Patriotism: Trash or Treasure?

Roger

Now don't you start with more puzzles. You will need to translate your post for me-----you haven't contributed any "bare your soul" posts. You seem to stay "on the fence" because ----you're a -----"diplomat"---?????

Nimh:

You seem to fit right into this picnic ground of friendly, neighborly??--intrique.

NIMH...as clear and compelling a case for abortion rights as any Ronald Dworkin might advance.

what?

Lola, Dlowan and ehBeth

I apologize for my rudeness in ignoring your posts to pursue the attacker who wields the sledgehammer of the bully.

My post about condemnation of soldiers came not as a result of anything said here but on another thread so I apologize for the implication

Dlowan:
You expressed disappointment that the thread has not taken a desired direction----what is that direction?

I also very much like your acknowledgement that even though you have knowledge of sad situations where soldiers have reacted to constantly being shot at by children and other civilians, with sudden and ruthless vindictiveness by slaughtering an entire village in a rage; by indicating that you would first ask yourself what you would have done in a similar circumstance.

I want to also thank you ladies for not condemning my frequent "soapbox" ----appeals.

I don't believe you, nimh.....you're way too old to be Blatham's grandson.........but let's see, you could be his son, heaven forbid........

But I don't believe Blatham either........we love you and are glad you're here with us. But don't be giving away family secrets.

Beth,

Remember about Blathams posts, he's almost never straightforward and wouldn't use a smiley to indicate humor if his life depended on it.

Perception,

For a look at many a2kers, click above, at the top of the page on Gallery (where it says, HOME :: Forums :: Portal :: Gallery :: Store :: Help) Then under catagories, click on a2k members and then again on under catagories, on a2k gatherings Sometimes these photos can be very informative. You'll find lots of pix of "lovie's" (ehBeth) doggie friends there. Hang around a little on the social threads and you'll learn more about the back channel a2k life than you may want to know. But actually that's a good place to get to know the other members and to let down your hair and just play for the sake of playing........try it.

Lola

Thanks for the tip on reading up on the "family"-----I will try to bring mysefl up to date.

Translation:

Lots of people post some stuff that is painful to read. But by suggesting that a member has sex with another member's dogs you have pushed the envelope.

-------------

I think pushed far enough for even you to recognize.

The relative lack of outrage is only because most 'consider the source' and pity replaces anger.

ehBeth

nimh wrote thus my position on Roe v Wade

ROTFLMHAO

Craven

You appear to be wallowing in your self righteous indignation and I'll leave it at that. What puzzles me is the lack of outrage at Setanta for his intimidating attack on me or does he have you intimidated also?

perception,

I was not indignant at all, I fell into the category I descibed in my last post's last sentence. Lots of the barbs posted on message boards are what I call "intentional errors". Yours was, as has been mentioned, a new low.

And you know this perc. There is a quantative difference between some putdowns and others, and I think that by your own standards beastiality was pushing the envelope.

I wasn't commenting on the fact that you wanted to attack, but about the attack you chose. If it was a comment on attacks then, yes, others have attacked. But it was a direct comment about the lowness of using one member's pets to insult another member by suggesting beastiality between them that I was commenting on and as far as I know you were the only one doing that.

If there was one shred of impartiality from you I would I would have a new look at my supposed new low---but not one word of Setanta's bullying tactics.

Just to bring you up to date it was Setanta's own use of beastiality(not against any member on this board) but against some unknown victim, that brought howls of laughter and more comments along the same lines.

Nope-- no double standard here---I also think he can answer for himself or maybe take himself out of the attack mode and into the introspection mode as I have suggested for you. You at least rile people up to be controversial----Setanta insults to destroy.

perception,

My comments had absolutley no intention of impartiality. You confuse site rules with my personal comments. Site rules must be impartial but my every comment doesn't have to be and that is a veritable impossibility.

This is evidenced routinely in my every post, you might note a partiality for women when I speak of nekid people for instance. Your posts are not impartial, nobody is. So don't give me the line about impartiality, I'd offered a comment and my opinions are certainly not impartial. That's just one reason why the site in maintained by more than one person. Holding me up to an impossible criteria of impartiality in my every post is just one more unreasonable thing to difficult my participation here. You don't know of my motivations and seem to take as a criteria for impartiality whether I have commented on something. I can't comment on everything.

In any case, I don't wish to discuss this any further. I was certain that you'd have agreed with the notion that it had crossed a line and I was mistaken. I thought you'd agree but hadn't had the intention of convincing you of it.

Er, morning all....

Good translation, but surely the request was some kind of rhetorical device, Craven.

Prolly - but responding to it worked well, I think!

tip o' the hat

I shouldn't have bothered. I really did think he'd agree that even if two people are going at it lines can still be crossed, but my confidence was misplaced. Live and loin, as Boita would say.

Got to admit, Perc, I thought you'd fess up too, rather than justify.