Shocking Real World Events by dreamtrove

I think it actually goes something like this..

Moussaoui: "I am a member of Al Queda. I was learning to fly planes so that I could crash them into buildings, kill thousands of infidels and claim my virgins. BUT. It was not these planes, it was a different attack that never happened so you can't kill me!"

The Prosecution (Played for effect by Jack Nickelson) "On the one hand this guy never had a chance to kill anybody and, since he's mentally subnormal perhaps he never would. Since there is no law called _taking flying lessons with intent_ maybe the sucker is even innocent. Who knows? But once in a while your honor ya just have to say _what the f**k? And fry the bastard anyway. Am I right?"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 7, 2006 5:15 AM

CARTOON

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Man with no links to Al Qaeda awaits execution for the crime of not being white or a christian. Or possibly for having and unpronouncable name like Moussaoui. Moo Sowie?

What Fletch said.

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
US seeks to kill Russia-Iran Nuke deal so it can invade, kill millions, steal oil, and bring homocracy to Persia.

Uhh, I'm just curious. Does anyone here actually think the world would be a safer place with Iran having nuclear weapons? Particularly when one considers that their president has called for the extermination of Israel, and has denied that the holocaust of WWII ever actually happened? I for one, don't want to see him with a pea-shooter, much less nukes. But then, maybe I'm just the distrustful sort who doesn't like seeing raving maniacs with nukes.

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Israel openly seeks to assassinate democratically elected leaders of the nation of Palestine, refuses peace offering.

Uh, the way I heard it, Israel warned Hamas not to renew attacks against them (an entirely reasonable, civilized request in my opinion) or their leaders would be subject to assassination.

ie: "Play nice with us and we'll play nice with you. Try to pull a fast one, and we'll cut you down." Again, entirely reasonable to me.

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Crash beats out Brokeback Mountain as a result of being a better movie.

Haven't seen either, but, based upon the reviews of people whose opinion I respect, I'm glad I didn't. I didn't like the one I did see (Munich). Then maybe I'm not like a lot of movie-goers. I'd prefer to see something I would actually enjoy (and would make me leave the theatre feeling better), rather than something which would just irritate the crap out of me, and/or depress me and make me want to jump off a building. I have enough problems of my own without paying to be depressed and/or irritated.

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Military Recruiters to spy on, kill college kids.

Oh dear. Been hanging around the pirates lately, haven't you?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 7, 2006 9:39 AM

Sorry if the truth offends you, just tellin' like it is.

Quote:
Does anyone here actually think the world would be a safer place with Iran having nuclear weapons?

Of course not. Of course it was Pakistan that was in quesiton, not Iran, but a ditto no to that too. But some idiot thinks The world will be safer if India has them. And he's president of the United States.

Quote:
Particularly when one considers that their president has called for the extermination of Israel, and has denied that the holocaust of WWII ever actually happened?

Fortunately, it's a theocracy, and the president has no power, or so the Bushies keep telling me. But anyway, who hasn't? I mean among our allies. Certainly the UAE has. Hell, so have the Saudis. Oh, my, what friends we have now. Why don't we just sell nukes to Hamas and see what happens? Well why not, now that we've broken the treaty someone else will. Actually, this nuke deal, it has the potential to push Bush down to "Worse than Kerry." One thing Kerry said that I agreed with was we needed to negotiate and end to weeny dictatorships with nukes. Thanks to Bush, a treaty is now invalid which blocked weeny dictatorship having nukes. Not that weeny dictatorships ever cared, but people who might sell to them would have. Now China is free to sell nukes to Chavez. Which they will now do.

Quote:
Haven't seen either, but, based upon the reviews of people whose opinion I respect, I'm glad I didn't.

Neither have I. I like Ang Lee, but I also like Paul Haggis. I don't think glofying homosexuality is something worth doing, like ever, but esp. with AIDS on the march. But objectively, my comment was drawn from the IMDB stats, which show that the viewers clearly prefered Crash to BBM, so the fact that the Academy also did should not be viewed as some sort of right-wing subversive move, the way the media seems to be viewing it. Anyway, Crash made 77 on IMDB's top 205, BBM failed to make it at all.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 7, 2006 9:41 AM

Ps.

Actually, Hamas offered to open peace talks and Israel refused. They're current position is that all jewish settlements have to be removed from the West Bank and Gaza, which oddly is identical to Sharon's own stance. It's a lot better than they're previous position, which is the position the UAE still holds: "Israel must be destroyed."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 7, 2006 9:50 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

dreamtrove wrote:
Tuesday, March 07, 2006 03:59

South African leader accused of rape of which he is unbelievably guilty as usual. ( I have no comment on this, as I don't know anything about it in the 1st place)

Crash beats out Brokeback Mountain as a result of being a better movie. ( Hey, you may be right. Didn't see either of those two, but I did like Capote while hated Goodluck, Goodbye and Good riddence. )

Rep. Bill Thomas throws in towel over nothing in particular, possibly Port deal. ( No clue 'bout this one either )

Those are the only 3 which made any sense. The rest got completely discombobulated by your filter. I'd get a new filter, and quick.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 7, 2006 9:52 AM

STORYMARK

Quote:
Originally posted by Fletch2:
I think it actually goes something like this..

The Prosecution (Played for effect by Jack Nickelson) "On the one hand this guy never had a chance to kill anybody and, since he's mentally subnormal perhaps he never would. Since there is no law called _taking flying lessons with intent_ maybe the sucker is even innocent. Who knows? But once in a while your honor ya just have to say _what the f**k? And fry the bastard anyway. Am I right?"

It's nice to see that more and more people are becoming comfortable with the selective application of our constitution.

It'll make it that much easier to toss it out entirely when it becomes really inconvenient.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 7, 2006 10:16 AM

Tell me that it isn't a sarcastic but generally true rendition of both sides of the case?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 7, 2006 10:48 AM

STORYMARK

I don't see how. I am not aware of anyone throwing out the constitution to protect him.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 7, 2006 11:23 AM

CARTOON

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
But some idiot thinks The world will be safer if India has them.

Well, unless I'm mistaken (and that happens occasionally)

-- India has been a nuclear power since the 1970's.

Secondly, I don't hear the leader of India calling for the annihilation of one his neighbors. (Well, yeah, the Indies and Pakistani's don't exactly see eye to eye on Kashmir -- and a few other things -- but I haven't heard either calling for the other's total destruction.)

(You'd think that two countries could get along better over a region named after a Led Zeppelin song.)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 7, 2006 12:28 PM

SHADYGLEN

How about South Dakota takes possession of all uteri.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 7, 2006 1:19 PM

Quote:
How about South Dakota takes possession of all uteri.

From the RTL PoV I considered "SD bans genocide of next generation" but I really wanted to avoid the subject.

I guess no one caught the obvious angle, which was, all of these stories were headlines I picked up that had thick standard media-slant spin on them, and completely reversed the spin. You're headline is more or less the way the media portrays that story so my rtl one would be the reverse. But I really really would like to avoid this topic. It's a big distraction.

Anyway, I'm not sure I agree with all of the things I posted, I was just being reactionary and completely reversing the media spin on each headline.

I strongly suspect the SA guy is guilty, because this story has been kicking around for a while.

I'm more or less indifferent to the looney who thinks he's Al Qaeda, but he should be institutionalize, not hung. In case anyone missed this detail, he does not actually have any ties to Al Qaeda, *it's all in his head.* He's a fruitcake. But not one who actually blew anything up.

I haven't seen either flim.

I don't know why Thomas give up, I was just throwing in a timing related suggestion.

I'm not particularly opposed to recruiters on campus.

The debt is a problem, it crossed the $8.2B limit at some point over the weekend, but the media for some reason is talking about it as a possible future event because they're using data from last year, and yet no one has okayed the debt ceiling to be raised.

Quote:
Well, unless I'm mistaken (and that happens occasionally) -- India has been a nuclear power since the 1970's.

Sort of, but not like this.

Cartoon, I kind of agree with you on this one.

I actually support India on the Kashmir dispute, and in general, I think India is much more the sort of state that the US should have as allies, ie. capitalist democracy with real power, democracy and generally civilized, as opposed to military dictatorship pakistan in agressive looney land. But I think that it violates the treaty and so we can't do it without having Mr. January sell nukes to Bin Laden.

But knowing that India and Pakistan are caught in an arms race and openly arming one side is an invitation to a nuclear black market. If we lose Pakistan as an ally to someone who *will* arm her, that being China, then china gains a corridor to Iran. The China-Pakistan-Iran scenario is a potentially devestating one for our little mideast excursion. While I oppose our mideast excursion, I don't want China to have it, and I would support defending it against a communist takeover.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 7, 2006 1:26 PM

CAUSAL

Quote:
Originally posted by cartoon:
Oh dear. Been hanging around the pirates lately, haven't you?

Those damned pirates!

________________________________________________________________________
I wish I had a magical wish-granting plank.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 7, 2006 1:27 PM

CAUSAL

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Ps.

Actually, Hamas offered to open peace talks and Israel refused. They're current position is that all jewish settlements have to be removed from the West Bank and Gaza, which oddly is identical to Sharon's own stance. It's a lot better than they're previous position, which is the position the UAE still holds: "Israel must be destroyed."

Attribution? Based on the stuff I've seen, it's basically both sides refusing to budge.

________________________________________________________________________
I wish I had a magical wish-granting plank.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 7, 2006 1:43 PM

CARTOON

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Anyway, I'm not sure I agree with all of the things I posted, I was just being reactionary and completely reversing the media spin on each headline.

I thought it was a bit strange -- I mean, even for you.

Seriously, you got me. I thought you were serious. Oh well. Not as young (and alert) as I used to be. Back in the day...

Oh, never mind. I already forgot what I was going to say.

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Cartoon, I klind of agree with you on this one.

You have any idea how long I waited for the other foot to fall on that one? There's always a "but" -- but this time, there was no "but". I must be losing it.

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
But

Oh. There's the "but". Knew there had to be one somewhere.

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
But knowing that India and Pakistan are caught in an arms race and openly arming one side is an invitation to a nuclear black market. If we lose Pakistan as an ally to someone who *will* arm her, that being China, then china gains a corridor to Iran. The China-Pakistan-Iran scenario is a potentially devestating one for our little mideast excursion. While I oppose our mideast excursion, I don't want China to have it, and I would support defending it against a communist takeover.

Yeah. Sort of like that Star Trek episode where the Klingons and Federation were each backing different sides in a dispute. Very scary. Klingons, I mean.

And, oh, yes. By all means -- avoid the pirates.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 7, 2006 2:02 PM

I think the world would be safest with no nuclear weapons at all, and especially out of the hands of the one country we know for a fact is actually willing to use them...

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
You should never give powers to a leader you like that you’d hate to have given to a leader you fear

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 7, 2006 2:35 PM

Cartoon,

Lol

There's actually a serious side to this. Both Pakistan and Iran are Chinese allies. If Pakistan ceases to be our ally, that gives China a red corridor. It means they directly border us in Iraq, and if anyone recallls Korean and Vietnam, the effect of being in a conflict which was bordered by Chinese forces. Furthermore, it means that almost completely surround us in Afghanistan.

The addition of India to our alliance does little for us, since we cannot use that without a direct military confrontation with China, which we will never risk. So suddenly we have massive China corridor with border support to anyone who they choose to support. And don't think they won't. If China sees an opportunity to take control of the region by supporting one of our opponents, they will do so. And we can't do jack about it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 7, 2006 4:25 PM

KHYRON

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
I think the world would be safest with no nuclear weapons at all, and especially out of the hands of the one country we know for a fact is actually willing to use them...

France?

Well, Chirac did say they'd use them if France were subject to terror attacks...

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 7, 2006 4:35 PM

Quote:
France?

Well, Chirac did say they'd use them if France were subject to terror attacks...

France is way up there on the list of countries that should *not* have nuclear weapons, as one of the only powers to have used nuclear weapons post-cold war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 8, 2006 4:47 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Khyron:
France?

Well, Chirac did say they'd use them if France were subject to terror attacks...

Nope, word's is cheap, I'm talking about actions, people who actually used nuclear weapons against civilian populations...

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
You should never give powers to a leader you like that you’d hate to have given to a leader you fear

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 8, 2006 9:55 AM

WALKERHOUND

Quote:
I think the world would be safest with no nuclear weapons at all

reminds me of one of those philosophical question thing's.

you have a time machine and can go back and change one thing do you....

a.kill Hitler
b.kill the guy that invented gun powder (off course till it was superseded by other explosives gunpowder was rather useful stuff)

so c. kill the guy that came up with the idea to use it to propel small weights of lead and iron.

and that citizen always picking on the French

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 8, 2006 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Citizen:

people who actually used nuclear weapons against civilian populations...

Oh! You mean democrats!

Walkerhound:

a) because the world is not going to randomly come up with another of these.

If you kill the inventor of XYZ death thing, someoene else will invent it. But Eistein would be a better target if you were going to.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 8, 2006 10:58 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Some people believe that society is better when everyone is packing a piece. But they reverse themselves when it comes to explosive nuclear warheads. Personally? I think every nation should have at least three, along with ICBM delivery capability. I'll bet we'd all be a lot nicer to each other if we never knew where a warhead might be lobbed from....

---------------------------------
Free as in freedom, not beer.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 8, 2006 11:32 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Dreamtrove:
Oh! You mean democrats!

Because as we all know the Republicans wouldn't have done it, they'd of prayed for peace, and since they are all saints of the highest calibre and as I’m sure Cartoon will agree God is always on their side, everyone would have immediately put done their weapons and we'd be living in a land of milk and honey. Or something else if Milk and Honey ain’t your thing.

Or, we can start living in the real world where Republicans are as bad (or as good) as Democrats and the Left is as bad (or as good) as the Right. You know, the real world, where all those people you desperately try to convince everyone is actually a socialist is, in fact, rightwing

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
You should never give powers to a leader you like that you’d hate to have given to a leader you fear

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 8, 2006 2:23 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Citizen:
Republicans wouldn't have done it

Ah, something else we agree on.

Quote:
they'd of prayed for peace, and since they are all saints of the highest calibre and as I’m sure Cartoon will agree God is always on their side, everyone would have immediately put done their weapons and we'd be living in a land of milk and honey. Or something else if Milk and Honey ain’t your thing.

Still not a Christian.

Quote:
Or, we can start living in the real world where Republicans are as bad as Democrats

Um, which world is this?

Quote:
everyone is actually a socialist

Nope, not me. Bush maybe. But then Bush is a democrat. When everyone on my side who hasn't figured that out yet figures that out, they'll feel stupid. When everyone who hasn't figured that out on your side figures that out, you'll come and join our side. Except for Fletch, who will be elated.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 8, 2006 2:32 PM

I don't see any point in discussing it DT. I'm talking about the terms everyone uses, where the Right is as bad or as good as the Left. Your using the ones you've made up, which you've decided are correct, where right == good and left == evil which your convinced is correct and everyone else is wrong. So there's no point in discussing it.

Edit (a few clarifications):

Quote:
Still not a Christian.

That was more a swipe at Cartoon, because he's an ignorant moron with a consistently smarmy self important superior attitude. He has thoroughly earned my contempt, but it wasn't meant for you, sorry.

Quote:
But then Bush is a democrat.

Yes, he just happens to be called a Republican, the son of a Republican, elected as Republican by Republican voters. Keep reaching.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
You should never give powers to a leader you like that you’d hate to have given to a leader you fear

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 8, 2006 2:49 PM

Can I still be elated? Been a while since that happened....

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 8, 2006 3:16 PM

Sorry Fletch, didn't realize you were on the Bush is Clinton page. I'm never sure where you stand actually. It's occurred to me that you blanketly oppose. I have to confess I've done it some myself.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 8, 2006 3:21 PM

I dont think Bush is Clinton.

I know Bush is not very conservative. I know he seems to value loyalty over competance. I also know that you dont have to be conservative to be a Republican, and that if you are unwilling to play the religion card then you probably wont make the primary.

Oh, and as the most powerfull man in the world Clinton should be able to do better than Monica. Halle Berry at least....

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 8, 2006 3:26 PM

KHYRON

Quote:
Originally posted by Fletch2:
Oh, and as the most powerfull man in the world Clinton should be able to do better than Monica. Halle Berry at least....

Maybe he did and we don't know about it.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 8, 2006 3:30 PM

Halle has more taste

It was a low blow anyway.... it was what the Italian press said during the Monica thing. Apparently trophy mistresses are a status symbol in the Italian ruling elite. Monica, though a nice enough girl, feel short of the standard the Italian press expected.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 8, 2006 6:53 PM