mobileCategory: jihad
11/07/05 11:14 - 46ºF - ID#23601
Schadenfreude! Indeed!
Only in the sense that the French are the loudest critics of how we handle radical Islam, saying they are smarter and safer than we are, that their methods of dealing with the world are far superior to anyone else's. They can't even handle radical Islam in their own country - so why the hell would anyone who cares about National Security listen to them? Remember this is the country that took all of TWO WEEKS to decide their country wasn't worth fighting for in the past. When it comes to fighting terror or dealing with global security issues, we should politely tell France to shut up and let the grown-ups handle it.
More on this later, I have work to do.
Jason
More on this later, I have work to do.
Jason
Permalink: Schadenfreude_Indeed_.html
Words: 123
Location: Buffalo, NY
Category: jihad
11/04/05 01:38 - 62ºF - ID#23600
Burn, Baby Burn!
From Yahoo:
WHY PARIS IS BURNING - by Amir Taheri
AS THE night falls, the "troubles" start — and the pattern is always the same.
Bands of youths in balaclavas start by setting fire to parked cars, break shop windows with baseball bats, wreck public telephones and ransack cinemas, libraries and schools. When the police arrive on the scene, the rioters attack them with stones, knives and baseball bats.
The police respond by firing tear-gas grenades and, on occasions, blank shots in the air. Sometimes the youths fire back — with real bullets.
These scenes are not from the West Bank but from 20 French cities, mostly close to Paris, that have been plunged into a European version of the intifada that at the time of writing appears beyond control.
The troubles first began in Clichy-sous-Bois, an underprivileged suburb east of Paris, a week ago. France's bombastic interior minister, Nicholas Sarkozy, responded by sending over 400 heavily armed policemen to "impose the laws of the republic," and promised to crush "the louts and hooligans" within the day. Within a few days, however, it had dawned on anyone who wanted to know that this was no "outburst by criminal elements" that could be handled with a mixture of braggadocio and batons.
By Monday, everyone in Paris was speaking of "an unprecedented crisis." Both Sarkozy and his boss, Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin, had to cancel foreign trips to deal with the riots.
How did it all start? The accepted account is that sometime last week, a group of young boys in Clichy engaged in one of their favorite sports: stealing parts of parked cars.
Normally, nothing dramatic would have happened, as the police have not been present in that suburb for years.
The poblem came when one of the inhabitants, a female busybody, telephoned the police and reported the thieving spree taking place just opposite her building. The police were thus obliged to do something — which meant entering a city that, as noted, had been a no-go area for them.
Once the police arrived on the scene, the youths — who had been reigning over Clichy pretty unmolested for years — got really angry. A brief chase took place in the street, and two of the youths, who were not actually chased by the police, sought refuge in a cordoned-off area housing a power pylon. Both were electrocuted.
Once news of their deaths was out, Clichy was all up in arms.
With cries of "God is great," bands of youths armed with whatever they could get hold of went on a rampage and forced the police to flee.
The French authorities could not allow a band of youths to expel the police from French territory. So they hit back — sending in Special Forces, known as the CRS, with armored cars and tough rules of engagement.
Within hours, the original cause of the incidents was forgotten and the issue jelled around a demand by the representatives of the rioters that the French police leave the "occupied territories." By midweek, the riots had spread to three of the provinces neighboring Paris, with a population of 5.5 million.
But who lives in the affected areas? In Clichy itself, more than 80 percent of the inhabitants are Muslim immigrants or their children, mostly from Arab and black Africa. In other affected towns, the Muslim immigrant community accounts for 30 percent to 60 percent of the population. But these are not the only figures that matter. Average unemployment in the affected areas is estimated at around 30 percent and, when it comes to young would-be workers, reaches 60 percent.
In these suburban towns, built in the 1950s in imitation of the Soviet social housing of the Stalinist era, people live in crammed conditions, sometimes several generations in a tiny apartment, and see "real French life" only on television.
The French used to flatter themselves for the success of their policy of assimilation, which was supposed to turn immigrants from any background into "proper Frenchmen" within a generation at most.
That policy worked as long as immigrants came to France in drips and drops and thus could merge into a much larger mainstream. Assimilation, however, cannot work when in most schools in the affected areas, fewer than 20 percent of the pupils are native French speakers.
France has also lost another powerful mechanism for assimilation: the obligatory military service abolished in the 1990s.
As the number of immigrants and their descendants increases in a particular locality, more and more of its native French inhabitants leave for "calmer places," thus making assimilation still more difficult.
In some areas, it is possible for an immigrant or his descendants to spend a whole life without ever encountering the need to speak French, let alone familiarize himself with any aspect of the famous French culture.
The result is often alienation. And that, in turn, gives radical Islamists an opportunity to propagate their message of religious and cultural apartheid.
Some are even calling for the areas where Muslims form a majority of the population to be reorganized on the basis of the "millet" system of the Ottoman Empire: Each religious community (millet) would enjoy the right to organize its social, cultural and educational life in accordance with its religious beliefs.
In parts of France, a de facto millet system is already in place. In these areas, all women are obliged to wear the standardized Islamist "hijab" while most men grow their beards to the length prescribed by the sheiks.
The radicals have managed to chase away French shopkeepers selling alcohol and pork products, forced "places of sin," such as dancing halls, cinemas and theaters, to close down, and seized control of much of the local administration.
A reporter who spent last weekend in Clichy and its neighboring towns of Bondy, Aulnay-sous-Bois and Bobigny heard a single overarching message: The French authorities should keep out.
"All we demand is to be left alone," said Mouloud Dahmani, one of the local "emirs" engaged in negotiations to persuade the French to withdraw the police and allow a committee of sheiks, mostly from the Muslim Brotherhood, to negotiate an end to the hostilities.
President Jacques Chirac and Premier de Villepin are especially sore because they had believed that their opposition to the toppling of Saddam Hussein in 2003 would give France a heroic image in the Muslim community.
That illusion has now been shattered — and the Chirac administration, already passing through a deepening political crisis, appears to be clueless about how to cope with what the Parisian daily France Soir has called a "ticking time bomb."
It is now clear that a good portion of France's Muslims not only refuse to assimilate into "the superior French culture," but firmly believe that Islam offers the highest forms of life to which all mankind should aspire.
So what is the solution? One solution, offered by Gilles Kepel, an adviser to Chirac on Islamic affairs, is the creation of "a new Andalusia" in which Christians and Muslims would live side by side and cooperate to create a new cultural synthesis.
The problem with Kepel's vision, however, is that it does not address the important issue of political power. Who will rule this new Andalusia: Muslims or the largely secularist Frenchmen?
Suddenly, French politics has become worth watching again, even though for the wrong reasons.
Amir Taheri, editor of the French quarterly "Politique internationale," is a member of Benador Associates.
WHY PARIS IS BURNING - by Amir Taheri
AS THE night falls, the "troubles" start — and the pattern is always the same.
Bands of youths in balaclavas start by setting fire to parked cars, break shop windows with baseball bats, wreck public telephones and ransack cinemas, libraries and schools. When the police arrive on the scene, the rioters attack them with stones, knives and baseball bats.
The police respond by firing tear-gas grenades and, on occasions, blank shots in the air. Sometimes the youths fire back — with real bullets.
These scenes are not from the West Bank but from 20 French cities, mostly close to Paris, that have been plunged into a European version of the intifada that at the time of writing appears beyond control.
The troubles first began in Clichy-sous-Bois, an underprivileged suburb east of Paris, a week ago. France's bombastic interior minister, Nicholas Sarkozy, responded by sending over 400 heavily armed policemen to "impose the laws of the republic," and promised to crush "the louts and hooligans" within the day. Within a few days, however, it had dawned on anyone who wanted to know that this was no "outburst by criminal elements" that could be handled with a mixture of braggadocio and batons.
By Monday, everyone in Paris was speaking of "an unprecedented crisis." Both Sarkozy and his boss, Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin, had to cancel foreign trips to deal with the riots.
How did it all start? The accepted account is that sometime last week, a group of young boys in Clichy engaged in one of their favorite sports: stealing parts of parked cars.
Normally, nothing dramatic would have happened, as the police have not been present in that suburb for years.
The poblem came when one of the inhabitants, a female busybody, telephoned the police and reported the thieving spree taking place just opposite her building. The police were thus obliged to do something — which meant entering a city that, as noted, had been a no-go area for them.
Once the police arrived on the scene, the youths — who had been reigning over Clichy pretty unmolested for years — got really angry. A brief chase took place in the street, and two of the youths, who were not actually chased by the police, sought refuge in a cordoned-off area housing a power pylon. Both were electrocuted.
Once news of their deaths was out, Clichy was all up in arms.
With cries of "God is great," bands of youths armed with whatever they could get hold of went on a rampage and forced the police to flee.
The French authorities could not allow a band of youths to expel the police from French territory. So they hit back — sending in Special Forces, known as the CRS, with armored cars and tough rules of engagement.
Within hours, the original cause of the incidents was forgotten and the issue jelled around a demand by the representatives of the rioters that the French police leave the "occupied territories." By midweek, the riots had spread to three of the provinces neighboring Paris, with a population of 5.5 million.
But who lives in the affected areas? In Clichy itself, more than 80 percent of the inhabitants are Muslim immigrants or their children, mostly from Arab and black Africa. In other affected towns, the Muslim immigrant community accounts for 30 percent to 60 percent of the population. But these are not the only figures that matter. Average unemployment in the affected areas is estimated at around 30 percent and, when it comes to young would-be workers, reaches 60 percent.
In these suburban towns, built in the 1950s in imitation of the Soviet social housing of the Stalinist era, people live in crammed conditions, sometimes several generations in a tiny apartment, and see "real French life" only on television.
The French used to flatter themselves for the success of their policy of assimilation, which was supposed to turn immigrants from any background into "proper Frenchmen" within a generation at most.
That policy worked as long as immigrants came to France in drips and drops and thus could merge into a much larger mainstream. Assimilation, however, cannot work when in most schools in the affected areas, fewer than 20 percent of the pupils are native French speakers.
France has also lost another powerful mechanism for assimilation: the obligatory military service abolished in the 1990s.
As the number of immigrants and their descendants increases in a particular locality, more and more of its native French inhabitants leave for "calmer places," thus making assimilation still more difficult.
In some areas, it is possible for an immigrant or his descendants to spend a whole life without ever encountering the need to speak French, let alone familiarize himself with any aspect of the famous French culture.
The result is often alienation. And that, in turn, gives radical Islamists an opportunity to propagate their message of religious and cultural apartheid.
Some are even calling for the areas where Muslims form a majority of the population to be reorganized on the basis of the "millet" system of the Ottoman Empire: Each religious community (millet) would enjoy the right to organize its social, cultural and educational life in accordance with its religious beliefs.
In parts of France, a de facto millet system is already in place. In these areas, all women are obliged to wear the standardized Islamist "hijab" while most men grow their beards to the length prescribed by the sheiks.
The radicals have managed to chase away French shopkeepers selling alcohol and pork products, forced "places of sin," such as dancing halls, cinemas and theaters, to close down, and seized control of much of the local administration.
A reporter who spent last weekend in Clichy and its neighboring towns of Bondy, Aulnay-sous-Bois and Bobigny heard a single overarching message: The French authorities should keep out.
"All we demand is to be left alone," said Mouloud Dahmani, one of the local "emirs" engaged in negotiations to persuade the French to withdraw the police and allow a committee of sheiks, mostly from the Muslim Brotherhood, to negotiate an end to the hostilities.
President Jacques Chirac and Premier de Villepin are especially sore because they had believed that their opposition to the toppling of Saddam Hussein in 2003 would give France a heroic image in the Muslim community.
That illusion has now been shattered — and the Chirac administration, already passing through a deepening political crisis, appears to be clueless about how to cope with what the Parisian daily France Soir has called a "ticking time bomb."
It is now clear that a good portion of France's Muslims not only refuse to assimilate into "the superior French culture," but firmly believe that Islam offers the highest forms of life to which all mankind should aspire.
So what is the solution? One solution, offered by Gilles Kepel, an adviser to Chirac on Islamic affairs, is the creation of "a new Andalusia" in which Christians and Muslims would live side by side and cooperate to create a new cultural synthesis.
The problem with Kepel's vision, however, is that it does not address the important issue of political power. Who will rule this new Andalusia: Muslims or the largely secularist Frenchmen?
Suddenly, French politics has become worth watching again, even though for the wrong reasons.
Amir Taheri, editor of the French quarterly "Politique internationale," is a member of Benador Associates.
Permalink: Burn_Baby_Burn_.html
Words: 1229
Location: Buffalo, NY
Category: politics
10/30/05 04:49 - 55ºF - ID#23599
I'll Add Some Context
Since (e:Ajay) refused to acknowledge what I wrote, instead going for the bait and switch. Feel free to look if you are reading and are interested.
Essentially your silence says this:
No, (e:Jason), I refuse to live by the standards I set for you. Do what I say, not what I do. No, I refuse to challenge my own political ideas and no I am not interested in reading the same subject from multiple points of view before coming to my conclusions. No, I am never skeptical of any point of view that lambastes the right - no matter what they say it has to be true! Yes, you are absolutely correct that I am only interested in pointing at the right and staying silent about my own side. I refuse to be anything but a pointy-headed partisan like Hannity and Rush.
How could such a brilliant analytical mind stoop to this when it comes to politics? All I'm asking for is an equal effort, and for you to be as honest as you want me to be. Don't ask me to do the things you refuse to do. I'm trying to reach out my hand here.
Jason
PS - The "Niman is a mosquito, here are the real issues!" argument refuses to acknowledge press accountability, which is the real topic here. Try to stay on topic. We have plenty of time to discuss Halliburton and anything else you desire, but for now try and explain why the media shouldn't be accountable for what they say, and why it isn't a problem that pretty much every media outlet breathes lies or half-truths to the American public on a regular basis. Try and explain to me why Paul Krugman can get away with reprehensible lies about the presidential recount and numerous other topics, and is never forced by his bosses to issue a correction. Instead of reporting facts, it's become favorable to tell a story. Don't tell me this shit isn't nearly as important as "war profiteering". I'm not buying it.
"Niman got some bunk info from someone, liked what he heard, and started telling people the 12 tribes are white supremacists. He didn't need or want anything other than what he agreed with. He wrote an entire article making his case. He is peddling his opinion as if it is fact, and people are going to read the article thinking it is fact. If you were to ask Niman if what he wrote was opinion or fact, what do you think he would say? The "this is just an opinion piece" argument shrivels up as a result.
Maybe you're right. Maybe he isn't lying. Maybe he didn't already have his opinion in his head before he tried making a case for it. Maybe he just got BS information. Apparently that passes as a legitimate argument nowadays. We are seeing it more and more.
Don't think that just because I don't talk about Fox News that I don't have an opinion about them. There are 120239879834798 people talking about Fox News, and zero talking about the alternative press, who get a free pass from everyone. You tell me to be skeptical about what I read, but are you skeptical about what you read from the alternatives or from any information source? I'm sure the answer is yes but I've never asked. I want to make sure that you are willing to be as honest as you want me to be.
I'm willing to "set the example" but I feel like I am completely alone in that sentiment. I feel like people just want ME to point the finger at the right so they can tell me how correct they are, while they stay silent. Nobody wants to point the finger at the people who represent their political "side". As of yet I am the only person on e-strip who is willing to do this. Will you join me? =)
Yes I know Fox News reporting is skewed to the right, everyone knows that. They are the only TV news outlet in the USA that reports this way. There isn't any reporting from any media outlet that isn't skewed. They do report facts, but not the same facts and not in the same context. Hannity and O'Reilly and Rush and the rest - no I do not think everything that comes out of their mouth is fact. I am not so far to the right as a Hannity or a Rush.
Ultimately I want truth, and truth does not come from a single source. It comes from reading a broad spectrum of pieces. I feel like I'm the only person on e-strip who does that as well. I feel like I'm the only one who is willing to challenge his/her ideas and to grow. I'll never be a partisan."
Essentially your silence says this:
No, (e:Jason), I refuse to live by the standards I set for you. Do what I say, not what I do. No, I refuse to challenge my own political ideas and no I am not interested in reading the same subject from multiple points of view before coming to my conclusions. No, I am never skeptical of any point of view that lambastes the right - no matter what they say it has to be true! Yes, you are absolutely correct that I am only interested in pointing at the right and staying silent about my own side. I refuse to be anything but a pointy-headed partisan like Hannity and Rush.
How could such a brilliant analytical mind stoop to this when it comes to politics? All I'm asking for is an equal effort, and for you to be as honest as you want me to be. Don't ask me to do the things you refuse to do. I'm trying to reach out my hand here.
Jason
PS - The "Niman is a mosquito, here are the real issues!" argument refuses to acknowledge press accountability, which is the real topic here. Try to stay on topic. We have plenty of time to discuss Halliburton and anything else you desire, but for now try and explain why the media shouldn't be accountable for what they say, and why it isn't a problem that pretty much every media outlet breathes lies or half-truths to the American public on a regular basis. Try and explain to me why Paul Krugman can get away with reprehensible lies about the presidential recount and numerous other topics, and is never forced by his bosses to issue a correction. Instead of reporting facts, it's become favorable to tell a story. Don't tell me this shit isn't nearly as important as "war profiteering". I'm not buying it.
"Niman got some bunk info from someone, liked what he heard, and started telling people the 12 tribes are white supremacists. He didn't need or want anything other than what he agreed with. He wrote an entire article making his case. He is peddling his opinion as if it is fact, and people are going to read the article thinking it is fact. If you were to ask Niman if what he wrote was opinion or fact, what do you think he would say? The "this is just an opinion piece" argument shrivels up as a result.
Maybe you're right. Maybe he isn't lying. Maybe he didn't already have his opinion in his head before he tried making a case for it. Maybe he just got BS information. Apparently that passes as a legitimate argument nowadays. We are seeing it more and more.
Don't think that just because I don't talk about Fox News that I don't have an opinion about them. There are 120239879834798 people talking about Fox News, and zero talking about the alternative press, who get a free pass from everyone. You tell me to be skeptical about what I read, but are you skeptical about what you read from the alternatives or from any information source? I'm sure the answer is yes but I've never asked. I want to make sure that you are willing to be as honest as you want me to be.
I'm willing to "set the example" but I feel like I am completely alone in that sentiment. I feel like people just want ME to point the finger at the right so they can tell me how correct they are, while they stay silent. Nobody wants to point the finger at the people who represent their political "side". As of yet I am the only person on e-strip who is willing to do this. Will you join me? =)
Yes I know Fox News reporting is skewed to the right, everyone knows that. They are the only TV news outlet in the USA that reports this way. There isn't any reporting from any media outlet that isn't skewed. They do report facts, but not the same facts and not in the same context. Hannity and O'Reilly and Rush and the rest - no I do not think everything that comes out of their mouth is fact. I am not so far to the right as a Hannity or a Rush.
Ultimately I want truth, and truth does not come from a single source. It comes from reading a broad spectrum of pieces. I feel like I'm the only person on e-strip who does that as well. I feel like I'm the only one who is willing to challenge his/her ideas and to grow. I'll never be a partisan."
Permalink: I_ll_Add_Some_Context.html
Words: 807
Location: Buffalo, NY
Category: politics
10/29/05 04:27 - 50ºF - ID#23598
Why Bush Is Unimpeachable
From HuffingtonPost: 
"The News article is anonymously sourced but we know it's 100 percent true because the White House won't deny that Bush is a traitor."
Some people just can't be helped. I've said for a long time that for some people, "truth" means "whatever the left writes that goes against the right, regardless of lack of proof or any kind of logic." Hey hey hey guess what?!?! I have a 25 inch cock! That's right, 25 thick motherfucking inches! Over two feet of monstrous pleasure for the ladies (sorry dudes)! Is it true? Hell yes it is true, because I say so and no I don't have to prove myself, I just have to believe it! So goes the media in October 2005.
My take? If someone is at fault, AND IF THEY ARE PROVEN IN A COURT TO BE GUILTY (this is very important to remember, in the US legal system people are innocent until proven guilty - I suppose this exposes a mortal flaw in our legal system too, eh lefties) then they should pay the consequences. I'm not going to be one of those assholes (they are all over the left and the right) who completely ignore anything my side does while hypocritically going after the other side. I have no use for people like that - they are intellectual toddlers. I want clean government and it's not good enough for only one party to be clean. Indictments are what (in part) helped the Republicans to take Congress. Mr. White Lie Bush and Mr. Sexual Assault Artist Clinton (not to mention his husband...err wife) should both be jailbirds as far as I'm concerned (yeah, I think that if it were possible for a US president to be accountable for crimes, they both very well could end up in prison as charges could actually be brought against them and successfully argued).
Jason
"The News article is anonymously sourced but we know it's 100 percent true because the White House won't deny that Bush is a traitor."
Some people just can't be helped. I've said for a long time that for some people, "truth" means "whatever the left writes that goes against the right, regardless of lack of proof or any kind of logic." Hey hey hey guess what?!?! I have a 25 inch cock! That's right, 25 thick motherfucking inches! Over two feet of monstrous pleasure for the ladies (sorry dudes)! Is it true? Hell yes it is true, because I say so and no I don't have to prove myself, I just have to believe it! So goes the media in October 2005.
My take? If someone is at fault, AND IF THEY ARE PROVEN IN A COURT TO BE GUILTY (this is very important to remember, in the US legal system people are innocent until proven guilty - I suppose this exposes a mortal flaw in our legal system too, eh lefties) then they should pay the consequences. I'm not going to be one of those assholes (they are all over the left and the right) who completely ignore anything my side does while hypocritically going after the other side. I have no use for people like that - they are intellectual toddlers. I want clean government and it's not good enough for only one party to be clean. Indictments are what (in part) helped the Republicans to take Congress. Mr. White Lie Bush and Mr. Sexual Assault Artist Clinton (not to mention his husband...err wife) should both be jailbirds as far as I'm concerned (yeah, I think that if it were possible for a US president to be accountable for crimes, they both very well could end up in prison as charges could actually be brought against them and successfully argued).
Jason
Permalink: Why_Bush_Is_Unimpeachable.html
Words: 332
Location: Buffalo, NY
Category: business
10/27/05 01:08 - 42ºF - ID#23597
Disgusting Filthy Motherfuckers
I read today on the CNN and Fox News web sites that Exxon/Mobil has posted the highest quarterly profit in US corporate history:
10 Billion dollars. TEN BILLION IN ONE QUARTER!! People are freaking out about heating and other fuel costs, and those assholes made 50% of their record profits from last year in one quarter. I don't care what anyone tells me, this is not right. They are laughing at us right now, sitting in their corner offices and putting their middle fingers up, shouting "Fuck you jerks, we can do this and you're so addicted to oil you can't do a goddamn thing about it!"
There comes a time when a company should give back to the country that allows it to earn big profits - like for example during national emergencies. Is 5 Billion in profit not enough? Is 1 Billion not enough? People's heating costs are expected to rise by 90 percent this winter and Exxon would rather see their pockets getting fatter instead of their customers having heated homes and lower gas prices during a time of national emergency. FUCK YOU EXXON!!
Jason
10 Billion dollars. TEN BILLION IN ONE QUARTER!! People are freaking out about heating and other fuel costs, and those assholes made 50% of their record profits from last year in one quarter. I don't care what anyone tells me, this is not right. They are laughing at us right now, sitting in their corner offices and putting their middle fingers up, shouting "Fuck you jerks, we can do this and you're so addicted to oil you can't do a goddamn thing about it!"
There comes a time when a company should give back to the country that allows it to earn big profits - like for example during national emergencies. Is 5 Billion in profit not enough? Is 1 Billion not enough? People's heating costs are expected to rise by 90 percent this winter and Exxon would rather see their pockets getting fatter instead of their customers having heated homes and lower gas prices during a time of national emergency. FUCK YOU EXXON!!
Jason
Permalink: Disgusting_Filthy_Motherfuckers.html
Words: 190
Location: Buffalo, NY
Category: sad
10/27/05 11:11 - 41ºF - ID#23596
Bad Week Becomes Worse
I found out last night one of my friends, Kim, died yesterday. I don't know all of the details yet but from what I know, she wasn't happy, things happened, and she was rushed to a hospital in Rochester for a Liver transplant. She never made it alive to the hospital. I know my friend Janine is going to tell me later that she did it to herself and I just don't want to hear the words come out of her mouth. She was Janine's best friend. I've got this song playing in my head over and over....
Doves - Caught by the River
Son
What have you done?
You're caught by the river
You're coming undone
Life
You know it can't be so easy
But you can't just leave it
Cause you're not in control no more
And you give it all away
Would you give it all away now?
Don't let it come apart
Don't want to see you come apart
Son
What are you doing?
You learned a hard lesson
When you stood by the water
You and I
Were so full of love and hope
Would you give it all up now?
Would you give in just to spite them all?
Cause you give it all away
And you give it all away now
Don't let it come apart
Don't want to see you come apart
Cause you give it all away
And you give it all away now
Don't let it come apart
Don't want to see you come apart
Lay
I lay in the long grass
So many people
So many people pass
Stay
Stay here and lie on back
Get down in the cornfields
Stay till we're caught at last
Give it all away
Give it all away now
Don't let it come apart
Don't want to see you come apart
And you give it all away
Would you give it all away now?
Don't let it come apart
Don't want to see you come apart
Would you give it all away?
Would you give it all away?
Would you give it all away?
Give it all away
Give it all away
Give it all away
Give it all away
Doves - Caught by the River
Son
What have you done?
You're caught by the river
You're coming undone
Life
You know it can't be so easy
But you can't just leave it
Cause you're not in control no more
And you give it all away
Would you give it all away now?
Don't let it come apart
Don't want to see you come apart
Son
What are you doing?
You learned a hard lesson
When you stood by the water
You and I
Were so full of love and hope
Would you give it all up now?
Would you give in just to spite them all?
Cause you give it all away
And you give it all away now
Don't let it come apart
Don't want to see you come apart
Cause you give it all away
And you give it all away now
Don't let it come apart
Don't want to see you come apart
Lay
I lay in the long grass
So many people
So many people pass
Stay
Stay here and lie on back
Get down in the cornfields
Stay till we're caught at last
Give it all away
Give it all away now
Don't let it come apart
Don't want to see you come apart
And you give it all away
Would you give it all away now?
Don't let it come apart
Don't want to see you come apart
Would you give it all away?
Would you give it all away?
Would you give it all away?
Give it all away
Give it all away
Give it all away
Give it all away
Permalink: Bad_Week_Becomes_Worse.html
Words: 367
Location: Buffalo, NY
Category: rant
10/26/05 02:06 - ID#23595
Fuck You, Planet Earth!
I am a man with numerous issues. I wake up every morning thinking, "Jesus Fucking Christ, I can't believe I have to go through this shit again." Although the doctors tell me it is a detriment to my health and mental well being, I drink and do drugs on a regular basis because life is so excruciatingly boring, ugly, pointless and nonsensical. There are so many things that make me want to give the world a middle finger and check out of this mess.
I hate the fact that someone who is higher up than you on the corporate food chain feels like it is his God-given right to belittle you and tell you how idiotic and appalling you are. They talk at you like you are a lesser human being. They hold their position of power and your own job over your head as if to say "yeah I'm fisting you in the ass, you'll take it and you'll beg for more." This makes me want to go on a Buckhead-esque killing spree to rid the world of these assholes. Nobody would miss them anyway but their gold-digging ass trophy wives, and even they would only miss the lifestyle.
I am sick and god damn tired of people thinking that an act of kindness on their part deserves reciprocation. Not once in my life have I ever done something for someone thinking, "man, I wonder what I can get out of this one!" If you do something nice expecting that they should reciprocate, you are a disingenuous asshole. Just don't bother. I'm at the point where I don't want anyone doing anything for me because I'm afraid they have alterior motives, or they will get pissy with me if I don't give them anything more than a thank you. I hate being this cynical.
Ladies, I love you and I hate you at the same time. You have no idea how intensely I can love. I would jump into the middle of a fight and take knives and bullets to defend your honor. I would bleed every drop out of my body before I would allow you to be hurt. Yet I am looked at with contempt and made to feel I am not worthy or good enough to even share a conversation. You go for the most superficial, thuggish, despicable behavior possible and I am always caught off guard. It always surprises me and it always hurts. Worse yet, I can be as selfless as possible and it will still always be about you and what you want. What men want and need just isn't important to you. I've allowed you to turn me into a self-absorbed, cynical, angry human being. That's my fault but FUCK YOU for thinking that humility, grace and mercy are nothing more than words. At this point I just want me to be happy, not you. For once I deserve to be happy god damn it. No, I am not going to bend over backwards trying to cater to you. If you dig me it does not mean that I have to dig you, and don't make me feel uncomfortable about it because I will become furious at your uncaring attitude towards me. Sometimes it just doesn't work out but I will always be respectful and I will never put you down or think that I am somehow better than you. All I want from you is unconditional love and understanding but my god it's like I'm asking you to change the way our planet spins on its axis. I am so frustrated that I'm giving up on the idea of having a family someday.
About the war on terror - everyone goes way out of their way to tell us how evil Christians are, yet they routinely ignore the islamo-fascists out there who are killing indiscriminately all over the world to intimidate people, to force them to see the world their way. You don't check out the BBC and hear these people, in their own words, say how they want to raise the flag of fundamentalist Islam over every nation, but I do. They hate Western Civilization and see it as immoral. They have a bloodlust for killing unbelievers and we're sitting over here sipping lattes and waxing philosophical about how bad we are. I wonder what level of violence it will take for us to wake the fuck up. Terrorism SHOULD be fought, not just by the US Military, but by the entire globe. It's actually a very simple situation - Islamo-fascists want to kill you or convert you, regardless of your status as a flaming liberal, for no other reason than their disapproval of Western civilization. They kill their own brother muslims all the fucking time for not being muslim enough. The evidence is right in front of your face every day but you refuse to see it. The world needs to take action. For me it's not a matter of "is it winnable", it's "terrorism MUST lose." If you want to give up, if you want to NOT fight the war on terror, then you must like the idea of a world dominated politically by the Islamo-fascists and their bombs. Better them than the Christians, eh?
To me the world is so fucked up and backwards that it is unbearable. I don't know why I care so much. I should just not give a shit and do like Nero, happily playing my lyre while watching the world burn. I don't think it's fixable - the human race is spiraling down the fucking toilet and who gives a shit as long as we get our free social benefits and are allowed to go on living our uncaring, misanthropic lifestyle! Fuck it, I am locking myself in my apartment for a while and I'm not coming out unless it's to get food or other essentials. Fuck everyone, fuck me fuck you fuck the planet. We deserve to perish.
Jason
I hate the fact that someone who is higher up than you on the corporate food chain feels like it is his God-given right to belittle you and tell you how idiotic and appalling you are. They talk at you like you are a lesser human being. They hold their position of power and your own job over your head as if to say "yeah I'm fisting you in the ass, you'll take it and you'll beg for more." This makes me want to go on a Buckhead-esque killing spree to rid the world of these assholes. Nobody would miss them anyway but their gold-digging ass trophy wives, and even they would only miss the lifestyle.
I am sick and god damn tired of people thinking that an act of kindness on their part deserves reciprocation. Not once in my life have I ever done something for someone thinking, "man, I wonder what I can get out of this one!" If you do something nice expecting that they should reciprocate, you are a disingenuous asshole. Just don't bother. I'm at the point where I don't want anyone doing anything for me because I'm afraid they have alterior motives, or they will get pissy with me if I don't give them anything more than a thank you. I hate being this cynical.
Ladies, I love you and I hate you at the same time. You have no idea how intensely I can love. I would jump into the middle of a fight and take knives and bullets to defend your honor. I would bleed every drop out of my body before I would allow you to be hurt. Yet I am looked at with contempt and made to feel I am not worthy or good enough to even share a conversation. You go for the most superficial, thuggish, despicable behavior possible and I am always caught off guard. It always surprises me and it always hurts. Worse yet, I can be as selfless as possible and it will still always be about you and what you want. What men want and need just isn't important to you. I've allowed you to turn me into a self-absorbed, cynical, angry human being. That's my fault but FUCK YOU for thinking that humility, grace and mercy are nothing more than words. At this point I just want me to be happy, not you. For once I deserve to be happy god damn it. No, I am not going to bend over backwards trying to cater to you. If you dig me it does not mean that I have to dig you, and don't make me feel uncomfortable about it because I will become furious at your uncaring attitude towards me. Sometimes it just doesn't work out but I will always be respectful and I will never put you down or think that I am somehow better than you. All I want from you is unconditional love and understanding but my god it's like I'm asking you to change the way our planet spins on its axis. I am so frustrated that I'm giving up on the idea of having a family someday.
About the war on terror - everyone goes way out of their way to tell us how evil Christians are, yet they routinely ignore the islamo-fascists out there who are killing indiscriminately all over the world to intimidate people, to force them to see the world their way. You don't check out the BBC and hear these people, in their own words, say how they want to raise the flag of fundamentalist Islam over every nation, but I do. They hate Western Civilization and see it as immoral. They have a bloodlust for killing unbelievers and we're sitting over here sipping lattes and waxing philosophical about how bad we are. I wonder what level of violence it will take for us to wake the fuck up. Terrorism SHOULD be fought, not just by the US Military, but by the entire globe. It's actually a very simple situation - Islamo-fascists want to kill you or convert you, regardless of your status as a flaming liberal, for no other reason than their disapproval of Western civilization. They kill their own brother muslims all the fucking time for not being muslim enough. The evidence is right in front of your face every day but you refuse to see it. The world needs to take action. For me it's not a matter of "is it winnable", it's "terrorism MUST lose." If you want to give up, if you want to NOT fight the war on terror, then you must like the idea of a world dominated politically by the Islamo-fascists and their bombs. Better them than the Christians, eh?
To me the world is so fucked up and backwards that it is unbearable. I don't know why I care so much. I should just not give a shit and do like Nero, happily playing my lyre while watching the world burn. I don't think it's fixable - the human race is spiraling down the fucking toilet and who gives a shit as long as we get our free social benefits and are allowed to go on living our uncaring, misanthropic lifestyle! Fuck it, I am locking myself in my apartment for a while and I'm not coming out unless it's to get food or other essentials. Fuck everyone, fuck me fuck you fuck the planet. We deserve to perish.
Jason
Permalink: Fuck_You_Planet_Earth_.html
Words: 998
Location: Buffalo, NY
Category: fun
10/25/05 06:32 - 43ºF - ID#23594
Club 110 Reunited!
My good friend (and former roommate) Walt came from Florida to hang out with us and engage in some debauchery. I can't show you the bad stuff but here are some pics of the guys before we went out.
(e:Jason) and Walt:
(e:Joshua) and Walt:
(e:Jason) and Jerry (OMG Jason lost a finger!):
Walt, (e:Joshua) and Jerry
(e:Jason) and Walt:
(e:Joshua) and Walt:
(e:Jason) and Jerry (OMG Jason lost a finger!):
Walt, (e:Joshua) and Jerry
Permalink: Club_110_Reunited_.html
Words: 69
Location: Buffalo, NY
Category: potpourri
10/20/05 12:05 - ID#23593
Quick Hits
In a stunning act of Congressional common sense, the House passed the "Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act" by a vote of 307-119.
Essentially what the House is saying is - "If you stuff your face with whoppers and bacon and fries it's your own damn fault if you blimp up!" You have to be pretty much brain dead to not know that fast food is unhealthy. If this isn't a case of common sense, I don't think there is one. And if your kids become fat because you feed them a diet of fries and burgers, you are not doing right by them in the least, and it is YOUR fault. I've grown to believe that the US is quickly becoming a place where personal responsibility doesn't matter (hey it's anyone's fault but mine!), but this development is encouraging.
In an equally stunning act of ignorance, burgeoning dictator and hero to kook liberals the world over Hugo Chavez claims the US is planning to invade Venezuela!
Of course Chavez is blowing smoke, but the liberal media grabs hold to anything that is remotely anti-US or anti-Bush and runs with it whether it is fact or fiction. He gives us the eternally flawed reasoning that we want Venezuela's oil just like we went to Iraq to get their oil. Yeah buddy, sure. I'm beyond tired of explaining to you all why this argument betrays logic, reality and common sense. I'm not sure what's funnier, that or Chavez's claim that we would pay for "100 centuries" and drown in our own blood if we indeed launched his fantasy invasion. Rather than doing the correct thing (passing this stuff off as crazed nonsense), the media instead rolls with it, believing Chavez and his looney talk. How amusing.
Jason
Essentially what the House is saying is - "If you stuff your face with whoppers and bacon and fries it's your own damn fault if you blimp up!" You have to be pretty much brain dead to not know that fast food is unhealthy. If this isn't a case of common sense, I don't think there is one. And if your kids become fat because you feed them a diet of fries and burgers, you are not doing right by them in the least, and it is YOUR fault. I've grown to believe that the US is quickly becoming a place where personal responsibility doesn't matter (hey it's anyone's fault but mine!), but this development is encouraging.
In an equally stunning act of ignorance, burgeoning dictator and hero to kook liberals the world over Hugo Chavez claims the US is planning to invade Venezuela!
Of course Chavez is blowing smoke, but the liberal media grabs hold to anything that is remotely anti-US or anti-Bush and runs with it whether it is fact or fiction. He gives us the eternally flawed reasoning that we want Venezuela's oil just like we went to Iraq to get their oil. Yeah buddy, sure. I'm beyond tired of explaining to you all why this argument betrays logic, reality and common sense. I'm not sure what's funnier, that or Chavez's claim that we would pay for "100 centuries" and drown in our own blood if we indeed launched his fantasy invasion. Rather than doing the correct thing (passing this stuff off as crazed nonsense), the media instead rolls with it, believing Chavez and his looney talk. How amusing.
Jason
Permalink: Quick_Hits.html
Words: 326
Location: Buffalo, NY
Category: gender
10/19/05 04:16 - ID#23592
Are You Sure That's YOUR Kid?
From LiveScience:
"About 4 percent of men may unknowingly be raising a child that really belongs to the mailman or some other guy, researchers speculate in a new study."
How fascinating. Look around you and see that approximately 1 in every 25 fathers aren't raising their child. Of course nobody cares about the plight of men in this situation, especially the feminized quasi-men out there who constantly and happily write biased law and willingly accept that other men get the shaft in court and in life. This is especially true in California where it doesn't matter if you're the dad or not - you're paying buddy! Watch the feminist lobby try to work AGAINST technological advances which can make parental identification easy.
What happens if you're a guy and have been DUPED and LIED TO by your wife concerning their adultery and the identity of the child's father? You're pressured by women's groups and the already mentioned pseudo-men to be a "real man" and "do what's best for the child." If you don't pay up what happens? You GO TO JAIL. I challenge ANY OF YOU to come up with a vaild reason that explains why we allow this to happen. Where's the fairness and equity in the law? How many of you guys out there know that in NYS if you get engaged and give her an engagement ring, she can just say "eh I don't like him" and call off the wedding, but legally she is ENTITLED to the ring that you probably spent thousands of dollars on? FUCK THAT!
I'm sure some of you are wondering what I would do if I found out the kid I've loved and raised was fathered by some other guy. What would YOU do, Jason? I would walk the fuck out, that's what I would do. And I wouldn't pay one single damn penny towards the child's upbringing. If I had to go to jail, then fine I would be sitting in a jail cell because I didn't pay up for a kid that wasn't mine. I would rather do that than feel the shame, humiliation and helplessness of being the guy who got fucked over in life by some cheating ass wife. Not your kid? You should be FREE from any obligation regarding the child. It's not your problem anymore, it's between the REAL father and the REAL mother. Anything else is biased, anti-male bullshit that needs to be eradicated.
Jason
"About 4 percent of men may unknowingly be raising a child that really belongs to the mailman or some other guy, researchers speculate in a new study."
How fascinating. Look around you and see that approximately 1 in every 25 fathers aren't raising their child. Of course nobody cares about the plight of men in this situation, especially the feminized quasi-men out there who constantly and happily write biased law and willingly accept that other men get the shaft in court and in life. This is especially true in California where it doesn't matter if you're the dad or not - you're paying buddy! Watch the feminist lobby try to work AGAINST technological advances which can make parental identification easy.
What happens if you're a guy and have been DUPED and LIED TO by your wife concerning their adultery and the identity of the child's father? You're pressured by women's groups and the already mentioned pseudo-men to be a "real man" and "do what's best for the child." If you don't pay up what happens? You GO TO JAIL. I challenge ANY OF YOU to come up with a vaild reason that explains why we allow this to happen. Where's the fairness and equity in the law? How many of you guys out there know that in NYS if you get engaged and give her an engagement ring, she can just say "eh I don't like him" and call off the wedding, but legally she is ENTITLED to the ring that you probably spent thousands of dollars on? FUCK THAT!
I'm sure some of you are wondering what I would do if I found out the kid I've loved and raised was fathered by some other guy. What would YOU do, Jason? I would walk the fuck out, that's what I would do. And I wouldn't pay one single damn penny towards the child's upbringing. If I had to go to jail, then fine I would be sitting in a jail cell because I didn't pay up for a kid that wasn't mine. I would rather do that than feel the shame, humiliation and helplessness of being the guy who got fucked over in life by some cheating ass wife. Not your kid? You should be FREE from any obligation regarding the child. It's not your problem anymore, it's between the REAL father and the REAL mother. Anything else is biased, anti-male bullshit that needs to be eradicated.
Jason
Permalink: Are_You_Sure_That_s_YOUR_Kid_.html
Words: 416
Location: Buffalo, NY
Author Info
Date Cloud
- 11/11
- 08/11
- 03/11
- 10/10
- 09/10
- 08/10
- 07/10
- 06/10
- 05/10
- 04/10
- 03/10
- 02/10
- 01/10
- 12/09
- 11/09
- 10/09
- 09/09
- 08/09
- 07/09
- 06/09
- 05/09
- 04/09
- 03/09
- 02/09
- 01/09
- 12/08
- 11/08
- 10/08
- 09/08
- 08/08
- 07/08
- 06/08
- 05/08
- 04/08
- 03/08
- 02/08
- 01/08
- 12/07
- 11/07
- 10/07
- 09/07
- 08/07
- 07/07
- 06/07
- 05/07
- 04/07
- 03/07
- 02/07
- 01/07
- 12/06
- 11/06
- 10/06
- 09/06
- 08/06
- 07/06
- 06/06
- 05/06
- 04/06
- 03/06
- 02/06
- 01/06
- 12/05
- 11/05
- 10/05
- 09/05
- 08/05
- 07/05
- 06/05
- 05/05
- 04/05
- 03/05
- 02/05
- 01/05
- 12/04
- 11/04
- 10/04
- 09/04
- 08/04
Category Cloud
More Entries
After This
My Fav Posts
- This user has zero favorite blogs selected ;(
hiking recovery 
Hummus ? 
Nephew's Art 
Spring Feelz 
Hello hello 
moz://a