By-Tor.com

during the first gulf war back in the day i knew a guy who joined an anti-war protest. people walked by and yelled and called him names like "sand-n*gger-lover". that's an attack. it deserved an apology. he never got one of course. when he told me about it, i asked him to defend/explain some of his points of view to me. he didn't see the questions as an attack, but an opportunity.

i've asked da a question that will allow him to explain some stuff he's said. to differentiate. i didn't think it was an attack.

but if i've broken the rules of the board, forget the tape. just put me in cement galoshes and throw me off the bridge.

Ever since you have joined, you mostly have been targeting D.A. about his opinions in politics or religion. I don't know what for since I've seen people that just attack others for personal reasons (not here but in other boards) You may think me an annoyance because I'm his girlfriend but I want to ask What Gives? I can be protective of my boyfriend so when you asked him if he supports al quaida, I find it as an attack at him and therefore will not stand for it. What is your reason?

anthem wrote: but you've avoided the second question. the real question.

You mean this one:

"how would your rhetoric be any different if you were an al aqaida supporter?"

?


If I were a supporter of al qaida, I'd say things in support of al qaida.

CygnusX1 wrote:soupy...got some pics 4 ya...

...

Dunno 'bout Soup, but I prefer the one in your sig. It's a Prandtl-Glauert singularity... and I did have a few pics of them, and also a video clip. Somewhere.



Edit to add: I found it! Here is the video. (Or a list of links you can get it from, at least. )

anthem wrote:

by-tor wrote:

anthem wrote:da, are you an al qaida supporter?

That has to be one of the dumbest things I've ever seen/heard. What makes a person think that if another doesn't support one side of a debate/argument the he/she automatically supports the other? Very rarely is the answer black or white.

it is a dumb question, since the answer is a predictable, "no". then the logical follow up question would be, "how would your rhetoric be any different if you were an al aqaida supporter?". and it's a question i'd like to hear answered.

The problem is that you seem to think it's one or the other. Your, "how would your rhetoric be any different" suggests that you believe a person must either support the 'war on terror' or support terrorism. That's an elitist, nay a zealots point of view. There is a third (and fourth, and fifth, etc) option.

I will tell you right now that I believe this "war on terrorism" is a farse, much like our "war on drugs". While the title suggests something that we'd like to see taken care of, ie the elimination of terrorism, the methods are failing miserably. Vietnam should have taught us that you cannot fight a non-conventional enemy with conventional weapons.

Now, after hearing me say that, do you wish to question what side I lay on? Question my loyality to my country?

rushlight wrote:Ever since you have joined, you mostly have been targeting D.A. about his opinions in politics or religion... What Gives?

yuck, you're right. that does deserve an apology.

just let me put on my best voice like you hear at the beginning of the r30 dvd.

whoa! sorry, dude!

by-tor wrote: Vietnam should have taught us that you cannot fight a non-conventional enemy with conventional weapons.

Now, after hearing me say that, do you wish to question what side I lay on? Question my loyality to my country?

question your loyalty to your country? nope. you're making sense. we shouldn't do this with one arm tied behind our back.

anthem wrote:

by-tor wrote: Vietnam should have taught us that you cannot fight a non-conventional enemy with conventional weapons.

Now, after hearing me say that, do you wish to question what side I lay on? Question my loyality to my country?

question your loyalty to your country? nope. you're making sense. we shouldn't do this with one arm tied behind our back.

Now that is something I think most of us would agree on. Fight the war to win or bring our kids home.... I agree 100% with that.

**Soup throws a water balloon at Anthem**

Sorry to jump on ya dude, like I said I do not agree with DA's politics but he is a smart guy and I do consider him a cyberfriend. I hope ya stick around this forum for some more healthy debate.

anthem wrote:

rushlight wrote:Ever since you have joined, you mostly have been targeting D.A. about his opinions in politics or religion... What Gives?

yuck, you're right. that does deserve an apology.

just let me put on my best voice like you hear at the beginning of the r30 dvd.

whoa! sorry, dude!

Never had the r30 dvd. Don't care much for it really.

rushlight wrote:

Never had the r30 dvd. Don't care much for it really.

Kiddo....................what's up with not liking a Rush dvd????

I'm happy with the albums and the rio cd my friend. As soon as they get another album out, I'll snatch one up.

(snaps Hairy with a wet towel)

Well I still have not heard the R30.............I know, I'm lame..................what is wrong with it?

Walkinghairball wrote:Well I still have not heard the R30.............I know, I'm lame..................what is wrong with it?

I know I saw the reviews at amazon for it. Some people complained some songs were chopped from it. Some complain it's the same thing. To me it's another rush in rio and I love the rio one so I'll pass on this one and wait for something new.

Cool.





But it's RUSH!

rushlight wrote:

anthem wrote:

rushlight wrote:Ever since you have joined, you mostly have been targeting D.A. about his opinions in politics or religion... What Gives?

yuck, you're right. that does deserve an apology.

just let me put on my best voice like you hear at the beginning of the r30 dvd.

whoa! sorry, dude!

Never had the r30 dvd. Don't care much for it really.

**Soup smacks RL with a wet noodle**