
saving you some embarrassment, because of the stupid way you had
framed your comment to imply that you were speaking of the German
population as being 'the worst ones...' Presume that you WERE speaking
of the German population, as you posed your comment... what word would
you have 'substituted' for 'they,' if you had meant the German population?
In point of fact, you could only use 'they.' They -- being the "German
population."
------------------------------------------
they
they [?ay]
pron
1. people in general: used to refer to people in general when making statements
about the things people do, think, or say
As people and businesses move out of inner cities, bank branches follow, they say.
2. he or she: used instead of “he” or “she” to refer to a person without specifying
gender (informal)
A friend phoned the other day and they told me what you had said.
3. those: an archaic word for “those” (archaic)
[12th century. Old Norse þeir . Ultimately from an Indo-European word meaning “the,
that,” which is also the ancestor of English the, this, that, and there.]
Because English is deficient in that it lacks a gender-neutral third person singular
pronoun, they, together with associated words such as their, is often used in this
role and is a revival of an older use that was once well established in English. In
more formal contexts, and when the individuality of the subject is significant, it is
necessary to use he or she, but this phrase is too cumbersome to provide a solution
in informal conversational usage such as in the sentence Everyone taking the test
should do the best they can.
Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2004. © 1993-2003 Microsoft Corporation. All
rights reserved.
---------------------------------------------------
See the very first definition? PEOPLE IN GENERAL. THINGS PEOPLE DO.
>Now, the point is: do you consider that the German population opposed
>generally the measures taken by the Nazi?
Do you think so?
> If so, how can you prove it?
One does not PROVE an OPINION, you illogical fruitcake... One EXPRESSES
an opinion, based on their subjective framework. When will you ever understand
that FACT and OPINION are not the same?
>Do you consider that there were many acts of resistance by the German
>population against Hitler (not only in the last months of the regime, but
>also, say, in the 30s)?
Do you?
> Will you argue, like many Japanese (and German) revisionists, that the
> (Japanese or German) people was victim of politicians who deceited them,
> and that they are not responsible for the crimes committed by their past
> governments?
Will you?
>I'd be interested in hearing what you have to say about this.
Why? So you can argue that the word "Kollektivschuld.... is one of the
concepts on which West Germany was built"? To 'argue' that a 'collective
guilt' on the part of every German is WHY Germany now prospers? I am
only here to tell you how incredibly ignorant and hateful you are in such
a thought.
You might see this comment to be an insult... but I find your presumed
'argument' to be an insult, and thus will not permit it to be perpetuated,
at least in any dialog you might hold with me. To believe that you might
engage in some 'intellectual pursuit,' with me, based upon such a
disgusting argument is unacceptable to me. It insults the very meaning of
the word 'dialog.' Since it would imply that your 'idea' has MEANING.
It does not. It would be like arguing with a racist, as to whether or not
'racism is a good thing.' There are some arguments that by their very
nature should not be argued. Because simply arguing them, lends some
credence to the belief that they CAN be argued. There are arguments
that are too absurd to even argue. We have here in your argument... one
of those that are simply unworthy of being believed as arguable. So
absurd is the 'theory' you offer. Your 'theory' you expect to 'argue' is
an insult to the rebirth of the Germans and the regeneration of Germany.
Thus, I simply call it radical hate for the Germans, and will not permit
you to perpetuate that hate. Find another outlet for your hate... since
I'll not be a party to it.
Is there ANYONE that you do not hate, euro? I mean... aside from murderers,
and your MESSIAH, that is?
>The remaining,
>i.e. many insults you provide everyday on this group, is useless and
>therefore snipped.
>
LOL... You bring in a dialog you held with Richard, in a comment to me, and
presume THAT is somehow relevant... and then you cut out the heart of the
words that spanked your behind to a rosy-red glow.
PV
>Euro (okay... I agree that thinking such as mine was much to blame for the holocaust)
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:jmhorvso585gquk3k...@4ax.com...(snipped)
> >>
> >> Whatever are you raving about, you evil little shit?
> >
> >Still very much into scatology, PV? After all, if that's where your
cultural
> >level is...
> >
> Your comment had NOTHING to do with the argument...
So for you "little shit" is an argument?
Your dialogue is uninteresting.
Euro
A Planet Visitor
>
>"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>??????:jmhorvso585gquk3k...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 12:58:11 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> 'what's
>Justice?'
>> wrote:
>> >
>(snipped)
>> >>
>> >> Whatever are you raving about, you evil little shit?
>> >
>> >Still very much into scatology, PV? After all, if that's where your
>cultural
>> >level is...
>> >
>> Your comment had NOTHING to do with the argument...
>
>So for you "little shit" is an argument?
>
It's an insult in respect to the fact that you had no argument.
>> >Let me thus refresh your memory:
>> >
>> >Euro: For politicians, being able to support necessary reforms that are not
>> >popular is sometimes a sign of courage.
>> >
>> >Richard: Sometimes, and sometimes it is a show of tyranny. Or do you claim
>> >the German population supported the acts of the Nazis?
>> >
>> >Euro: Slippery subject... Historians might tell you that some measures taken by
>> >the Nazis were actually supported by an important part of the German
>> >population. They may not be the worst ones...
>> >
>> >At which stage I had to explain you that the pronoun "they", plural, could
>> >not refer to "an important part of the German population", singular, and
>> >that it thus could only refer to "measures".
>> >
>> The reasons I clipped them, sport... Is because they are NOT RELEVANT
>> to OUR DIALOG. You must take them up with Richard. I do not intend
>> to argue YOUR side or RICHARD'S side in our argument. And I was
>> saving you some embarrassment, because of the stupid way you had
>> framed your comment to imply that you were speaking of the German
>> population as being 'the worst ones...' Presume that you WERE speaking
>> of the German population, as you posed your comment... what word would
>> you have 'substituted' for 'they,' if you had meant the German population?
>> In point of fact, you could only use 'they.' They -- being the "German
>> population."
>
>Your dialogue is uninteresting.
>
Game... set... match... to PV
PV
>Euro
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:l2n0sv8ttjh3b0jv6...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 14:44:53 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
> >??????:jmhorvso585gquk3k...@4ax.com...
> >> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 12:58:11 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> 'what's
> >Justice?'
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >(snipped)
> >> >>
> >> >> Whatever are you raving about, you evil little shit?
> >> >
> >> >Still very much into scatology, PV? After all, if that's where your
> >cultural
> >> >level is...
> >> >
> >> Your comment had NOTHING to do with the argument...
> >
> >So for you "little shit" is an argument?
> >
> It's an insult in respect to the fact that you had no argument.
It's an insult that shows you didn't understand my argument.
who needs a foreigner to teach him English grammar.
Euro
A Planet Visitor
>
>"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>??????:l2n0sv8ttjh3b0jv6...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 14:44:53 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>> >??????:jmhorvso585gquk3k...@4ax.com...
>> >> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 12:58:11 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> 'what's
>> >Justice?'
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >(snipped)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Whatever are you raving about, you evil little shit?
>> >> >
>> >> >Still very much into scatology, PV? After all, if that's where your
>> >cultural
>> >> >level is...
>> >> >
>> >> Your comment had NOTHING to do with the argument...
>> >
>> >So for you "little shit" is an argument?
>> >
>> It's an insult in respect to the fact that you had no argument.
>
>It's an insult that shows you didn't understand my argument.
How can someone insult something that doesn't EXIST?
>> >> >Let me thus refresh your memory:
>> >> >
>> >> >Euro: For politicians, being able to support necessary reforms that are not
>> >> >popular is sometimes a sign of courage.
>> >> >
>> >> >Richard: Sometimes, and sometimes it is a show of tyranny. Or do you claim
>> >> >the German population supported the acts of the Nazis?
>> >> >
>> >> >Euro: Slippery subject... Historians might tell you that some measures taken by
>> >> >the Nazis were actually supported by an important part of the German
>> >> >population. They may not be the worst ones...
>> >> >
>> >> >At which stage I had to explain you that the pronoun "they", plural, could
>> >> >not refer to "an important part of the German population", singular, and
>> >> >that it thus could only refer to "measures".
>> >> >
>> >> The reasons I clipped them, sport... Is because they are NOT RELEVANT
>> >> to OUR DIALOG. You must take them up with Richard. I do not intend
>> >> to argue YOUR side or RICHARD'S side in our argument. And I was
>> >> saving you some embarrassment, because of the stupid way you had
>> >> framed your comment to imply that you were speaking of the German
>> >> population as being 'the worst ones...' Presume that you WERE speaking
>> >> of the German population, as you posed your comment... what word would
>> >> you have 'substituted' for 'they,' if you had meant the German population?
>> >> In point of fact, you could only use 'they.' They -- being the "German
>> >> population."
>> >
>> >Your dialogue is uninteresting.
>> >
>> Game... set... match... to PV
>>
>
>who needs a foreigner to teach him English grammar.
>
Don't be an ass... You are quite certainly ignorant of the fact that your
comment was constructed in such a manner that I believe even YOU can
no longer figure it out. I notice that you have 'clipped' the proof from
the definition that I provided. So again --
------------------------------------------
they
they [?ay]
pron
1. people in general: used to refer to people in general when making statements
about the things people do, think, or say
As people and businesses move out of inner cities, bank branches follow, they say.
2. he or she: used instead of “he” or “she” to refer to a person without specifying
gender (informal)
A friend phoned the other day and they told me what you had said.
3. those: an archaic word for “those” (archaic)
[12th century. Old Norse þeir . Ultimately from an Indo-European word meaning “the,
that,” which is also the ancestor of English the, this, that, and there.]
Because English is deficient in that it lacks a gender-neutral third person singular
pronoun, they, together with associated words such as their, is often used in this
role and is a revival of an older use that was once well established in English. In
more formal contexts, and when the individuality of the subject is significant, it is
necessary to use he or she, but this phrase is too cumbersome to provide a solution
in informal conversational usage such as in the sentence Everyone taking the test
should do the best they can.
Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2004. © 1993-2003 Microsoft Corporation. All
rights reserved.
---------------------------------------------------
See the very first definition? PEOPLE IN GENERAL. THINGS PEOPLE DO.
When will you ever grow up? You are more in need of a spanking from mommy
than anyone I can imagine. It might have changed your whole life.
PV
>Euro
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:bv93sv88tmuaurmmc...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 13:32:49 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
> >??????:l2n0sv8ttjh3b0jv6...@4ax.com...
> >> On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 14:44:53 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
> >> >??????:jmhorvso585gquk3k...@4ax.com...
> >> >> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 12:58:11 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> 'what's
> >> >Justice?'
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >(snipped)
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Whatever are you raving about, you evil little shit?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Still very much into scatology, PV? After all, if that's where your
> >> >cultural
> >> >> >level is...
> >> >> >
> >> >> Your comment had NOTHING to do with the argument...
> >> >
> >> >So for you "little shit" is an argument?
> >> >
> >> It's an insult in respect to the fact that you had no argument.
> >
> >It's an insult that shows you didn't understand my argument.
>
> How can someone insult something that doesn't EXIST?
This is exactly why I never insult your "arguments", by the way.
Euro
A Planet Visitor
You cannot insult my arguments, euro. Since they represent simply
my opinion... unless I recognize that I am stating a fact. While I
can insult your arguments, because you presume your opinions ARE
FACT.
You insult our species, euro... Plain and simple. You insult innocent
slaves... you insult every victim of murder... and you have consistently
insulted the Jews in various comments lately. I would welcome a
reasonable argument with you... but the concept is beyond you...
just as it is beyond Desmond to hold a reasonable argument. Since you
argue your 'opinions' as fact... since you provide some of the most
unbelievably fatuous comments... since your 'insults' are more
easily recognized as those expressed by 6 year old children when they
are denied access to the swing by another 6 year old...since you
are a toady to the most mindless views of others, simply because
you hope they will return the favor to you... since you are not immune
to lies and deception when you find it might serve your purpose... since
you have offered conflicting views within the very same post...since your
views seem to argue that murderers are 'more important' than ordinary
citizens, seeming to have a high regard for murderers and a low regard
for our species in general... since you demonstrated the clear behavior
of Buridan's ass... since you have clear anti-American sentiments
far above that of any reasonable mind... since you seem to be obsessed
with my bowel habits... and since you have recently demonstrated a clear
anti-Semitism. In fact, the only differences I have discerned between
you and Desmond, is that you appear to not be a racist, and do not post
obscenities presuming they can substitute for articulate dialog. The problem
is... your presumed 'articulate dialog,' although not obscene... is certainly a
winding, twisted, tangled assembly of meaningless words.. hooked together
in what seems to be a random fashion, with you going to your 'dictionary,'
picking out a random word, and then trying to form a meaningful sentence
constructed from that word.
Sorry... but all of those factors mitigate against any possibility of holding a
rational argument with you.
PV
>Euro
Euro says -- ""Murderers are humane, whether you like it or not" See -
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=humane
Euro says -- "Goebbels was polite in his propaganda" See --
http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/goeb1.htm
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:ndndsv40fcd7c095u...@4ax.com...
Quite right, PV. You have none.
Euro
A Planet Visitor
My arguments are NOT based on asserting that 'Goebbels was polite.' [1]
Or that I change my mind three times in the same post regarding
how families affect Justice [2]. Or that I call murderers "humane" [3].
Or that John Wayne Gacy has the same "human rights" as any non-criminals [4].
Or that murderers are more valuable to me than innocent slaves [5]. Or
that it is 'moral' to elevate a murderer to a place where millions of humans
would be required to call that murderer BLESSED [6]. Ot that it was
a 'collective guilt' which was the reason for the rebuilding of West
Germany. [7] Those are YOUR 'arguments' (sic).
In addition to a great number of other diseased and gangerous ideas that
seem to have infected your mental thought processes.
[1] Your words --
"At least, Goebbels was polite in his propaganda" See --
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=d8232deaf4cfd86aa600b816fd947ca8%40news.meganetnews.com
[2] Your words --
"I made a claim of principle, that families have nothing to do
with justice."
"Justice concerns also the families of victims and murderers."
"justice should, on the contrary, be compassion for the murderer's family"
"hence the feelings of the victims' families should not be instrumentalized to
justify a harder penalty;"
"the tears from one side (the victims' family) cannot be compensated
by the tears from another side (the murderers' family)."
"I never alluded to pity for murderers, but to pity for the murderers'
families."
What an unbelievable assortment of Machiavellian, ignominious, disingenuous,
feckless, sophistic, and offensive, double-speak nonsense. See --
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=98ecf84d186fb6f02671ac97f3157aec%40news.meganetnews.com
[3] Your words --
"because murderers are HUMANE, whether you like it or not."
"But since murderers are humane..."
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=5bfda818764410613bc12ca4df5b16ba%40meganetnews.com
[4] Your words --
"Do you find that John Wayne Gacy is an animal who does not enjoy the
same human rights as you do?" See --
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=a5ccea6e7e4217cf160862d1c39b026740news.meganetnews.com
[5] Your words --
"That would lead me to the conclusion that I should abolish death penalty."
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=c80a9ef0a3cea5a2e77e8fc9f80eb05d%40news.meganetnews.com
[6] Your words --
"You will also note that Lustiger is, in France, one of the prominent
activists for the beatification of Jacques Flesch, sentenced to death and
executed in France in 1957 for the murder of a police officer following a
bungled robbery.
http://www.catholicdigest.org/stories/200108106a.html
Thanks for giving me the opportunity to stress the great moral qualities of
Lustiger" See --
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=dd7b24844c1b79d34bac9efbb48e2fcd%40news.meganetnews.com
[7] Your words in speaking of 'Collective guilt.' --
"This word is one of the concepts on which West Germany was built."
PV
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/desmond_gimmick_index.html
>Euro
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:ohunsvsclhm15f8g3...@4ax.com...
Neither are mine. Besides, my arguments are not based on insulting others,
or on twisting their statements.
(snipped)
> You insult our species, euro...
The only one who uses insults here is you. Either directly, when you insult
persons because of the ideas they promote - without even trying to address
those ideas.
Or indirectly, when, for instance, you promote your views on species.
Weren't you the one who argued that "murderers didn't bring an iota of
benefit to our species" and became purely hysterical when I asked why they
should?
Euro
(remaining PV lies snipped)
A Planet Visitor
Of course they are... You presume YOUR arguments are 'polite.' Right
above. While you have claimed that Goebbels was "polite in his propaganda."
You follow his methods quite rigidly in dispensing your own propaganda,
which display an unusual affection for murderers, arguing that we have no
'right' to deprive them of their 'human right' to FREEDOM. Your words --
"At least, Goebbels was polite in his propaganda" See --
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=d8232deaf4cfd86aa600b816fd947ca8%40news.meganetnews.com
>Besides, my arguments are not based on insulting others, or on twisting their statements.
>
See right there that you presume YOUR arguments are 'polite'? Just
as you feel Goebbels was ALSO "polite in his propaganda." What a
hypocrite you are.
When will you possibly have something of value to actually say? Rather
than worrying about the fact that I point out the flaws, contradictions,
and prejudices that you demonstrate when you DO try to make a point
that is not intended to preen yourself in the hope that others might not
see you as I see you?
>(snipped)
>
>> You insult our species, euro...
>
>The only one who uses insults here is you. Either directly, when you insult
>persons because of the ideas they promote - without even trying to address
>those ideas.
What 'ideas' are those, sport? These perhaps --
[1] Your words --
"At least, Goebbels was polite in his propaganda" See --
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=d8232deaf4cfd86aa600b816fd947ca8%40news.meganetnews.com
[2] In an absolutely conflicted assortment of Machiavellian, ignominious,
disingenuous, feckless, sophistic, and offensive, double-speak nonsense.
ALL IN ONE POST. Your words --
"I made a claim of principle, that families have nothing to do with justice."
"Justice concerns also the families of victims and murderers."
"justice should, on the contrary, be compassion for the murderer's family"
"hence the feelings of the victims' families should not be instrumentalized to
justify a harder penalty;"
"the tears from one side (the victims' family) cannot be compensated
by the tears from another side (the murderers' family)."
"I never alluded to pity for murderers, but to pity for the murderers'
families." See --
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=98ecf84d186fb6f02671ac97f3157aec%40news.meganetnews.com
[3] Your words --
"because murderers are HUMANE, whether you like it or not."
"But since murderers are humane..."
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=5bfda818764410613bc12ca4df5b16ba%40meganetnews.com
[4] Your words --
"Do you find that John Wayne Gacy is an animal who does not enjoy the
same human rights as you do?" See --
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=a5ccea6e7e4217cf160862d1c39b026740news.meganetnews.com
You stated "And that is true." In reply to the question of John Wayne Gacy
having the same 'human rights' as any innocent person. See -
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=40383cc79857308eb110320ca87bc907%40news.meganetnews.com
[5] When choosing between abolishing the DP and 'saving' all murderers from the
DP, or abolishing slavery and freeing all slaves in a society that practices both --
Your words --
"That would lead me to the conclusion that I should abolish death penalty."
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=c80a9ef0a3cea5a2e77e8fc9f80eb05d%40news.meganetnews.com
[6] In expressing the 'great moral qualities' of a RC Cardinal who wants
to elevate an executed murderer to a role which would demand that millions
refer to that murderer as BLESSED -- Your words --
"You will also note that Lustiger is, in France, one of the prominent
activists for the beatification of Jacques Flesch, sentenced to death and
executed in France in 1957 for the murder of a police officer following a
bungled robbery.
http://www.catholicdigest.org/stories/200108106a.html
Thanks for giving me the opportunity to stress the great moral qualities of
Lustiger" See --
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=dd7b24844c1b79d34bac9efbb48e2fcd%40news.meganetnews.com
[7] Your words in speaking of 'Collective guilt.' --
"This word is one of the concepts on which West Germany was built."
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=6a7f4c90ad29d61171fb19a75c4359d6%40news.meganetnews.com
Then saying that the word 'collective guilt' "targets the whole German
population..." How bigoted can you be, euro?
>
>Or indirectly, when, for instance, you promote your views on species.
>Weren't you the one who argued that "murderers didn't bring an iota of
>benefit to our species" and became purely hysterical when I asked why they
>should?
Once again you lie. Since your statement was in respect to all of our species.
Your words... you little liar... were "Is anyone supposed to "provide an
iota of benefit for our species"? Why should they?" See --
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=3ea20de1%241_6%40news.meganetnews.com
You expanded on the comment.. by arguing "is ANYONE" supposed to
provide an iota of benefit for our species? And answering in the negative.
You are the one who became hysterical at the thought that murder provides
no benefit for our species, and as usual, presumed that EVERYONE is
the same as a murderer.
PV
>
>Euro (Goebbels was polite)
>
>(remaining PV lies snipped)