[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

You’ve Never Seen THIS Side Of Donald Trump President Donald Trump Nominates Former Florida Rep. Dr. Dave Weldon as CDC Director Joe Rogan Tells Josh Brolin His Recent Bell’s Palsy Diagnosis Could Be Linked to mRNA Vaccine President-elect Donald Trump Nominates Brooke Rollins as Secretary of Agriculture Trump Taps COVID-Contrarian, Staunch Public Health Critic Makary For FDA F-35's Cooling Crisis: Design Flaws Fuel $2 Trillion Dilemma For Pentagon Joe Rogan on Tucker Carlson and Ukraine Aid Joe Rogan on 62 year-old soldier with one arm, one eye Jordan Peterson On China's Social Credit Controls Senator Kennedy Exposes Bad Jusge Jewish Land Grab Trump Taps Dr. Marty Makary, Fierce Opponent of COVID Vaccine Mandates, as New FDA Commissioner Recovering J6 Prisoner James Grant, Tells-All About Bidens J6 Torture Chamber, Needs Immediate Help After Release AOC: Keeping Men Out Of Womens Bathrooms Is Endangering Women What Donald Trump Has Said About JFK's Assassination Horse steals content from Sara Fischer and Sophia Cai and pretends he is the author Horse steals content from Jonas E. Alexis and claims it as his own. Trump expected to shake up White House briefing room Ukrainians have stolen up to half of US aid ex-Polish deputy minister Gaza doctor raped, tortured to death in Israeli custody, new report reveals German Lutheran Church Bans AfD Members From Committees, Calls Party 'Anti-Human' Berlin Teachers Sound Alarm Over Educational Crisis Caused By Multiculturalism Trump Hosts Secret Global Peace Summit at Mar-a-Lago! Heat Is Radiating From A Huge Mass Under The Moon Elon Musk Delivers a Telling Response When Donald Trump Jr. Suggests FBI recovers funds for victims of scammed banker Mark Felton: Can Russia Attack Britain? Notre Dame Apologizes After Telling Hockey Fans Not To Wear Green, Shamrocks, 'Fighting Irish' Dear Horse, which one of your posts has the Deep State so spun up that's causing 4um to run slow? Bomb Cyclone Pacific Northwest

4play
See other 4play Articles

Title: Goldi on Women's Suffrage
Source: ElPee
URL Source: http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/ ... rt.cgi?ArtNum=162468&Disp=5#C4
Published: Oct 16, 2006
Author: Goldi-Lox
Post Date: 2006-10-16 21:50:48 by Nostalgia
Keywords: None
Views: 1554
Comments: 142

4. To: High Hopes (#0)

Women led the opposition, with seven in 10 saying they oppose the war. Twenty-eight percent say they support it, which is the lowest support among women in any CNN poll taken since the invasion more than three years ago.

Women voting is a mistake.

Women are emotional, changeable, and notoriously unstable because of hormone flux.

They usually want to talk talk talk talk a situation over, under, around, and to death. LONG after the time for action.

And action, even when the right thing to do, is the LAST thing they want, and will try to stop it after it starts.

I'm a woman, and I know this is true.

I'd give up my vote in a minute if they took it away from all other women as well. We just don't have what it takes to be "rulers" and "deciders". Those roles require cooler heads and harder hearts.

Goldi-Lox posted on 2006-10-16 17:54:48 ET Reply Trace

Poster Comment:

Oy Vey

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 74.

#17. To: Nostalgia (#0)

I'm a woman, and I know this is true.

She needs to get laid more than once in the last 10 years.

angle  posted on  2006-10-16   22:30:07 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

She needs to get laid more than once in the last 10 years.

we should all kick in and buy buckeroo a plane ticket to maryland.

Morgana le Fay  posted on  2006-10-16   22:37:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

US troops 'winning friends in Iraq'

Why does Buck post these there at LP? Then he makes a show that he hates the piece and that he is, "...not a liberal nor a democrat as you claim. Nor am I a "compassionate conservative" or a Republican as yourself" to a bot's bot there.

There are just some things I can't understand about the lad.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2006-10-16   23:47:38 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Why does Buck post these there at LP?

Because I feel like posting that ludicrous crap. I love the torturous methods of enigmas snapping jellyfish's backs ... like yours.

buckeroo  posted on  2006-10-17   0:46:17 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Actually, it is more the tactic of those conflicted. You are like the guy who says no while shaking your head yes.

As far as torturous goes, I have no problem with your loony thread posting there. And as far as insults go, yours' amuse me.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2006-10-17   0:54:36 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

You are like the guy who says no while shaking your head yes.

You are very confused. I have maintained my perspectives upon the various HOT political topics forever. You know that, too. Of course, you won't produce any links worthy of merit to actually contradict me, either. All you can do is say what you believe which is an outright lie.

buckeroo  posted on  2006-10-17   0:59:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

"All you can do is say what you believe which is an outright lie.

Believe? I didn't say I believed anything. I noted an interesting manner in which you seem to court conflict.

You spoke so glowingly and compassionately about Goofy-Lox being a Mama protecting her creation, LP. Then you post an article she would agree with and post back patting denials that that is how you feel about the war.

So, are you empathetic with her and trying to contribute in ways she likes, or hacking at her? You seem to have some conflict and I merely inquire regarding this.

#9. To: Coral Snake (#5)

CS - "Goldi is just another JimRob."

Rubbish. Shes struggling. Shes seeing a change in the political climate; shes renewed her forum with a re-fresh of tech and sees new forum members pouncing in more than ever.

Shes a mother hen wanting none other than to protect the forum. Nothing wrong with that .... but, the strain is showing.

buckeroo posted on 2006-05-04 2:17:41 ET Reply Trace Private Reply

Ferret Mike  posted on  2006-10-17   1:08:20 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

I rarely perform the gang pings that you elude to. The article I posted was not intended for Goldie or anyone in particular. I simply stated my opinion by ripping it up which I have always performed. In effect, it was intended for EVERYONE including yourself whom is making a BIG_DEAL out of it.

Ever since I have been at LP ( since 2002-3 ) I have been against GW Bush's Iraqi invasion. EVERYONE knows it, to include EVERYONE on 4um but yourself.

Get a life, pal. You are losing yourself in delusion.

buckeroo  posted on  2006-10-17   1:15:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

"I rarely perform the gang pings that you elude to."

How special of you.

"Ever since I have been at LP ( since 2002-3 ) I have been against GW Bush's Iraqi invasion. EVERYONE knows it, to include EVERYONE on 4um but yourself."

You are conflicted. When I showed you the contradiction inherent to your call to murder a man who acted in accordance with his conscious and refused to go back to take part in what he had come to realize is an illegal and immoral conflict you went ballistic and avoided any further discussion on the topic.

He acted in accordance with the Geneva Accords that superseded his oath of enlistment. And you reacted by going nutz.

So, what is it Buck? An illegal and immoral conflict people should display good moral judgment and refuse to take part in? Should the Geneva Convention that calls upon people who would say, "I was only following orders" to remember they have higher responsibilities, some of which call for them to disobey illegal orders be taken seriously? Or what?

No, you are conflicted, that is obvious. And you have a Madonna/Whore relationship with Goofy-Lox on top of it.

I only note what I see Buckeroo. I am more impressed by the contradictions I note then by your bluster about your beliefs.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2006-10-17   1:25:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

When I showed you the contradiction inherent to your call to murder a man who acted in accordance with his conscious and refused to go back to take part in what he had come to realize is an illegal and immoral conflict you went ballistic and avoided any further discussion on the topic.

The man contradicted his own oath. In the REAL world, we don't get to sit around and act like pansies protected by the tooth-fairy. We stand tall and confront our own basis of reality. We maintain our honor by ensuring that our own oath is actually worth something besides an at-ta-boy.

The decision to join the military is totally voluntary in the US. And its a serious matter. The later decision to abandon his oath was, as well. But, it jeopardized others within his own unit. It could have cost others their lives.

buckeroo  posted on  2006-10-17   1:37:09 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

"The man contradicted his own oath. In the REAL world, we don't get to sit around and act like pansies protected by the tooth-fairy. We stand tall and confront our own basis of reality. We maintain our honor by ensuring that our own oath is actually worth something besides an at-ta-boy."

You don't know squat, do you? Smirk, Rummy and Snarl violated the spirit of the oaths taken by our military men and women by engaging them in a war not conducted for the defense of this country.

It is a war that makes nonsense of the oath by making our men and women who swore it mercenaries to Imperialism, and for profit entities like Kellogg Brown and Root. They didn't raise their right hand to take part in a pointless war of zero purpose to wind up being whores for Haliburton

In a nonsense war with no mission or real defensive purpose, men do foolish things out of frustration and because our culture not grounded in good ethical behavior. They shoot at the cars of innocents to speed them up or move them out of the way on the road.

They get angry and pull a man out and put a bullet in his head frustrated at deaths in their unit and because they could/t find whom they were looking for (real incident).

The oaths were compromised by making people work in a war that is one huge war crime. I would refuse to go if I were still in. If enough people did combat refusals in illegal and immoral wars, they would be doing the true and best defense of their country.

He went giving the liars the benefit of the doubt. He found out they were indeed lying and putting his unit and him in needless jeopardy of their lives for a purposeless conflict.

He has courage, ethics and conviction. People like you who feel the oath is like some blood initiation into a mafia generally don't understand what a commitment to that oath means.

" The decision to join the military is totally voluntary in the US. And its a serious matter. The later decision to abandon his oath was, as well. But, it jeopardized others within his own unit. It could have cost others their lives."

He didn't abandon his oath, he honored it by refusing to fight in a war that makes nonsense of the sworn commitment to defend this republic and her constitution.

It is Bush and company who take hat oath lightly and consider the U.S. Constitution a "goddamn piece of paper." We had our first refusals by officers to fly combat missions in B-52s doing carpet bombing in Indochina as the criminal Nixon shifted from a ground war to a navel bombardment and air war.

Those were brave men with true principles accepting imprisonment and other negative sanctions rather then engage in criminal conduct at the behest of criminals of the illegal war making kind.

Get your head out of your ass Buck. This is the real world and that oath means something. And if a man is smart and moral enough to put two and two together and realize they actually are being made to dishonor their oath bu serving in an illegal and immoral war, he is honor bound to refuse to go to that theater of operations.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2006-10-17   7:08:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

People like you who feel the oath is like some blood initiation into a mafia generally don't understand what a commitment to that oath means.

Cool the theatrics, pal. Here is the oath we are discussing:

I, {insert name here}, do solemnly swear, (or affirm), that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God. (Note that the last line is not required to be said if the speaker has a personal or moral objection)

And you say that its OK for an experienced soldier to just walk away and hide. Yeah, he can just skip away, whistling Dixie while sucking a government paid lollipop without any social stigma attached to his cowardice towards his own pledge. I say he should be executed.

buckeroo  posted on  2006-10-18   2:42:42 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

#75. To: buckeroo (#74)

http://freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=36741&Disp=9#C9

I posted that a few days ago, you just don't pay attention sometimes.

Answer the question in this earlier post for me please:

#11. To: buckeroo (#8)
If I were under official orders to be in the Armed Forces and in a combat zone, and my superior officer said, "Look, they are parachuting from that plane that is about to crash, fire them up!" and I absolutely refused, I would be disobeying the enlistment oath I quoted in my last post, but I would be obeying the Geneva convention accords. Do you agree?

hors de combat Combatants who are hors de combat are out of the fight are and entitled to respect for their lives and physical and moral integrity. They are to be protected and treated humanely, without adverse discrimination. (Convention I Art. 3; Protocol I, Art. 4)

Attacking a person who is hors de combat is a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions. (Protocol I, Art. 85, Sec. 3)

Persons are hors de combat if they have been captured, if they have surrendered, or if they are unconscious or otherwise incapacitated provided that they do not attempt to fight or escape. (Protocol I, Art. 41, Sec. 2)

Parachutists who eject from a damaged aircraft cannot be attacked while they are descending. (Protocol I, Art. 42, Sec. 1)

Parachuters who have landed in hostile territory must be given a chance to surrender, unless they are clearly acting hostile. (Protocol I, Art. 42, Sec. 2)

http://freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi? ArtNum=36741&Disp=11#C11

Ferret Mike  posted on  2006-10-18 03:06:16 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]