Political speculation on FIREFLY by reginaroadie

Quote:
Originally posted by christhecynic:
...I can assure you that the American Civil War had nothing to do with slavery...

...it is proof of exactly how bad our educational system has become...

*Applause from the homeschooled guy in the back.*

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

Monday, April 4, 2005 1:38 PM

DIETCOKE

Interesting take! Actually the Civil War was about state independence vs. a united states government, not slavery. Yes, I agree that it is more about Republicans and Demoncrats but keep in mind the Republicans don't want big government meddling in their business. That is more Mal and Republican.

I'm always amused by this topic and how both Republicans and Democrats see Mal as a member of their party. :)

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

Monday, April 4, 2005 1:59 PM

POTEMKINVILLAGER

Bingo!

First: given incidental inside info, reginaroadie ain't American (think: Saskatchewan, Canada).

Wars, civil or international, have never been about moral ideals. Wars have always been about acquisition, whether it be territorial or markets. Moral ideals such as (anti-) slavery, or "democracy" have served their purpose only as propoganda tools to justify killing actions to the general populace, for obvious political necessity and for gathering would-be troops to the cause.

Sigh. Rant, rant, rant. I'm either preaching to the converted, or not.

--The trouble with worse is that it always seems normal.--

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

Monday, April 4, 2005 2:01 PM

REGINAROADIE

First of all, as my sig name should point out, I am Canadian. And even though history was one of my favorite high school subjects, I only have a basic rudimentary understanding of the American Civil War. I know for a fact that Canada had the Underground Railroad going on at the same time, wich was set up for slaves to escape across the border into a country that actually promoted immigration and international freedom.

Don't states and provinces govern themselves slightly? Even though they're all under one system of rule, each individual state or province has their own set of rules and taxes. Or does that only apply to Canada.

Republicans don't want big government meddling in their business. So why is Bush waging pointless wars over oil, stomping on human rights, planning on destroying Social Security and bullying other countries into becoming the United States of Texas? Bush is the kind of man that Mal and Co. would rob or take down in a heartbeat.

"NO HAI ES BANDAI. THERE IS....NO.....BAND. AND YET....WE HEAR A BAND."

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

Monday, April 4, 2005 2:47 PM

DIETCOKE

Quote:
Originally posted by reginaroadie:
First of all, as my sig name should point out, I am Canadian. And even though history was one of my favorite high school subjects, I only have a basic rudimentary understanding of the American Civil War. I know for a fact that Canada had the Underground Railroad going on at the same time, wich was set up for slaves to escape across the border into a country that actually promoted immigration and international freedom.

Don't states and provinces govern themselves slightly? Even though they're all under one system of rule, each individual state or province has their own set of rules and taxes. Or does that only apply to Canada.

Republicans don't want big government meddling in their business. So why is Bush waging pointless wars over oil, stomping on human rights, planning on destroying Social Security and bullying other countries into becoming the United States of Texas? Bush is the kind of man that Mal and Co. would rob or take down in a heartbeat.

"NO HAI ES BANDAI. THERE IS....NO.....BAND. AND YET....WE HEAR A BAND."

As the person above stated, it's about bigger issues, but some issues gather the attention of general public, i.e. slavery being an issue of the time. But make no mistake, that was not what caused the war, but it did become a pro-war cry of the north. We are dealing with a global economy. China is growing rapidly in their economy but still remaining a Communist country. I have spent over a month in China and I have no desire for them to the the global economic power!

Make no mistake, it is not a pointless war over oil, it is about keeping stability in the Middle East. It's about maintaining freedom. The middle eastern religions are a threat to the western way of life just as the evangelical Christians are a threat to a woman's freedom.

Social Security? Doesn't work. My mother, who lives in Wyoming, only gets $599 a month to live on. That is way below the poverity level in the US. The system just doesn't work any more and if it doesn't change there will be nothing left for me when I am old.

My cousins and uncle live in Toronto and I know that Canadians do not get a good education about our country, just as we do not get a good one about yours.

Don't beleive everything you see on TV.

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

Monday, April 4, 2005 7:20 PM

SIGMANUNKI

Quote:
Originally posted by christhecynic:

As a northerner I can assure you that the American Civil War had nothing to do with slavery.

paraphrased.

Interviewer: Why did the Civil war start?
Apu: Well, aside from the economic...
Interviewer: Just say Slavery.
Apu: Slavery.

*Apu get his US citizenship*

----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 3:07 AM

GRRARRG

Quote:
Originally posted by reginaroadie:
but I'm sure that there are some Republicans here that detest the Alliance.

I don't know, most of us enjoy oppressing people's rights and torturing little girls.

Seriously, "some?" If Bush's regime were anything like the Alliance, Iraq would be a US territory now, and we'd be constantly taking over other countries. There's not a member of this board, Republican or not, who wants that. Think what you will about possible ulterior motives; the main issues motivating the war in Iraq were squelching terrorists and supporters of terrorism and breaking apart a government that enjoyed oppressing people's rights and torturing little girls. How about that, Saddam was just like the Alliance, just with less power. I'm not saying that Bush is a Browncoat, but I think his political ideals regarding personal freedom are much farther from the Alliance than Saddam's are.

Could Firefly be an allegory warning against the dangers of a powerful government that meddles in the business of smaller governments? Sure, and it's a good and valid warning. But Bush's motivation and the Alliance's motivation are quite different.

I mock you with my monkey pants

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 3:17 AM

BROWNCOAT1

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

Quote:
Originally posted by christhecynic:
Quote:
Originally posted by reginaroadie:
As we see in the show, Mal is a hard core Independent. But at the same time, he abhorrs the idea of slavery.

As a northerner I can assure you that the American Civil War had nothing to do with slavery.

Lincoln said very clearly that he was not interested in ending slavery if it would harm the union. I hope very sincerely that you are not an American, if you are then it is proof of exactly how bad our educational system has become.

Remember that the Union proudly counted slave states among its ranks. If memory serves the Confederate constitution had directions on how to outlaw slavery, all that the United States constitution says about slavery is how much a slave is worth and how long you are not allowed to end it for.

We didn’t have Confederate privateers in Portland harbor because of slaves.
Slave states didn’t fight on the Union side to end slavery.

You don’t go into a war against slavery with your own front line pro-slavery.

BRAVO!!!

I am glad to see that someone has actually not fallen for the revisionist history taught in schools these days.

Reginaroadie, you do realize of course that history is written by the victors, right? The winner will always cast themselves in the best possible light and villify the defeated. Been that way since the beginning of time.

I think the true parallel between the Alliance/Independents and the War for Southern Independence (not a Civil War as that is defined as two factions fighting for control of the same government, not independence) is the struggle for independence from an oppressive, all powerful centralized government. It is the right of any people to sever their ties to a governement they feel does not work and establish their own. This is what the South tried to do when they left the Union, and from what we have seen in the series, this is what the Independents did as well. The Alliance, like Lincoln's Union, would not let them go, using force to make them submit and reenter the Alliance.

The underlying message of Firefly is freedom, independence from the manipulation and interference of the government. This was what the South fought for, what the Independents fought for, and what we all long for.

__________________________________________

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

Richmond, VA & surrounding area Firefly Meet Up:
http://firefly.meetup.com/9/boards/

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 3:22 AM

REGINAROADIE

Of course I know that history is written by the winning side. Part of the appeal of FIREFLY is seeing the POV of the losing side of a war. It's just that I don't think that slavery is a political ideology that a new country should aspire to keep. I shudder at the prospect of a country where slavery is of the norm, science is abolished and replaced by a Xtian retoric that says that 6 billion people desceneded from two, and a general hypocritical attitude towards minorities by using the Bible as a tool for subjugation of anyone who isn't a white male. Of course, much of what I said still exists today in the South, but not as overblown as what I could've been if the Confederates won.

"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

We'll keep that in mind when we reminisce about that time in 1812 when after you guys invaded us, we went down to D.C. and burned the White House to the ground.

"NO HAI ES BANDAI. THERE IS....NO.....BAND. AND YET....WE HEAR A BAND."

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 6:19 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by reginaroadie:

We'll keep that in mind when we reminisce about that time in 1812 when after you guys invaded us, we went down to D.C. and burned the White House to the ground.

I thought you were Canadian. You really don't know much about American or British history. Guess you'll be taking credit for Canada's great victory in the Faulkland War. Oh for the days when Canada's mighty fleet ruled the seas, when Africa and India were Canadian provinces, and the sun never set on the Canadian Empire. Then there's Canada's pivotal role in defeating the Japanese in WW2, standing up to keep the Soviets out of Europe, and single-handedly expelling Saddam Hussein from Kuwait in 1991. Not to mention Canada dominance in American football and baseball or Canada's contributions to space exploration and tsunami relief. The list goes on and on. Books are filled with the exploits of other, real nations, that you can take credit for.

For the record, slavery did not cause the American Civil War (Canada did...hahahaha). Actually it was a combination of factors including slavery, regional economic, social, and political differences, and the election of 1860, the reactionaries in South Carolina, Lincoln's irresponsible escaltion of the conflict, etc, etc.

In fact war could have been avoided. Only a handful of states had rebelled. The issue could have and should have been submitted to the courts. Lincoln, however, knew he would lose the court case and gambled for open conflict. This in turn caused the conservatives and moderates (states like Virginia and Tennessee) to abandon the Union.

H

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 6:32 AM

NAKEDANDARTICULATE

NO!NO!NO!!!!
PLEASE STOP!!! LOOK,IM A COMEDIAN AND WHILE I DONT TALK ABOUT IT AS MUCH ON STAGE---I LOVE TALKING ABOUT RELIGION AND POLITICS,BUT PLEEEEEAASSEEE AFTER THIS ELECTION,DONT PUT MY ONLY--FANTASY FROM THE REST OF THE WORLD--YET STILL DEEPLY MOVING AND REAL--SHOW. I DONT WANT TO KNOW IF MAL AND THE CREW IS DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN....NOW I KNOW I SHOULD JUST STOP READING THIS POST--WHICH I WILL, BUT PLEASE, ALL IM SAYING IS DONT TAKE THESE CHARACTERS AND PUT THEM IN TODAYS VERSION OF WHAT A DEMOCRAT AND REPUBLICAN IS BECAUSE FRANKLY NEITHER PARTY IS WHAT THEY ONCE WERE.

"Hamsters is nice."

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 6:37 AM

ZOOT

Quote:
Originally posted by grrarrg:
Quote:
Originally posted by reginaroadie:
but I'm sure that there are some Republicans here that detest the Alliance.

Think what you will about possible ulterior motives; the main issues motivating the war in Iraq were squelching terrorists and supporters of terrorism and breaking apart a government that enjoyed oppressing people's rights and torturing little girls. How about that, Saddam was just like the Alliance, just with less power.

I think I'm going to be ill. Is it only in the UK that we now know that the Iraq war had nothing to do with terrorism (there were NO links between Saddam and Al Qaeda, there were NO weapons of mass destruction blah, blah blah!)? If it was about stopping a government that enjoys opressing people's rights and torturing little girls, why haven't we invaded Saudi Arabia (to name but one other sovreign state that's down right mean)?

Let's face it, as stated already above, the Iraq war, like all others, was about economies and money . . .

Okay, I'm lost, I'm angry, and I'm
armed.

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 6:42 AM

ELSUPREMO

To claim the American Civil war had 'nothing to do with slavery' is far more inaccurate then saying it was fought just to end slavery. The fact is while the war wasn't fought explicitly to end slavery the political actions (such as the Missouri Compromise, and later the compromise of 1850, and Kansas-Nebraska act) that attempted to address the issue and maintain some sort of balance between free and slave states were a major contributing factor to the tensions that resulted in the war.

I think the independents in firefly are clearly supposed to represent the confederacy, but only as it's been portrayed in many old westerns. The idea of the disillusioned former confederate soldier moving out west to get away has long been a staple of that genre and I think that's as deep as the parallels between the independents and confederates go.

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 6:54 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by nakedandarticulate:
NO!NO!NO!!!!
PLEASE STOP!!! LOOK,IM A COMEDIAN AND WHILE I DONT TALK ABOUT IT AS MUCH ON STAGE---I LOVE TALKING ABOUT RELIGION AND POLITICS,BUT PLEEEEEAASSEEE AFTER THIS ELECTION,DONT PUT MY ONLY--FANTASY FROM THE REST OF THE WORLD--YET STILL DEEPLY MOVING AND REAL--SHOW. I DONT WANT TO KNOW IF MAL AND THE CREW IS DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN....NOW I KNOW I SHOULD JUST STOP READING THIS POST--WHICH I WILL, BUT PLEASE, ALL IM SAYING IS DONT TAKE THESE CHARACTERS AND PUT THEM IN TODAYS VERSION OF WHAT A DEMOCRAT AND REPUBLICAN IS BECAUSE FRANKLY NEITHER PARTY IS WHAT THEY ONCE WERE.

"Hamsters is nice."

Can't help it...and since you asked.

Republicans- Mal, Zoe, Jayne, and River (pro small-business, anti-big govt., pro life, Ex-military, NRA, pro-marriage, crazy...describes some or all).

Democrats- Kaylee, Simon, Inarra, Book (Book is a conservative Democrat, Simon a NE intellectual, Kaylee a union girl, and Inarra...she's a whore).

So its a cross section...just like America.

H

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 7:37 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:

Republicans- Mal, Zoe, Jayne, and River

Democrats- Kaylee, Simon, Inarra, Book

And what about Wash??

Also, I disagree about Kaylee. I don't think she cares about benefits....Except maybe compression coils!

-Ratboy

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 7:57 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Rat:
Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:

Republicans- Mal, Zoe, Jayne, and River

Democrats- Kaylee, Simon, Inarra, Book

And what about Wash??

Also, I disagree about Kaylee. I don't think she cares about benefits....Except maybe compression coils

Wash doesn't vote. He might have voted once, but now he doesn't. Probably would describe himself as a Democrat, but likely holds a mix of moderate and conservative values, but very liberal on social issues. But it don't matter, cause he just does not vote.

Kaylee is a union girl from a union family. She's the kind of girl you could take to a AA baseball game and she'd enjoy it. Hard worker, good values. I grew up in coal country...thats union workers for you. Now the unions themselves are as corrupt as anything you'll find. But the workers, they's good folk.

H

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 8:52 AM

P1NKISPUNK

Quote:
I think I'm going to be ill. Is it only in the UK that we now know that the Iraq war had nothing to do with terrorism (there were NO links between Saddam and Al Qaeda, there were NO weapons of mass destruction blah, blah blah!)? If it was about stopping a government that enjoys opressing people's rights and torturing little girls, why haven't we invaded Saudi Arabia (to name but one other sovreign state that's down right mean)?

Let's face it, as stated already above, the Iraq war, like all others, was about economies and money . . .

Okay, I'm lost, I'm angry, and I'm
armed.

*sings* I think I love you, so what am I so afraid of?

Dear Holy Christ I loved that. I would have chimed in and said something at least 50% less articulately, but luckily you got there first. I think most people from the UK share that view, probably because our media, though faulted is a lot more honest than America's.

Did you notice, that the fact that Robert Mugabe, Leader of Zimbabwe who not only persecutes his own people, but the white people living in his country was re-elected, and though it was clearly fraudulant, all anyone did was say: the election was fraudulent. Robert Mugabe has also banned our media from entering, yet this is just accepted? Well I'm sure there's nothing to hide, maybe he's just a very camera shy man..

I think the answer is among us, and it's black and sticky, and worth a few bob.

Like Michael Moore (he is a little crazy, but generally accurate) said, how can you ever justify invading a country and killing many of it's inhabitants to "liberate" them, when they haven't even asked for help. (Well that's the gist of what he said, I'm not quoting exactly.)

On the issue of terrorism, as we can see it's everywhere. Evil is everywhere. Many many people in the middle-east hate the West. So I guess we'll just invade them, because then they'll be humming our National Anthems patriotically non-stop. I'm sure they're heads will be filled so much with joy by it, they'll completely forget the notion of terrorism at all! Lame sarcasm aside, I don't understand how the actions of both us, and the U.S could ever be justified. Does anyone even remember who Osama Bin Laden is, and yet he supposedly is why all this started?

I also wonder how anyone could see Farenheit 9/11 and still vote Republican. Whether or not the Iraq War is an issue, having someone like that as a leader even if they are improving the economy or healthcare, seems ludicrous to me.

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 8:55 AM

SIGMANUNKI

@reginaroadie:
Wait a minute, I was just making a joke! Chill out man.

1) If you check my profile, I am a Canadian browncoat. Winnipeg is where I am

2) I was just bringing up some commentary from the Simpsons on the Slavery issue. Which I found funny.

3) When Jon said that, I burst out laughing, along with everyone that I've told that to.

4) Get a sense of humour.

----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 9:28 AM

SIGMANUNKI

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
Quote:
Originally posted by reginaroadie:

We'll keep that in mind when we reminisce about that time in 1812 when after you guys invaded us, we went down to D.C. and burned the White House to the ground.

I thought you were Canadian. You really don't know much about American or British history.
[snip blah blah blah]

Man, you like putting words in peoples mouths, don't you. Well, onto the reply.

Actually we did. The only reason why you don't think so is that you've probably only read "history" books written by americans.

And the reason why they are "right" when they say that it was the British that did that, is because Canada was still a British colony at the time. God forbid if Canada ever got the best of the US at any point in history, right? Might bruse that huge american ego.

As to your other comments. We've never have taken credit for things that we haven't done. In fact, we get shafted for things that we have done. Kinda sucks, but whatever. We know what we've done and can be very proud of it ie Lester B Pearson.

On the other hand, the US regularly beats its chest of things that it as been associated, but claims (or at least implies) full ownership of. All the while, quitely doing some of the most horrible things around the world ie Iraq currently. So, you really shouldn't be talking.

Also, you mention that we can't claim anything regarding space exploration. Have you heard of the Canada Arm? If not, look it up. Most of what's done up there would be impossible without it.

We also contribute disproportionally comedians, actors, scientists, and are sought after for matters of international relations.

Maybe you should actually know something about a country you seek to criticize before you start spouting off next time.

----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 9:40 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by p1nkispunk:
Our media, though faulted is a lot more honest than America's.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! Thanks I needed that!

What you're thinking of is CNN, CBS, ABC and even NBC! However, we also have FOX, and news(except for Geraldo) is the one thing they know how to do!(I'm going to take a lot of flak on this aren't I )

Quote:
Originally posted by p1nkispunk:
Does anyone even remember who Osama Bin Laden is, and yet he supposedly is why all this started?

He's been neutered! He has no power! He's liveing in a cave somewhere! And he's not a martyr! What more could you ask for?

Quote:
Originally posted by p1nkispunk:
I also wonder how anyone could see Farenheit 9/11 and still vote Republican.

If that's where you're geting your information, then there's no use talking to you

-Ratboy

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 9:43 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Have you heard of the Canada Arm?

Um,...no!

-Ratboy

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 9:54 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
...Have you heard of the Canada Arm? ...

Isn't that what you find at the end of a Molson?

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 1:44 PM

CHRISISALL

Thoughtful Republicans and Democrats=GOOD

Stupid Republicans and Democrats=BAD

The crew of Serenity are (mostly) good, so it doesn't matter to me whichever way they lean, left or right.

Anyway, I'm not a Republican or Democrat, I'm a Conspiracy Theorist.

Chrisisall

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 2:04 PM

Thoughtful Republicans=Good

Thoughtful Democrats=Nonexistent

Stupid Democrats=Abundant(But don't turn out to vote and therefor don't matter)

Stupid Republicans=There are a few of us

-Ratboy

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 2:06 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL

I think he is referring to the RMS, or the robotic arm on the Space shuttle.

And I also think he’s being a little generous with what is and is not possible.

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 2:15 PM

CHRISISALL

Rat, when you go gettin' political you remind me of someone....

Yeah, that's it. Jayne. You remind me of Jayne.

I like you, anyway.

Chrisisall

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 2:21 PM

CHRISISALL

Are you guys conspiring agin' me?

Chrisisall

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 2:58 PM

CANTTAKESKY

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
Republicans- Mal, Zoe, Jayne, and River (pro small-business, anti-big govt., pro life, Ex-military, NRA, pro-marriage, crazy...describes some or all).

Democrats- Kaylee, Simon, Inarra, Book (Book is a conservative Democrat, Simon a NE intellectual, Kaylee a union girl, and Inarra...she's a whore).

Haha! Very funny.

How about this?

Alliance = republicrat / autocrat(big goverment in both economic and socio-moral spheres)

Crew of Serenity = libertarian / anarchist (with the exception of maybe Inara, who still had one foot in the Alliance). They just wanted to be free, man.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 3:09 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL

I’ve always thought of the Alliance as being something like the Soviet Union, and the crew of the Firefly being something like Georgian Gypsies. I know that there’s supposed to be a Reconstruction Era theme to it, but I just like to modernize my view of it.

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 4:08 PM

PurpleBelly wrote:

Quote:
something, something... set the hook, let the big fish run until it tires itself out, and then don't even bother reeling it in, just drag it along after the boat and let the dockhands haul its carcass up onto the pier.

Then, have your picture taken alongside it, grinning madly from ear to ear, with a big stogie in yer mouth!

Hey, 'Belly! How they hangin'?

You know if there's one thing I love better than one group of propaganda-hoodwinked 'believers' taking potshots at the other group of propaganda-ecstatic 'individualists', its watching them sneer, "My Dad is bigger than your Dad!", "My Dad could beat the crap out of your Dad!" at each other.

I predict someone will shortly storm off in a huff...

Apolitically,

zoid

P.S.
Really is good hearing from you again, friend. I thought we'd lost you to the NOB forever.
_________________________________________________

"Burn the land and boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me." The Ballad of Serenity

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 4:38 PM

VETERAN

Don't squat with your spurs on.

Quote:
Quote:
Originally posted by p1nkispunk:
Does anyone even remember who Osama Bin Laden is, and yet he supposedly is why all this started?

He's been neutered! He has no power! He's liveing in a cave somewhere! And he's not a martyr! What more could you ask for?

I want him captured or dead, like the President promised.

For the history buffs.

Read some of the platforms of the southern states for the 1860 election. A major plank in most is the continuation of Slavery. Yes the Civil War was about States Rights, but Slavery was a States Rights issue.

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 4:49 PM

GREENFAERIE

Quote:

Quote:
Originally posted by p1nkispunk:
Does anyone even remember who Osama Bin Laden is, and yet he supposedly is why all this started?

He's been neutered! He has no power! He's liveing in a cave somewhere! And he's not a martyr! What more could you ask for?

How about Justice.

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 4:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Veteran:
I want him captured or dead.

Would be nice, but then he'd be a martyr!....But it would still be nice!!

-Ratboy

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 5:00 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by GreenFaerie:
How about Justice.

WagWag

I'm not saying I don,t want him caught! I'm saying that as a threat he's been neutralized!!...And stop wagging at me!

-Ratboy

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 6:17 PM

the movie is not the Series. Only the facts have been changed, to irritate the innocent; the names of the actors and characters remain the same

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
We also contribute disproportionally comedians, actors, scientists,

. . . usually to the USA. And don't forget hockey players. (OK, this year, you can forget hockey players (praise Bob))

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 9:00 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by zoid:
Really is good hearing from you again, friend. I thought we'd lost you to the NOB forever.

Hei, z. I still come here, like Donald Lydecker at an AA meeting. Rarely see a chink in the closed minds to give my brand of enlightenment any purchase, that's all.

Not at the Universal site that much, there are just folks over there boosting my credit - I think they like the fact that it's completely useless to anyone outside the US and Canada; I claim to be back on topic

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

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 10:10 PM

ZOOT

Quote:
Originally posted by p1nkispunk:
Quote:
I think I'm going to be ill. Is it only in the UK that we now know that the Iraq war had nothing to do with terrorism (there were NO links between Saddam and Al Qaeda, there were NO weapons of mass destruction blah, blah blah!)? If it was about stopping a government that enjoys opressing people's rights and torturing little girls, why haven't we invaded Saudi Arabia (to name but one other sovreign state that's down right mean)?

Let's face it, as stated already above, the Iraq war, like all others, was about economies and money . . .

Okay, I'm lost, I'm angry, and I'm
armed.

*sings* I think I love you, so what am I so afraid of?

Dear Holy Christ I loved that. I would have chimed in and said something at least 50% less articulately, but luckily you got there first. I think most people from the UK share that view, probably because our media, though faulted is a lot more honest than America's.

Did you notice, that the fact that Robert Mugabe, Leader of Zimbabwe who not only persecutes his own people, but the white people living in his country was re-elected, and though it was clearly fraudulant, all anyone did was say: the election was fraudulent. Robert Mugabe has also banned our media from entering, yet this is just accepted? Well I'm sure there's nothing to hide, maybe he's just a very camera shy man..

I think the answer is among us, and it's black and sticky, and worth a few bob.

Like Michael Moore (he is a little crazy, but generally accurate) said, how can you ever justify invading a country and killing many of it's inhabitants to "liberate" them, when they haven't even asked for help. (Well that's the gist of what he said, I'm not quoting exactly.)

On the issue of terrorism, as we can see it's everywhere. Evil is everywhere. Many many people in the middle-east hate the West. So I guess we'll just invade them, because then they'll be humming our National Anthems patriotically non-stop. I'm sure they're heads will be filled so much with joy by it, they'll completely forget the notion of terrorism at all! Lame sarcasm aside, I don't understand how the actions of both us, and the U.S could ever be justified. Does anyone even remember who Osama Bin Laden is, and yet he supposedly is why all this started?

I also wonder how anyone could see Farenheit 9/11 and still vote Republican. Whether or not the Iraq War is an issue, having someone like that as a leader even if they are improving the economy or healthcare, seems ludicrous to me.

P1nkispunk, I think I love you!

You are, of course, right in every respect – lets have a little mutual appreciation!

I danced a little jig this morning when I heard it looks like identity cards are off the agenda but am seriously scared about the erosion of the rule of law in the UK!

We’re all over electoral fraud in Zimbabwe (I particularly liked that Mugabe gets to chose 30 MPs himself!) but what about when a judge in our own country and the electoral commission complain of serious electoral fraud issues and the government CHOOSES not to worry about it?? I’m scared!

Okay, I'm lost, I'm angry, and I'm
armed.

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

Wednesday, April 6, 2005 3:10 AM

In a (for him) long-winded post, PurpleBelly wrote:

Quote:
Hei, z. I still come here, like Donald Lydecker at an AA meeting. Rarely see a chink in the closed minds to give my brand of enlightenment any purchase, that's all.
Not at the Universal site that much, there are just folks over there boosting my credit - I think they like the fact that it's completely useless to anyone outside the US and Canada; I claim to be back on topic

Okay, I googled 'Donald Lydecker' and only got "Dark Angel" references. Since I've only seen 3 episodes of that show from S1, I'm afraid your reference sailed a little high for my short arms and white man's vertical leaping ability (approximately 7 inches, or at least, that's what I tell the ladies). I know you won't explain it for me, because that would be outside your particular metier, your code; so I guess enlightenment will elude my grasp, yet again.

I rarely escape the GenDis board here at FFFn, since I like long posts (well-fleshed out ideas, arguments and evidence) and non-political topics (which belong on the RealWorldDis board, hello). But every so often I go to the NOB because someone has linked to it, and then stick around to see if people are talking about anything of substance. That's when I see your name listed on the top five for points, which phenomenon you've explained. Raises two questions: "What are the points good for anyway?" (Fully paid trip for two to the California premiere?) and "Why do they feel the need to entice people to participate on the board in such a fashion?" (Doesn't anybody understand what this community is all about?).

I know I'm violating your 'no-scroll' rule, so I'll close with a question, quickly: Do you mind if I use you as an example of what 'trolling' should be? These adolescent wannabes keep getting it wrong. I've got to preside over the Inquisition of yet another one (on 'ask ndugu') this morning. You know, find out which unclean spirit possesses him, get a complete confession (the Iron Maiden is my favorite implement for this task, especially "Run To The Hills" and "The Mob Rules") and then purge his body of sin by applying pitch and torch.

So, I want to use you as an example of the mature and appropriate use of reaction-provoking speech. Sort of, "Not all trolls are bad, and in fact they can break us out of our ideological ruts", and then point out that a triple digit IQ is required, and only those with pairs of X and Y chromosomes need apply. (NB: If they've got a set of three, they should just go hang out in the prison shower until the urge to write stuff on the Internet passes. Say, 'hi' to Bubba for us.)

Way too long I know, but I trust you'll forgive me. You know me: I'm just so obvious...

Genuinely,

-zed

P.S.
In lieu of timely permission to invoke your name and style in that thread, I gonna use you anyway, 'coz, what're friends for if not using each other?
_________________________________________________

"Burn the land and boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me." The Ballad of Serenity

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

Wednesday, April 6, 2005 3:24 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by zoid:
Do you mind if I use you as an example of what 'trolling' should be?

Mind? No, but I think you were correct in your previous attribution of devil's advocate. I like to think of trolling as cloak trailing, provoking aggression rather than my attempts to provoke thought; I usually fail, of course.

EDIT: this is the best I can do on the Deck reference without a transcript

Quote:
Logan accesses Lydecker’s personal files and finds out Lydecker’s past. Lydecker had a brilliant military career until his wife was murdered and the killer was never found. Then, Lydecker became an alcoholic and was forced to undergo drug rehabilitation and attend the future’s equivalent of Alcoholic Anonymous meetings. So, in kind of an odd plot move, the scene flashes to Lydecker, or Donald, as he says in the meetings, giving a talk at an AA meeting. At first I’m thinking, oh no, they’re going to try and show the humane side of the evil guy, but Lydecker stays true to form. Instead of telling his sob story about how his wife was murdered, he tells everyone in the room that they’re just losers and that if they want to get over their problem they just have to be strong and make a choice. He, on the other hand, only goes to the meetings to remind himself what he doesn’t want to become again. Nice.

Thanks to the guys at http://www.campusnut.com/tv_e.cfm?article_id=706
Yes, it is Dark Angel - which was shot in Canada

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

Wednesday, April 6, 2005 3:36 AM

BROWNCOAT1

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

Quote:
Originally posted by reginaroadie:
I shudder at the prospect of a country where slavery is of the norm, science is abolished and replaced by a Xtian retoric that says that 6 billion people desceneded from two, and a general hypocritical attitude towards minorities by using the Bible as a tool for subjugation of anyone who isn't a white male. Of course, much of what I said still exists today in the South, but not as overblown as what I could've been if the Confederates won.

ROFLMAO!

Slavery was an institution on its way out. Unfortunately America held on to it longer than Europe. Shame on us.

Not touching the religion thing. You do your thing and I'll do mine. I don't question your faith, don't question mine or anyone elses. Nothing will start a heated arguement faster than politics or religion, that is why I steer clear of both.

Science is aboloished in the South? Funny, seems to me there is plenty of industry, scientific labs, research facilities and the like down here. Maybe you know something I don't.

Last time I looked around me no one is being subjugated by the whites, we don't wear white sheets, and no one beats anyone over the head w/ the Bible. Contrary to whatever tripe you have read Southern does not equal racist, bigot or white supremacist. People like that do exist all over the world but thankfully make up a very small percentage of the population. By the way, not all racists or bigots are white or Southern. Might want to look into that.

As for what may or may not have resulted from the South winning her independence is a mystery. We can all speculate on "what if". Your obvious misconceptions of the South and her people may color your judgement however you like. I for one refrain from judging a people or their country on the actions of one or a handful of her citizens. Judgmental statements and slanderous remarks smack a bit of bigotry to me:

Main Entry: big·ot
Pronunciation: 'bi-g&t
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French, hypocrite, bigot
: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices

__________________________________________

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

Richmond, VA & surrounding area Firefly Meet Up:
http://firefly.meetup.com/9/boards/

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

Wednesday, April 6, 2005 4:02 AM

THESOMNAMBULIST

Interesting how there was a cry at the top of the thread about education in schools as regarding the reasons why the American Civil war started...

Being a brit (of sorts) I know little about the finer details about the American Civil war and the little I know has been acquired through my own readings and/or hearing opinions such as the ones above, however y'know what, I followed Iraq and the conflict there-in and I still can't give you a definitive reason as to why there was a war there. I have my suspicions but many I know have differing opinions also....

It's a tricky thing History, and Historical fact.... No?

Fascinated....

The
Somnambulist

www.cirqus.com
For Pictures:
http://www.cirqus.com/lightfantastic.html

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

Wednesday, April 6, 2005 4:09 AM

'Belly responded in timely fashion, thus:

Quote:
Mind? No, but I think you were correct in your previous attribution of devil's advocate. I like to think of trolling as cloak trailing, provoking aggression rather than my attempts to provoke thought; I usually fail, of course...

The failure is not yours, except perhaps for the assumption of a baseline intelligence (capacity for thought), which may be a bit higher than is realistic...

Your point on 'devil's advocate' is well taken, and I think I will revisit that metaphor ("he's not just the devil's advocate, he's his client as well" or words to that effect). Good call.

And I may be trying to ascribe more utility to trolling than the term will hold; but perhaps I can morph one or two of these wannabes into something more useful, instead of just putting them all into the compacter. I'd like to change the concept of 'trolling' to the fishing reference (i.e., "drawing a baited line or lure behind a boat"), rather than the "Three Billy Goats Gruff" reference type. I've already made the change in my own mind, so no offense intended (and would everybody else please try to keep up?). The other kind of troll doesn't deserve dignification with a term of its own, other than 'sh*thead'.

Setting a beneficial standard for 'trolling' might elevate that baseline you're seeking. If a particular poster is a known 'troller' or 'troll', one would know that some discernment is required in order to comprehend his/her intent (and possibly some googling and/or Wikipedia-ing); but, it's worth the effort. Additionally, the initial reaction to someone claiming to be a 'Troll' would be "Oh, goodie! Someone's going to challenge us intellectually!" Anyone who couldn't maintain the high standards of the Troll would just be a 'sh*thead' or alternatively, 'F*x Exec'.

One thing is sure: I will not allow someone to come into my home and abuse others ab initio, regardless the mythological title applied to the behavior. "I'm a mean old man."

v/r,
-zed

P.S.
I'm copying this post into 'ask ndugu', as a preamble for the massacre to follow.

P.P.S.
(EDITed, because you EDITed):

Quote:
Yes, it is Dark Angel - which was shot in Canada

Those damned Canadians! When will they ever purge themselves of their fixation with firearms and shooting things? (NB: That was the kind of 'trolling' I was talkin' about.)

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

Wednesday, April 6, 2005 4:15 AM

BROWNCOAT1

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

TheSomnambulist wrote:
Quote:

It's a tricky thing History, and Historical fact.... No?

Fascinated....

Indeed. Many take what is in books at face value, failing to realize that such books tend to be written by the victors of conflicts.

I have done more research than even I care to admit on the War for Southern Independence and it seems that historical fact and History seldom coincide.

__________________________________________

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

Richmond, VA & surrounding area Firefly Meet Up:
http://firefly.meetup.com/9/boards/

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

Wednesday, April 6, 2005 4:21 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by zoid:
I'd like to change the concept of 'trolling' to the fishing reference

My understanding is that this is the correct analogy for Usenet trolling.

EDIT: by this I mean that (the quoted original), of course

Asking the Wombat at:
http://foldoc.doc.ic.ac.uk/foldoc/foldoc.cgi?query=troll&action=Search

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

Wednesday, April 6, 2005 4:59 AM

P'Belly:

*zoid loads and reads the URL*

Yeah! See? That's what you do, and it's spot on. Just what the doctor ordered for our entire freakin' civilization!

Keep up the good fight. You may never make a silk purse out of that particular sow's ear, but it's really La Manchian of you to try. You're "my kind of stupid," as our quixotic leader, Malcolm Reynolds might say.

Sincerely,

zoid

P.S.
And from a historical standpoint, that was back when the Usenet was the only existing message board available. Now we've got Internet message boards (i.e., FFFn); but I think the term should equally apply. It's just gotten degenerated into 'mindless' troll, rather than the deprecated original 'thoughtful' definition.
_________________________________________________

"Burn the land and boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me." The Ballad of Serenity

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

Wednesday, April 6, 2005 5:41 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by YT:
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
We also contribute disproportionally comedians, actors, scientists,

. . . usually to the USA. And don't forget hockey players. (OK, this year, you can forget hockey players (praise Bob))

Thats true. We hear about alot of Canadians doing big things here in America...but not so much about them doing it in Canada. Lets face it, Canadians are a big part of American entertainment culture...but in Canada they are relegated to various forms of internet porn and nude journalism (and hockey).

H

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

Wednesday, April 6, 2005 5:48 AM

Hero:

And what's wrong with nude journalism? Mmmm... Katie Couric.

-zed

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

Wednesday, April 6, 2005 5:49 AM