rising up out of the back seat-nuh

If Kane is still over as a monster heel, I could see him facing Taker at WMXX. Kane finally ending his streak at the biggest show in a few years (if built up around the streak and their history) would establish Kane as a Main Event monster heel for a good year or so. However, knowing WWE, Taker would be the one to finally destroy him.

Well, it got people on an American wrestling message board talking about a magazine they've never heard of. I say they've more than justified publishing it to themselves.

Actually, what the fuck were those lyrics about? Who goes from trying to be a wise man to trying to be a poor man stealing, and what the fuck has that got to do with some dumb bint reminding him of what he really is? Dumb Canuck.

Just so you know, someone will probably respond to this and claim they're "jealous." Which I don't really agree with. People around the world who hate the States do so for different reasons, IMO. Arrogance, blind nationalism, and bullying are just a few reasons why America is usually not well liked by others. I'd go with blind nationalism and patriotism as the reason Americans rub so many up the wrong way. The whole "U.S.A." chant doesn't go down well.

And may FIRE rain down upon thee who tries a gimmick otherwise! Thou MUST be established! This is the law! Of course, this is a moot point, since none of you have TEN POSTS anyway. I guess only I can have a gimmick, since I'm ESTABLISHED and all. TEN POSTS. You have 23 posts. Phoney.

Someone I knew had a saying: "The drunk man says what the sober man is thinking." The alcohol may have had something to do w/ him saying that, but I would argue he already harbored those feelings. The alcohol just gave him the "courage" to express it. Yes. It may have done.

Because, the fact of the matter is there isn't any anti-black sentiment anymore! You've tried to give second-hand arguments about how there are no African Americans in high places, but we have Clarence Thomas, Colin Powell, and Condolezza Rice, plus there are black representatives and senators abound. Marney has given articles from different sources showing it. France itself has admitted it and says it needs to be combated. How about this one, from the BBC? Or Time, from about a year ago? At the top, it shows how those comments were made, and his reaction to them. The fact that he wasn't asked to step down after or that there was little outrage over it in France kinda inkeeps with the argument. It's not just our country giving to the articles. I have a BBC one up there. And so what? Your personal experience is just that: Your own. It doesn't disprove anything that is shown in those articles. The fact that anti-semitism is rising doesn't mean that it is the major problem. From that Time article: You say that there are no anti-black sentiments in America anymore, but race-related crimes are still comitted. The rise in anti-semitism and race related crimes in France have been met with widespread disgust throughout the country. Of those articles you quoted, the Time one said that anti-semitism wasn't as big a problem as Americans believe, the BBC one said thatt the majority of anti-semitic remarks in schools were based on squabbles between Jews and Muslims that was mainly restricted to graffiti and verbal insults and the last one was a sensationalist piece calling on Israel to boycott French goods (which again fails to place his comments in context and admits that Bernard was shocked at the anti-semitic claims). And all those pieces were sensationalist in some way, playing up to the idea of anti-semitism to appear more interesting. And they certainly don't disprove anything I've said. Yes, the government has admitted there is a rise in anti-semitic feelings, but that doesn't mean that France is anti-semitic.

Oh shit *runs off*

I try to take people seriously when they say things. I don't immediately hunt for reasons why they MIGHT not have meant what they said. You do, naturally: your preconceived notions allow you to admit no possibility that might contradict them. If someone makes an uncoerced statement, I don't have to provide any "proof" that he meant what he said. I take it at face value unless I have reason to do otherwise. In this case, I have none. And all you offer are inane hypotheticals. And I suppose you have proof that he wasn't co-erced then? You've got proof that that quote wasn't taked out of context? Or are you basing your whole beliefs on this situation on what an American said about it on the internet? God you're good Marney. I know. I don't care. Your beliefs are irrelevant. Have you grasped that yet? Shut your ignorant mouth. Well, I'm glad that you could be mature about that and agree to disagree So basically, you can't refute any of the evidence, and you have no new or valid arguments to advance, but you're going to stick by your "point" regardless. I'm sure that's just marvellous for you, but why tell me? It has nothing to do with me. It has nothing to do with the facts. In fact, it has nothing at all to do with anyone but you. So be a dear and keep it to yourself Why tell you? This was started by the fact that you dislike France and believe it to have an anti-semitic core and yet disagree that it might just be like America. And, oh yes. The facts. Written by the most unbiased sources, of course. I go to France regularly, and it is nothing like the country your precious articles would lead you to believe it is.

I vote Miss Mattitude, but then again I'm biased.

This is precisely the problem. You have no proof for anything you say. It was made at a party, and the dude probably had a few. Calling Israel a "shitty little country" may well have just been a bad taste joke. "Probably," "may well have just been," "I still believe." Well, that's fine and dandy, but it's also irrelevant. No one cares about what you believe. I just want to know what you can prove. You're trying vainly to explain away blatantly anti-Semitic remarks because of your ridiculous belief that France can do no wrong. Evidence against the French makes no difference. There must have been a reason for him to say what he said. Obviously he couldn't have meant it that way. He must have been drunk. And so on. Appropriately enough, these are the shameless apologetics of a drunk and nothing more. But at least a drunk's judgement is affected by external factors, whereas you're only intoxicated by your own intractable, uncritical, and downright stupid beliefs. You don't even have an excuse. And I suppose you've got proof that the guy meant those comments in all seriousness while sober, eh Marney? If you have, I'd be more than willing to here it. If not, then you've just contradicted yourself. All I'm trying to show is that the guy might not have made that comment as part of some grand political manifesto. The fact is that sometimes you don't need proof to to know that there are always gonna be some people who are predjudiced. There arI fully admit that I know nowhere near as much about life in the U.S. as you guys, and much of what I'm saying is based upon my life in Britain. I appologise for insinuating that the U.S government was rascist, but I still believe a bunch of middle-aged, middle class white guys aren't necessarily gonna be completely non-rascist (although again I obviously have no proof). I am still gonna stick by my point, however, that France is not an anti-semitic country, and the general attitude towards Jewish people is no different from the American attitude towards black people. There may be a few extremist groups, but they are not representative of the country. There are precious few statistics that Britain has racists (compared to America) but that doesn't mean it's not. If you can find some, I'd like to see some comparison between French anti-semitic crimes and American (or British) anti-black crimes to see how they compare.

True, but it took us a while. We did it faster than they did. And we did it more completely than they have. And we had the added burden of having MANY different nationalities instead of just one to "change". Ah, the enlightened people of continental Europe. -=Mike The major difference is that Frances history of anti-semitism is older than the whole history of the U.S.A. And there are many, many different nationalities in France, many who have longer histories of French nationalism (through colonialism) than most American minorities.

I fully admit that I know nowhere near as much about life in the U.S. as you guys, and much of what I'm saying is based upon my life in Britain. I appologise for insinuating that the U.S government was rascist, but I still believe a bunch of middle-aged, middle class white guys aren't necessarily gonna be completely open to minorities (although again I obviously have no proof). I am still gonna stick by my point, however, that France is not an anti-semitic country, and the general attitude towards Jewish people is no different from the American attitude towards black people. There may be a few extremist groups, but they are not representative of the country. And, indeed, the main reason I am arguing this point is that I know far more about France and everyday life there than most on the board.

Daniel Bernard, the French ambassador, said "that shitty little country, Israel" was the cause of all the world's troubles: "Why should the world be in danger of World War III because of those people?" It wasn't a "joke," he wasn't just "a politician," and what he said had nothing to do with Israel being a threat to France. Kindly refrain from lying about the ambassador's statements. Oh, and one other thing: it took over one and a half years after his statements for Bernard to be recalled. Trent Lott: mere days. Are you still eager to compare our supposed anti-black prejudice to France's demonstrated anti-Semitism? It was made at a party, and the dude probably had a few. Calling Israel a "shitty little country" may well have just been a bad taste joke.

The "shall I buy you a gun..." remark seems a little over the top, but I have no problems with the rest of it. I see the scenario as this: Rant and Mike posted a couple of jokes in the thread, then everyone who had ever taken an antidepressant theatrically overreacted. I've been online for almost ten years now, and I still fail to see why people give such weight to the words of a complete stranger on their computer screen. Since everyone else is fond of quoting the board rules around here, I'll play along: Emphasis added, because it apparently needs to be. By that logic, should someone be banned for making insensitive comments about Mole's mum or not?

^ has done well. What's it of?

That's fact now?

Synagogues getting burned or bombed in France aren't quite rare. Anti-Semitic remarks from politicians seldom lead to career suicide in France. Yup, almost identical. -=Mike *sigh* You keep on saying that like they're a popular occurence. Apart from that example of Marney's (of a politician making a joke about Israel being no threat to France at a party) what examples are there of French officials making anti-semitic comments? And, while there has been a rise in crimes on synagogues, it's hardly like this is happening every day to every synagogue in the country. The French Nationalists are a very small group and to tar the whole nation with that brush is just stupid. That would be like saying all Americans were like the KKK at their peak.

^is wrong <rhymes with have, not rave

asta la vista (http://astalavista.box.sk) has a shed load of cracks and serial numbers too.

^is Zacktastic, a word I just made up

Also, for producers: Dan The Automator Simply because he's one of the best around at the moment.

As I said before, France is not an anti-semetic country. People may make rascist jokes, but they do that everywhere. They may have extremist groups, but they are everywhere. It's certainly no worse than Britains attitude towards black people, and from what I've heard and seen not that much different from America's.

Indeed. Truly it was crap.

It all depends what your motives are. Defend her honour, or to try and win her back. But ultimately, violence always leads to more violence, and he's gonna end up taking it out on her.