 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Arthritis / December 2005OTP Theodore Roosevelt on Immigrants
Theodore Roosevelt on Immigrants and being an AMERICAN in 1907. "In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people." Theodore Roosevelt 1907 2005-11-26, Responding to Gwen Love... > Theodore Roosevelt on Immigrants and being an AMERICAN in 1907. > "In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Theodore Roosevelt 1907 Esto es interesante, pero estoy luchando para ver cómo tiene cualquier importancia a la artritis en cualquier manera cualesquiera. ¿Dado el hecho de que esto es un internationl foro abierto, y centrado absolutamente específicamente en artritis, y dado que es claramente un poste sobre política e historia americanas, me estoy preguntando qué clase de respuestas usted está buscando aquí? Or am I missing something here? ;\ Mike@N.UK  Signature---- * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) I think that this is the sentiment of most Americans. Immigrants is what made this country. Except for the Native Americans, we all came from immigrants. But they came here to Be Americans. So if you come to live in this country...BE AN AMERICAN Thanks for sharing Gwen. Hugs Cindy > Theodore Roosevelt on Immigrants and being an AMERICAN in 1907. > "In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Theodore Roosevelt 1907 2005-11-29, Responding to Cindy/the subject in general... >> Theodore Roosevelt on Immigrants and being an AMERICAN in 1907. >> "In the first place we should insist that if the >> immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an >> American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be >> treated on an exact equality with everyone else, [...] > I think that this is the sentiment of most Americans. > Immigrants is what made this country. Except for the > Native Americans, we all came from immigrants. But they > came here to Be Americans. So if you come to live in this > country...BE AN AMERICAN Thanks for sharing Gwen. Hugs > Cindy Why is it I get nagged for pointing out there are securable free alternatives to M$ when people are struggling with yet another bug/hole in their OS, but subjects where different nationalities could easily have differing opinions, even conflicting views, (read "will") are somehow "Ok" because they are about the U.S. and from a particular viewpoint at that? Would it be ok for me to post up about the downside of American history and the many and ongoing abuses of the principles of the Constitution and Bill of Rights? Citations of occasions where Presidents (and others in positions of power) have behaved in the most deplorable manner even? Maybe we could examine the views of the 2nd-Amendment "enthusiasts" for instance, and the opinions of many of them regarding skin colour? We could even discuss the virtual genocide of the "Native Americans" and the many ways "America" betrayed their agreements with them, over and over... Or would that be going over the top a little? If its an "Americans only" thing BTW, then maybe it would be better served as a subject on a more appropriate NG? Mike@N.UK Signature---- * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) That's okay, MikesBrain, we like this NG just fine! Gwen > 2005-11-29, Responding to Cindy/the subject in general... >>> Theodore Roosevelt on Immigrants and being an AMERICAN in 1907. [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt > - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) 2005-11-30, Responding to Gwen Love... [...] (I'm assuming you were responding to this bit?) >> If its an "Americans only" thing BTW, then maybe it would be >> better served as a subject on a more appropriate NG? >> > That's okay, MikesBrain, we like this NG just fine! > Gwen I which case, would it therefore be appropriate, under the OT tag, to continue developing threads of a political nature on this NG? What I'm refering to is when somebody (me occasionally ;) posts something that challenges the "norm" politically, there is typically a round of accusations of partisan politics, "Anti-Americanism", and other indications of outrage sometimes bordering on McCarthy-ist knee-jerk paranoia. "I've had enough of this guy's Anti-Americanism!" etc. (But I only asked what the weather was like! ;) (Only from the American side of things though, ever noticed that one? You NEVER read people biting back with "Anti-Brit" or "Anti-French" or "Anti-German" etc. Only "Anti-American" Curious huh?) But when someone posts up a chunk of patriotic flag-waving to an international forum, (again, curiously, only from certain Americans), you can almost hear the cheering through your newsreader from those quarters. So, based on your comment above, my key question is... Is it as ok to challenge assumptive statements as it is to make them? Following on from this of course comes the further question of just where is the line on this kind of thing. Is it when someone is offended? Is it when enough people are offended to register it as a problem? What? ??? Who decides what is acceptable and what is not? My curious mind awaits your wisdom, dear lady. ;) Mike@N.UK Signature---- * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) Mike, again I say to tell your brain that if it is posted OT or OTP, just don't read it. Problem solved. Gwen > 2005-11-30, Responding to Gwen Love... > [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > > Mike@N.UK 2005-12-01, Responding to Gwen Love... >> 2005-11-30, Responding to Gwen Love... >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >> OT tag, to continue developing threads of a political >> nature on this NG? [...] >> Who decides what is acceptable and what is not? >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > OT or OTP, just don't read it. Problem solved. > Gwen Hmmm... Dodging the question huh? ;\ There is no "problem" regarding reading posts to "solve". There are however unanswered (dodged?) questions regarding the content of some posts. Just sliding in behind the "Its OT so its ok!" excuse does not work for my explaining how to free onself from M$ bugware, it does not work for those who are called trolls (though most are indeed trolls, but not all) and it probably shouldn't work for exhortations to "support our troops" etc. And for those reasons and similar, I would have also thought that random postings such as regarding some dead president's opinions on immigration could be seen as provocative, and to some, potentially racist. Certainly a questionable post to appear "out of the blue" methinks, even under an OT tag. Therefore, once again, my curious mind is interested in where YOU "draw the line" on these matters, and what rational you deploy. Can I start posting about the devastation of Palestine and other US(and UK) backings of horrific terrorist actions across the globe? Or is that too OT for this NG? Should I dump my thoughts and comments regarding the phenomenon of "learned helplessness" that afflicts so many dependant on M$ software, on this NG? How about the subject of BiSexual invisibility within the medical establishments of both the US and the UK, where to many in authority, BiSexuality is still a "mental disturbance"? Thats a good one, huh? Come on Gwen, where IS that line? Do tell! ;) P.S. Remember, I have a QUESTION, not a "problem". I WANT to know, rather than NEED to know. Mike@N.UK Signature---- * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) This is a "support" group. We offer "SUPPORT" to each other. We offer advice on arthritis based on our experiences and what our RD's and other doctors tell us. We also share recipes, tell stories, vent frustrations, offer cyber-hugs to those who need them and cyber-kiss each other's boo-boos. We gang up (or take turns) stomping on trolls and "people" who want to make a dishonest coin selling us worthless ointments and nostrums. We have also agreed to try to avoid posting things which will offend others, including political, ethnic and other prejudicial diatribes and pornography. Occasionally, some of us do post something of a so-called "adult" (?!!!) nature, but we put something in the header to warn others, such as "R rated", just as we put "OT" or "OTP" in the header to indicate that the post is "Off Topic". As I say, MOST of us try to avoid irritating/annoying/insulting others. The trolls like to irritate/annoy/insult others. The spammers like to irritate/annoy/insult others while trying to badger those who tell them that their fake cures are not wanted here. You also seem to enjoy irritating/annoying/insulting others, though I'm not sure whether this is out of boredom or from being frustrated with your social ineptness (ineptitude???). Sometimes you DO post something supportive or on topic, but most of the time you just find fault with everyone else. If you are really that bothered by everyone here, why don't you go somewhere which is more to your liking. 2005-12-04, Responding to Norman... > This is a "support" group. > [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > If you are really that bothered by everyone here, why don't you go > somewhere which is more to your liking. Who are you responding to Norman? Mike@N.UK Signature---- * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) > You also seem to enjoy irritating/annoying/insulting others, though I'm > not sure whether this is out of boredom or from being frustrated with > your social ineptness (ineptitude???). Okay, why don't you have a read of what you just wrote and explain to me how you're not a hypocrite? I've stayed right away from this thread because it started as a politically provocative thread that probably shouldn't have been posted here, even with "OTP" added to the heading. I think it's long past time that this thread is allowed to die. Signaturespammage trappage: remove the underscores to reply I'm going to die rather sooner than I'd like. I tried to protect my neighbours from crime, and became the victim of it. Complications in hospital following this resulted in a serious illness. I now need a bone marrow transplant. Many people around the world are waiting for a marrow transplant, too. Please volunteer to be a marrow donor: http://www.abmdr.org.au/ http://www.marrow.org/ > > You also seem to enjoy irritating/annoying/insulting others, though I'm > > not sure whether this is out of boredom or from being frustrated with [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > shouldn't have been posted here, even with "OTP" added to the heading. I > think it's long past time that this thread is allowed to die. Didn't we agree some time ago that if a political thread is introduced into this forum it would say "POLITICS", so a reader can see immediately what it's about. IMO, OTP is not enough. It's not a joke, a recipe, or a movie review. Politics is/can be very volatile, so it's always in the group's best interest to just not post politics. Hell's bells, if we go the political route, I'm sure I could affend lots and lots of people here. I choose, however, not to do that, even with the most seemingly benign post, such as Gwen's. Gwen, I'm sorry, but your post is not benign. It raises all kinds of issues that do not belong in this support group. But, I do understand your good intentions, and you are just too nice to try and stir up stuff. See, I know that, but MikesBrain apparently does not. I'm not saying that MikesBrain is wrong, but rather that he is taking your post to places we choose not to go on this forum. Which is the whole point to leaving political posts out of ASA. Love ya, Gwen :-) SignatureDi zinkadoodle at gmail dot com www.pbase.com/di www.dustydoggie.blogspot.com (if you wish to see my political leanings) 2005-12-04, Responding to Di... >> > You also seem to enjoy irritating/annoying/insulting others, though I'm >> > not sure whether this is out of boredom or from being frustrated with [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > Love ya, Gwen :-) On reflection, it would seem that a simpler comment from me would have let this fizzle before it got this far. Good point. I shall bear it in mind for the future. I still have questions regarding the assumptions some make that everyone on this NG (should?) hold the same views on such desperately important matters however. But that is another discussion for another time maybe. Suffice to say, can we just leave out the flag-waving and "Support our troops" stuff please. They're not MY troops, and I don't like the assumption I approve of their current locations or actions at the moment. There are more people use this NG than Americans with a particular opinion. Post the spin, expect a response. Anything else falls dangerously close to tacit approval, which for some is all but impossible to not respond to, which is what these slogans were designed to do, raise arguments which will inevitably end with some poor well-meaning dear feeling picked on by some other well-meaning dear(prat? ;) who tripped over the slogan's payload. Nuf sed for now? Mike@N.UK Signature---- * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) > Suffice to say, can we just leave out the flag-waving and > "Support our troops" stuff please. They're not MY troops, Well...your PM has committed your troops...so they kinda are your troops. :P (as has ours) Signaturespammage trappage: remove the underscores to reply I'm going to die rather sooner than I'd like. I tried to protect my neighbours from crime, and became the victim of it. Complications in hospital following this resulted in a serious illness. I now need a bone marrow transplant. Many people around the world are waiting for a marrow transplant, too. Please volunteer to be a marrow donor: http://www.abmdr.org.au/ http://www.marrow.org/ 2005-12-04, Responding to spodosaurus... >> Suffice to say, can we just leave out the flag-waving and >> "Support our troops" stuff please. They're not MY troops, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > (as has ours) This of course assumes that I accept that B-Liar was acting in my name (or even legally), which he and his cronies were clearly not, just as Bush.Co were not acting in the name of at least half of America. It goes on and on, and deeper and deeper. Now is it something we should be digging into so deeply on this NG, or should we be avoiding making provocative posts on sensitive political issues? This is a question I have asked many times, and all I get is that I should not "disturb" people by questioning their statements that disturb me. While I may be untypical by insisting on voicing my concerns regarding the content of some posts, I'm certainly not unusual in my views and concerns about the issues. Therefore, sauce for the goose etc. ? I'll forgo the issues of if Shrub is in any way a legal occupant of the Whitehouse BTW. ;\ Mike@N.UK Signature---- * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) > 2005-12-04, Responding to spodosaurus... > > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > Mike@N.UK Mike, I can't say I disagree with you. I've just learned over the years to keep politics off this site, and give some modicum of latitude to those who chose to post political stuff, particularly if those posts are relatively benign and well-intentioned. Believe me, I've been involved in quite a few arguments over politics here, all of which become reduced to ugly flame wars. It ain't worth it. I leave my politics to my dustydoggie blogsite, if you care to visit. Consider this a personal invite. :-) SignatureDi zinkadoodle at gmail dot com www.pbase.com/di www.dustydoggie.blogspot.com 2005-12-04, Responding to Di... [...] >> This is a question I have asked many times, and all I get is >> that I should not "disturb" people by questioning their [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > if you care to visit. Consider this a personal invite. > :-) Yup, this would seem to be the best way to enjoy NGs, but... There is that problem of who to block, if one should block, and on what grounds. Once you start this game, the whole point of an open forum is compromised. (Apart from obvious trolls and spammers that is.) Then there is the problem I've already mentioned, tacit approval. Where blatently partisan posts appear, we are back, or at least *I* am back to a strong urge to at least "tag" the post with a challenge to the logics within it. My view is that if those who post up politically loaded stuff don't enjoy legitimate challenge, then it might be a good idea to avoid "stirring the pot" in the first place. Funny how I usually end up waiting for a response that never materialises when I raise this point... ;\ P.S. I'll take a peek at that URL. Cheers! ;) Mike@N.UK Signature---- * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) Over on the Fibro newsgroup, Dawn shared how her niece was injured recently in Iraq, as a result, she had to have one foot amputed, and suffered brain damage. She may also loose her other foot as well. She is very young, and yet she has seen more than we back here will ever see, or want to see! If that is considered "political", then things are worse than they seem. Our responses to Dawn were of compassion for her niece. Nanny >> 2005-12-04, Responding to spodosaurus... >> > [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > dustydoggie blogsite, if you care to visit. Consider this a personal > invite. :-) <snip> ummmmm...okayyyyyyy Here, have an Ativan, I have extra :-) Signaturespammage trappage: remove the underscores to reply I'm going to die rather sooner than I'd like. I tried to protect my neighbours from crime, and became the victim of it. Complications in hospital following this resulted in a serious illness. I now need a bone marrow transplant. Many people around the world are waiting for a marrow transplant, too. Please volunteer to be a marrow donor: http://www.abmdr.org.au/ http://www.marrow.org/ Mike, I'm getting tired of you jumping on anyone who uses the terms, "America", or "soldiers laying their lives on the lines", or even "God bless the U.S.A.". You are doing this on both ASA and AMF. Since you are NOT an American, you may not understand how precious our freedoms are and how we try to protect those freedoms. Perhaps we could put an OT America on the subject line, then you could just skip over those. One of our freedoms is to have the right to speak out in support of our troops and our government, whether you like it or not. Nanny > 2005-12-04, Responding to Di... >>> [quoted text clipped - 54 lines] > > Mike@N.UK 2005-12-06, Responding to Nanny... Oh dear... As I mentioned, I accept that I could have done a better job of articulating my response to what I saw as a contentious issue WITHIN the post I responded to. While I understand the strong feeling and concern behind the responses to Dawn's post, and extend my depest sympathies to her and her family, this does not negate the anger I feel in response to what I see as political opportunism and sloganeering in several of the replies to Dawn. It does seem clear in your post here that you do not see the point I have laboured over, and are therefore unaware of what I am saying, and indeed what I am NOT saying. As you've made the comments you have, and I accept you've done so with the best of intentions and therefore I have no "axe to grind" with you, I'll try to make my position a little clearer for the record. [...] >> On reflection, it would seem that a simpler comment from me >> would have let this fizzle before it got this far. Good [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > to speak out in support of our troops and our government, > whether you like it or not. Nanny I'm going to break down your reply here to respond to it. > Mike, I'm getting tired of you jumping on anyone who uses > the terms, "America", or "soldiers laying their lives on > the lines", or even "God bless the U.S.A.". (I wanted to respond "Tough!" I'm tired of the spin! But...) Then you need to understand that the constant repetition of these slogans (which is what they are) in an international forum is in itself political opportunism, and is objectionable to as many as would make them. Many, as has been mentioned, simply "give up" trying to challenge this type of thing, which appears to be somehow taken as "acceptance" of the media-generated spin-payload. It is not acceptance, just a resigned moving on from minds that either cannot or will not acknowledge that there are other equally valid viewpoints. (In other words, there are many who "get tired" of being called out for simply disagreeing.) I for one find "SoT!" statements, in these troubled times where people are dying as a direct result of what has been (IMO rightly so) called America's "Vietnam-2" to be at the very least tactless exclusivism. A point I raised recently, which still has not been responded to, was to suggest that IF it is "ok" to post up "SoT!" stuff, it should therefore be "ok" to post up other politically loaded and equally questionable/contentious material. > Since you are NOT an American, you may not understand how > precious our freedoms are and how we try to protect those > freedoms. As its you I am responding to here, I'm going to assume you did not intend the huge and ignorant (and quite frankly simplistic) insult this comes across as. American does NOT have an "exclusive" on "freedom". To even think for a moment that Americans are somehow different in this respect, that "freedom" was somehow "invented" in America (it wasn't, it was a French import ;) demonstrates an attitude that is clearly in need of a review. As for "how we try to protect those freedoms"... NOTE: *NO* WMD found to date. Therefore, AT BEST, the whole ongoing Iraq episode is a HUGE blunder that has, and continues to, cost lives on a daily basis. It has NOTHING to do with "protecting freedom" at all. (The rest is probably and argument you and I don't want here.) Now you may disagree with me here. You may also consider that this NG is NOT the proper place for me to make this kind of statement. In the same spirit, I (and others) do not consider it a proper place to make the statements that DO appear (SoT, GBA etc.) Therefore, to avoid this kind of argument, we need to accept that my responses are just that, responses, and look to NOT making the kind of statements that ASK for such a response. In other words, to be petty for a moment, "I didn't start it!" Also... Now it just so happens I have relatives who served (amongst other tours of duty) in Northern Island during the "troubles". I know full well what it is like to have family members go out and come back permanently altered and not for the better. I have relatives currently serving who I worry about constantly, who I expect to end up having to offer support to when the corporate meat-grinder our (and your) defense forces have been turned into has chewed up their best efforts and spat them out to fend for themselves. Assuming they do actually come back at all that is. I STILL consider what they have become involved in to be wrong wrong wrong. I still feel like ripping somebody a new one each time my ex-army relatives recount what they were injured for. I still insist that because so many, including MY family, who have served in what they were told was the defensed of OUR country, find in retrospect that they were mis-informed of the purposes of their deployment, that it is MY "duty of care" to question each and every instance where we are called on to "Support out troops!", when so often what we are being exhorted to do is "Accept the current actions of the day without question!" (Incidentally, as American troops are supposedly protecting MY freedom too, I claim a right to an opinion on the matter, ok?) This is something I do NOT see those who post "Support our troops!" doing that often. To truely support our families when they are put in harms way, we need to maintain "eternal vigilance" and publically take to task those who would cynically exploit our family's willingness "to protect and serve". We should NEVER stop asking the questions that need to be asked, and NEVER accept what we are told as the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. When the stakes are so high, we need to accept responsibility for our OWN part in it all, and NOT simply rely on being TOLD what to think, say, and do (which happens far more than you may realise, and in many more ways than you might know about). So please, dear lady, do NOT assume I know nothing of the loss families suffer in these times. Do NOT assume I do not have a solid base for my objections to the obscenities that are still carried out in the name of "freedom". (Clues @ www.killinghope.org) In blindly (albeit with good intent) rejecting my objections to opportunistic partisan political pro-invasion/occupation propaganda, which is what is coming across when the "SoT!" and GBA! statements come flooding in, you also dismiss MY experience, and MY right to a voice in the issues, and that on a PUBLIC and INTERNATIONAL forum. "alt.support.americanism" maybe? And you wonder why so many people get angry with Americans when this is their typical experience of them? But this is not about you, or me. It is about the "payload" that gets delivered with these statements. As I've been trying to make clear all along. And if this is not something you are aware of, we have a more serious communication problem that I'd anticipated. > Perhaps we could put an OT America on the subject line, > then you could just skip over those. One of our freedoms > is to have the right to speak out in support of our troops > and our government, whether you like it or not. Oh pur-leeeez! And this "One of our freedoms" bit again... Sheesh" Get this... AMERICA DOES NOT OWN FREEDOM! It is NOT, despite indications to the contrary, a concept copyrighted to America. Dammit! If anything, its FRENCH! ;\ And in making this statement AT ALL, you also, by association, accuse me of attempting to oppress YOU! Come ON now! GET REAL GIRLFRIEND! Rolling over and "playing the victim" is beneath you. Citing "freedom of speech" whilst calling me out on exercising mine, is also a tad questionable wouldn't you think? Can you really NOT see the irony in all this? Seriously? P.S. I spent the time and effort required to reply as I have here because I have respect for you. Please feel free to offer me the same consideration. Mike@N.UK Signature---- * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) > 2005-12-06, Responding to Nanny... > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > of articulating my response to what I saw as a contentious > issue WITHIN the post I responded to. Hi Mike,,,, This newsgroup is not about what we think about the world around us,,,,, if it causes some people stress. There is an old southern saying,,,, let sleeping dogs lay..... I know that you have very strong beliefs and understandings and they bother you and cause you stress. What you do not realize is that you are bring with you into this support newsgroup. I could go back and dig up the post you made that was red hot with hate for America,,, Microsoft,,,, ect.ect. It did not need to be answered,,, its been seen before and nothing said or done would change you or the way you think or post in this newsgroup..... I hope this post will. I am not going to debate with you in this newsgroup. The harm that it does far outweighs any good that might come from it even if you believed information that does not support what you believe which you will not. Sooo, the old saying about letting sleeping dogs. If you have never walked up on a porch and was bitten for nothing other than you woke a dog up,,,,, I am glad for you for that. Harv 2005-12-06, Responding to Harvey R. Stone... >> 2005-12-06, Responding to Nanny... >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > would change you or the way you think or post in this > newsgroup..... I hope this post will. Ahem... "red hot with hate for America,,, Microsoft,,,," Excuse moi? Your powers of recall are faulty. This is an example of what I have mentioned many times, and that is people reacting to what they *wanted* to read into what was posted, and not what was said, and indeed what was NOT said. What you cite here is not "hate" but simply frustrataion at people complaining about how their computers got screwed again, when a free solution is available at any time. The "America" stuff is, again, largely a matter of other people turning one post into an argument about what they THOUGHT they read, and having missed the point I was making at the time, which typically I would have also drawn attention to at the time too, typically with little or no result. I will agree that my skills in putting my point across have, and still do, require some honing, but dammit! Look at the audience I have to deal with! 8( I do take your point regarding the stress thing though, but I have to say in all honesty that MY stress levels don't always stretch as far as I'd like, as I've mentioned many times, despite my best efforts. Some things are so blatent I find it impossible not to exercise my wonderful right to free speech and say something. I'd LOVE to pass these things by, but I think it only fair that if I'm expected to avoid stressors, others might make the effort too. Like I said before, its not me that starts these things, I'm just drawn to bite on them when they get too close and draw blood. > I am not going to debate with you in this newsgroup. > The harm that it does far outweighs any good that might [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > other than you woke a dog up,,,,, I am glad for you for > that. Has it crossed your mind that mind that *I'm* the dog *someone else* disturbed? ;\ Which is what I've been trying to say all along. Anyhoo, now I've raised the issues, there can surely be no doubt that certain "matters" are indeed contentious and do indeed cause a lot of stress for others, even though most of those "others" tend to simply do what you suggest and leave that particular dog alone. Me? I HATE living in fear of dogs. Have I made my point here? Freedom brings responsibility, for ALL! Thanks for trying Harv. Mike@N.UK Signature---- * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) Mike, since you don't live in the US, why do you let things about us bother you? There might be things in the UK that we could criticize but what good would it do? We in the US don't lie there and have to right to concern ourselves with what you folks decide and do, and what you feel! Enough already. Gwen > 2005-12-06, Responding to Harvey R. Stone... >> [quoted text clipped - 79 lines] > > Mike@N.UK 2005-12-07, Responding to Gwen Love... > Mike, since you don't live in the US, why do you let > things about us bother you? There might be things in the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > feel! Enough already. > Gwen Hmmm... Here we are back at the beginning of the loop huh? Ok, suppose I put it this way... If you're going to post to a newsgroup that only Americans will use and read, then your point would seem valid. (Though you may find other Americans may also object as I've done to certain post content etc.) As it is, a.s.a is an international newsgroup, which means people from all over the planet can read and post to it. Therefore, when you post to it, you post to everybody everywhere. This then means that anyone can respond, from anywhere. It also means that if you piss somebody off, they will not just shrug their shoulders and say to themselves "Hey! They're Americans, so what ya gonna do!" Or are you labouring under the idea that somehow a.s.a is the "property" of only Americans with a certain point of view? If you take a peek back in the archives (and you don't have to go back that far) you can see plenty of posts where folks were taken to task for posting things Americans didn't like. So why does this only work one way for you Gwen? Why is it only the opinions of a few Americans count for anything on a.s.a? Is this an acceptable situation to you? Ok, suppose a lot of UK, or French, or Australian people started posting, and did so for long enough to become regarded as "regulars". Then suppose a number of these new/regular posters started posting stuff that made you feel annoyed, that you felt really needed responding to. Then, after you'd made your objections as clear as you could, suppose that these posters told you to... 1/ Go somewhere else if you don't like it. 2/ Whats it got to do with you? 3/ Tough, deal with it. ...and so on. How are YOU going to feel/respond in this situation? Remember that we are discussing an INTERNATIONAL OPEN FORUM here, and not a restricted or moderated BBS. And also please remember that "Freedom of speech" has been cited several time recently. Is this reserved just for certain Americans already? I have to confess I'm somewhat amazed at your lack of ability to understand this mind-bogglingly simple idea. I'm now stuck between thinking that you're either completely unaware of even the basic issues here, or you are being deliberately obtuse. If the former, then I'd ask you to accept that there is something beyond your present understanding, that results in some other people feeling the kind of stress and upset that you appear to be telling me I'm causing by raising the matter at all, even though I'm a respondee here. If the latter, then lets just admit this has been a game on your part and end it, ok? Did this post answer your question? Y/N ;\ Mike@N.UK Signature---- * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) Mike, I made a couple of typos in the post, but I think you knew what I meant. If the situation arose as you said, I hope I would keep my mounth shut on the NG and do any seething to myself. I have opened my mouth here a couple of times and have been told about it promptly. Now I try not to do that; most times I succeed. This is my last post back to you, or on the subject. Goodby. Gwen > 2005-12-07, Responding to Gwen Love... >> Mike, since you don't live in the US, why do you let [quoted text clipped - 80 lines] > > Mike@N.UK 2005-12-07, Responding to Gwen Love... >> 2005-12-07, Responding to Gwen Love... >>> Mike, since you don't live in the US, why do you let [quoted text clipped - 86 lines] > I try not to do that; most times I succeed. This is my > last post back to you, or on the subject. Goodby. Gwen So what happend to that "Freedom of speech" thing then? (Sigh...) As you appear to be determined to dodge the issues and refuse to even acknowledge the point I have virtually written a BOOK trying to explain to you Gwen, I think I'll join you in letting this now sand-trapped and circular discourse go cold. I have a disconcerting feeling that I'm the only one who has learned anything from this though, and what I've learned is not reassuring... Be well. God bless Earthica. ;\ Mike@N.UK Signature---- * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) >>>> Mike, since you don't live in the US, why do you let >>>> things about us bother you? Since the fools who run this country insist on talking and acting as if they run the world I think everyone in the world deservs a vote. So there. Now, if you will excuse me, it's time for my methotrexate. (note cleverly inserted group relevant insetion diverting the discussion to familiar territory) The MTX seems to be working. Neat. 2005-12-08, Responding to Pope Pie (Sy Lehrman)... >>>>> Mike, since you don't live in the US, why do you let >>>>> things about us bother you? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > world deservs a vote. So there. Now, if you will excuse > me, it's time for my methotrexate. Too many big words and a reasonably intelligent sentence structure. You're clearly one of them thar damn commie pinko subversives. ;\ > (note cleverly inserted group relevant insetion diverting > the discussion to familiar territory) Noted. ;) > The MTX seems to be working. Neat. Nice! P.S. My fingers hurt. Owie! (Must be my arthritis!) Gahd bless Earthica! Arooo! Mike@N.UK Signature---- * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) >P.S. My fingers hurt. Owie! (Must be my arthritis!) > >Gahd bless Earthica! Arooo! > >Mike@N.UK Chill out Mike, put your speakers on and listen to this Linux article instead http://tinyurl.com/9fzhz 2005-12-08, Responding to me@privacy.net... >>P.S. My fingers hurt. Owie! (Must be my arthritis!) >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > instead > http://tinyurl.com/9fzhz So someone who can't recognise a Futurama reference thinks I should "chill out"? Is my sense of humour too sophisticated for ya then? 8D And there's me thinking I'd got back on topic and all. ;\ Mike@N.UK Signature---- * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) >2005-12-08, Responding to me@privacy.net... >> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >And there's me thinking I'd got back on topic and all. ;\ Here ya go. You might want to check this out. http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/posting.php ~Kenny 2005-12-09, Responding to kenny... >>2005-12-08, Responding to me@privacy.net... >>> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > ~Kenny Would do, but I don't "Flash" as the plugin TOC are invasive, I'm on a dial-up connection, and I already have a TV Ta V.much. ;\ Mike@N.UK Signature---- * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) >Here ya go. You might want to check this out. > >http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/posting.php > >~Kenny or even this http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/index.htm pick yourself/myself/anyone else out from the pulldown on the right! >>Mike@N.UK wrote: >>And there's me thinking I'd got back on topic and all. ;\ > kenny wrote: > Here ya go. You might want to check this out. > > http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/posting.php kenny, good to see ya bud. hope your still doing well. thanks for the 'flash'. its very clever. Too bad Mike's mis-placed bias against one of the best tools to ever emerge from the CG community prevents him from enjoying. (me thinks he's been blinded by the light)...>g< johnie 2005-12-09, Responding to johnie... >>>Mike@N.UK wrote: >>>And there's me thinking I'd got back on topic and all. ;\ [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > johnie iii. Usage on an Authorized Operating System is only permitted if an installer is provided by Macromedia to Licensee for that specific Authorized Operating System ...which means in effect I would be forced to allow an unknown untrusted binary to install software to my system. No option to compile as I see fit, according to my system and security requirments etc. And... iv. Licensee must use the installers provided by Macromedia AS IS and may not modify or alter the way the files are installed without express written permission from Macromedia. Just keeps getting better huh? ;\ T'aint a bias as such, its just that I don't like the idea of giving a corporation permission to dig into my system at will. Its all in various TOCs if you look for it. (Not that they'd get far with my system of course, but it would still be a "breach of contract" to deny them access.) Too much security hassle for a few cartoons IMO. I got a TV already, and I don't watch that much. (Avid Lynx user! :) There's more, but I can't be bothered digging through the reams of pages the other licencing details are tucked away in, again. (Yup, I looked into all this a while back.) I suppose if you're running a M$ OS online, it makes little difference as most of the world can probably get info from your system anyhoo. (Nyaah! :) Mike@N.UK Signature---- * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) mike, there is no reason to re-hash this one. you don't have any interest in the graphic world and that is where i have lived for the last 35 years. you should be aware that cartoons is the very least of what 'flash' is used for as it has become a serious tool for graphic designers and 'internet' artists. And re: the answers you seek in this thread..."i have none"...>g< but good luck with that endeavor. johnie 2005-12-10, Responding to johnie... > mike, there is no reason to re-hash this one. you don't have any > interest in the graphic world and that is where i have lived for the > last 35 years. you should be aware that cartoons is the very least of > what 'flash' is used for as it has become a serious tool for graphic > designers and 'internet' artists. Whatever. ;) > And re: the answers you seek in this thread..."i have none"...>g< but > good luck with that endeavor. T'were a simple enough question and all... Sigh! Be well. Mike@N.UK Signature---- * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) >>>Mike@N.UK wrote: >>>And there's me thinking I'd got back on topic and all. ;\ [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >johnie Hi Johnie Haven't posted in awhile but have been lurking around from time to time. I'm doing well despite all that has happen to me in the last year. I did have an RD appointment Wednesday and despite a high sed rate I am doing well. Considerably better than I have a right to expect. I've almost overcome all the effects of the stroke I had last March and I am back on my feet but not sprinting 100 yard dashes yet. Got a ways to go on that one. <G> I do consider myself very blessed that I've come this far. I hope you are doing well too. ~Kenny This is good news kenny, i have wondered how your recovery was going and have missed it here if you have been posting. I haven't been around much myself. Stroke recovery is a long process and if your nearly all the way back you have done well. Must be keeping up with your PT. A close friend of mine is a piano player and it took him nearly 2 years to get back to where he could perform. Let me know when your ready to run that 100 yard dash and I will race ya.>g< johnie > Hi Johnie > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > ~Kenny >This is good news kenny, i have wondered how your recovery was going >and have missed it here if you have been posting. I haven't been around [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >> >> ~Kenny Johnie I'll probably be able to perform with a piano before I can actually run any 100 yard dases again and I never played piano before the stroke.>G< It does take a long time to overcome the effects but I could never just be still before this happen and fortunately that stayed with me and enabled me to come back much quicker than some individuals. I stay kind of busy all the time at least with something. If it had been any other way for me I don't think I could have made it as well as I have or at all. I did have some great PT's and nurses working with me and I'll be eternally grateful for that. I just visited them this last week and when I just walked in the door as if nothing had ever happen to me they were shocked I was even able to get around as well as I can. They told me that nobody ever comes back to visit them and I never thought anything about it like that. I have really been very fortunate. I'm not perfect but a hell of a lot better than what I expected to be at this stage. ~Kenny >Chill out Mike, put your speakers on and listen to this Linux article >instead roflmao! Sounded like a tortured rendition to me! -- MZ Visit my website: http://www.mzuschlag.com >>Chill out Mike, put your speakers on and listen to this Linux article >>instead > >roflmao! Sounded like a tortured rendition to me! -- MZ LOL, Don't tell Dr. Condoleezza then...... > 2005-12-08, Responding to Pope Pie (Sy Lehrman)... >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > structure. You're clearly one of them thar damn commie pinko > subversives. ;\ Ta. > Remember that we are discussing an INTERNATIONAL OPEN FORUM > here, and not a restricted or moderated BBS. What I want you to do is substitute Arthritis Support for the word OPEN....... Now,,,,,, it gets down to,,,,, do you understand what support IS or how does a person do that without causing more stress to others... I do not think you are dumb in any way. Then,,,, it gets down to,,,, your own subjects are more important to you than talking about arthritis or trying to support someone that is having their life crushed by arthritis. I can not say my thoughts any clearer. Your posting in the future will say a great deal about who and what you are and it does not need a comment from me for people to understand you better. Harv 2005-12-08, Responding to Harvey R. Stone... >> Remember that we are discussing an INTERNATIONAL OPEN FORUM >> here, and not a restricted or moderated BBS. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > you understand what support IS or how does a person do > that without causing more stress to others... So *my* stress counts for what now? (As I've said before, I'm a RESPONDEE here.) > I do not think you are dumb in any way. Then,,,, it > gets down to,,,, your own subjects are more important to [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > and it does not need a comment from me for people to > understand you better. I'd like you to remember this comment the next time a thread condoning all the killing US/UK troops are being sent to carry out in some other poor people's country manifests. Easy money says you'll be in there Harv. And this will say a lot about you, and the rest. (And I know damn well you got my point at the beginning of this particular thread, ok?) Anyhoo, I think Gwen finished this one, so lets let it go cold now the flags are up the poles huh? Mike@N.UK Signature---- * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) Everybody says, posts or does something now and then which is either wrong, inappropriate or poorly worded. When it is somebody we know and respect, we make allowance and remember the good things about them. That is how most of us feel about Gwen, Harv, Nanny, Spodosaurus, any of the Dianes and most of the other regulars. They usually post things of interest to most of us, friendly words of support and consolation and, sometimes, humor. I have not read all of your posts (I gave up after finding only negative things in the ones I did read), but of the ones I have read, 2 were "that was a good post" and all of the others were either finding fault with what people post or with the way they said it. It would appear that you are annoyed with everybody who is not you. Most people like that are also annoyed with themselves. If you are feeling stress all of the time it is probably because you are incapable of not being stressed due to the fact that so much of your stress is on the inside. People who are bound and determined to be insulted will always find a way to read an insult in every thing said, even if it's just , "Hello." When you are the only one who is right, and the rest of the World is wrong, maybe you have it backwards. (NOTE: The following should be read assuming a satirical but friendly, and yes, slightly mocking tone, but tempered with love and respect for a great bunch of people I have come to know and love like my own family. This note is provided for those with a defective sense of humour, and/or an incapacity to see the underlying irony in the whole thread/subject matter. And yes, this note itself is also partially satirical, and possibly ironic. ;) 2005-12-09, Responding to Norman... > Everybody says, posts or does something now and then which > is either wrong, inappropriate or poorly worded. When it [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > things of interest to most of us, friendly words of > support and consolation and, sometimes, humor. Now I wonder where *this* patronising intro is leading? > I have not read all of your posts (I gave up after finding > only negative things in the ones I did read), but of the > ones I have read, 2 were "that was a good post" and all of > the others were either finding fault with what people post > or with the way they said it. Aha, leading here then... So you dug out what you *wanted* to see. Ok, this fits the "profile" I've come to expect so far... > It would appear that you are annoyed with everybody who is > not you. Most people like that are also annoyed with > themselves. Would it? Are they? Wanna talk psychology then Norm? ;) Shall we do you next? Go on! Lets? Huh? 8) (Hint = Bad idea Norm! You'll get muddy, and I'll like it!) (Oink Oink! >8) > If you are feeling stress all of the time it is probably > because you are incapable of not being stressed due to the > fact that so much of your stress is on the inside. People > who are bound and determined to be insulted will always > find a way to read an insult in every thing said, even if > it's just , "Hello." Now if you'd thought to apply a little home-spun psychology when it was ASKED for, and spread it a little further... While we're at it, I think I've got some unresolved childhood issues about broccolli. Can we talk about that next? (Chortle!) > When you are the only one who is right, and the rest of > the World is wrong, maybe you have it backwards. Now THIS is a good one! You speak for the "rest of the world" now huh? Hooooooooo BOY! We got us a live one here Ma! Narcissistic delusions here maybe? Messiah complex? Freud fantasies? Head-up-arse syndrome? ()*() To continue... Norman, dear sweet Norman. I really do appreciate you trying to solve all these problems I didn't know I'd got, but until you have half a clue about that which you espouse upon, it really might be a good idea if you just stuck to what you know, which "appears" to be far less than I'd hoped. Now if anybody who has attempted to paint me a certain colour on this thread had actually explained why my complaint was "out of order" rather than just "undesired", had actually dealt with the issue I raised about why this kind of stuff is inappropriate on an international medical support newsgroup, then my question would have been answered. As it is, all we've got here is a thread that evidences the defensive denials of a determined and self-confirming clique of people only too happy to provide all the "encouragement" needed to "move on" those they do not "approve" of. No biggie, as many NGs gain a collective like this, and, as you pointed out, sometimes this can be a good thing as it creates a "sand-trap" for incoming trolls and spam-artists. I've enjoyed "operating" in such groupings myself, and so understand how these things work, and how sometimes they need challenging themselves. However... At each and every opportunity, rather than answer the fundamental question being asked, almost without variation (which is a huge clue in itself), the same character-challenging responses come back, attacking the messenger rather than dealing with the message (not to mention utterly mis-representing it on more than one occasion). Almost without variation, again, each new explanation, each new re-focussing back on the question, met with the same "optionally blind" refusal to even look at the question being asked, or even acknowledge it has been asked. (Kinda like trying to tell a stroppy 3yo something important when they want to watch cartoons instead.) Which kinda suggests that sometimes a collective like this can get it's own collective head up it's own collective arse, and become the very thing it objects to. The clues about this include typically (you can see it on many NGs) that an "outsider" to the clique gets "collectively" hammered for asking questions the group-mind would rather not deal with. (Not to be confused with a good old fashioned troll-whippin' of course ;) (Which I'm suggesting here, if you'd missed that point?) On this particular topic BTW, I'll offer you this to consider... "Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation" Oscar Wilde (D'you get the ironic joke here?) And so, UNTIL somebody decides to answer the original question, and answer it in a reasonable fashion, its just gonna hang there like a dead bird, while folks turn their noses up at it and pass it by like Victorian Gentry passing poor people. (Like the imagery here? Am I good or what?! ;) Of course, nobody is under any obligation to respond at all. That is a given. But on the other hand, I (and others who typically wouldn't even have bothered to mention the problem, but would have simply "moved on" in dismay/disgust) am similarly under no obligation to "get in line" with the dogmas and prejudices (however unintended they may be) that have generated the self-defensive "just-us" clique I refered to earlier. Call me a stubborn old fool for trying where others have fallen/given up/ducked, but somehow I still cling to the idea somebody on this NG might actually respond to the question I asked instead of using me as target-practice for asking it in the first place. (Must be my faith in the concept of "freedom of speech" coming out huh?) Just a reminder of where were were some time back... @[2005-12-04] > On reflection, it would seem that a simpler comment from > me would have let this fizzle before it got this far. Good [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Nuf sed for now? Apparently "nuf" was not "sed" then? And apparently I triggered a group-alarm response here. Oops! (Cluck! Cluck! Cluck! p'Keurk!) (Who gets to play "farmer" this time? ;) P.S. Oh, and regarding the "troll" jibe? Go spin on it buddy, ok? ;\ Mike@N.UK Signature---- * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) Man, Mike, you've been around a long time over on AMF, but you've outdone yourself this time in the area of criticism! Norman had some good points, but you seem to delight in taking his words (and those of others) and try to demean them by your responses. Shame on you! Just in case you still don't get it: I'M AN AMERICAN AND I'M PROUD OF IT!! There. Now, why don't you and your brain take a nap or something. Nanny (who can't tell after all whether Mike has FM or Arthritis??????) > (NOTE: The following should be read assuming a satirical > but friendly, and yes, slightly mocking tone, but tempered [quoted text clipped - 188 lines] > > Mike@N.UK Nanny, you tell 'em. Me too!!! Gwen > Man, Mike, you've been around a long time over on AMF, but you've outdone > yourself this time in the area of criticism! Norman had some good points, [quoted text clipped - 195 lines] >> >> Mike@N.UK 2005-12-10, Responding to Nanny and Gwen Love... [...] >>> At each and every opportunity, rather than answer the >>> fundamental question being asked, almost without variation [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >>> with the same "optionally blind" refusal to even look at the >>> question being asked, or even acknowledge it has been asked. [...] >>> Call me a stubborn old fool for trying where others have >>> fallen/given up/ducked, but somehow I still cling to the >>> idea somebody on this NG might actually respond to the >>> question I asked instead of using me as target-practice for >>> asking it in the first place. (Must be my faith in the >>> concept of "freedom of speech" coming out huh?) [...] >>> P.S. >>> Oh, and regarding the "troll" jibe? >>> Go spin on it buddy, ok? ;\ >> "Nanny" <dorlchas@tds.net> wrote >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Nanny, you tell 'em. Me too!!! > Gwen Wow! When you folks get your pointed sticks out, you just never stop "stabbing at the beast" huh? Ok, seeing as you've taken yet another opportunity to COMPLETELY IGNORE THE ORIGINAL QUESTION and indulge in the very group-alarm "attack-the-stranger" response I just covered, and seeing as once again you've taken the opportunity to load up the thread with more half-baked and reactionary tub-thumping instead of DEALING WITH THE ORIGINAL ISSUE, I'll indulge myself once again in trying to explain this to you, but this time, at the level I'd use to explain to a 3yo why throwing someone else's food on the floor is a silly thing to do. (Mild sarcasm intended and IMO deserved!) Ready? Here goes... [...Nanny...] >> Man, Mike, you've been around a long time over on AMF, >> but you've outdone yourself this time in the area of >> criticism! Norman had some good points, but you seem to >> delight in taking his words (and those of others) and try >> to demean them by your responses. Shame on you! Nope. Norman was trying to be clever whilst also trying to get out of a thread he couldn't handle once he'd started it. He attempted this by an indulgence in home-spun psychology which he couldn't maintain. While in some circumstances, he might have had a point or two to make, these, if they existed this time around, were more than negated by his clear intent to, as y'all have done so far, divert attention away from the fundamental question I asked at the start of all this, and for which I am still being used for target-practice by one after another, to make me, and the question, go away. (So much for that "freedom of speech" thing then huh?) If I have "outdone myself" in anything, it's in standing my ground and refusing to be beaten back or otherwise dismissed by those who are clearly having a major problem even looking at the question they have been asked. (I'll repeat it at the end for those who have forgotten it, ok?) I refuse to accept that at this point in the thread you do not "get it" regarding the basic issue here. ALL these continuing flusterings and protestations have more to do with a reactive and defensive group-alarm response of a cosy little collective of those who, as I've already outlined, and as you've already read, appear determined to "occupy" this NG and "see off" any that disagree with the "collective mindset". And so, if there is any "shame" to be on anybody, it must be those who have consistantly turned all this into a continuing duck-hunt, with me as the target. (If the cap fits...?) [...Nanny...] >> Just in case you still don't get it: I'M AN AMERICAN AND >> I'M PROUD OF IT!! (Oh no! Not this one again? Pur-leez!) Er... So what? So are all those Americans who object to the ongoing slaughter visited on other peoples by US troops. So are all the Americans behind SorryEverybody.com. So are all the Americans who've moved on from the kind of insistant ignorance I'm facing here, and the relentless hammering I'm currently experiencing for daring to speak up on a serious issue. Or are these people you'd rather not mention? Are these Americans "Anti-American" even? (Du-UH?) This has got NOTHING TO DO with your feelings about being an American. You DO NOT have copyright on what it means to be an American. You DO NOT speak for all Americans, (or even a significant majority). So lets get off this particular an utterly irrelevant horse right now shall we? And so... As the dust y'all have stirred up here seems to have obscured the original point, here it is again... BEGIN = THE QUESTION If it is ok for some to post up pro-war slogans such as "Support our troops" etc. (especially in these sensitive and politically loaded times, and no matter how well intentioned the poster may be) on an INTERNATIONAL medical support newsgroup such as this one, is it also ok for others to post up other pro-something-else statements such as... "Bring our troops home NOW!" or "Why were our brave dedicated defenders put in harm's way for a lie?" or "Who caused this war?" or "Where are the WMD?" etc. Well...? Is it ok? Is it? If not, WHY NOT? END = THE QUESTION My opinion, FWIW, is that ALL the above belongs somewhere else. Therefore, I objected to the posting of such material on this international medical support newsgroup. The rest is me defending myself against an apparent reactive (read knee-jerk) collective mind-set that to date has not even acknowledged that this question has been asked. What say you now, dear ladies? I await your continued wisdom on this pressing matter. P.S. Yes, it was intended, but only in mild jest. ;) Mike@N.UK Signature---- * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) > BEGIN = THE QUESTION > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > END = THE QUESTION jeeeeeez, you know, i know, we all know that on USENET its OK to post damn near anything you want or need to express. On health NG's you know, i know, we all know it's much better to avoid anything political and this war is Extremely political. i know, you know, we all know that the posting of a political sentiment is going to raise the stress levels of someone that has an illness that responds negatively to stress. i,you,we need to remember this before we post messages with political content. johnie 2005-12-10, Responding to johnie... >> BEGIN = THE QUESTION >> [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > johnie Yup. Thats why I finally broke and challenged what I saw as the very same thing, and asked the question above (only to end up with this continuing thread, (but no lousy T-Shirt! Dammit! ;) I also offered this... > My opinion, FWIW, is that ALL the above belongs somewhere > else. Therefore, I objected to the posting of such > material on this international medical support newsgroup. ...to make sure folks understood where I was coming from, and where I was heading. I'm hoping that either someone is going to answer my question, or certain folks are going to take the point I've made that it matters not which side of an argument you may take with this type of subject matter, only that indulging in it will impact many, some of whom you may never know were affected by it. My choice was to say nothing, or speak up and say something. Having taken the 2nd option this time around, well, you know the rest... :( Mike@N.UK Signature---- * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) Mike perhaps i needed to word my response to you a tad differently. We all need to keep in mind the stress we create when we post a political message OR RESPOND to a political post. As for this thread you need to accept that you are responsible for turning it into a discourse. It has always been your choice to just let it die. Then you get the T-shirt... johnie 2005-12-11, Responding to johnie... > Mike > perhaps i needed to word my response to you a tad differently. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > johnie I understand your point, and I agree with the sentiment, but its not me "turning it into a discourse" by introducing all kinds of incidental stuff, like the insults, the name-calling etc. And its also other people's choice to not try to hammer me into the ground for standing mine, and in not doing so, "just let it die" if this is THEIR choice. T'aint me accusing others of being #*@*... for raising the issue and asking the question, and t'aint me taking each and every opportunity to try to turn this into something it never was. T'aint me insisting in banging on with the pro-war slogans, driving others away just because what appears to be a certain self-supporting clique wants the unchallenged freedom to dictate a certain mind-set on this NG (Not to mention THEIR determined persuit of those THEY disagree with!). And t'aint me running and hiding behind killfiles, or just keeping the pot boiling, until someone manages to introduce a nice fat juicy distraction into the thread so some other opportunist can turn it into "Mike's a stinky Anti-American!" or whatever, just to get out of a thread of their own continued fuelling that, as you point out, should never have grown this long, and a thread that so far has only revealed that in the determined opinions of some, I "should not" have a voice on these matters. But I understand your point, and I agree with the sentiment. Which is why each and every time I've been either accused of something I'm not doing, or blamed for something I'm not responsible for, or called a #*@*... etc. for even speaking up, I've responded to that post directly, (and as reasonably as I could). And its also why I re-posted the question in its own space, so we could leave it to be answered or ignored as people see fit. So what are you asking me here? Are you asking me to let this question get trashed/ignored along with me being used for target practice for asking it? I'm more than happy to forgo all the incidental nonsense that has flooded into this thread. Others apparently are not. So, once more, lets leave the question hanging, and hope that either it gets answered directly, or it gets ignored. While I'd like the former, I'll settle for the latter. But if I'm called upon yet again to comment, are you suggesting I should not? Lets see if we can do this thing huh? ;\ BEGIN = THE QUESTION If it is ok for some to post up pro-war slogans such as "Support our troops" etc. (especially in these sensitive and politically loaded times, and no matter how well intentioned the poster may be) on an INTERNATIONAL medical support newsgroup such as this one, is it also ok for others to post up other pro-something-else statements such as... "Bring our troops home NOW!" or "Why were our brave dedicated defenders put in harm's way for a lie?" or "Who caused this war?" or "Where are the WMD?" etc. Well...? Is it ok? Is it? If not, WHY NOT? END = THE QUESTION Be well people. (And thanks for trying Johnie.) Mike@N.UK Signature---- * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) Hi Gang, As we have seen so many times in the past, Mike of MIkesbrain is just a simple troll who loves to come into ng's and just stir up trouble. When challenged, he always whines and cries and says that it is others that pick on him and whaaaaa, whaaaaa, whaaaaa!!! He never, and I mean never, offers any support to anyone in the groups he sets up house in and only sits in waiting for things he can find to nit pik at and criticize. Either he doesn't like the way someone spells something, or he doesn't approve of the words one uses, or in this case, he doesn't like the material posted and even after his so called "question" has been answered (thank you Johnie and others for your attempts) he still continues to cry and whine and yell foul!!! This is and always has been MIkes MO and more than likely he will never change. He is working himself right up there with the likes of good ole Tommy the iron head. Kind of sad, really, that MIke chooses to set up house in health related ng's and spew his vision of what he thinks we all should be when he has nothing to offer anyone but criticism. It is quite doubtful that he actually suffers any of the diseases of the ng's he sets up in, but he just comes in to criticize and make everyones lives as miserable as he can. He seems to take great joy in making people suffer even more by listening to his tirades and rantings and then his whiney cries of nobody likes him!!! Uggggh!!! ******Please people lets not feed this troll anymore and try our best to just ignore him.****** Maybe someday he'll actually go set up house in a ng that he actually belongs in and that he actually may be able to offer some help and support to, although I rather doubt it. Donna G > Hi Gang, > [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > Donna G I tried to quit responding to him a long time ago. And have finally blocked him with the last tirade. Likes to hear himself whine and loves non productive conversation and dissention. Really a shame as he seems to be quite intelligent and could make a valid contribution. He chooses not to and I just plain give up. Jo 2005-12-12, Responding to Jo Firey... Round two squaring up for a good participation from the audience here... Sigh... >> Hi Gang, >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> whines and cries and says that it is others that pick on >> him and whaaaaa, whaaaaa, whaaaaa!!! [.SNIP unrequired and provocative ranting.] >> Kind of sad, really, that MIke chooses to set up house in >> health related ng's and spew his vision of... [.SNIP more mildly offensive ranting.] [...] > I tried to quit responding to him a long time ago. And > have finally blocked him with the last tirade. Likes to > hear himself whine and loves non productive conversation > and dissention. Really a shame as he seems to be quite > intelligent and could make a valid contribution. He > chooses not to and I just plain give up. If you ever paid any attention to what was actually said or asked, and stopped for a moment before firing off assuming the worse in a post, you might find something of interest in that which you bark at so eagerly. See my previous comments in the thread which outline this. You got an answer for "that question" BTW? Mike@N.UK Signature---- * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) 2005-12-12, Responding to Newsgroup Spambuster... And round two begins, with no prompting from me. I'll let this one stand without comment as a good example of what I've been talking/asking about. (See what I mean Johnie?) > Hi Gang, > [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > Donna G Mike@N.UK Signature---- * MikesBrain+WebStuff @ http://tinyurl.com/5ayqt - Schauen Sie immer auf der hellen Seite des Lebens! :) > 2005-12-11, Responding to johnie... >> Mike [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > into the ground for standing mine, and in not doing so, > "just let it die" if this is THEIR choice. In other words,,,, you do not know how to stop. Your thoughts on this subject is more important than the fact that you might be causing someone stress. Count how many times you say "I" in your last post. I have told you before and I am telling you again,,, this newsgroup is not about you and you are not going to make it that way WITHOUT you GETTING HAMMERED. Please read johnies post again but this time put the thought into some action. Harv 2005-12-12, Responding to Harvey R. Stone... >> 2005-12-11, Responding to johnie... >>> Mike [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > thoughts on this subject is more important than the fact > that you might be causing someone stress. Harv, dear well meaning Harv. The stress was already there with the pro-war sloganeering. It has distressed many, and those that have tried to outline THEIR stress have typically been "discouraged" (as indeed I am currently being) from even asking for consideration regarding the matter. Some have not posted again as a result. The choice I made to raise the issue and not be distracted by spurious accusation, insults, and other indulgences, I outlined in a previous post in this thread. And yes, I am aware that this is a stressful thread. I am aware that the stress is |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message