|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 5:58 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Most Americans don't give a rat's ass what non-Americans think. Haven't you figured that out yet? |
This is true. It is also true of all other people in all other countries. (Lao-what's-his-name doesn't agree with my generalizations but that's his problem.) As the late great Tip O'Neill said, "All politics is local."
|
So much for debate. You don't like people generalizing about Americans. But you openly flaunt your generalizations of everyone else in the world |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 7:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
So much for debate. You don't like people generalizing about Americans. But you openly flaunt your generalizations of everyone else in the world
|
What debate?
I said I over-generalized in my effort to make my main point. I admitted my error, hoping the discussion could focus on the main point.
What? Do I need to throw myself at your feet and grovel in abject apology? That ain't gonna happen.
You can choose your number, I won't quibble about it as long as it is a reasonable estimate of the number of anti-Americans who insist on blaming everything including the bad weather and their girlfriend's bad performance in bed on Americans.
This is the second time I've admitted my error in writing in haste. I don't know what else you want. And I'm quickly losing my interest in discussing the issue with someone who misses (or willfully ignores) the main point. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 7:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
but you can throw that little quip in generalizing Canadians as obnoxious?
|
ummm...I didn't generalize. I made it specific. I can give his nickname if you want.
My impression of the posters on this forum is that many of them will tell you that that kind of statement would not come from an Aussie, a Kiwi, a South African, an Irishman, a Scot or even most Brits. It is something only a drunk who thinks he is still talking to the town drunk back in Saskatoon would say. Right before he falls off the bar stool. But I don't wish to get in to that kind of discussion on this topic. Save it for the inevitable one that will show up is a few weeks. They always do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hypnotist
Joined: 04 Dec 2004
Location: I wish I were a sock
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 8:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| I can sympathize a little bit. There are times when I would love to have a vote in Korean elections. I would also like to have a vote in other states' elections. It ain't gonna happen. I don't get to have a vote in Canadian elections, but you guys send down lobbyists to influence my government's decisions that may well affect my life negatively. I can legitimately resent that. I wish you would stop it. Seagrams and your wheat farmers and your lumber industry have a lot more money in their bankroll than I do. That is life. I don't like it but I try not to whine about it. |
Maybe I should point out at this stage that I am not, nor have I ever been, a Canadian? I am in fact a Brit, of Scottish blood but with most of my life spent in England. You're right, I can't expect you to keep up with where various posters on this board are from - but please be careful of jumping to (wrong) conclusions!
| Quote: |
(change of topic for the slow on the up-take)
Mr. hypnotist,
You have mentioned that you are a leftist. Fair enough. What I think is not fair is that when you criticize the US you don't automatically mention that.
It is only fair to say at the beginning of all discussions, "I'm a leftist (Marxist or whatever) and therefore no matter what policy choice the US makes it is going to be wrong because the US is a capitalist state. I profoundly disagree with the basic economic/social/philosophical underpinnings of the whole shebang. That being said, yada, yada, yada." That seems only fair to me. Disagree if you wish. |
I wish...
I'm very much centre-left as far as European politics is concerned. I'm not a Blairite, but I'm certainly nowhere near a Marxist these days. I don't like unrestrained capitalism, but I do operate in a post-Thatcher&Reagan world where capitalism has won a lot of the arguments. Sometimes my idealism gets the better of me, but I am at heart a pragmatist. Yada yada yada.
I would also make it clear when I believed the US had done something right, if only the US would do something right  More seriously, I supported a great deal of what the Clinton administration did. I can make the distinction between the Bush administration and the country as a whole too!
| Quote: |
| I don't think it is fair that you expect me to keep track of every person's philosophical view and deal with the criticism as if it was offered in a spirit of fair play. When I am always wrong because of who I am, then I need to know that going in, not because you expect me to waste my time figuring out who sometimes thinks I can be right but this time thinks I'm wrong and the other ones who always thinks I am wrong. There are 6 billion people in the world. I can't keep track of all of you, although the CIA may try. |
Don't worry - MI5 already have a file on me, if the reports of the anti-war protests are to be believed.
However, your suggestion that I would always disagree with anything American citizens said on principle is completely wide of the mark. I do try not to consciously think about who's writing the message when I choose to reply to it. I can't say I can always perfectly ignore said, but I try. (I find myself agreeing with Des more often than not, for example.)
| Quote: |
| I've been on this board since '99. Except for Bulsajo, I can't think of anyone who has been here half as long. Or who is more fair-minded. When he criticizes the US, I can listen and agree or disagree without an overly-emotional reaction because I know he is not a knee-jerk kind of guy. I think I can listen to his point of view and at least try to evaluate it on its merits. Octavius Hite is a prime example of someone I cannot respect. Read his posts and you will see what I mean. |
I have and I do. I will admit that I am a knee-jerk kind of guy - at least on this forum. I post when I disagree with something that's being said, or think there are interesting points to be debated. I don't usually post to agree with something someone else has written.
| Quote: |
| Maybe it is unfair but I have to put most of you in the same category as OH because you put yourselves in his category. Maybe it isn't deserved. Well, maybe the hakwon owner shouldn't suspect you are plotting a midnight run either, but that is the residue of the people who have been here before you. Unfortunately, we don't reap only what we sow, but what other people sow. |
Well, given I'm not a teacher (in a hagwon or otherwise) I don't think anyone need worry about me doing a midnight run Looking at my previous posts in this forum, there are far more defending multiculturalism in the UK than there are attacking US foreign policy. Perhaps it's not something you care about and so you don't notice - fair enough - but it's harsh to categorise me based on the little you do see of me, I feel. You previously said you can't keep up with all the posters on the board - if that's the case, why not respond to the arguments made on a case by case basis and ignore the names behind them?
| Quote: |
| Which brings us back to my original point. Mr. Gopher and I largely agree. If all you have to say is that no matter what the US does, it is wrong because it is the US, then you really have no point to make. You are being intellectually dishonest as well as morally dishonest. |
That isn't all I have to say. Indeed, I don't believe that at all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 12:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The degree of hypocrisy on this thread is startling. That is, even compared to the typical drivel by some, this thead is breathtaking.
I shall leave it to the Dear Reader to decide wherein hyocrisy is resident. For now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 12:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| laogaiguk wrote: |
Since 1945, the only things I have complete knowledge of are the 1973 military coup in Chile, the 1954 Guatemala coup, Manuel Noriega mishap, and of course the continuing embargo on Cuba. The current administration isn't focusing too much on them (prob a little to busy with some other countries), but check these out...
I have heard the opinions of my south american friends and one friend who lived there for 4 years. I haven't been there so all of that is second hand opinion and I won't use it, but let's just say what they said wasn't so good. |
This is exactly what I mean by U.S.-centrism.
There was a great deal of turbulence and violence in Central America between 1944 and the mid-1990s, involving, of course, the 1954 Guatemalan coup.
If all that you see when you look at these events is what the U.S. did to those people, then you suffer from serious, fatal bias, and are gravely misinformed, if not on an anti-U.S. agenda...
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| You can't honestly believe what the US is doing and it's foreign policies are not hurting anyone? I will not bash Americans just because they are American, and I actually go to the defence of many of my American friends when they are being attacked not based on their ideas and opinions but on who they are (really!). But I will bash the idea that America isn't hurting anyone nowadays except for Iraq and Afghanistan. |
The U.S. government is certainly associated and partly responsible for much that is wrong in the world.
To say that this U.S. is willfully (are you alleging willfully?) harming people all over the globe is absurd. It's way too complicated for that. Everyone is involved in this. And this is an old pattern in world affairs.
The Portuguese may have begun the slave trade, as a world-system industry, that is, but there were a lot of Africans who were willfully enslaving and selling other Africans in this mess, too.
And, by the way, where were your clothes made? Before taking on the U.S. govt as the cause for suffering in peoples' lives, you might want to make sure that you aren't just as involved in what's going on as all of the rest of us in the world in supporting and sustaining this system. It's not easy to buy clothes that weren't produced by harshly exploiting cheap labor, you might protest, I'm just caught up in something that's hard to control...Fine. But what makes you think the U.S. govt is in any more control of this thing and these events than you?
Peoples' daily lives, in most parts of the world, largely proceed as is without respect to who is in the White House or whatever their politics may be.
The infant death rate in Chile, for example, decreased under the Christian Democratic regime, between 1964 and 1970.
It continued to decrease when Allende was in office, between 1970 and 1973.
And, lo and behold, it continued to decrease during the Pinochet dictatorship between 1973 and 1990. (Haslam cites the statistics in his new work on the coup.)
I'll bet that even though W. Bush is president, people in London still behave much the same way they did when Clinton was president, and people in other parts of the world still do whatever it was they used to do on Sat. nights, too...
If you're going to allege that W. Bush has made such a tremendous and terrible impact on peoples' lives all over the world, again, apart from Afghanistan and Iraq, which are special cases, you're going to have to be specific, and you're going to need to cite credible evidence to back it up.
How about them apples? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 1:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
So much for debate. You don't like people generalizing about Americans. But you openly flaunt your generalizations of everyone else in the world
|
What debate?
I said I over-generalized in my effort to make my main point. I admitted my error, hoping the discussion could focus on the main point.
What? Do I need to throw myself at your feet and grovel in abject apology? That ain't gonna happen.
You can choose your number, I won't quibble about it as long as it is a reasonable estimate of the number of anti-Americans who insist on blaming everything including the bad weather and their girlfriend's bad performance in bed on Americans.
This is the second time I've admitted my error in writing in haste. I don't know what else you want. And I'm quickly losing my interest in discussing the issue with someone who misses (or willfully ignores) the main point. |
Ya-ta boy, sorry, I seriously didn't realize that you had apologized (the nitpicking thing sounds more like an attack). I thought you were being ironic. I would never expect grovelling, nor is that ever needed. So now I'll say sorry. I really didn't realize you had agreed with me. I do agree with your main point, I just didn't like being generalized myself, so I shot the first post down. Like I said in another post, I have always gone to the aid of any american friend who is being bashed solely because of their nationality 
Again, sorry about the hard time I gave you. I really didn't realize. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 2:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| laogaiguk wrote: |
Since 1945, the only things I have complete knowledge of are the 1973 military coup in Chile, the 1954 Guatemala coup, Manuel Noriega mishap, and of course the continuing embargo on Cuba. The current administration isn't focusing too much on them (prob a little to busy with some other countries), but check these out...
I have heard the opinions of my south american friends and one friend who lived there for 4 years. I haven't been there so all of that is second hand opinion and I won't use it, but let's just say what they said wasn't so good. |
This is exactly what I mean by U.S.-centrism.
There was a great deal of turbulence and violence in Central America between 1944 and the mid-1990s, involving, of course, the 1954 Guatemalan coup.
If all that you see when you look at these events is what the U.S. did to those people, then you suffer from serious, fatal bias, and are gravely misinformed, if not on an anti-U.S. agenda...
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| You can't honestly believe what the US is doing and it's foreign policies are not hurting anyone? I will not bash Americans just because they are American, and I actually go to the defence of many of my American friends when they are being attacked not based on their ideas and opinions but on who they are (really!). But I will bash the idea that America isn't hurting anyone nowadays except for Iraq and Afghanistan. |
The U.S. government is certainly associated and partly responsible for much that is wrong in the world.
To say that this U.S. is willfully (are you alleging willfully?) harming people all over the globe is absurd. It's way too complicated for that. Everyone is involved in this. And this is an old pattern in world affairs.
The Portuguese may have begun the slave trade, as a world-system industry, that is, but there were a lot of Africans who were willfully enslaving and selling other Africans in this mess, too.
And, by the way, where were your clothes made? Before taking on the U.S. govt as the cause for suffering in peoples' lives, you might want to make sure that you aren't just as involved in what's going on as all of the rest of us in the world in supporting and sustaining this system. It's not easy to buy clothes that weren't produced by harshly exploiting cheap labor, you might protest, I'm just caught up in something that's hard to control...Fine. But what makes you think the U.S. govt is in any more control of this thing and these events than you?
Peoples' daily lives, in most parts of the world, largely proceed as is without respect to who is in the White House or whatever their politics may be.
The infant death rate in Chile, for example, decreased under the Christian Democratic regime, between 1964 and 1970.
It continued to decrease when Allende was in office, between 1970 and 1973.
And, lo and behold, it continued to decrease during the Pinochet dictatorship between 1973 and 1990. (Haslam cites the statistics in his new work on the coup.)
I'll bet that even though W. Bush is president, people in London still behave much the same way they did when Clinton was president, and people in other parts of the world still do whatever it was they used to do on Sat. nights, too...
If you're going to allege that W. Bush has made such a tremendous and terrible impact on peoples' lives all over the world, again, apart from Afghanistan and Iraq, which are special cases, you're going to have to be specific, and you're going to need to cite credible evidence to back it up.
How about them apples? |
First, if you are going to say something, you should also back it up with credible facts. I hate to tell you this, but I really don't think that the infant death rate is solely America's doing (as you have implied, though maybe not purposely). I believe the infant death rate has increased everywhere in the world in the past 4 decades. But if it is solely America's doing in Chile, then please show me some credible facts supporting it.
Also, talking about the clothing making is a little off-topic. Where did that come from? Also, I lived in the Chinese countryside for a year. I probably know their plight much better than you. Did you know they get 1 day off a month and that day is usually told to them the night before ??? But that is not the point we are discussing. Shifting the blame isn't a valid argument.
Second, if people (other than crazy terrorists) actually thought America wsa "willfully" harming people, I think there would be significantly more anti-us violence. Ofcourse America doesn't willfully hurt people, it just never actually thinks before it acts.
I gotta go to work, but I will finish the "what is America doing to hurt other people" later.
BTW, "How about them apples?", come on... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 3:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| First, if you are going to say something, you should also back it up with credible facts. I hate to tell you this, but I really don't think that the infant death rate is solely America's doing (as you have implied, though maybe not purposely). I believe the infant death rate has increased everywhere in the world in the past 4 decades. But if it is solely America's doing in Chile, then please show me some credible facts supporting it. |
You missed my point.
Peoples' daily lives occur in a context that is much larger than government policies, political parties, or politicians and their ideas and/or decisions. In the Chilean case concerning decreasing infant mortality, I cited a demographic trend that occurred in a context that had little to do with who was in power in Chile, or the U.S., or Gabon, for that matter.
The point being that you can greatly overstate the importance of, say, the president of the United States, as many here indeed do.
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| Ofcourse America doesn't willfully hurt people, it just never actually thinks before it acts. |
More anti-American hyperbole.
"America NEVER actually thinks before it acts."
Never? Never ever? Not once in the history of the U.S. has the government thought before it acted? Not on any issue? By implication, it ALWAYS acts impulsively? Always?
Why do you keep making such broad, grandoise statments about the U.S. that cast it in such a negative light?
What's the point? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 5:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| First, if you are going to say something, you should also back it up with credible facts. I hate to tell you this, but I really don't think that the infant death rate is solely America's doing (as you have implied, though maybe not purposely). I believe the infant death rate has increased everywhere in the world in the past 4 decades. But if it is solely America's doing in Chile, then please show me some credible facts supporting it. |
You missed my point.
Peoples' daily lives occur in a context that is much larger than government policies, political parties, or politicians and their ideas and/or decisions. In the Chilean case concerning decreasing infant mortality, I cited a demographic trend that occurred in a context that had little to do with who was in power in Chile, or the U.S., or Gabon, for that matter.
The point being that you can greatly overstate the importance of, say, the president of the United States, as many here indeed do.
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| Ofcourse America doesn't willfully hurt people, it just never actually thinks before it acts. |
More anti-American hyperbole.
"America NEVER actually thinks before it acts."
Never? Never ever? Not once in the history of the U.S. has the government thought before it acted? Not on any issue? By implication, it ALWAYS acts impulsively? Always?
Why do you keep making such broad, grandoise statments about the U.S. that cast it in such a negative light?
What's the point? |
You're right. I should not have said "never". I apologize, I was in a rush because I was going to miss my bus, but that was my problem.
But it really doesn't think of the grand scheme of things in many of the worst cases (though I guess that goes hand in hand, the good things probably were thought out). Iraq is a mess. Afghanistan is a drug producing country again while warlords are gaining power. Those are the major things. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 6:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| First, if you are going to say something, you should also back it up with credible facts. I hate to tell you this, but I really don't think that the infant death rate is solely America's doing (as you have implied, though maybe not purposely). I believe the infant death rate has increased everywhere in the world in the past 4 decades. But if it is solely America's doing in Chile, then please show me some credible facts supporting it. |
You missed my point.
Peoples' daily lives occur in a context that is much larger than government policies, political parties, or politicians and their ideas and/or decisions. In the Chilean case concerning decreasing infant mortality, I cited a demographic trend that occurred in a context that had little to do with who was in power in Chile, or the U.S., or Gabon, for that matter.
The point being that you can greatly overstate the importance of, say, the president of the United States, as many here indeed do.
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| Ofcourse America doesn't willfully hurt people, it just never actually thinks before it acts. |
More anti-American hyperbole.
"America NEVER actually thinks before it acts."
Never? Never ever? Not once in the history of the U.S. has the government thought before it acted? Not on any issue? By implication, it ALWAYS acts impulsively? Always?
Why do you keep making such broad, grandoise statments about the U.S. that cast it in such a negative light?
What's the point? |
One more thing though, I do not spout anti-american hyperbole, I spout out anti-America hyperbole. There is a big difference, and minus the hyperbole part which I have already aplogized for, I will continue to be anti-America as long as the government continues like it is today.
The point of it is I can't change America, unlike Pamela Anderson who got American citizenship and voted against Bush. All I can do is point out these things and hope that the Americans who voted for Bush might actually see a point of view outside their little box. A lot of non-americans still wonder why he hasn't been impeached yet? Kill hundreds of thousand of innocent lives and put the men and women of your country in constant risk doesn't, but a blwjb will get the ball rolling on impeachement.
Just out of curiousity, you don't think that America should be held in a positive light at the moment, do you? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cubanlord
Joined: 08 Jul 2005
Location: In Japan!
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 7:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In a good light now...well...that depends on how you look at it:
Iraq situation.....no
Kyoto.....no
Helping other countries in need of security and aid (South Korea and a few other countries come to mind)...yes.
It really depends on what issue (what glasses) you look at America through. Overall, I agree that America is in a poor state these days. However, I am optimistic (sp?) that things will get back on keel. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 11:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cubanlord wrote: |
In a good light now...well...that depends on how you look at it:
Iraq situation.....no
Kyoto.....no
Helping other countries in need of security and aid (South Korea and a few other countries come to mind)...yes.
It really depends on what issue (what glasses) you look at America through. Overall, I agree that America is in a poor state these days. However, I am optimistic (sp?) that things will get back on keel. |
I sure hope so. As much as I would like to see another power to rival them, I am not sure China (the one growing now) is the best one. I wish the damn EU would pull things together. But America's ideals are ones I think most people (westerners atleast) can relate too. But, while I consider myself an optimist, I still see things going the way of Rome. I bet if you had said that Rome would fall to any Roman during it's height they would have figured you for crazy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 12:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| All I can do is point out these things and hope that the Americans who voted for Bush might actually see a point of view outside their little box. |
Not likely to happen, and for a variety of reasons. The style of your commentary, however, could tend to alienate some of us who never voted for Bush and disagree with him on all issues, but we don't hate our own country the way some do...
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| A lot of non-Americans still wonder why he hasn't been impeached yet? |
W. Bush has not committed an impeachable offense.
A lot of non-Americans come from countries with different traditions and politics. We are still a country of laws, however, and Constitutional standards, sooner or later, have usually prevailed.
W. Bush has not violated the Constitution or broken any other law.
In the U.S., you can't impeach a president just because he's unpopular and controversial, and foreign opinion of him has no bearing on the issue either.
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| Kill hundreds of thousand of innocent lives and put the men and women of your country in constant risk doesn't, but a blwjb will get the ball rolling on impeachement. |
First, you're overstating again. You have a tendency to go beyond the evidence. I last heard, only two or three days ago, that there are approx. 30 to 35 thousand dead Iraqis as a result of the war and occupation, and there are approximately 3 to 5 thousand dead Americans.
It may be conservative to go ahead and say the death toll is approx. 50 thousand overall, because it might be. But this is not even 100 thousand, let alone "hundreds of thousands of innocent lives."
Also, does your use of "innocent" mean you consider the taliban and the former Iraqi regime and armed forces "innocent"?
On the bj issue, I felt Clinton was totally maligned by a hostile and intolerant right from day one, just as W. Bush has been totally maligned by a hostile and intolerant left from day one.
When does this bs ever end?
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| Just out of curiousity, you don't think that America should be held in a positive light at the moment, do you? |
"America"? Again this is way too broad.
I think there is much about "America" at the moment that we can be proud of.
On the other hand, I disagree with nearly everything the W. Bush Administration stands for. Moreover, historically, U.S. foreign policy has been intertwined in the making of world history, sometimes and in some places disproportionately so, and this has sometimes been for the better, sometimes of little effect, and sometimes for the worse. When it has been for the worse, this has involved the U.S. in events we are not proud of. It has made us at least partly -- but never wholly -- responsible for some of the bad turns history has taken, in some places and in some times.
And your comment on Romans and Rome fails to account for authors like Gore Vidal, who, in Washington, D.C., spoke on the theme that nothing lasts forever...and this was several decades ago.
Finally, in my opinion, W. Bush and any other president or indeed any other govt in the world, is highly overrated as to its capabilities and power. It took scholars several decades, for example, to move beyond Nazi propaganda and start to appreciate that it wasn't such a powerful omnipresent dictatorship after all, and that, according to one historian, it was even rife with factionalism and internal dissent and protest, and would probably have collapsed before 1950, even if Hitler had been victorious...
Last edited by Gopher on Thu Dec 15, 2005 1:04 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mithridates
Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 12:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
Does your use of "innocent" mean you consider the taliban and the former Iraqi regime and <a style='text-decoration: none; border-bottom: 3px double;' href="http://www.qklinkserver.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=92&k=armed%20forces&st=1" onmouseover="window.status='Search for: armed forces'; self.ql_skeyphrase='armed%20forces'; if(window.event) self.ql_sevent=window.event.srcElement; self.ql_timeout = setTimeout('ql_doMouseOver(1)', 1000); self.ql_isOverLink=true; return true;" onclick="if(self.ql_timeout) clearTimeout(self.ql_timeout); self.ql_isOverTip = false; ql_closeiframe(); self.ql_skeyphrase='armed%20forces'; window.status='Search for: armed forces';return true;" onmouseout="window.status=''; if(self.ql_timeout) clearTimeout(self.ql_timeout); self.ql_isOverTip = false; setTimeout('ql_closeiframe()', 1500); ">armed forces</a> "innocent"?
|
Er...Taliban search for armed forces if self.ql_timeout...is OverTip= false search for armed forces = innocent...
uh...yes? That's the scariest question I've ever seen here. And no text decoration! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
