Morrissey supports terrorism

[The Devil's Reject]

Re: the pot calls the kettle communist

Oh, dear, you used to only post your commentaries about me on a weekly basis. Now it's every three days?

> This is completely true of you, Oaf. Someone says something you disagree
> with and you feel it is your duty to "correct" them.

I posted a thread about animal rights terrorism. You said you hated the thread, and you haven't stopped posting in it since, although in only one message did ya address the issue at hand. No one has refuted anything I've said about the subject. It's a perfectly legitimate topic for the forum, prompted by Morrissey's latest Q&A. If you wanna put a smiley face on his support for terrorism, that's fine, but don't tell me it's not a legitimate topic for a forum. It seems to me, if animal rights terrorism were as great as Morrissey says, this thread would've given you guys the opportunity to make your points and advance your cause. If you'd stick to addressing the points made about the topic instead of commentating on everything but them, it would be nice. Whatever the case, I'll just reply to what I'm given.

I only start about one thread a week. Everything else is in reply to what others are posting.

> What is completely telling about you, in my opinion, is the comment that
> you like to "mock Morrissey" and "next time I get
> drunk" something something blahblahblah, etc.

What is telling about you is you're always trying to figure out what is telling about me.

And that was a reply to a Jew-hater who was asking me to post about politics tonight. I decided to grant their wish, although on my own topic. I'm just having fun posting what I feel like. Of course I try and annoy certain people, but it's always in an above-board manner in clearly marked messages they can click on or not. Unlike the stalkings and harassments of others here.

What I'd like to know is why you seem obsessed with me. The first time you came to this forum, you went into a thread about Regina Spektor and started attacking me, and I'd never heard of you before. A couple weeks ago I posted something about Merle Haggard and the name of a band, and because I was getting phone calls while posting, the "the" from the band name got attached to Merle Haggard's name. For days you were posting under a screenname based on that typo, at least I assume it was you. Doesn't bother me, except when you now start saying you never try and annoy. Do you have a straight face when you say it, Pie? I'm just more above-board and honest when I do it.

> Your recent comment regarding Iraq that "the price of gas is coming
> down" was intellectually dishonest and proved that you are ready to
> cling to whatever argument serves your purpose for the time being.

It is amazing to me that a throw-away, one-line message I posted remains in your memory.

I dunno, man, there's a guy, perhaps he's mentioned to you he's from Texas? He was posting a lot about the gas prices going up because Bush is a shitter who needs to be impeached, yet he didn't seem too happy when the prices started going back down. I can't remember what I was thinking when I posted that one sentence, since it was weeks ago, but it was probably meant to imply that some people are happy when things go bad in the country if it helps them attack Bush. Myself, I love this country, and make no bones about that. And even when I dislike the president I always want the economy and everything else to go well, because that is good for the people. If a politician starts on a policy I dislike, I hope that I am wrong, because it's good for the country when a policy succeeds. It is my belief that many people have gone mental in their hatred of Bush, and I do like to annoy those who are like that. Why can't they feel happy that we were steered out of a recession despite their predictions? Aren't they happy when the unemployment rate drops even when the party they dislike is in power?

> As far as Margaret Thatcher, I wasn't brought up to wish death on people
> but I didn't live under her government, and I don't think you did either.
> It is no surprise on this board where Morrissey long ago wished for her
> death, that people would find that a reasonable opinion.

When Thatcher goes to the hospital, there's a whole thread of people hoping she suffers and dies, and then act surprised when someone actually doesn't have that sort of hate in their heart for Thatcher and says something good about her.

> Morrissey also said when Reagan died that it should have been George Bush.

Yeah, par for the course. Since Morrissey supports terrorism, I understand why he wants Bush to die.

> Would we be better off if George Bush had died rather than Ronald Reagan?
> I think maintaining our presence in Iraq is partly a matter of saving face
> for this administration. There is no way to pull out now gracefully
> without lending credence to the idea that maybe we shouldn't have gone
> there in the first place. So we dream of future goals which will somehow
> justify the deaths of American soldiers, not to mention the thousands of
> Iraqis killed in this war. Meanwhile we are told to look forward to
> decades of war.

> We have to stay there long enough for people to forget Abu Ghraib, I
> guess, becasue Iraq is probably never going to have a democratically
> elected government, friendly to the US, that anyone from here would want
> to live under.

You seem to be really itching to get into Bush and Iraq in this thread. I've already said all I want to you about those things. When you told me you didn't care about the humanitarian and national security consequences of pulling out immediately, we're clearly never gonna agree. When you now wonder whether we should wish for the President to die, I'm sorry, I can't relate. I've never wished for death upon a president. Why not try and win the 2006 congressional elections to cripple his second term, and then try and win the next presidential election? This wishing death upon those the people of this country have elected to represent them makes no sense to me. One might say it is TELLING about those who say such things.....

 

[..p.i.e..]

Re: I believe I answered that question 4 or 5 different times. Here....

> What you don't understand is that there are some political views in
> Morrissey's songs I do agree with, and some that I do not, but mostly his
> songs are about more universal feelings. He wouldn't be selling many
> records if all of his listeners agreed with all of his views. It's really
> not about that for most music listeners. Music gets beyond such things,
> IMO. The thing of it is, his views in interviews on certain topics are
> views that I totally despise, so I'll say so. I think we're in very
> dangerous times right now and I feel every bit as strongly about the war
> on my side of it (the side against Islamic-fascism) as you do in on your
> side (not really sure what side that is). We came very, very close to
> derailing the democratization process in Iraq on the unhelpful influence
> of Bush haters, for example. And that would've been a humanitarian
> catastrophe of huge proportions. I couldn't be prouder that to live in a
> country that is standing up to the Islamic-fascist bullshit that has been
> plaguing the world for decades, I won't stand for people talking shit
> about that without me saying something back. My country is at war, and the
> fact is, those who don't see eye to eye about it are gonna have pretty
> strong feelings and it's gonna cause fights. So be it.

So regarding the part about music being above poltics, I agree. I think music reaches us in the most basic way, goes beyond words.

Politics is a device limited to this physical, material level we are on.

This Islamic-fascist thing you mention, it sounds closer to the real reason we are at war to me. I don't think it is about blood for oil. That is the simple answer and that works in some ways. Certainly people are motivated by greed and lots of people are going to make obscene amounts of money. But it is a war against Islam to some people, and may have more to do with religion.

I don't support a religious war based on defeating Islam. It comes very close to what some people would call a conspiracy theory to suggest that this war in Iraq is a war against Islam. You can draw distinctions between Islam and Islamic fascism, I guess, but no, I don't support this. and it is what many people say were are at war for.

The other day on digg.com there was a debate about a man receiving a letter from the Phillipines that had been opened by homeland security. People were saying it was justified because "if you have nothing to hide, why hide it?" People were talking about dirty bombs and one person wrote "when they nuke Washington DC then you will have your civil liberties".

My point? I thought I was supposed to be on the side that was paranoid, the side that questions the motives of our government, but these rightwingers are convinced that they are going to be sprayed with anthrax or nuked anyday by a terrorist lurking in the bushes, and they are ready to give up their freedom to prevent it. Even though we saw that this government did a terrible job of protecting us on 9/11. Had the audacity to tell people to buy plastic sheeting and duct tape to seal their houses, and people BOUGHT IT! Relatives of mine were at Home Depot practically fighing for the last flashlight batteries.

If we are truly living in that world we need to be brave. Once we aren't afraid of dying we can live again. 9/11 did a number on all of us and made us see that we are vulnerable, that the world finally did manage to touch us and that random terrorism isn't limited to "other" places, meaning anywhere but here.

Political division is not the answer. Being a democrat or a republican is not the answer. We need to vote of course, whether it does any good or not, for the party that seems to be presenting the best plan, but the differences between the two are limited. Coke or Pepsi, people have there favorite but they taste pretty much the same.

What is important is to stand up for our rights and not let "them" change our way of life and put all of us in a sort of prison, prisoners in our own homes. That is what I believe in. Liberty to the degree that is possible without harming others. I believe in looking to the future and trying to plan for the long term, not treading water and going after ever more desperate measures.

It appears to me that the present way of thinking in America is very short term. That's why we always inherit the problems of the recent past.

As far as Iraq, I don't think it has a thing to do with democracy. This administration doesn't care for democracy, do they? They don't believe in the Constitution, spying on citizens without warrants. They seem to believe in torture and secret prisons.

They didn't go there to promote democracy, they went to defeat terrorism, the way I remember it. They took the (unprecedented?) step of attacking a country based on what that country might do to us in the future if certain information we had turned out to be true.

You can't do that. The police can't hear a rumor that you have an arsenal and firebomb you. Tell you to get out of town in 48 hours or you're going to be attacked. Oh wait, there's Waco, the famous test case. People should have been in the streets when all those children died there. If you believe the official story they were hostages after all.

We are in frightening times in some ways, but what I am more afraid of is losing (what's left of) our democracy here in the US, not taking it to people that have never had an interest in it before.

As far as humanitarian, we saw the humanitarian response they gave to New Orleans, sending private soldiers instead of doctors. They aren't about democracy or humanitarian concerns.

You have said in the past that you aren't a republican, and yet you always support Bush. I think I get it now. You are anti-Islamic fascism, and I guess that you would support anyone that you felt furthered that agenda.

I don't find that stance to be what America is about. There has always been someone somewhere on this planet being abused, tortured, murdered by fascists of some sort or another. Not that we shouldn't care or try to change the world, but I don't think we ever attacked any countries without being threatened by them directly.

Our soldiers are in Iraq protecting economic and religious interests and not promoting democracy. Or maybe all three. But the first two are the reasons that people are passionate about. The third is the excuse they try to foist off on us. If they were so strongly for democracy they would have more respect for it here at home. Things like the "Patriot" Act are not the work of a group strongly interested in democracy.

Where all of this connects is that some people do promote violence to achieve their means. Terrorism is a subjective term. I am not saying that no member of these animal rights groups has ever committed an act that was designed to coerce through fear. Certainly someone has. Does that mean that this entire group is composed of "terrorists"? I don't think so. No more than the rapes and torture in Abu Ghraib make all US soldiers rapists or torturers.

If you feel Morrissey makes these statements to be "punk", fair enough. But to feel bound to expose him, to "mock" him and call him a moron and so on, I don't think that is really a discussion. It offends me not because you are talking about Morrissey, although I'll admit that is slighty offensive, but because you feel bound to set us all straight, as if we couldn't think for ourselves. It reminds me of watching people on those news discussion shows. The truth isn't as important as a convincing argument to them.

I am not doubting your sincerity, but only the way it comes across. We are never going to agree on many many points, and that's fine. The people here that are obsessed with certain topics, I'd have to say that all of them are a little bonkers, no matter if they are right or wrong. I don't bother to debate people that post the same messages of hate repeatedly because it is pointless, regardless of who they hate.

And to the main point, once again I agree. The music is what matters.

 

[Let's Go Devils]

Irene, every party has a pooper and that pooper is you!

> Well so long as all the clubs where in reach of the gaza strip get out
> road i guess he was in luck.
I'm going to see Derek!!! under that warm Florida sun and riding the waves of Volusia County- The last thing on my mind is that Sharon should have had a living will.

 

[AHOY]

Re: There's a difference?

> I can see it bothers you that I draw this
> line violence from mentally deranged and self-righteous zealots.

There's a difference?

*bored of this stupid conversation*

 

[Short Term Memory Lost]

Re: Irene, every party has a pooper and that pooper is you!

> I'm going to see Derek!!! under that warm Florida sun and riding the waves
> of Volusia County- The last thing on my mind is that Sharon should have
> had a living will.

I envy you Devs, I really do.
To meet your hero on the crest of a wave.
Fly high!

 

[Let's Go Devils]

Re: Irene, every party has a pooper and that pooper is you!

> I envy you Devs, I really do.
> To meet your hero on the crest of a wave.
> Fly high!
ahhh Derek in a nice pair of board shorts!!Marble sacks don't do it for me.
See nothing matters when your riding those waves!!