conscientious objector

A few notes:

1) Congress.org is not the US congress' official website.

2) The house bill referred to in that article (HR 163) was sponsored by Charles B. Rangel (a Democrat from New York), and co-sponsored by Pete Stark (a Democrat from California), Jim McDermott (a Democrat from California), John Conyers (a Democrat from Michigan), John R. Lewis (a Democrat from Georgia), and Neil Abercrombie (a Democrat from Hawaii)

A copy of the bill can be found by going to this website and typing in HR 163: [link]

Now then, the bill was written basically to thrust the otherwise non-existent but always inflamatory issue of a draft to the forefront. The bill was written BY DEMOCRATS for this purpose, and no one ever inteded for it to actually pass, just to create a stir.

If you're going to complain about bills and nonsense like this, then at least do something resembling research prior to posting.

Hey, fuck you. I don't do research for a site I visit for a few laughs when I'm bored. All I ever hear is whining about what I post - why don't the rest of you post a bit more, then? Find your own fucking interesting net crap. Jesus. Some incentive to post.

Then I will hope you are either too young to vote or will at least put a little more thought into your vote than you put into this post.

Oh no, someone posted facts that add more details to your post!!!! Let's shut down everything and revamp the site!

I haven't been here too long but I've been here long enough (more than one day) to know that the average Foobie will not tolerate B.S. If you don't look into the details, another Foobie will; and they'll call you on it in an effort to get to the truth -- or just to bust your balls. :) Actually, I see you've been here longer than I have. Interesting.

Here are the two thing I like the most about your posts:

1. You fail to mention your claimed comedic factor in your original post but later state that you went to the site "for a few laughs when I'm bored." This is the true sign of someone who does not stand behind what they believe.

Let me illustrate:

You are a total tool-box.

I'm just kidding, I thought it was funny.


2. Your profile says you are from Denmark. If this is true, why do you even care about the U.S. draft?


Wooo Wooo Bubb Rubb. Was that an exhaust whistle or the clue train?

BTW, Bea Arthur.

Ouch....I'd be red in the face after that one.

Time to move to switzerland.

Umm, Switzerland has a required period of service for all of its citizens....as do many European countries. Looks like your going to have to move to Canada where its freaking cold!

Canada did give us cheese fries with gravy (more like bbq sauce up there though). They are definitely good up there (the fries).

That sucks.. What about the country Georgia?

And won't Canada be agreeing to send US Citizen's avoiding the draft back into the US?

Perhaps I overreacted a bit, and I apologize; I've simply grown tired of posting content only to be criticized for posting it.

Oh, I see - a REAL foobie has stepped forward to cast me out! I'm appropriately chagrined. However, your post is neither as telling nor as lucid as you seem to think. Much as I hate to explain myself to the victim of a collision with an asshat factory, in a fit of irritability I insulted ChePibe, which wasn't called for, despite his disparagement based on my simple introductory comment, and for that I think I'll offer a counterargument all the same.

I'm all for other foobies doing virtual legwork if I haven't, but I disagree that they have a right to demand that I use more of my time than I've already contributed to 'research' an article. What I post, I find in passing on the net, and I post it purely for the amusement of other foobies, just as I come to the site to be amused. Interestingly, you claim that because I don't make this disclaimer in the comment on each news article, I don't stand behind what I believe. ...I'm afraid I really can't argue with what, to me, appears to be a complete non sequitur. But to address that concern: I did not refute anything I had said previously with the excuse that I was joking; perhaps you should read my post more carefully. Specifically, I said I come to the site for a few laughs. I certainly don't rely on it for hard news - I certainly hope that it isn't your source of world information, either.

As for being from Denmark, it's true that I reside here now, but equally true I've done my share of travelling beforehand. Regardless of my location, is it so strange that citizens of other countries take an interest in world affairs? I realize that few Americans do, but trust me when I say that this isn't true of most Europeans. Nevertheless, don't feel put out; I understand that trains are uncommon in the States.

On the other hand, it'd suck to have to live in Mexico.

Me and sunfire would be the only shmucks GOING INTO mexico.

Yeah, you're right. It'd really suck to live in a country with great weather, excellent beaches, more different climates and environments than you could want to experience, friendly people, bribable cops, great weed, great job opportunities if you actually know something about the field you're working in, excellent food, rich culture...

I really hate it here in Mexico :D

Read my post above - this was never going to happen, it was a stunt by Democrats to attack Bush and bring up the always controversial topic of the draft.

Will you be 18 by November? Make sure you vote if you are, regardless of who you vote for, it's a great experience.

Ok, you've got me there - I never hear about the good things down there. Great weather is a step up from here, for sure.

Yeah this is true, and I'll be 18 on the 14th of November, so correct me if I'm wrong, but I won't be able to vote.

Yes, proposed by Democrats to add fuel to the fire. Stir up people and that lessens the chance of us just going along with what the govt. does.

By the way... My little hometown/community has a forum... Right now they are poll/voting on whether or not to allow anonymous posts. It is very close and I may need outsiders to help vote "Yes."

www.kyletexas.org

Thanks in advance,

LarryHChrist

Spooke,

First and foremost, I must apologize for the time lapse in my reply to your post. I mean no disrespect but, I have not been online for a few days. Secondly, your post is put together very well.

In response, I can assure you that my post was not in an effort to "cast" you out. This site is a community of people, well, mostly people, who discuss things. Casting people out would make this forum very boring almost immediately since everyone would agree with one another. Furthermore, I can also assure you that I was not attempting to be clever or, as you put it, "lucid," in my post. Your references to an "asshat factory" only makes you sound like a Reverend Jynxed copy-cat which will earn you no respect here as the Reverend has already earned his place in Foobiedom.

My post was basically based on your reply to ChePibe in which you stated "Hey, fuck you. I don't do research for a site I visit for a few laughs when I'm bored."

That is not a very intelligent post but, that is fine. In fact, that is great. That is your opinion. You own that opinion whether it is educated or not. It is your right. At least, it is your right in the United States.

You should do what you have got to do to make yourself feel important and complete even if you sound like a total idiot.

Anyway, all I stated was an observational fact. That fact was that someone added relevant details to your post and that you, for reasons unknown to me, were upset with this additional information.

I am sure that someone of your intelligence can see why I am confused... You seem educated yet at the same time you are obviously intolerant and ignorant to other people's information, ideas, and point of view; even when it compliments your own posts.

This way of thinking seems very self destructive and it would seem that you will only isolate yourself from society.

Like I said before, this is a community. Some of it is good, some of it is bad and some of it is not repeatable.

The point is that if your only intention is to have a place where you can post as an occasional passerby "for a laugh" where no one questions your facts, you will be disappointed at Kungfoo. Kungfoo is a place where ideas are formed, challenged and discussed. It is not a place for cry-babies who state "All I ever hear is whining about what I post."

Again, sorry for the late reply.
Best Wishes and good luck,


Bite Me

Spooke,

I am sorry, I forgot to address your final statement in your previous post. The one where you state:

"Regardless of my location, is it so strange that citizens of other countries take an interest in world affairs? I realize that few Americans do, but trust me when I say that this isn't true of most Europeans. Nevertheless, don't feel put out; I understand that trains are uncommon in the States."

One quick preface. Since you are so educated regarding Americans, I am surprised that you do not seem understand the implication of the word "Spooke." Or maybe you do and you are just a typical European racist. Don't worry, "most Americans" are aware of "most Europeans" final solution. Stereotypes are fun aren't they? Oh, don't worry, I just said that for "a few laughs."

Anyway, back to answering your final statement in your previous "lucid" post:

1. Is it odd that you have an interest in world affairs? No, any educated person would be concerned with world affairs. What is odd is that you are specifically concerned with the U.S. draft which has no effect on you.

2. Is it true that few Americans are concerned with world affairs? No. In reality, most Americans actually do care about world events since we dumb Americans love to dictate what the rest of you puppets do on a daily basis. Control is good. Control is fun. Control is profit. Dance puppet, dance.

3. Finally, don't worry, I don't "feel put out" because I don't see what trains have to do with the U.S. draft or your "Hey, fuck you. I don't do research for a site I visit for a few laughs when I'm bored" statement.

Trains are actually not as uncommon as the common "European" would like to believe ( trust me, you are very common, the mere fact that you do not think you are common is proof of how common you actually are). Furthermore, any perceived lack of trains in the U.S. equals fewer potential pathways that enemies would try to use to infiltrate the U.S. You know what I mean -- enemies like the Nazi Germans. In fact, you could say that the fact that "trains are uncommon in the States" is a brilliant strategic move since we were never occupied by Nazi Germany from 1940 to 1945 like Denmark was. Maybe you guys should have tried fewer trains.

Furthermore, The U.S. never lost land to the Swedish in 1658 or in 1814 because we sided with the French. We also never had to have Allied forces push out enemy troops in 1945 (just like France). In fact , I have realized in writing this that you have rather strong opinions for someone who comes from a country that publicly admits that it is a welfare state based on a monarchy that has historically failed to protect itself and its people from internal and external aggression and ultimately, when it is actually challenged, claims neutrality.

Neutrality. Now there's a strong statement. Agreeing with everyone yet no one at the same time. Neutrality. It almost rhymes with neutered.

I think "most Europeans" (as you put it) would be chagrined that you were comparing your Danish, neutral, surrender monkey, ass to the rest of them.


Bite Me, again.

the above reply was mine but showed up AC.

All overreacting aside, is it so out of line for Spooke to react that way when you are being a prick? Its great that you have an informed opinion about the topic, but you don't need to be insulting to someone while you add it. The research you did and posted is your contribution. Why not be more gracious about enlightening us all, or else expect a fuck you from time to time.

Sloth,

Apology accepted; think nothing of it. I'm glad you think my post was well-constructed; I'm only sorry that I can't repay the sentiment.

Lucid is not a synonym for 'clever,' but for 'clear.' Your posts unfortunately lack a sense of focus on the original issue, said issue being why I responded as I did to ChePibe. Of course, learning that a term I used is also in use by others has horrified me, and I'll attempt to excise it from my vocabulary immediately.

I fail to see how you can determine that my complaint against another foobie is uneducated. What, specifically, makes you think so? The vocabulary? The grammar? The opinion that no one else has a rightful demand on my time? I would posit, rather, that posts which lack a clear focus, proper use of grammar, and which repeatedly express anti-European sentiment and implied slurs is much more demonstrative of a mind unchallenged by higher education. Of course, "You should do what you have got to do to make yourself feel important and complete even if you sound like a total idiot."

I do challenge that what you stated in your original post was merely fact - rather, it was insult, as are these rather sad attempts at sophsticated elocution. Let me ease your confusion by once again pointing out that I was not responding to the content of ChePibe's post apart from the final remark, to wit that I ought to research what I posted. Considering that I didn't write the article in question, that I had bothered to take time to post it to Kungfoo for the amusement of others, and that I myself never spend much time perusing the site beyond what amusement it offers - and despite your claims that Kungfoo is a news and debate forum, I contend that it is in fact a site dedicated to amusement rather than either of those things - I took that remark ill. Perhaps I overreacted, but that would be a matter between ChePibe and myself. You seem to have taken this as an invitation, or perhaps merely an opportunity, to gain the respect of other foobies through the use of insult; that you may have done so is, I think, another point in favor of my view of the site versus yours.

To address your final concerns:

1. You seem to think it odd that I'm concerned with the US draft, apparently under the assumption that this doesn't constitute news, or perhaps that it's exempt from the status of 'world affairs.' The US is a large and important country; necessarily what it does regarding its military and/or the rights of its citizens is important enough to qualify. If you don't think so, well, you don't live outside the US, so I doubt what we think concerns you.

2. I would say, rather, that most Americans are concerned with what world events the American military is engaged in, or which otherwise relates directly to them - and even then, 'most' may be something of an exaggeration.

3. The missing trains I referenced would be the ones with the clues you missed. Rest assured that the Germans didn't move their troops into the country using public transportation.

4. Amazing how Danish history concerns you, as you didn't think current US news should interest me. I'm unsure how having strong opinions should be inappropriate to me because of where I live, or even what strong opinions you imagine that I hold. I assure you I'm not in charge of national policy, but then, having a national policy that isn't openly aggressive isn't something I'd be ashamed of in any case, particularly when considering that this is a very small country nestled in among many, rather than a large one safely situated across the ocean.

Regardless, I think you'll find I'm a better judge of European opinion on the relative merits of Denmark and the US than you. 'Play dumb American' has long been a standard description of someone who displays the appalling ignorance and general aggressive intolerance you've shown in this thread, whereas Denmark, together with the rest of Scandinavia, is widely agreed to be the most modern, civilized and sophisticated region on Earth.

I'm glad you're concerned with my status in society, but rest assured that I'm in no danger of isolation. I, in turn, am concerned with your obvious masochistic desires; please look elsewhere to satisfy them. In conclusion, in case you had as much trouble understanding this post as you did the last, I will be as clear as possible: My argument with ChePibe had nothing to do with his information, nor have I displayed any opinion on any other matter in the post under discussion. Please do not expect any further response to your attempts to troll.

Sincerely, Spooke

Spooke,

Yet again, excellent. I am consistently impressed by your posts and the proper manner in which you present them. You are an excellent yadda yadda yadda...

Unfortunately, I am concerned with your stress level. After all, you stated that you use Kungfoo as a source of "amusement" yet you seem to be spending a lot of time being angry at my "trolls." Remember, Kungfoo is your amusement!!! (so sad)

Anyway, back to your drivel. First off, in an effort to quell your concerns regarding my usage of the word "lucid:"

I am familiar with the word "lucid," its meaning, and its synonyms. I apparently took your original statement using the word "lucid" out of context. I thought *you* were being clever; silly me. I stand corrected and I apologize.


Next on the list, I welcome your ideas, rebuttals, and corrections but I ask that you not make false claims regarding my posts:

a. You state that I claim that Kungfoo is a news and debate forum, "despite your claims that Kungfoo is a news and debate forum, I contend that it is in fact a site dedicated to amusement rather than either of those things - I took that remark ill." First of all, I never claimed to you that Kungfoo was a news or debate forum. Secondly, the fact that you contend that Kungfoo is an amusement site does not make it so. You, nor I, get to decide this site's purpose. It is a community and the community defines the site's purpose. Again, I never claimed to you that Kungfoo was a news or debate forum.

b. You state that I have determined that your "complaint against another foobie is uneducated." I never made such a statement. In fact, if you search this thread's text, the only time that I previously mentioned the word "intelligent" and one of your statements was when I quoted you as saying "Hey, fuck you. I don't do research for a site I visit for a few laughs when I'm bored." I never claimed that your complaint against another foobie was uneducated, I merely questioned the thought behind it (although, it was a rather eloquent statement).

1. I do think that it is odd that you are concerned with the U.S. draft and I never claimed that it was not "news." It is your right to be concerned with whatever issues you please. It is also my right to think that it is odd for someone who is not eligible for the U.S. draft to be concerned with it. "News" is a relative term. News is only news if those paying attention to it perceive that it is relavent to themselves. So, if you are a guy like you then, God bless you.

2. "most Americans are concerned with what world events the American military is engaged in, or which otherwise relates directly to them - and even then, 'most' may be something of an exaggeration." I agree with exception to the "'most' may be something of an exaggeration." I find it strange that you are put off by European generalizations yet you seem to dispense American generalizations with ease.

3. Yeah, I got your train reference that was referencing my original clue train reference. You almost had me. That was fairly tricky. By the way, since I know you're not catching my sarcasm now, I apologize that you were unable to make the mental leap required to pick up on my train sarcasm previously just because it was disguised under some bland war trivia.

4. Actually, you're correct, Danish history does not directly concern me. But, if history has shown only one thing, it is that history will repeat itself. To date, all world wars have not been over the "they might both be right" kind of topics. You're either on one side or the other. This is not deciding which girl (or in your case, boy) you like best in grade school (oooh, I like all of them). This is not the kind of situation in which you claim neutrality. You try to play off you country's neutrality as valiance when it is really cowardice. As for not being ashamed of your country's neutrality, I'm not saying that you should be ashamed; I'm saying that, if it were me, I would be ashamed.

Also, while you're touting the greatness of your Scandinavian society:
From what I recall, along with being considered the "most modern, civilized and sophisticated region on Earth," Scandinavia is also near the top of the list (the top 3) for alcoholism and suicide. Yeah, that sounds like a utopia of educated, neutral, mother-humpers doing really well.




In conclusion, while you are obviously articulate and long winded, your literary gift does not make up for your seemingly purposeful fabrications of statements made by me. Please refrain from future fabrications. Honestly, claiming that I made statements that I didn't make which can be searched by anyone? What were you thinking?

Furthermore, I fully accept your statement of "Please do not expect any further response to your attempts to troll." I will (to my dismay) expect no more responses even though wasting your time has been so much fun for me and my friends.

I also accept the fact that for someone who claims to use this site for "amusement," you have absolutely no sense of humor.

Regards,
Sloth


p.s. I am waving my private parts in your general direction.

:)

Those who voted "obvious political ploy" have it right. Not only do they get to scare people into thinking that we might now face a draft, they get to stump about how the military (the all volunteer military) is disproportionately minority, and that whitey should have an equal chance of getting killed in Iraq.

The military is stretched thin, but only because of force reduction that leaves us with a much smaller military than we had even during Gulf War I. The military has made it clear that they don't want draftees- they'd much prefer volunteers rather than people too dumb to avoid the draft.

think about volunteering, you could learn skills you could never learn on your own. You could travel around the world. You would be remembered and honored for all time. You would grow up,you know,put away all of the childish stuff that will surely pass any way. If you make it back home, you will be a battle veteran, eligable for all kind of breaks that the government gives to heros like you! we will all die someday any way, what difference does it make if you die as a soldier,or as a dumpster diving,picking up cigarette butts off the ground, "Hey, you got fifty cents so's I can buy a taco?" loser.puhleeeze.keep it real ,yo?

Wow, it's been so long since this was posted, but I can see the pattern already.

He posted an inflamatory claim that a draft was coming without doing any research to back up his claim.

I called him on it.

He got embarassed and showed himself as either too lazy or too one-sided to actually research the topic, choosing to insult me instead for actually doing research and calling him on what he said.

I then told him that I hope he put more research into his vote, assuming he is old enough to vote.

If you expect me or anyone to be gracious, then I expect someone to put some research into a post of a highly inflamatory nature. Not simply an ignorant blab on what's supposedly going to happen.

If you get proved wrong, you're proved wrong. The "gracious" thing to do would be to admit defeat.

Yeh research sucks... who wants knowledgable informed statements... lets just all be like michael moore and say whatever we want using bits and pieces of real statements and fake unsubstantiated websites to make people like us.

I hate people who talk about the world like they know ANYTHING. Go to college take some history courses, some courses on the Middle East and a course on politics then come back and say something.

MORON.

Yeah whatever chepibe. Your response to this guy was way in-depth on the research and then you sounded like thats what you expect everyone to do if they're good enough to post here. And its a little harsh considering that not even you do the extensive research like what you did here, for every issue that pops up. Remember the time you tried to argue in all seriousness that the death penalty was a cheaper option than life in prison? No one who, you know, does something resembling research adheres to that side of the debate. So what if spooke didn't research it enough, rumors of a draft were still flying around and it was a current event that he brought to our attention.

I completely forgot about that, thanks Squee. I'll have to revive that thread sometime soon. Probably just put it in the forum to make it easier to deal with.

I honestly haven't had the chance to look into the claim that the death penalty is more expensive. Yes, there are some preliminary numbers, but what still needs to be looked at is how that data was gathered, etc. If most death penalty cases involved, say, mutliple murders, or (speaking completely randomly here) a large attack like the Oklahoma City bombing, then of course the costs of investigation and the cost of the trial would go up and cost more than a simple manslaughter case. Not necessarily as the result of simply putting someone up on the death penalty, but also involved with the cost of investigation, etc.

The above is simply a hypothesis I haven't had any time to research indepth just yet, but it could be reasonable. I'll have to look into it when I get some spare time.

I'll post something on it when I've finished doing some research on the matter.

As far as this post, though, c'mon Squee. It doesn't take much time at all to just look up this bill and determine who's sponsoring it. A quick news.google search would have shown the motives, even. And to post it as some sort of evidence that the draft is surely coming is ignorant at best, and misleading at worst.

I thought you were against smear campaigns and misleading statements?

Well, go ahead, but I have faith in the thoroughness of your research that you'll agree that the death penalty costs more. Whether having it is worth the extra cost, thats a different debate.
I am against smear campaign nonsense. Bush's assertion that Kerry would let France decide all our policies for us is really silly. It still spawned republicans to pass out Viva Bush! stickers everywhere anyway though. This draft issue isn't quite as transparent, since there is a real problem of servicemen leaving the military in droves rather than reinlisting, combined with our military being overextended. And I agree that it was an anti-war publicity stunt, but we can all live without you making rules on the quality of everyones posts.

Are you a Mensan?

Just finished a long, long section on proper collection and interpretation of statistical data for a Poli Sci class.

Basically, here's what you learn:

1) Statistics you get from the media are, most likely, wrong.

2) Always question how data was collected (best recent case is the claim that 100,000 civilians had died in Iraq as a result of the war based on several surveys and some interesting playing with the numbers, as well as some blowing it out of proportion in the media).

3) Often times, the best data you're going to get comes from peer-reviewed journal articles, because each person's data and conclusions have been dissected by several other experts in their field. They also give you a lot more information on how that data was gathered.

4) Use and love government statistics. They go to a lot of work to get them at your expense, so it makes sense to look into them. They're also usually free, and well organized.

I think people are often too willing to just trust any number they read in the paper. There's a lot more to it than that. As Mark Twain said, there are three types of lies, "lies, damned lies, and statistics."

Yin and Yang, in and out, cationic and anionic, matter and antimatter, good and bad .. . .... The Balance of Haiku.. .. .