Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 9/9/2004 9:09:27 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/9/2004 9:10:46 AM EDT by NSFJojo]
Read from bottom up


I do want to bring tha past to justify the present
because the past is what has made this present that we
have right now. And every NOW is what is going to
make the future. Just because things wrong were done
in the past doesn't mean that it is ok and justified.
And unlike you I am my own person NO one has my head
but it seems and if OVER Partiotism has gotten to
yours. You are too proud and it is going to catch up
to you, but with time you will understand.


In essence the quotation, "U.S.-implemented and
> staged" would refer to military or those with a
> military background because that's pretty much all
> their is in Iraq besides contractors. The Nicholas
> Berg execution was not a fake and he is still dead.
> Your quote, "These terrorist have done nothing to
> me." is false. These terrorists have had an effect,
> on you, on your fellow countrymen.
> Your other quote: "Da Man.. vs the indians..that's
> terrorist...
> >Slavery,..that's terrorist..."
> Da Man was an entirely different entity comprimised
> of everyone who is deead by now. If you want to
> bring the past to justify the present then who would
> blame the Israelis for terrorizing the Egyptions for
> their past slavery. You can't justify terrorist
> actions by claiming the United States is a hypocrite
> and therefore deserves it. If that is how you think
> I think the terrorists got to your head.


in fact the us did do it.. It was a fake and a student
did that beheading film.. And by the way. What I sent
you didn't say the us military did it.
thanks though. who are you?

oh ..is this matt from macaroni grill?
It seems to me that they have you scared out of your
wits. These terrorist have done nothing to me. And
if you want to talk about terrorist. Look at History.
Da Man.. vs the indians..that's terrorist...
Slavery,..that's terrorist...

--- NSF Jojo <nsfjojo@ar15.com> wrote:

> You really believe this shit? "
> A U.S.-implemented and staged beheading of Nicholas
> Berg."
> That was Al Qaeda. Nobody on our side would execute
> someone like that, we're not barbarians. Why would
> someone believe the US executes it's own for
> propaganda?? What proofs do you have to beieve
> this?
> "To steal elections and keep us from the polls
> illegally?"
> Who is "we", how are elections "stolen?"'
> "'I take personal responsibility' speech. You know
> the one - the speech that's designed to shut up
> detractors in a hurry (Tony
> Blair just gave it about WMDs)"
> The same one from Janet Reno, under the Clinton
> administration, gave for Waco?
> The whole article screams o f propaganda bullshit
> and it's aimed at unstable, unthinking people. It
> screams, "Vote democrat." They never once talked
> about Kerry, but only demeans the Bush
> administration. This is called bias. Try to find
> unbiased reports.
> If you believe all the conspiracy theories you deny
> the fact that there are people out there that do
> hang children and stab 18-month olds with knives.
> These people are terrorist. That is our enemy.
> Write me back,

> ---------- Original Message
> ----------------------------------
> From: JessiEarl <samsneez@yahoo.com>
> Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2004 13:12:57 -0700 (PDT)
> >Why Vote: A Compelling Arguement

Like the child who cried "wolf! " too many times and
was eaten when he really needed the help of people who
had grown to ignore him, the media and Bush
administration are faced with such massive lack of
credibility issues that we now must adopt a contrarian
stance when taking what they say into account,
especially when it comes to terrorism.
From the degrading and deplorable Abu Ghraib Iraqi
prison scandal, to the wag-the-dog-like
U.S.-implemented and staged beheading of Nicholas
Berg, to the recently expressed desire for war with
Iran, it's apparent that the Bush Administration is
scrambling to create further diversion and feelings of
fear and division to rally support behind its wicked
and out-of-touch policies.

So what can we do? Well, aside from community outreach
and living by example, one of the best solutions is
voting. The trouble is, I've read a lot of articles
and heard a lot of discussion lately from people in
our communities openly questioning whether or not we
have any business voting. We do.

The simple fact is, if you can't offer a concrete,
tangible alternative to us exercising our rights and
becoming a part of shaping decisions that affect us,
then you have no business being opposed to galvanizing
young people and people of color as a unified
political force at the polls. Besides, y'all ain't
ready for revolution. So before you go saying how I'm
"buying into the system" think about what it is
exactly that you would do differently - and then ask
yourself why you don't. Like I said - it's only a part
of the solution. The strategy we must adopt is one
that employs all of the tools that we have at our
disposal to progress. Voting is one of them.

Are we are too lazy or disillusioned with the process
that we won't exercise rights that people who came
before us died for? Voting doesn't cost anything, so
we can't say that we can't afford it (even though
elections are held on Tuesdays, during work hours for
many). Of course, it's easy to say "f**k voting,"
spark up the weed and turn on 106 & Park, but at what
cost? We've seen the results of not voting - an
illegitimate impostor in the White House, rollback of
Affirmative Action legislation, poorer economic
conditions and lack of employment opportunities,
reductions in budgets for education and social
services and increased instances of violence and
police brutality - so why not opt for change?

Now I know you might not feel either of the major
presidential candidates, especially with our recent
discovery that they're related - many don't. But
voting is larger than just the presidential race. What
about the economy? Record unemployment and
underemployment? Out of control gas prices? Shitty and
unequal education? Lack of affordable housing? Why
give conservatives and the existing powers that be an
easy way out by not participating? They vote, and have
an often unified support base that stresses the
importance of participation to maintain their quality
of life, often embracing policies and supporting
politicians that don't represent our best interests.
It's important that we participate too.

If we aren't effective and our voices don't matter,
than why do they feel the need to cheat? To steal
elections and keep us from the polls illegally? To
establish a conservative media network? To keep us
feeling disillusioned and disenfranchised, that s
why. To keep us thinking that we don't matter.

How many people have you heard say that they're not
political? Here's a news flash for you: you don't have
any choice but to be political nowadays, because
everything is politicized. Politics is now pop
culture, so you'd better adjust and become aware of
the way things really are and what you can do to
change our condition.

Opposition to voting often comes from the same people
who don't see the value in a college degree. Why is
that? By not having the necessary credentials we give
other people an easy out when it comes to dealing with
us. As a rule, use every tool, every angle and every
resource you have available to you to get ahead. As a
people, we don't have the luxury of adopting a stance
of non-participation in anything that can be
potentially beneficial to us. For too long we've sat
by and allowed others to dictate the terms and
conditions of our lives in our own communities.

We constantly hear commentary from conservative
pundits on the state of things - barking about why
it's not right to question our "leader" during wartime
- and calling anyone voicing dissent "treasonous" (and
getting wealthy in the process). Think Sean Hannity
(of Fox News) represents the everyman (he makes an 8
million dollar annual salary)? Or Bill O Reilly (6
million)? Think again. (Funny how they dis
easy-to-pick-on rappers but never discuss the
profanity and imagery on Fox's own Nip Tuck, the
racism of COPS, or the misogyny of The Swan - but
that's another article.) These people vote. And they
rally others who feel the same as they do to vote too.

We hear them say how much worse life was under Hussein
in Iraq, and how U.S. troops are fighting to protect
our freedom. But WE WERE NEVER IN DANGER from
Iraq...and U.S. troops are being used in the worst
way. They are there only to protect the big business
interests of Bush's buddies in high places - they ARE
NOT protecting our freedom. The fact that Bush just
signed a $417.5 billion wartime defense bill with an
addition $25 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan pretty
much drives my point home.

The world is full of dictators, but, luckily for them,
they don't have oil. Sorry-ass Saddam and his weak
country would still be among the living nations if
they had not had oil. Also still alive would be over
900 American servicemen and women, tens of thousands
of Iraqis and hundreds of thousands of
wounded-for-life people.

This is especially important to us because we're the
ones who die, and we're the ones the military places a
disproportionate amount of focus on recruiting as was
evidenced in Michael Moore's excellent movie,
Fahrenheit 9/11, which I encourage everyone to go out
and see.

And while we're on the subject of Fahrenheit 9/11, let
me say that there have only been 3 points raised by
those in opposition to the movie, and they are that 1.
Moore never mentioned Great Britain in the 'Coalition
of The Willing,' 2. that Iraq was misleadingly
portrayed as a utopia before we decimated it, and 3.,
that Moore is racist because of his portrayal of the
countries willing to stand by the U.S.

That's it.


There are still no other valid arguments against the
points raised in the movie (all of which,
coincidentally, were detailed on Sonic Jihad and on
www.guerrillafunk.com 2 years ago). The rest is true
and cannot be refuted, and Moore has even publicly
considered offering a $10,000 reward to anyone who can
find a factual error, according to TIME magazine.

What it really boils down to now is that we are at a
point in time where people simply believe in what
makes them feel comfortable, even if the facts
presented to them point to the contrary. If people
know something is foul and needs to be set right, they
agree that there needs to be regime change here. If,
however, they are uneasy and in denial about the fact
that the Bush Administration is full of shit, has lied
to us, murdered people unjustly here and abroad for
profit, reduced our civil liberties, is in bed with
those we are supposed to be at war against, had a hand
in facilitating the events of 9-11, and actively
solicits young people of color to use for its war
machine, then they tend to agree with the lies of the
current White House occupants.

Only the evil or the misinformed are supporters of
this administration, and they are the same people who
don't flinch when their conservative heroes are caught
lying and give that standard bulls**t 'I take personal
responsibility' speech. You know the one - the speech
that's designed to shut up detractors in a hurry (Tony
Blair just gave it about WMDs) - as though saying it
makes things A-OK.

Let's all take our own form of personal responsibility
and vote this November.
Top Top