Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

AlwaysQuestion

(442 posts)
40. Maybe I'm in for trouble (wouldn't be the first time) but here goes anyway...........
Wed Dec 28, 2011, 05:37 PM
Dec 2011

I have to have a sense of humor; else, I'd go quite mad. It seems that my mind doesn't work like most people's do--a mixed blessing to be sure. Opinions which fly in the face of my own (arrived at after due consideration) are quickly forgotten. I couldn't even imagine writing to any of the leaders from this or any other board to say that a published opinion contrary to mine should undergo examination for deletion. I truly think that to be too absurd to even contemplate. I'd choose to let it ride. If, however, I find to my utter dismay that the same opinion is voiced again and again, I might just give it a response--but that would be the extent of my horror, disgust, disconbobulation, or other negative feeling--and my participation. There is one reason for censorship--and only one--fear of authority. And make no mistake about it, I believe that many of these boards are under threat--veiled or otherwise. Just enough tolerated to be seen by some as the presence of some modicum of free speech but not enough to truly make it so. If I'm wrong (HORRORS!), I should be able to get some idea by lurking about some of the Rethug sites to determine what sorts of things are being banned there. Might be an intereting exercise if only I could develop a stomach of iron.

I think more than censoring opinions it would be better to ensure that we all separate the opinion from the person. You're an idiot to think as you do is clearly verboten. I find some of the ideas you have proposed to be idiotic; e.g., (list examples).--quite acceptable. I mean who among us has not come up with ideas that others think are idiotic; however, such ideas don't make the person coming up with them an idiot. Attack the idea and not the person, said she who's certainly at some point been guilty of non-compliance. I see a host cracking down on that sort of the thing--and believe me, if I knew that each and every time I pulled such a boner I'd be getting my ears pinned back, I'd be scrutinizing my words before posting.

But I couldn't imagine censoring an idea except in my own mind. I'm censoring all the time but I do so object when others censor on behalf of "a group." Now before anyone gets their knickers in a knot, let me assure each and everyone of you that I KNOW this makes me the odd "man" out--which is, perhaps, why I don't say too terribly much (as a rule). I've just never been a "group" person. So one thing is patently clear to me that I'm far too permissive to ever qualify as a host either here or on any other board--not that I was asked may I hasten to add--I'm just admitting to knowing my limitations.

As for the hens and the foxes. I'm a bonafide hen who believes (cannot prove) that 911 was an inside job, so quite naturally anyone who disagrees with that belief must by my definition be a fox. But lest anyone here take exception, I'd be the first to admit that foxes are far cuter than hens--although a might more dangerous, don't you think? And for those extraordinary few who can't, won't, daren't come down on either side of the debate--well, maybe, just maybe they are the really wise ones cuz let's face it, who among us can say we have the evidence. We don't. That being said, I make decisions every single day without ALL the FACTS. I can never have ALL the FACTS. Pieces of the puzzle are always missing, so what we generally do is hedge our bets to make the best decisions with the information we have on hand.

And that's what I've done with 911. Because I have absolutely no forensic evidence in hand (nor does anybody else in the general public), I have to dig deep into the U.S. as a whole. I have to look at its history, its methods of "persuasion"; its media; its laws; its government; its justice system; its inner cities; its disenfranchised; its sick; its treatment of third world countries; its treatment of its captors; its treatment of countries from which it wants resources; its willingness to abandon its own people in order to serve the super-rich who go to third world countries for cheap labour; its willingness to go along with globalization which means the people of this and other "democratic" nations will soon be working for peanuts. I look at all these various factions and how the ruling elite deal with them. And what I see is not at all pretty. Three thousand plus lives lost in 911 compared to the millions who have suffered as a result of U.S. policy within and without the U.S. and it is without any hesitation that I say it is highly likely 911 was an inside job. Prove it? Can't. However, there is no doubt in my own mind that the odds are very, very much in my favour. And in the absence of hard evidence, there we be. Engage in some serious, courageous introspection and the lights will appear. And lest you think I'm singling out the U.S. for derision, I am not. All of our so-called democratic countries can take its fair share of the brunt. Until S. Harper became P.M. we in Canada did not go for god, flag and country thing. We were extremely introspective. But now, a la the U.S., we've got the flag flying and we hear Harper invoking god to bless us. And I ask whatever for? What makes us so special? That's rhetorical. I don't feel for any country. I feel for people--regular, everyday people who hurt and bleed as I do--who love their kids every bit as much as I love mine. Countries are for those who would wield power and get their people to obliterate others in the name of the homeland but only for the GOOD of the ruling elite . What utter rubbish!!

And while I may disagree with you foxes, I like to believe that I know where you're coming from and therefore hold no grudges--although there was a time when I did.

You've been kind in answering my questions so I thank you for that. Cheers all!!

We did have Spooked as a host. He was above me in the hierarchy. Bolo Boffin Dec 2011 #1
Bolo, I think you will make a good host. Grateful for Hope Dec 2011 #2
Thank you, and I agree that a lot of others would as well. n/t Bolo Boffin Dec 2011 #3
Agreed Ohio Joe Dec 2011 #4
I don't think there is a hierarchy, Bolo. Grateful for Hope Dec 2011 #5
There is. We're all above or below someone. Bolo Boffin Dec 2011 #7
Ok. I thought it was only the top host who could do all these things. Grateful for Hope Dec 2011 #9
But what hierarchy? eomer Dec 2011 #49
Right, that's what I was saying. Bolo Boffin Dec 2011 #50
Spooked911 is tombstoned. greyl Dec 2011 #6
Ah. That would explain that. Bolo Boffin Dec 2011 #8
Tombstoned? zappaman Dec 2011 #10
Spooked being tomb stoned is very disappointing LARED Dec 2011 #13
DU will be a worse place without Spooked911 cpwm17 Dec 2011 #14
Spooked was nuts BeFree Dec 2011 #18
What is Bushco? zappaman Dec 2011 #19
Post removed Post removed Dec 2011 #20
Discuss? Ohio Joe Dec 2011 #21
It's a shame your post below was hidden because of some apparently offensive personal references. Grateful for Hope Dec 2011 #22
rewinding to December 17th OnTheOtherHand Dec 2011 #24
"I haven't seen Lithos and undergroundrailroad express many opinions." Bolo Boffin Dec 2011 #29
good point OnTheOtherHand Dec 2011 #31
There is no DU rule against being nuts jberryhill Dec 2011 #34
It would be a lonely place if there were Ohio Joe Dec 2011 #35
for what it's worth... OnTheOtherHand Dec 2011 #23
Tombstoning seems excessive for one post cpwm17 Dec 2011 #25
yup, it's a minefield OnTheOtherHand Dec 2011 #32
Please help this ol gal to understand the rules of engagement on this thread AlwaysQuestion Dec 2011 #26
Well... Ohio Joe Dec 2011 #27
tombstone refers to the old DU policy of using a tombstone graphic on the profile page of banned Bolo Boffin Dec 2011 #28
Spooked And DefectandPretend? jberryhill Dec 2011 #30
mmmm OnTheOtherHand Dec 2011 #33
Maybe I'm in for trouble (wouldn't be the first time) but here goes anyway........... AlwaysQuestion Dec 2011 #40
a few quick thoughts about that OnTheOtherHand Dec 2011 #41
Perhaps you can teach me to be more succinct, cuz here I go again.........at length :[ AlwaysQuestion Dec 2011 #44
oh, yeah, I'm all about succinct :) OnTheOtherHand Dec 2011 #48
For what it's worth Grateful for Hope Dec 2011 #36
And for me personally, that's very mild RP support Bolo Boffin Dec 2011 #37
I suspect both bannings were done with some background research. Grateful for Hope Dec 2011 #43
Bolo Grateful for Hope Dec 2011 #47
as long as we're going here... OnTheOtherHand Dec 2011 #38
Oh, yes, I forgot he had posted that video of Carl Levin. Bolo Boffin Dec 2011 #39
Thanks for digging up the historical thread. Grateful for Hope Dec 2011 #42
Hi Grateful AlwaysQuestion Dec 2011 #45
Tombstone does usually mean forever. Grateful for Hope Dec 2011 #46
Blocking PM's.? Grateful for Hope Jan 2012 #53
What? Bolo Boffin Jan 2012 #54
Perhaps, Bolo. Grateful for Hope Jan 2012 #55
You still can't send me PM's? Bolo Boffin Jan 2012 #56
Just sent you one. Seems it was a short-lived glitch. Grateful for Hope Jan 2012 #57
Good deal! n/t Bolo Boffin Jan 2012 #58
I had added based on when people more or less responded Lithos Dec 2011 #11
Thanks for weighing in, Lithos. Grateful for Hope Dec 2011 #12
I responded to you Ghost in the Machine Dec 2011 #15
I had also responded. Grateful for Hope Dec 2011 #16
Could be a software glitch, who knows? Ghost in the Machine Dec 2011 #17
The list is in lock step mrarundale Jan 2012 #51
I do think eomer was an excellent addition. Grateful for Hope Jan 2012 #52
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Creative Speculation»Has anyone seen the list ...»Reply #40