Guest Cancer Marney Report post Posted June 25, 2003 I REALLY wish we'd just have taken down Saddam in the first Gulf War. Ditto. Blame the Saudis and the State Department; they're responsible. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Vern Gagne Report post Posted June 25, 2003 Can't forget the UN. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest JMA Report post Posted June 25, 2003 No. But I'm claiming that it's not right to HATE someone just because they agree with their own government! Hate is a strong word. Why do you have to hate them for having a different viewpoint than you do? I didn't agree with the war in Iraq. However, I never came out and said "I hate everyone who agrees with the war in Iraq!" because it's a very ignorant statement to make. Hating an entire group of people for ANY reason is wrong, in my book. -Duo Amen. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Cancer Marney Report post Posted June 25, 2003 No. But I'm claiming that it's not right to HATE someone just because they agree with their own government! Well, I think you have to pick and choose whom you agree with a little more carefully than just giving allegiance to your government because you happened to be born in a particular country. Hate is a strong word. Why do you have to hate them for having a different viewpoint than you do? Why do you care so much if I do? Is "contempt" better? You're taking this way too seriously. You have been from the start. Hating an entire group of people for ANY reason is wrong, in my book. We're reading from different books. How about the Nazis? Is it wrong to hate Nazis as a group? No, I'm not equating the French with the Nazis, unlike the way you tried to equate me with the KKK; I'm just asking if you think it's wrong to hate ANY group regardless of justification and shared characteristics. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest JMA Report post Posted June 25, 2003 Ditto. Blame the Saudis and the State Department; they're responsible. Saudi Arabia... now THERE is a country I think we should've gone to war with a long time ago (and I'm a leftist). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Cancer Marney Report post Posted June 25, 2003 Yeah, I know. Sooner the better. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Kamui Report post Posted June 25, 2003 Well, I think you have to pick and choose whom you agree with a little more carefully than just giving allegiance to your government because you happened to be born in a particular country. A good majority of Americans agree with their government not because they agree with or even understand their government's politics, but just because that's the government they were born in. Do you hate them too? Why do you care so much if I do? Is "contempt" better? You're taking this way too seriously. You have been from the start. The majority of the French "jokes" have nothing to do with what you're saying, that you hate them becuase they agree with your government, but they have to do either with sterotypes or ethnicity. We're reading from different books. How about the Nazis? Is it wrong to hate all Nazis? No, I'm not equating the French with the Nazis, unlike the way you tried to equate me with the KKK; I'm just asking if you think it's wrong to hate ANY group regardless of justification and shared characteristics. The comparison is horribly off. The Nazi army members willingly joined the group and took part in it. You're hating someone for their actions. With the French, you're not hating them for any action, you're hating them for their thoughts and beliefs. THAT'S the difference. -Duo Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Cancer Marney Report post Posted June 25, 2003 A good majority of Americans agree with their government not because they agree with or even understand their government's politics, but just because that's the government they were born in. How do you know this? Have you polled every American in the world? No? The majority of the French "jokes" have nothing to do with what you're saying, that you hate them becuase they agree with your government, but they have to do either with sterotypes or ethnicity I'm not responsible for other people's jokes. The comparison is horribly off. The Nazi army members willingly joined the group and took part in it. You're hating someone for their actions. With the French, you're not hating them for any action, you're hating them for their thoughts and beliefs. THAT'S the difference. There is no difference. The Nazis "willingly joined the group" and took the actions they did because of their thoughts and beliefs. The French take the actions, make the statements, and think the thoughts they do because of their beliefs. As far as it goes the comparison is exact. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rob E Dangerously 0 Report post Posted June 25, 2003 You want irrational French hate? let me provide it to you! --------- This concept came onto me recently and like a puzzle, the pieces of it were scattered but the pieces have been put together. For you see, the French are the headsmen behind an international conspiracy. If you are groomed by the French-controlled media, you snicker at the idea. The French has made you think that the French existing is unlikely. Like a criminal would want you to think he isn't dangerous before he goes from your gardener to your killer. Let me mention the somewhat brief history of the French to give you perspective on this far-reaching 'shadow conspiracy'. French-dominated Communism started with the fall of the Czar in Russia. For some time before that, the first aims of the French was working to subvert the Empire. They hurt the Russian army, put Rasputin (a occultistic man who needed a bath) in the palace and generally hurt the Czar. The French reached into Germany and got them to send Lenin and friends to Russia on a sealed train. The French lurked around Germany afterwards. We'll get to that some more later. Lenin and friends took over in Russia, starved alot of people, killed the Czar's family (careful planning by the French there) and generally wrecked Russia. The French swarmed into Mongolia and installed French-dominated Communism in that land for 70 years. Lenin began to speak against his successor in his final days, but this successor had the French behind him and they betrayed the father of Russian communism, Vlad Lenin. That successor was Joseph Stalin. Stalin had Lenin poisoned while Lenin was suffering from strokes. The French knew that they would never succeed in their plans with Lenin, they needed a ruthless man like Stalin to do the job. Stalin implemented a more brutal brand of a brutal idea. Meanwhile, in the USA, Socialism, an arm of the French plan experienced some success, but it never did much in the US except elect a few Congressmen. While in Germany, a recent returnee from prison started his own radical brand of French-Communism with Nationalistic themes. That man, of course, was Adolph Hitler. While Hitler and Stalin had alot in common in views. The French knew that supporting Hitler wouldn't work, while Hitler was ambigious and powerful, he couldn't co-exist with the Soviets, he was psychotic and they knew he would fail. Hitler and the French both targeted the Jewish community, the French did the targeting due to the supposed influence of Jewish people in the banking and capitalism. Being French, they wanted to purge people they felt were Capitalists. Both Stalin and Hitler killed a large number of Jewish people, but the French stuck with Stalin. We go to the mid 1930s, where the Socialist and Marxist views in America weren't working with third-party attempts. They realized that they had to infiltrate one of the two parties to instill their views, and then infiltrate the other party in due time. Their man was Franklin Delano Roosevelt. FDR installed every part of the French-Communist Manifesto thru his 'New' Deal, he recongized Soviet Russia while they killed 20 million brave Ukranians, he delievered 600,000,000 men to Soviet slavery thru Yalta and he won't be the worst America will get. In 1939, Hitler and Stalin signed a Non-Aggression Treaty. Hitler signed it so he could invade Poland and act to the West without problems. Stalin and the French signed it to buy time before Hitler attacked them. Stalin spent his time purging the military of anybody he felt was disloyal (It's still an open question on who was more paranoid, Stalin or Hitler). The French provided support of Hitler, they softened France to the Germans, allowing Germany to take France in 30 days, they helped Hitler enslave huge parts of Europe and they worked in America preaching 'Isolationism', not the Isolation that others preached, but they wanted to keep the heat off Germany. That all changed in June 1941, when Hitler finally invaded Russia. The French turned against Hitler and decided to destroy his regime for their own interests. They kept working with Japan to plot the Pearl Harbor attack, in effort to put the US in the war and to save the hide of Stalin. Pearl Harbor happened, the US came into the war, Russia turned back Hitler, and started rushing thru Europe. FDR signed away Eastern Europe at Yalta. The French, after the surrender of Germany, now had Eastern Europe and they wanted all of it. Meanwhile, Stalin entered the Asian front, invading Manchuria and Korea, not to help the US but to establish French-dominated Communism in China and Korea. They cracked the egg to hatch Maoist Communism in China after the US sat on it. The US intentionally allowed for the Japanese to occupy China, along with the Maoists, to engineer discontent against Chiang. FDR was a French Stooge and he put Mao in power though neglecting China in World War II. When China was occupied by the French, many leftists cheered for their brothers. As we know know, Mao sickly murdered many of the dissidents in his country. He murdered his best friends when they got close to his power. Mao was a demon, plain and simple. May the day come that Communism falls in China and the pictures of Mao are ripped up and used as toilet paper. In 1950, the French invaded South Korea, while they put in an American army that nearly lost all of Korea. Despite the heroic efforts of Douglas MacArthur, French stooge Harry Truman cuffed the hero. Eisenhower stopped French efforts to unite Korea and conceded to a stalemate, despite the efforts of Russia, China, American Leftists and other stooges. On to 1961, John F. Kennedy took office, and while a liberal Catholic, he was moved against the French. The French tested the President by moving missiles into Cuba, Kennedy blockaded the Island and both sides averted a Nuclear war, to the delight of the French, they wouldn't risk themselves by nuking the US first, they still had goals to achieve, they felt that the US 'hardliners' would strike first and they tried to push the line without the hardliners attacking. Heck, the French knew that the US government was infested with their comrades who would keep them save. On to the Kennedy assassination, supposedly by French 'patsy' L. Harvey Oswald. The French had their role in concealing the truth, they were scared stiff that the Government might expose a connection between them and the assassination and they felt that would be the end of them. They had good reason to panic, Oswald had lived in Russia, Oswald had been a Castro supporter and he wasn't that stable. The French were confused, they concealed any other French roles in the death of Kennedy while pushing skepticism of Oswald's role. Honestly, the French can't tell you that much on the assassination, they shred their documents regularly and they still haven't held a concensus on who did what. They don't care, they will save themselves. The French also helped the Vietcong and Ho Chi Minh, they helped the Protests of Vietnam to destablize America. They then pushed the peace process to deter any American efforts to defeat HCM. After the US left, North Vietnam invaded and put in two Vietnams. In the meantime, the French was involved in various roles in the Civil Rights movement, some of the roles included invading Southern society to hold Blacks down (to encourage them to become more radical) and then they worked with the radical movements. The French may have had a hand in killing Martin Luther King for not being radical enough, and then they made him into a martyr for all "oppressed black people", going all the way to a holiday for French King. Sure, they trained King, but they also trained Trotsky, but that didn't stop them from introducing Leon's brain to an icepick in 1940. The French's pet projects of the 70s included encouraging drug use, coddling Islamic fundamentalism (as a means to destablize American oil and interests), pushing Solar power and putting in a few useless stooges into a Hotel called 'Watergate', those stooges ended up helping the destruction of the Nixon presidency. Don't think it's far-fetched, that's what they want you to believe. Onwards in History, the French-supported Ayatollah deposed the American friendly Shah and held hostages for 444 days. They took the hostages to embarass America and put their boy Jimmy Carter back in place. Carter never quite got back into his place, condemning the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and not giving in. The French was prepared to push the envelope and risk putting in a Conservative at the means of hurting a traitor to them. While they held hostages, they planned viciously to smear the man who would certainly become the next President, a Hollywood Actor named Ronald Wilson Reagan. Reagan had held French-supported Liberal views once but he shook them off to embrace Conservatism and denounce Hollywood's coddling of French-dominated Communism. In response, the French started a small time black-listing and humilation of Reagan, keeping him out of the big movies and putting him in ridiculous farces. Reagan and the French clashed again when the French-supported protesters of Berkley stomped and shouted. They knew that they couldn't go far with Reagan since he would never be the type to tolerate them. But, they felt it was worth the risk. So in November 1980, Reagan crushed Jimmy Carter to become President. The French ordered the Iranians to give up the Hostages, they had their intent, they felt that they could smear Reagan by saying he played a political game for the hostages. Plus, they wanted to get another shot in on Jimmy Carter. To say the French/Reagan deal backfired for the French would not be hyperbole. Reagan attacked Communism, but the French was planning for the future, they knew that the USSR was on it's way to the boneyard. The French supported defections of Democrats to the Republican party with the hope that some of the 'Reagan Democrats' would move the GOP to the left, or at least help them accept the New World Order/One World Government philosophy. In fact, they had at least one man ready to do something for them, he was running for President in 1988, his name was, you guessed it, George Herbert Walker Bush. Bush's father Prescott was rumored to have connections with Nazi Germany, that's all a mystery, but the French and Prescott couldn't have never met. They may have split at sometime but the French wanted to use George HW to promote their 'New World Order' idea. They knew that a Democrat advocating that would never work and a Republican doing it may help them out. When Communism began to 'fall', that wasn't a sign of total change. That was Gorbachev putting Communism 'underground'. The same Frenchmen who killed millions are still living without being charged of any crimes. Communism still lives in the East and it still thrives in the West. The Cold War didn't end, it just went Guerilla. The Gulf War was another plot by the French, they lured local Arab Socialist Saddam into invading Kuwait and they lured Kuwait into giving him some provocation. They wanted Saddam beat on a bit to spread Anti-American philosophy in the Mid-East thru Iraqi propaganda. The French then hooked onto Osama Bin Laden, hoping to use Anti-Americanism preached by him for their benefit. They provided Osama's men with the power to bomb the World Trade Center in 1995, to pull off the Oklahoma City Bombing (and cover it up, blaming it on French 'stooges' McVeigh and Nichols), taking out TWA800, bombing embassies in Africa and so on. They wanted to provoke a strike to fuel more Anti-American sentiment. French stooge Bill Clinton, who had helped out the French view by having David Koresh killed, covering up the true OKC and TWA800 fates, along with his slavery to Chinese Communism. The French got Clinton to lob off a few Cruise Missiles and then they made propaganda about the missiles hitting baby food plants and other lies. As they smuggled more American secrets to China, they prepared the 9/11 hijackers thru their network. They weakened the airline security thru Clinton and they waited. On Tuesday Morning, they got what they wanted. The French struck the World Trade Center, a symbol of American Capitalism and they struck the Pentagon, a symbol of American military. Both symbols brought down the Soviet Union, and the French had a plane on it's way to the White House, a symbol of American Hope. Fortunately, America prevailed on that plane, defeating the French. The Frenchmen tried to discredit us in Afghanistan using the false propaganda preached by the leftist-controlled media. Mullah Mohammad Omar and Osama Bin Laden are being hidden by the lackeys of this French conspiracy. Omar, who lost his eye fighting Soviets, is now dependant on them. He knows that if he betrays his new masters, he will be thrown to the Americans. The Taliban is a fragile fraud based on the lie of Wahabbi Islam. Currently, we are embroiled in a problem in Iraq. Guess who is riling up Americans to oppose it? The same Frenchmen that we all know. Ed Asner is a Frenchman. Barbra is a Frenchman. They know that they want to see. They want to see America suffer because they think America is evil. Frenchmen are guiding the 'Peace' protests. They are succeeding right now, more and more gulliable Americans are being fooled by the Frenchmen and the Nazis who love Hussein. Saddam Hussein has as many weapons as his French Masters have given to him. Saddam Hussein would be nothing without Communism. The War on Terror is being lost on the fields of public opinion. The Frenchmen seek to turn this into another Vietnam and good Americans are doing NOTHING to stop them. As French-controlled stooges like Daschle and Gephardt bellow constantly about their socialist scum, they hope for our defeat in this war. The War on Terror is, at heart, a War on France also. Iran, Iraq and North Korea are all supported by Frenchmen. Cuba is French-dominated. Libya is French-dominated. China is working on a plan to attack us by 2010 or 2015. Don't worry Americans! It will only be a last resort if they cannot establish a dictatorship here by then. Then they will take the risk and attack America. Their reason to not attack us regards their 'survival'. But, they should be strong enough to survive and defeat the US at this course. The French ruins the lives of those who stand against it, Joe McCarthy died at 49 in Depression due to the French Media efforts, Republican cowardice and other factors. The French would also like for President Bush to sign the Campaign Finance bill. They want to protect their incumbents and win Congress. They want to destroy free speech. They have stooges ready to do their work in both parties. Many candidates in the GOP support the French without realizing it. America must be vigilant. The International French Conspiracy is a cockroach and it will take a few 'nukings' of it exterminate it. Apologies for the rambling, but the history of these monsters is important to know. The French are also involved in alot of other small things that I didn't mention. The connections between the French, Hinckley, Bush Sr and Hinckley nearly killing Reagan are there, but not strong enough to be a definate deal. The French is the most devious earthly group, they will go with men who aren't on their side to give themselves more power. They will smear and they will ruin lives. Anyways, with awareness, the French will wither and die. They want us to destroy ourselves, if we can't do that, then they will invade our party and do it for us. The French stand against Racial tolerance, they stand against Feminism, they want those people to think they support those causes but they mess with the causes to get the supporters angrier and more willing to vote in radical movements. The French are racist, sexist, anti-semetic and pure evil. They are the true Axis of Evil, they have a core and all their stooges revolve around that core. -------- The preceding was written awhile ago. I just revised it to replace references to Communism with 'French'. None of that is my views. Please don't kill me. And screw you Franconia! Nah.. France can't be that bad, aslong as I don't go over there. and my rant was SATIRE. Do not get mad at me because it advocates the use of nukes on the French. Do not get mad because it says the French conspiracy weakened France for a German invasion. Des amis les goodes, eh? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Kamui Report post Posted June 25, 2003 How do you know this? Have you polled every American in the world? No? Did I claim that "every American" believed that? I'm drawing off of personal contacts and things I read. If I said "every American", then I could understand your point. I'm not responsible for other people's jokes. If you're going to defend French hate, you have to be willing to defend all of it, not just the parts that you personally take part in. There is no difference. The Nazis "willingly joined the group" and took the actions they did because of their thoughts and beliefs. The French take the actions, make the statements, and think the thoughts they do because of their beliefs. As far as it goes the comparison is exact. If the French started bombing America, maybe I'd see your point. And that parody rant was especially funny because WE'RE the ones that armed Osama in the first place. Thanks Bush Sr.! -Duo Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Cancer Marney Report post Posted June 25, 2003 Did I claim that "every American" believed that? I'm drawing off of personal contacts and things I read. If I said "every American", then I could understand your point. You said "a majority of Americans." Prove it. If you're going to defend French hate, you have to be willing to defend all of it, not just the parts that you personally take part in. Goodness me, are you generalising me into part of a group? And holding me accountable for all actions and statements of that group? This would be ironic if it weren't so farcical. You are doing exactly the same thing you've been accusing me of all along. Sorry, you're a hypocrite. Thanks for playing, now go away. If the French started bombing America, maybe I'd see your point. I doubt it. If Jesus comes back, maybe you'll see my point. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rob E Dangerously 0 Report post Posted June 25, 2003 And that parody rant was especially funny because WE'RE the ones that armed Osama in the first place. Thanks Bush Sr.! Actually, the rant does dig into Bush Sr and the French for various things. You ask too much, amigo. You get alittle, you want some more. Cut the loss. Get a whore. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Kamui Report post Posted June 25, 2003 You said "a majority of Americans." Prove it. Go find the links yourself. It's 4:50 in the morning, I'm tired, so you can "win" here. Yay. Goodness me, are you generalising me into part of a group? And holding me accountable for all actions and statements of that group? This would be ironic if it weren't so farcical. You are doing exactly the same thing you've been accusing me of all along. Show me where I said I hate everyone who takes part in French hate. I'm just saying that if you're going to defend a group of people (which you are) then you can't pick and choose which parts of it you're going to defend. I doubt it. If Jesus comes back, maybe you'll see my point. Oh yes, let's add religion into this discussion! Please. The day Jesus "comes back" (from where exactly? Tahiti?) is the day I proclaim Bush (either one) to be the best President in US history. -Duo Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Kamui Report post Posted June 25, 2003 Just because it was too good an opprtunity to pass up: Christ Returns For Some Of His Old Things After being away for nearly two millennia, Jesus Christ triumphantly returned Monday to pick up some of His old belongings. "I realize this isn't exactly how the world's Christians were imagining it, but I left a really comfortable pair of sandals in Galilee, and I wanted them back," said Christ, who died for our sins. "Also, I'm pretty sure I lent [Apostle] Simon Peter my best goblet at the Last Supper." This marks Christ's first return since 76 A.D., when he thought he'd forgotten to turn off his coffee pot. See? Jesus has already come back, and I still don't see your point. -Duo Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Cancer Marney Report post Posted June 25, 2003 Go find the links yourself. It's 4:50 in the morning, I'm tired, so you can "win" here. Yay. No, if you make a statement you have an obligation to back it up. If you can't, fine. I'm just saying that if you're going to defend a group of people (which you are) then you can't pick and choose which parts of it you're going to defend. I sure can. Just like you can defend the French people who don't hate the United States, on whose behalf you decided to take extremely shrill and prolonged offense. I'll defend those things I do or believe and those things only. Take your crusade somewhere else. Oh yes, let's add religion into this discussion! Please. The day Jesus "comes back" (from where exactly? Tahiti?) is the day I proclaim Bush (either one) to be the best President in US history. Frankly, I don't intend to wait for either event to occur. The reference to Jesus wasn't religious, it was rhetorical; and in any case, I doubt even he could cure someone as willfully blind as you. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest JMA Report post Posted June 25, 2003 Hm. So, France secretly runs the world, eh? I've heard crazier theories... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Cancer Marney Report post Posted June 25, 2003 Christ Returns For Some Of His Old Things After being away for nearly two millennia, Jesus Christ triumphantly returned Monday to pick up some of His old belongings. "I realize this isn't exactly how the world's Christians were imagining it, but I left a really comfortable pair of sandals in Galilee, and I wanted them back," said Christ, who died for our sins. "Also, I'm pretty sure I lent [Apostle] Simon Peter my best goblet at the Last Supper." This marks Christ's first return since 76 A.D., when he thought he'd forgotten to turn off his coffee pot. Dammit! I meant to give him a ring. Is he still around? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Kamui Report post Posted June 25, 2003 I sure can. Just like you can defend the French people who don't hate the United States, on whose behalf you decided to take extremely shrill and prolonged offense. I'll defend those things I do or believe and those things only. Take your crusade somewhere else. I think my earlier comments made it pretty clear I was defending all French people. See: The "thoughts are not grounds to hate someone" rant. Frankly, I don't intend to wait for either event to occur. The reference to Jesus wasn't religious, it was rhetorical; and in any case, I doubt even he could cure someone as willfully blind as you. Ah, yes, I'm "willfully blind". I guess in order to see, one must make lots of blanket statements and throw hate around the world, like you do. -Duo Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rob E Dangerously 0 Report post Posted June 25, 2003 Hm. So, France secretly runs the world, eh? I've heard crazier theories... BOW DOWN TO GENERAL CHIRAC! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest JMA Report post Posted June 25, 2003 BOW DOWN TO GENERAL CHIRAC! (bows) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rob E Dangerously 0 Report post Posted June 25, 2003 KNEEL BEFORE ZOD! Kneel before your FrOG! and if you can't figure out what FrOG would be in the conspiracy/psycho vocabulary, then tough Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Cancer Marney Report post Posted June 25, 2003 I think my earlier comments made it pretty clear I was defending all French people. See: The "thoughts are not grounds to hate someone" rant. Sooo, the Nazi philosophy wasn't grounds to hate the Nazis? The KKK philosophy isn't grounds to hate the KKK? Jerry Falwell's "thoughts" (I use the word liberally) aren't grounds to hate Jerry Falwell? I guess in order to see, one must make lots of blanket statements and throw hate around the world, like you do. Yes indeedy. I'm inculcating a vast movement of anti-French zealots around the world whose ultimate goal is to burn down Paris and cast the Eiffel Tower into the Seine. Hmm, that doesn't sound like a bad idea, come to think of it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Kamui Report post Posted June 25, 2003 Sooo, the Nazi philosophy wasn't grounds to hate the Nazis? The KKK philosophy isn't grounds to hate the KKK? Jerry Falwell's "thoughts" (I use the word liberally) aren't grounds to hate Jerry Falwell? I obviously meant on a broader spectrum, i.e. part of a group's thoughts equaling hatred for the entire group. I was merely referencing the rant, not stating it all over again. Yes indeedy. I'm inculcating a vast movement of anti-French lunatics who want to burn down Paris and cast the Eiffel Tower into the Seine. Hmm, that doesn't sound like a bad idea, come to think of it. So it's okay to say things like that as long as you're being sarcastic? -Duo Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Cancer Marney Report post Posted June 25, 2003 Your "rant" was illogical and silly in the first place. As for sarcasm, I'm amazed you have the capacity to detect it all. Congratulations young Jedi, you may yet become a sentient being. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Kamui Report post Posted June 25, 2003 Your "rant" was illogical and silly in the first place. As for sarcasm, I'm amazed you have the capacity to detect it all. Congratulations young Jedi, you may yet become a sentient being. Yes, it's completley illogical and silly NOT to judge an entire group based on the thoughts of a part of it. How DARE I make that claim! -Duo Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest JMA Report post Posted June 25, 2003 Yes indeedy. I'm inculcating a vast movement of anti-French zealots around the world whose ultimate goal is to burn down Paris and cast the Eiffel Tower into the Seine. Hmm, that doesn't sound like a bad idea, come to think of it. Apart from the deaths of men, women, and children, right? Yeah, yeah, it was a joke. But I find taking jokes seriously to be funny. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Cancer Marney Report post Posted June 25, 2003 At least you have a sense of humour. Occasionally. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest JMA Report post Posted June 25, 2003 Your "rant" was illogical and silly in the first place. As for sarcasm, I'm amazed you have the capacity to detect it all. Congratulations young Jedi, you may yet become a sentient being. I think Duo did/is doing a good job. He seems like a pretty smart and reasonable person. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Kamui Report post Posted June 25, 2003 At least you have a sense of humour. Occasionally. Oh fucking hell. Just because we don't find war to be funny means we don't have senses of humor? "We should ram another plane into a tower and kill lots of Americans!" HAHAHAHAHA! THAT'S SO FUNNY! -Duo Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest JMA Report post Posted June 25, 2003 At least you have a sense of humour. Occasionally. I have a GREAT sense of humor. Just not when it comes to the French. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
