posted March 26, 2007 08:28 PM            

In every way it's possible to have your head up your ass, you do.

The entire idea behind the Oil for Food Program was to permit Saddam to sell oil and buy food, medicine and other necessities for the Iraqi people.

Saddam refused to participate for 5 years and Saddam oppressed his own people.

When Saddam finally agreed, he took the money from unauthorized oil sales and kickbacks from authorized sales and built palaces (10, 12) for himself, put billions in offshore bank accounts and treated his Baathist friends to perks for continuing to support him. Instead of supplying the needs of Iraqi citizens, Saddam ripped the program off, used the money to bribe officials of other nations and UN officials.

Pull your head out of your ass acoustic. I knew you were a Saddam supporter when the worst thing you could muster to say about Saddam was..."Saddam was not a good leader for his people".

No shiiit Sherlock. He killed about a million of them, tortured and raped untold others and you want to blame the United States for "oppressing the Iraqi people".

Get it through your dense skull. Saddam oppressed his own people in every way it was possible to do so.

You're even more dense than I realized if you believe truth is subject to a vote.

posted March 26, 2007 11:14 PM            

It's like little drops of water constantly spread around to erode people's reputations. It also spreads the idea that GU is a certain way ... mostly because of certain people. I don't care that people feel the need to take things out of GU and spread them around. I think it's rude to talk about other people on other parts of this site where certain people are known to not frequent as much. I have, however, wondered how many people who have such a negative opinion of GU have it because they've come here and read and posted, etc. and how many have a negative opinion because of what they've heard spread around this site.

Can't say I've seen jwhop write negative things about anyone here in a thread where they weren't going to see it.

I think the idea that jwhop is *THE* problem at GU has been brought up more than once in other forums. But I disagree. It's not that I agree with him on everything, because I don't. But he is not stupid and presents, more often than not, a more logical and reasonable argument than the majority of people here even when I find myself disagreeing with him. No, I don't like his aggressive posting style, but neither do I like the way people reply with equal aggression and then whine about how jwhop is such a bad guy and they were obviously provoked into behaving like him ... as though feeling provoked makes it somehow okay or understandable or different. Or as though no one can possibly have control of their actions when arguing with jwhop ... which is untrue as many of us do have more than enough control. It just makes it sound like people see him as so very powerful and such a huge threat. He's just one person. And whenever someone agrees with him then it's a right wing, conservative "bandwagon" conspiracy and jwhop's "little gang" is out to destroy the peace and harmony that would obviously reign around here without him/them.

I'm not into joining cliques or being popular or having people pat me on the back just because I agree with them or defend them. I post what I want to post because *I* feel like doing so. If, however, I did buy into the whole my side / their side bs ... I can't imagine seeing myself in the overwhelming majority opinion group and justifying the idea that one person, or even a handful of people, have so much more control and power over all of GU than so many others. I can't say that attitude would bring my "side" much morale or much credibility. Neither would I ignore the fact that jwhop never argues for x number of pages with himself.

I could probably understand the jwhop-is-a-big-bad-wolf theory if alot of the people that complain about him didn't behave just like him or worse. If everyone else around here posted with love and respect, was able to listen, understand and argue the ideas instead of jumping on the people, then the idea that jwhop is the big problem here would make me start questioning what goes on around here. But that's just not the case. Instead, arguments against jwhop make him seem like some sort of mental Hercules who can single handedly oppose and silence those who disagree with him. What a way to feed anyone's ego.

posted March 27, 2007 01:07 AM            

You know this last absense of his was barely an absense, but even in that short time GU practically died. Anyone disagree with that? Most of the time when he takes a break things come to a near standstill in here. I really find it difficult to believe I'm the only one to witness this.

He was out from Mar 14th to Mar 20th:

N.Y. Times: Better dead than read: 2 posts (Political posts: 0 Posts inciting argument: 0)

Justice Dept. Would Have Kept 'Loyal' Prosecutors: 2 posts (Political posts 2 Posts inciting argument: 2)

Palestinians unveil unity government: 2 posts (Political Posts: 2 Posts inciting arguments: 0)

Let Them Eat Tofu: 1 post (Political posts: 0 Posts inciting arguments: 0)

Jwhop, I am sorry: 3 posts (Nothing political or inflammatory)

The Vedas - a video: 1 post (No argument or discussion)

A dream: 3 posts (Political posts: 1 Posts inciting argument: 0)

Astrologer is here for your help: 3 posts (Nothing political)

Pro, anti-seal campaigns step up across Canada: 1 post (Political Posts: 1 Posts inciting argument: 0)

Mayans to wash sacred site after Bush visit: 13 posts (Political posts: 0 Posts inciting arguments: 2)

Gingrich tells Christian group of affair: 3 posts (Political posts: 3 Posts inciting arguments: 0)

Ann Coulter Not Surrendering, She's Reloading: 1 post (Political posts: 0 Posts inciting argument: 0)

35 total posts in 6 days here in GU. That includes 2 threads with a single post each, a thread dedicated to BlueRoamer's dream, a thread soliciting astrology service, and Lotus' apology thread.

Let's break that down per day to see what happened when Jwhop stepped away:

March 14th: 15 posts
March 15th: 8 posts
March 16th: 4 posts
March 17th: 1 post
March 18th: 1 post
March 19th: 3 posts
March 20th: 3 posts

Alright, now I want you to really consider what you're saying. I want you to look at the posts that were posted in Jwhop's absense, and I want you to tell me honestly that what you see in those posts reflects attitudes that match Jwhop's in form, style, and substance.

posted March 27, 2007 09:07 AM            

I never said jwhop didn't stir up tempers in here. I said he wasn't the only one to ever do so. How many times have people gotten into fights around this entire site with little to no input from jwhop? Or is all the fighting in FFA or Astrology or everywhere else somehow magically connected to jwhop and his supposedly negative energy, too? Hey, if I have a fight with my husband can I blame it on jwhop provoking me, too?

In the interest of "fairness", why don't you take a look at all the times some could argue jwhop has been "provoked"? I guess those just don't exist or aren't worth looking into. Nevermind the times jwhop asked people to respect his beliefs and was blown off. But, of course, jwhop should bow to everyone else's wishes for respect. How silly of him to expect people to be able to take what they can give.

And for the umpteenth time, jwhop has asked people to stick to the topic without personal attacks on anyone ... anyone, famous or not. Yet that simply can't be expected around here and is somehow unfair. I personally don't care if people want to take cheap jabs at anybody around here as long as they (1) don't go too far as per Randall's standards and (2) don't expect only themselves or those who agree with them to be able to do so. Yet would I prefer it if everybody could stick to just ideas/theories/issues, etc? Absolutely.

The majority of posts made here are still here, 67 pages worth of posts. If anyone really wants any idea of the kind of bs that has been happening here they only need to go back to the beginning threads of this forum and start reading from a truly objective standpoint. Grab some popcorn, a nice tall drink and get ready for some entertainment.

posted March 27, 2007 02:15 PM            

quote:

---

Fair? You think focusing on a week's worth of posts out of how many years is actually fair?

---

What is unfair about it? It's apparently unfair of me for attributing the sourness of GU on Jwhop, though 26Taurus did it before my time, and yet when I point out objectively what happens in Jwhop's absense, you think it's a cheap shot?

quote:

---

I can't even imagine seeing only what I want to see and then trying to use that as support for an argument.

---

That's what Jwhop does 24/7.

How is catalogging what happens in Jwhop's absense "seeing only what I want to see"? I've been here numerous times when he's stepped away, as a lot of people have, and yet somehow I'm the only to notice how this place changes? Why don't you tell me what you see when he steps away, and we'll compare notes?

quote:

---

How many times have people gotten into fights around this entire site with little to no input from jwhop? Or is all the fighting in FFA or Astrology or everywhere else somehow magically connected to jwhop and his supposedly negative energy, too? Hey, if I have a fight with my husband can I blame it on jwhop provoking me, too?

---

Who's talking about arguments outside of GU? Isis tried to make the point that Jwhop was not responsible for the atmosphere in GU, and I just showed how the atmosphere changed in just 6 days of him being away!

quote:

---

In the interest of "fairness", why don't you take a look at all the times some could argue jwhop has been "provoked"? I guess those just don't exist or aren't worth looking into.

---

Are you going to try to make the case that Jwhop gets provoked more than the amount of times he does the provoking? Do you know how realize how difficult it would be to make that case? I once catalogged how many threads were created between Jwhop and I, and he beat me by nearly 2 to 1. (He was trying to say that he didn't have an agenda in here.) And what about incendiary thread titles? You want to compare notes on that as well?

quote:

---

Nevermind the times jwhop asked people to respect his beliefs and was blown off.

---

I don't recall Jwhop ever asking people to respect his beliefs unless you're talking about the way he starts bullying and insulting people when someone contradicts him.

quote:

---

And for the umpteenth time, jwhop has asked people to stick to the topic without personal attacks on anyone ... anyone, famous or not.

---

Show me. Most of the time when something like this comes up he denies that he was the one to choose the disrespectful format. Even recently he started a thread claiming that someone else started the war, and he's just going along with it. I've never seen him call for an end to all personal attacks. (I have seen him call for an end to attacking the President, but it's perfectly ok for him to attack former Presidents and other members of government.)

quote:

---

The majority of posts made here are still here, 67 pages worth of posts. If anyone really wants any idea of the kind of bs that has been happening here they only need to go back to the beginning threads of this forum and start reading from a truly objective standpoint. Grab some popcorn, a nice tall drink and get ready for some entertainment.

---

I have. If you go back to the beginning, there was actually a time when Jwhop was more respectful. I haven't found the incident yet that soured him.

quote:

---

How many will just keep blaming jwhop for everything that goes wrong or is ugly around here?

---

Once again, look at what happened while he was away, and compare it to when he's here. Simple as that.

quote:

---

If jwhop never again posted on this site, I'm sure we'd all be hugging and loving each other, never fighting, and no one would ever insult anyone again.

---

No. What typically happens is that GU goes nearly dormant. Threads are started more sparsely, and commented on much less than usual. Then people get to missing the action, and wonder if Jwhop's ok. Then a bunch of people post that they miss him.

Sure, someone could take up Jwhop's place, but I don't recall that happening previously. Could someone get insulted? Sure. Would people be insulted on a daily basis the way Jwhop brings it? I doubt it.

quote:

---

And isn't that what seems to be the underlying current around here? Shut up and away with those who disagree with the majority? Let's see anyone cop to that. I won't hold my breath, at least.

---

This started because Isis thought it unfair for me to tribute Jwhop with so much of blame for the discord in GU. I illustrate what it's like in his absense in order that you guys might actually take a look for yourselves and realize that I'm not really off the mark. I didn't call for him to go away. I just had to make a point that is most easily illustrated by comparing his presence to his absense.

posted March 27, 2007 03:48 PM            

There are those here...leftists one and all who believe whatever they say is covered by their free speech rights and whatever is said in rebuttal is hate speech, racist, and beyond the limits of acceptable behavior.

To disagree with a leftist is by definition, (their definition), beyond acceptable behavior.

Now, these juvenile whining pants wetters, the hand wringing shriekers who say they pine for accord and accommodation...while they hurl insults at anyone who disagrees with the slanderous, insulting lies they tell about Bush and the United States are up in arms...again.

Notice also that Mirandee, one of the worst abusers on this forum, a member who repeatedly and continually alleged Bush lied but when called to account, couldn't come up with a single lie..notice, Mirandee decided to challenge me by having all leftists on this forum refrain from insults against Republicans and other members on this forum...to see if I and other more conservative members could also refrain.

3 minutes after Mirandee's post, acoustic had already stepped over the line.

2 minutes later, Mirandee had too.

It would seem the "Right" has won Mirandee's challenge..hands down.

acoustic posted some numbers from days I was away from this forum. Interesting indeed.

By the day by day number of posts on this forum...in my absence, it would appear leftists only come here for what they would consider their nuisance value. But I don't consider them nuisances. I consider their leftist icons targets of opportunity..of which there are plenty. But, they certainly don't come for logical, reasonable debate or discussion.

I wonder if it has occurred to leftists that they're now dancing to someone else's tunes? That they've been programmed? It's amusing to consider that leftists, like lemmings marching in lockstep over a seaside cliff, leftists have been programmed to howl and shriek on command.

Before you decide to mount your charger to make the left safe from having their lies and vicious slanders refuted acoustic, I'd put some training wheels on that rocking horse you're trying to ride.

posted March 27, 2007 03:52 PM            

I try to be fair and reasonable, and when I feel I can't, I just sthu and walk away these days, but you know what? Honestly, I think Jwhop has you pegged to a T. And that's all the astrology aside...

Here's the way I see it. Once upon a time this place was over run by people who passionately detested and would rip a new @sshole to ANYONE who didn't agree with them - these people were politically left of center (and that's being kind about it).

When I first got here, I merely voiced support for Bush and was jumped on, belittled, the list just goes on - not for saying Bush is god or my hero (although even if he were that still doesn't give someone the right to attack and belittle me), but that I don't detest him and that I support him. That's it.

This went on for a very long time. Then they started getting it back like they were giving it. Then they started crying.

Let's break it down to basic astrology for a moment...line up a Scorpio, a Leo and a Sag and start throwing rocks at them. Go ahead. What do you think is going to happen? This isn't Pisces or Libra we're talking about here. At some point, they're going to start throwing them back. Hard and fast.

Now when that happened, basically all out war started. Bullies don't like it when people push back. How dare we?! We should just stand there and take the stoning.

And as soon as we started pushing back and using the same tactics, they, in their gall, cried foul. After spending years doing the exact same $hit.

I for one silently applaud a lot of what Jwhop says. Unlike the high five crowd, Pid and I know that Jwhop doesn't need us to come in the backside and give him kudos or support - he can take everyone on all by his lonesome - and usually does...and does just fine.

Oh that's right, but now he has single handedly ruined a forum, as is evidenced by a week worth of posts and the words of a bunch of people who can't take what they dish out.

This is politics, and you are no beacon of truth. You are a beacon for YOUR version of it, but make no mistake AG, it's YOUR truth, and as you pointed out in an earlier thread, supposedly half the population agrees with your political position. Let's just assume for one moment that is completely correct...

But what about the other half?

I guess they just don't count cause their "truth" just plain wrong?

Regarding all the people that argue right back with him (like yourself, using the exact same tactics). No, they're not responsible for their own actions, nope not at all, cause Jwhop made them do it...

It's a grand example of "do as I say, not as I do" on the part of everyone who has ever flung $hit then cried foul when it got flung right back.

posted March 27, 2007 04:05 PM            

I noticed too when Jwhop was gone that this board basically died.

The way I see it anyone who supports Bush should have mud slung at them. They deserve it for supporting one of the worst presidents in American history. A president who has damaged his own party so much that they're trying to distance themselves from him (good luck with that LOL). A president who has quagmired us in a pointless war, letting thousands of people die. A president who has gotten us into an incredible amount of national debt, all for his war.

posted March 27, 2007 05:07 PM            

quote:

---

Let's break it down to basic astrology for a moment...line up a Scorpio, a Leo and a Sag and start throwing rocks at them. Go ahead. What do you think is going to happen? This isn't Pisces or Libra we're talking about here. At some point, they're going to start throwing them back. Hard and fast. ..Isis

---

A very good trio to go to war with. Think we should try to round up an Aries and make it a quartet?

Yes, I remember when you were under almost constant attack...for merely stating your "opinion". But the left operates on a different opinion principle..."when they want your opinion, they will give it to you".

You know Blue, it's said ignorance is bliss. If that's true you must be in a perpetual state of comatose ecstasy.

posted March 27, 2007 07:09 PM            

quote:

---

Or is it possible AG that you're actually not right in this case? Could that be the point? Of course not. Because you're never wrong?

---

Well, I do ask myself that question quite frequently to keep myself from making mistakes.

What would it require for me to be wrong, Isis?

I think it would require that a person demonstrate that the atmosphere is equally sour when Jwhop's away as it is when he's here. Do you disagree?

quote:

---

Now when that happened, basically all out war started. Bullies don't like it when people push back. How dare we?! We should just stand there and take the stoning.

And as soon as we started pushing back and using the same tactics, they, in their gall, cried foul. After spending years doing the exact same $hit.

---

There are two ideas here.

The first is that somewhere in the history of this place the people of the Right felt belittled by people of the Left, and decided to revolt. I have yet to find that point in time when that happened. I would like to know if I was here during that (mostly because it's not hard to demonstrate that this behavior goes back beyond the beginning of my time). I'd also be interested in hearing the names of these raging bullies of the Left, so that we can know which of them are still here. If they're not still here, then the story is fairly empty to me. You won your battle, and still maintaining battle stance? For what?

The second idea is that the Left has been the aggressor. Take Jwhop's thread starters and match them up with anyone from the Left, and you'll be able to plainly see who the aggressor is. Eleanore tried that argument as well in the rock-throwing thread. Face facts, though, Jwhop is the instigator much more often than not.

quote:

---

I for one silently applaud a lot of what Jwhop says. Unlike the high five crowd, Pid and I know that Jwhop doesn't need us to come in the backside and give him kudos or support - he can take everyone on all by his lonesome - and usually does...and does just fine.

---

Thanks for pointing out how your perception is colored. I bring you the gun, the fingerprints, the videotape, etc. and you can't objectively state the obvious, because of your affection for the shooter. You know it is true, and not a mere matter of perception, that when Jwhop goes away things change dramatically in here.

quote:

---

This is politics, and you are no beacon of truth. You are a beacon for YOUR version of it, but make no mistake AG, it's YOUR truth, ...

---

Back up a second there. Go and search for threads I've started to be caustic and incendiary, and then look up Jwhop's. There's an enormous gap there.

I don't have an agenda to tear down the Right. Jwhop definitely has an agenda to tear down the Left. Are you unable to see this as well? Look at what you guys make mention of: the President. The Left attacks the President, and you guys want to equate that with Jwhop going after every facet of the Left? There's a big difference between going after one person (or even extending it to the Administration)versus going after half a nation.

quote:

---

But what about the other half?

I guess they just don't count cause their "truth" just plain wrong?

---

No. I believe that everyone believes in what they think is right, just and good. Most political opinions come down to a person thinking that one party is more right than the other, which doesn't prevent them from interacting peacably with people of opposing views.

quote:

---

Regarding all the people that argue right back with him (like yourself, using the exact same tactics). No, they're not responsible for their own actions, nope not at all, cause Jwhop made them do it...

It's a grand example of "do as I say, not as I do" on the part of everyone who has ever flung $hit then cried foul when it got flung right back.

---

posted March 27, 2007 07:16 PM            

quote:

---

I wonder if it has occurred to leftists that they're now dancing to someone else's tunes? That they've been programmed? It's amusing to consider that leftists, like lemmings marching in lockstep over a seaside cliff, leftists have been programmed to howl and shriek on command.

---

posted March 27, 2007 07:38 PM              

it's usually been, alot of the left, attacking the few of the right....

Just my perception, remember, when I got here, I was on the left, LOL. ...I'm in the Middle now!

posted March 27, 2007 07:59 PM            

quote:

---

noticed too when Jwhop was gone that this board basically died.

---

I will third that.

posted March 27, 2007 08:18 PM            

for yours truly.

------------------
~
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world is immortal"~

posted March 27, 2007 08:28 PM            

Colored by admiration, or colored perhaps by nausea in my case.

posted March 28, 2007 09:51 AM            

Have you ever noticed who some of the people involved in fights out of GU would be and whether or not they frequent GU? Not everyone, surely, but some. Could there possibly be a connection due to basic human temperments?

And volume of posts? jwhop contributes a lot to this forum. Yes, he posts a lot of topics. When he's not here, less topics are posted. How unexciting a conclusion. That you or others want to turn that into an agenda and convince other people of same rests on nobody's shoulders but your own. Feeling provoked is subjective. We could waste away arguing whether or not someone was provoked but in the end the person who felt provoked felt provoked and the person who didn't, didn't. I'll ask you ... should feeling provoked make an equally aggressive response more acceptable or more tolerable? If we have to tolerate any ugliness from anybody why shouldn't we tolerate the rest?

Because you don't recall or haven't seen something in GU doesn't mean it never happened. If you really want to find out the things jwhop has said then look for them yourself. I've seen them, I was here for them. And I'm not the one trying to make a case against anyone here.

You apparantly get offended by alot of things jwhop writes. I don't. Who is to judge whether or not what he actually wrote is offensive. Oh, that's right, in the end it comes down to Randall's decisions. And, surprise, jwhop is still here. That couldn't possily be due to anything fair, right? Does the worst have to be assumed as the only possible explanation?

Yet you admit that there was a time when jwhop posted in a different manner. Perhaps it wasn't a single incident. Perhaps it was the attitude of the majority of people who frequented GU and the things they consistently posted. Perhaps it was people doing precisely what he does and, in a number of eyes, worse things yet. But jwhop happens to disagree with the majority so naturally, to some, he must be in the wrong.

jwhop isn't the only person to post things that others might see as offensive. And if you find jwhop that supremely offensive you can take your concerns to Randall directly as he is the one who makes the calls.

I'm not going to get into a philosophical debate regarding our perspectives. I didn't realize my loyalty or my sense of fairness was under scrutiny here, either. Don't worry, though, I won't be crying to anyone about being insulted or attacked just yet. I've seen people turn on the person instead of the issue here too many times and I, for one, can tolerate the same bs from everyone rather than a chosen few. I suppose, in the end, it was to be expected that someone else would try to turn the tables on me just for stating how I see things and, heaven forbid, disagreeing. I simply don't let a handful of people get to me. Isn't that ironic?

I can accept that we disagree.
Can you?

I can accept that Randall has come against this kind of thing before from the majority around here and his mind remains unmoved.
Can you?

I can accept Randall's decisions based on all the evidence I've seen presented over the years.
Can you?

I can accept that jwhop is still here.
Can you?

posted March 28, 2007 11:47 AM              

you're more the focus of conversation than most discussion topics around here....

posted March 28, 2007 03:41 PM            

I think it's interesting that you keep bringing this back to the idea that I want Jwhop banned, and that that's my purpose. I stated very clearly for you what my illustration was about. That you consider it unexciting is irrelevant. There is an objective point there that can't objectively be denied.

quote:

---

I didn't realize my loyalty or my sense of fairness was under scrutiny here, either.

---

Well, if you're going to be loyal, and speak from your sense of fairness without actually being fair, then it would make sense that it might be under scrutiny.

quote:

---

I simply don't let a handful of people get to me. Isn't that ironic?

---

Is that why you chose to respond?

I agree with you, though. Sag through Aquarius are brilliant at being able to monitor and measure emotional responses, which prevents us from allowing others to dictate a reaction.

quote:

---

I can accept that we disagree.
Can you?

---

Yes. Can you accept that I made an objective point?

quote:

---

I can accept that jwhop is still here.
Can you?

---