You're absolutely right about this, mike. I would make you an apology, but that is only reducing the natural state of human desires... my reason for saying that is simple. There is nothing 'natural' about what this event in fact makes. It's very make-believable acutally, and believe me I've been trying to make sense about how I feel with regard to the horror without having (thank god) a true to life experience. This is as close as true to life as it should ever get for anyone god forbid.
What I'm getting at is this. . . I've tried my best to rationally examine what issues I feel are relevant enough in encountering the dysfunctional reality. I think it's healthy for me to use Vincent Li as a personal scapegoat, to pursue some form of comfort in a psychological nature (for myself) when attemtping to come to terms with Li's psychotic episode. I suppose it's a model for the time-being, that the effect something like this has on the victim of this tragedy.
I guess what I've concluded is far from satisfactory, but if we're talking movies, I'd relate more with what happened in Dead Man Wallking if we're equating real life analogies with fantasy.
===================
^if you get this first part, then read on to this second part. . .
In chinese culture, if you completely accept (the contradicition of a crime you commited) then you automatically assume it is your duty/responsibility to yourself (i.e. dignity) to execute yourself. You are not only doing a service to yourself as a spiritual entity, but you are doing the right thing in the eyes and ears to status quo.
However. . . (this is the 3rd part of my opinion)
that in western culture, if you take apart the dichotomy of (chinese influenced eastern thought. . .) you must now take full responsibility for your actions and live with the consequences. For the most part, here in western culture, we degrade individuals instead of realizing the potential for healing power. Therefore, in this case Vincent Li if he were in Chinese totalitarian rule, he would be punished by means of Socratarian philosophy. Which is to say, Socrates would drink the hemlock given to him by the state, even if the state were wrong to do so.
Reply Quote Notify
===================
In this country, knowing the chinese tradition is a distinction unlike most 'western' functioning ideoloiges. All this relates to is that the eastern way of life, any person who is shamed unto the community which they live have no meaningful existence when compared to western thought. Today, I am of the opinion. . . to restore oneself in a means of 'irony' as if you must return to the eye that made you commit the crime.
========================
This individual in my sympthatic outfit was in fact, 'out of his tree'. . . which is not to say what he's done is unforgiving of him. This man clearly has done something that is the worst case imaginable. To trust he did this on such inconceivable grounds, warrants a definite awakening of the publics interest to help those with mental illness in a favorable light.
========================
I actually see the police not as subject to ridicule, but for the floundering use of tasers as a comedy of errors:
specifically. . .
that the police force (in the case of tasers) are a civil authority. Therefore, if one incident were to incriminate a police officer use of the taser, means everyone that uses tasers are invalid. . . that makes the argument a slippery slope.
On the other hand if tasers are used in the same manner, that is to say legal-use-of-tasers continue to defile the public interest as a lethal device (there runs the course of another slippery slope. . . ) but in this case the unmarked deaths that result in the cause of those fatal to it.
Reply Quote Notify
=========================
I'm with hap. Clinical, is not an abrasive term, mind you. Do not punish yourself, BEFORE, making a decision to go. Act now. Then face consequences, later. It will be the easiest thing you ever did for yourself. Thinking about the what-could-be is a lot to deal with for people going through a time like yours. However, if you act responsibly, also taking it one step at a time. If you fail to do so, you will run the risk of minimalizing whatever the chance is in discovering/unconvering your dilemmas. Remember, this isn't about deflating depression, it's about feeling why you feel 'defeated'. It is for the same reason you will face your issues.
People in general feel intimdated when they get depressed mainly because they're confused without the clarity, becomes a major stumbling block, but it's not an obstacle that can't be overcome. Positive influences outwiegh the negative outcomes or potential pitfalls that deceive your better self. To better yourself you achieve results in thinking differently + seeking alternatives in order to cope.
In the meantime, focus on what you need to prepare for as if you were 'willing' to talk it out/ this is an ongoing thing you will learn to get better at doing. You need to pretend that whatever it is your hiding from yourself, can be talked about outloud with someone. You may be surprised with what you gain/learn in your experience. Do not internalize this (negative thoughts), so it becomes a defense mechanism. Otherwise, you'll be projecting everything against yourself rather than be willing to share it openly and honestly (. . .with some form of treatment.) Remember about 'you' is the 'me' doing the treatment.
In the process you'll find ways to deal/facilitate with what it is that's bothering you. Start from the inside out, rather than going to the outside in. Coming it from an objective manner will reinforce the negative impact/energy stopping you from doing what you should be doing.
==========================
I happened to have a conversation with an interesting take on evolution. I saw a shooting star this weekend. During the same conversation, then we began discussing the origins of the universe. Someone then said: scientists propose to prove the big-bang theory. Another said, that's impossible. TO which someone else replied, "That must mean you're darwinist."
================
If I had a large pizza I would sooo be sharing the smallest piece with all of you right now.
===================
The problem here is simple, let's not flip-flop on the issue that merk seems so frantic about, then decide. Obviously, there is a winner, the police are not to be given unrestricted use of tasers. That is all this boils down to.
====================
Quote from: Hap on August 02, 2008, 07:20AM
The guy has earned a bachelors degree, holds a steady job and is taking care of his family. I wouldn't call that the "bare minimum."
Here's a solution:
Mike and I create a diversion, we'd be singing the star-spangled banner, whilst becky snuffs out merks beer. In the process vegas can be wearing a shirt that reads: Taser ME. (on the front) Mens Rea (on the back).
=============================
Quote from: swedes on August 02, 2008, 05:42AM
It does actually. Marco is very tight with his family. It is his choice to live there with them. It may even be cultural. Not sure. I don't think he should be ridiculed for living there.
Great, now I'm going to have to kill someone based on your honor toward me.
============================
Seriously, I've told you this before - stop posting. Go back to your ewok board.
*This has nothing to do with my response to sadie. I meant it, sincerely. Please do not take offense to what I'm saying, I am sick of vegas, now beaf, as well as merk using this as a hiding place for inferiority complex. Don't think I'm not objective about this, I can seperate the dung with my retard-friendly super powers.
======================
Quote from: goonie on August 01, 2008, 11:06PM
I was watching Global news tonight - and they ended this story with "As we remember little Tim - The Carnie who cared".
I shit you not. Dede and I bursted out laughing. Wtf. Who thought that was a good idea?!
This whole thing is a cruel injustice of the surreal.
========================
Listen, as far as your mouth may travel across this Internet board I've lost any kind of respect for you. You are unintelligent, judging by your "taser-me" thread.
========================
Quote from: Vegas on August 01, 2008, 11:04PM
have fun with that
Get bent you annoying unadulterated idiot fuck.
best regards,
deviant one
P.S. Not to be confused with as the socially awkward guy because he chooses to face cop-outs. . . merk, beaf-fuck, vegas-bunghole.
========================
Quote from: beaf on August 01, 2008, 07:24PM
champions typically don't find every opportunity to play the victim
I completely agree with you. 110%
. . . back to your ewok board.
========================
Quote from: Sadie on July 31, 2008, 02:52PM
that would be EXACTLY what the Joker is...read the comics. The Joker isn't meant to be funny, he's very scary, in fact, because he is a sociopath in the extreme. Then dress him like a clown - you have a terrifying villain.
As far as the voice on Batman, it's what he does...I just didn't understand why he was doing it with people who knew his identity, lol. That seemed holy retarded. Otherwise appropriate.
Also, Batman kind of is like an anti-hero, only in that he can be very unlikable (again, read the comics) as opposed to some of the other, friendlier superheroes.
I honestly appreciate your thoughts, so not to disagree with you. . . however. What I meant by the portrayal of this joker in the dark knight, is that he was played to an extremity of sort. The sort of thing that to my estimation, seemed brutally over played as if I started to EMPATHIZE with the joker, but not as a super-villain but as a human being that has immeasurable mental/physical illness. Please, don't underestiamte what that means (again. . . I'm not disagreeing with your interpretation.) However, what I felt in my personal afflicition with the joker, I seriously forgot I was watching a super-villain, I'm not joking. I'm not sure if I'd be the one person who felt that about it, but I'd be inclined to see if people that read this would say, "Hey - I got that feeling to."
As for Batman, I said enough of Bale's performance. I didn't buy it one minute.
=========================
I honestly have difficulty in fathoming how calling a man 'socially awkward' gets off on some trivial retreat in calling me that? I would think the correct term is 'deviant'. Even so. Deviance is a trademark of champions.
thank you kindly.
========================
The people I'd love to meet on this board are becky/mike. I can't win. But thanks mike.
========================
I just want to know what the guy was thinking, as in, will (the killer) reveal any detail why he felt something toward (the victim). I seriously doubt we'll here any true confession as to what tempted him, but I'm hoping the killer will have aslip of the tongue, as in some form of racial profiling, "Yeah, I almost caught the guy stealing something from me." something as small as that. It's probably going to be nothing, though. Just a random violent attack.
===========================
re; vegas
Shocking. You're so counter-intuitive, that you actually refuse to enlighten us with your tremendous dissection of the facts. I applaud you. Does this mean I get to be tasered???
============================
sorry, i'm still trying to internalize how great that comment was. Because bullies enjoy disguising their true misperceptions of other people's virtue, as if in some magical reasoning, think they know what's already happened?? It is laughable to say the least, but I'm glad to. I honestly don't know what to do with that type of ego.
I am a cleaner. I am living with my parents. (To answer your question.)
==========================
Quote from: Vegas on July 31, 2008, 01:15PM
I found it a bit hard to get through what you were trying to say for most of your post, but understand what you're saying and pose a question to you based on your last sentence:
Were tasers not brought in, in the first place to be used as a tool that stood between just plain old jumping on the guy and using the gun? A tool to be used as a NON-LETHAL weapon? I would believe that the deaths that have occurred as a result of using tasers was not the intention of the police officer.
I don't know who has the power to stand up first and say this issue needs more looking into.
Your last sentence is your first problem.
Second, I agree with you, I couldn't put it any better myself. . . A taser should absolutely be used as a NON-LETHAL weapon. To answer the purpose of your question, in even lesser detail than I already have.
It appears the main topic of concern, is that no choice can be made to 'kill' someone unless (the officer's intent) is holding a NON-LETHAL weapon. How curious that is, which is to say, anything used as an accessory to purposely prevent death should be the officer's main priority. Tasers act as a satisfactory tool in serving that. Again, I agree with you. (Remember, we're using your line of thinking/linear pattern for logic.)
^If this is all true: the main question now becomes (which you haven't attempted in even ASKING. . . ) Why should tasers be used as LETHAL weapons?
In your opinion, lethal weapons, does not constitute as tasers. Which in my opinion is completely false, given the exact origin of what you fully described, can only jeopardize a potential victim of being shot with a stun-device also causing DEATH. In fact, you have failed in answering the same question I asked, which was: should tasers be used as LETHAL weapons. You dismissed it (again using your logic) that tasers are meant to be used as non-lethal weapons, therefore, the intent to kill a person is not at all present. In question the reality is, that, tasers should not be used even as "non-lethal" stun-devices which would cause death. If you say tasers are not lethal, you've avoided the question entirely. Which is exctly the anti-thesis against which the police are doing.
The right thesis: is should tasers be used as weapons? (police avoids question.)
Answer: tasers are not lethal. (which they are.)
It takes a genius to see this exaclty as it should be.
==============================
Quote from: languedoc on July 31, 2008, 01:09PM
Dad was really pissed off when he found out how much I was spending on dope.
I wouldn't dare. I'd just say: don't let the door hit you on the way out.
==============================
^ and if some idiot is copping out in saying it's "borderline", it's just a cop-out, nothing more.
========================
It's just odd when people have no idea what they're talking about, stem from their own ineptitude on a mission. I mean, if you have no intellect to offer, you probably have no reason to exist in the first place. So, you know.
======================
No, I call it feeble use of one's imagination, but nothing I mean nothing to do with stalking. The borderline thing is what set me off. Cute though.
=====================
Quote from: Vegas on July 31, 2008, 04:58AM
So Tasers ARE the issue....
I'm asking this, because I'm not sure what the regulations are: Is there a level of the officer's security that has to be reached before a taser can be thought of as an option? Ex. A cop won't pull a gun on someone he just pulled over for going 120 in a 100 zone. Not in Canada anyways.
^^first read what hap says.
Secondly, it reinforces my own subjugation that questions, specifically, the intent that any officer carrying a weapon (in this case tasers) has in using an 'alternative' to imposing any use of tasers. The risk of altercation between a person that might need an officer to deploy tasers, right now is not contingent with any reprimand, based on the fact "tasers are safe". That should tell you, any police action if it requires a reasonbale use of force is taken into consideration. For this purpose a dichotomy that tasers should be used or not, is not even a question they're being asked. The level of incomptence, therefore, widens the scope of how 'practical' can tasers be used if it can also be applied as a LETHAL hand held device??
That can only tell you, as in the RCMP tasering a man to death in Vancouver, that the force used only made the assailant a victim of police discharging a LETHAL WEAPON. The case in favor of tasers could only provide evidence that they should not have been used, even if the protocol suggests otherwise. Tasers should be strictly enforced as a categorized lethal weapon.
==============================
Quote from: Hap on July 31, 2008, 09:46AM
I figured you'd vote for the other conservative, Christian war candidate, John McCain.
No - no, if one says war is 'good' the other says war is 'bad'. It's a cop-out's cop-out. I blame the Amercian history of deceit, that will initiate force on any given day. It makes me smile, really.
==============================
Quote from: Hap on July 30, 2008, 11:19AM
Well you're half right. If he were rejecting American policy - the parts I don't like at least - I would respect him a whole lot more.
There is absolutely no question in parody of respect for a potential president elect, that has a cake walk prepared from the get go, due to what the Bush administration has left untidy. Everyone is completely immune to the fact that no matter if Obama is elected or not is irrelevant, to the conditions imposed by Bush's reign as president. If anything, what the reality that exists are formed because of Bush's footprints, which Obama will undoubtedly have his way in covering up the blueprints, without having to excuse himself to the public wherewithal. It astounds me how inept we become due to the gravity of Obama's meager representation.
===========================
What's so tight about that, all I see are the shorts.
========================
^ so yeah, overrated movie, great action. But the machines are cool.
======================
Quote from: beaf on July 31, 2008, 02:52AM
is that your professional opinion
That depends on what you mean by professional.
The scenes of Bale were hovering on absurdity, as if batman were an actual villain or anti-hero. Some of the scenes involving batman were borderline - I felt it was the scenes where batman has monologues were poorly executed - I just didn't believe Bale was Batman at all.
Then of course. . . the joker.
Everyones favorite super-villain, I think they did a good job in making him terrifying, but at the same time oddly enough likable. The problem with the joker was that he seemed more as if a purturbed emotionally psychotic individual, than another super-villain having fun. . . which disturbed me. Nobody is supposed to like the joker - but I think everyone in the theatre liked him best. Therefore, the plot by the end leaves you wondering if the joker outlives batman, which was anti-climatic but unpredictable a story-line. I was disappointed by the end of the movie, otherwise watching 2 morons facing each other was worth the price.
====================
The guy must have finished watching batman before his bustrip/murder.
========================
So I saw it last night. The movie was alright. I'm glad I waited. . .not like half the nut-jobs that wanted to break down the doors to see it when it first came out. I'm glad I ignored the hype, and just saw this movie without the false fascination surrounding it. No joke. Just a regular movie, that deserves some credit. That's all I'm saying.
==========================
Quote from: toonces on July 23, 2008, 04:27PM
Cops without tasers, means tasers are safe.
^ What this means is in the public interest, either take away the use of stun-devices or subject them to the status of lethal weapons. . . not just the 'alternative' to hand-guns.
We're totally oblivious to this right now.
==================
Tasers are not an issue. What is an issue is that any form of stun-gun device is potentially as lethal as a hand-gun. The debate must be given its proper context, otherwise it flies over the radar, and is therefore meaningless.
If people in the public awareness of stun-gun devices, were to hold a referendum on whether guns as in this case "Tasers" are in fact lethal? I would say the answer is a resounding 'yes'. Second, are stun-devices just as prone to killing people as would the use of a hand-gun. . . again the answer is 'yes'.
Now the question:
The question as (I have identified. . . ) that hand-guns equate with the use of stun-gun devices, should be placed in the same category as hand-guns? Again, the answer is 'yes.'
What all this means^ is that stun-guns have been deployed with a trial basis of being used resulting in fatality CAUSING death. IT IS not a QUESTION of whether police had the right to (-such-and-such- a ?reason?) to deploy the use of a LETHAL weapon. Therefore, if stun-guns are identified as LETHAL weapons, there must be a clear prohibition to justify the use of such a WEAPON.
Right now, Tasers are not presented as lethal weapons when you turly think about the QUESTION (. . .given the nature of when should "Tasers" be deployed?. . . ) is a flaw in the police system. Until we in the public interest cohesively reject the idea that 'tasers are a safe alternative' the police will only tell us it's meant for our own protection. When the reality is, we're being lied to in the sense that stun-guns aren't lethal. They in fact are as lethal as bullets, that inject voltage into a persons body.
How blind are the masses to this??????? The news isn't going to spoon feed you what to believe here.^
======================
Unless you are completely ignorant to the ideas I presented herein, (along with merk of US sovereignty), I accuse both of you for using some form of contempt or denial. . . whichever of the two fits your vague notion regarding my own rather eloquently put defintions. Let me put it to you this way, I am not a 'stupid' individual, not by any stretch of the imagination. You'd probably be surprised at how often I introduce myself to people, who are either trying to belittle me of which I pose in a non-threatening manner. . . they start listening in a hurry. I guarantee you though, in reality, I am not a stupid or complacent indiviudal. When it comes to such ridicule such as,
Quote
BigC has his parents to thank for participating. One day his parents will die and he'll either inherit the house or the money made from the sale of the home and property. None of which I am sure he is going to share with anyone (to any meaningful degree) and without one ounce of complaint. He knows this to be true as well.
or. . .
Quote
What I figure for me is though, when it comes time for me to find a home, i'll compare the prices to location and if the prices are too high just outside a city, i'll move a bit further out in the country.
Was talking to this guy who knows a guy who bought a plot of land, looked around for a house that was going to get demolished or that someone didn't want, paid 5 grand for the house, paid 20 grand to move the house to the plot of land. Lived there for a few years, fixed it up, then sold the whole thing for around 700,000.
^These are the types of arguments that only lead to no certain kind of solution, nor is it addressing the real problem of such incremental value.
========================
What I was explaining is that in a country such as ours, with the quality of life we share, it's unacceptable to me. . . that we should live in a society that is blind to the acts of corruption. In this case, my virtual personal welfare as a consumer of a residential property.
The potential of such increase in a sky-rocketing real estate market place, is two fold, because people will pay whatever the cost.
I also provided my own view that the government (because all property regardless of it's ownsership. . . ) is crown property. In that case we live within a society of ignorant socio-economic individuals that may or may not act irresponsibly due to their lack of income, combined with poor spending habits. As result this increases the risk of inflation, and the effort to deploy or decrease the average price of homes based strictly on what it's worth. . . requires an agency to oversee this contradiction.
The equity people have compared to the real estate as it stands today are eye gouging to say the least. It needs to stop. We're not talking about infringing about people's rights, it's about taking government action for reasonable social policy. I blame people that are going to the banks (banks/do nothing to provide solutions) but mortage their property for a 20-25 year term. In the process the 'investment' reduces our place as consumers to unreasonably high priced levels. I blame not only the banks, but profit motives, which good responsible government would take into consideration. There is nothing anyone could do about that. . . especially those that are blind to it everyday.
========================
You guess.
In a country with the quality of life Canada has this standard is completely unacceptable. It borders on the intolerable in fact, that people are only blind to it.
Acting with genuine sophistication (i.e. living in my parents basement) without conceit , displaying human decency is much different than opposing forces that obey only because of how rich you are.
As a matter of thinking: I've seen pics of beck's/mike's digs. . . are you telling me that taste in lifestyle is anything less 'luxurious' than that of the pics in Jenn Good's webpage?? I believe not. It's contemporary living with the influence of modest urban property. Nothing wrong with that I'm afraid. The definition of the market place is becoming two-fold it's outrageous. That is plain and simple, merk.
============================
My apologies, I thought it served purpose more toward the solicitation/beheading of the former Miss. Jenny Good. Putting all that aside, I Will divulge becky with agreement. . . however, those 'luxury' style condos are nothing more than a contemporary living module. To add the term 'luxury' to it makes it seem less affordable than it sould be to articulate the point I made.
As for the 'food for thought' comment my friend mike gave. . . there is a disparity among real estate/consumer gouging that has to stop. Why not the government that controls the allocation of property (crown) land. It amazes me how ignorant people must be, to subdue their well being to the mainstream line of thinking, that only go so far to jump at whatever cost. There has to be a happier medium, which is to say that people cannot afford to lose control of their spending habits just so they can feel they're playing catch up (i.e. staying in the game. . . ) thus this promotes an unstable market driving up costs virtually needlessly to say the very least.
Real estate agents like Jen are making a crap load of money, just so easy, that it makes the blood thicken. What ounce of intelligence does that of a cocaine loving female persuasuion have; we joke about how high house prices we have lost control over?? I think we beg to differ.
There's a purging among buyers (delluded in their 'investment' as a long term wager. . . ) against sellers (that want to cash in.) The parody is capitalist in ideology, but it refutes the norm that we're paying far to much based on equity. The masses are completely blind to it, and this has to stop immediately.
========================
On a serious side note: it'd be a fantstic day to see a push in government, (Though the thought is wishful at best. . . ), that one would institute a good social policy into regulating the real estate market. After all it is crown property and the government of Canada would be in full control of an agency that would over-see the price of making home ownership more affordale. The benefit would be ten fold, in terms of reducing the risk of potential rising inflation due to a moderate cost of living expense. This would also increase the control of mortages that people would be able to reasonably afford.
Of course this takes vision, but it's definitely doable.
The incredulous hike in the real estate market is of primary concern. Real estate agencies are cornering the market which drive the price of homes to its consumers sky high. This is reaching an intolerable state of social welfare for people in this day and age that simply cannot afford to pay out a 20+ year mortage. It's inconceivable to me, that people acutally pay the prices that they are blind to the eye gouging within the market place.
It's becoming a serious enough issue that this has also become a detrimental effect on potential home owners equity. What this means is what houses are retailing for, most people might not be able to afford.
I simply cannot comprehend the logic behind such ludicrous change in the market right now. In fact, I do not protest it one bit, instead I plan not to sell an arm and my legs for the cost of a new./used. house. People without the supplemental income to purchase a house, are already going into debt without even thinking of the consequence, because they either can't afford to be complacent, but choose to.
The average person today that makes an 'above-average' income, should be capable of paying the interest on mortages. However, this is a cause for the government to levy itself against how much it generates from collectable taxes, as opposed to people of less-than-average incomes that outweigh the balance. This means that the government can profit from a system for houses that sell at a premium rate for above-average-incomes, should also stabalize the prices for moderate priced homes.
============================
Quote from: swedes on July 28, 2008, 09:46AM
the prices are crazy.
That has to be an understatment.
========================
Good thread. Great observations.
I wholeheartedly agree with the misconception of the american populus if obama is to become their next president elect. To put it quite frankly the absolution between Bush/Obama are almost identical in their mindset.
The main difference being that Obama has Bush to use as a scapegoat in terms of image, as (hap put it), the illusion of diplomacy is Obama's magic number.
=======================
Anywho, been absent from the board in well close to 2 years now. i haven't missed a beat really.
=====================
^geez i hate vancouver. i mean right up there with toronto in my books.
==========================
^i mean honestly, what has this world come to? i'll never know i guess. 1mil+ for a condo that micheal j. fox lived in. Yeah, probably not.
========================
i luv spinach. . . especially in lasanga.
==========================
^sweet. The cup of coffee was wayyy better, beck.
=========================
Quote from: swedes on July 27, 2008, 03:01AM
I have no idea what I was doing this time last year.
thank you for the purdy picture, marco. i'll draw you one too. gotta think of what to draw tho.
any ideas?
As long as you can draw me a barn with you holding a glass of shiraz
========================
^ If you want to take this next topic of focus one step further merk, by all means. . .
What we already know is, Germany is a super power within the European union, what a perfect way to enshrine a potential future selling-point for a potential US president. Obama is there to leave with keys to the power of trump-cards. Let's not bullshit here, merk. I mean come on, you know that's why Obama is there.
When I read stupid articles in the media stating how "Obama wants the nuclear (Iran) program seized immidiately." What an insult to the intelligence of those ignorant to the fact, those same manufatured nukes are already paid for. How hard is that for Obama to pull rank and play hero on such a contensious issue?? It's mind boggling.
On a side note, what's been done for Tibet - like - Ever? I mean, this Obama stuff is hazardous to my health.
=========================
Honestly, I thought I covered the bases pretty nicely with my posts, it wasn't intended to rekindle meaningless debate/banter. (If you look closely enough at what I presented in truth.)
The element of contradiction is perfect for an Obama made-in-germany ad hoc campaign. Such an illusion would only fuel the paper-puppets row upon row of such onlookers. It kind of sickens me to no end actually. If people in general are so repressed that they need an emotional uplifting speech from a sub-par candidate, it could have been anybody, but because it's obama. . . I mean really.
Let's not go there. It's silly. It's pointless.
====================
^Not to burst your obama_bubble corky, but when you think about what you just read. . . in that 'futuristic' sense, which obama has upgraded his candidacy to a premium. What we're talking about is that Napolean Dynmaite 'vote for pedro' speech where he states "I'll make your wildest dreams come true." In terms of evolution, because this is in Germany how it reminds the world of a pro-african american that defies the odds against the fascist rule that stigmatized that country. It's a very clever political afadavit leading the election campaign. I guarantee you that this 'made in Germany' approach is a strategic effort to sway the current right leaning republicans into a dizzying spiral.
They're using Germany as a platform based upon the present day "we're taking back america" from the right-wing hypocrisy.
========================
Obama doesn't make me feel anything. Maybe that's why so many people showed up. Eager to fill that void, from a 'potential' leader that makes full disclosure in the public circle. If the average democracy in this world, such as in this case Berlin, had more to look forward to than a US presidential candidate public appearance. Obama carries very little mystique.
=======================
Quote
(Of course what the csis agent was referring Khadr to was how "the law" treats it's citizens in the middle east where they are maimed ergo capital punishment.)
Is this not true hap?^ In accordance to the non-specific standards commited by the csis agent, I would say that technically in practice his interrogation blatantly purges upon Khadr. The result of this stereotyping Khadr is appalling.
=====================
The time that Khadr is 'bleeding his heart out' to the response: "I think you're getting good medical care. . . you still have your eyes, you're feet are still at the end of your legs you know. . ." In my opinion this translates into, "You have 2 feet, two hands you're still alive. . .etc." What this revealed really did it for me. (Of course what the csis agent was referring Khadr to was how "the law" treats it's citizens in the middle east where they are maimed ergo capital punishment.) The sociological impact of the csis officer's interrogation are quite simply astounding to say the least.
=====================
The guy interviewing Khadr is an imbicile as well.
====================
100 General Category / General Discussion / have you ever on: July 09, 2008, 09:01AM
. . .met a person so interesting in your life; that when you speak with them it makes your day that much brighter.
======================
Unless Sundin signs with a contender; I seriously doubt a guy of his stature will even bother taking Vancouver. He wants a chance to win, not just get paid to bring a mediocre team like the Canucks into the post-season. Getting rid of Naslund would be a start then go from there. But to offer Sundin 10mil is a desperate move, what the hell they're thinking is a joke. Edmonton, Calgary, Mtl and Ottawa are the teams that have built through the draft + trading. Anaheim has got to be doing something right since Burke and now Nonis are back together. Vancouver and Toronto will be falling to the tank of sharks below next season. . . you'll watch.
========================
I suppressed my urge to go to the beach no longer. . . so today I made a 1hr trip toward lake winnipeg. It was a surprising turnout, which the weather cooperated much. The great weather is a welcome time for summer. Spent the afternoon there, lemonade, mini donuts, and sunbathing. (Kind of making me wonder when the next occassion will be.) No matter.
=================
Holy kripes. 60k. Anyway, when I do my stationary it's mainly for regulating the waist size + cardiovascular system. I never thought cardiovascular health would be as beneficial to me as it has been. A total uphill climb; but i've never attributed the kind of shape I'm now in before I started.
==================
This deserves an ingenious response; simply because our news media neglects to focus on the immoral validation of the war, since they've gone so far to support it, that it leaves the masses to wither in naive ignorance of the truth.
In my view: there is one short message that echos to this history of war in Iraq.
When you know in your heart there is something that should be said, but you don't know what else to say about it - it's probably a nightmare. On the other hand, if there's one thing you'd wish that could happen, it'd be that the perpetrators of such gluttony would come forward and state, "It's all been an accident, we realize what is better after we decided to unilaterally absolve our humanity, thus contribution to the war effort. As such we apologize and regret the actions accountable. Our addmission is that we are sorry and let this not happen in future time." Then we'd measure that sentiment with a statement of our own, that we're not going to punish anyone because we appreciate the solid confession is a step forward in the right direction, leaving us to believe that a new kind of thinking has been found - something we've been unconsciously waiting for yet suspicious it might someday be spontaneous we all agree to it.
Sadly, the reality is not this^. The reality we face is waging war against ourselves because that's what makes the world turn, with money to burn.
However, when you think about it, it's totally unselfish thinking (as in my example of it. . . ) that could save us so much trouble it's almost ridiculous to mention. Honestly, in my mind, the world is a shoestring attach to greatness as in my example suggests, yet - we are either totally completely blind to it as such, yet it's so fucking obvious. I mean honestly. ?Have you ever read anything so cut and dry it makes perfect sense, that the world is at your fingertips ^ that was it.
P.S. I've said from day 1 it was all about oil + CNN.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment