No Next Item No Next Conference Can't Favor Can't Forget Item List Conference Home Entrance    Help
View Responses


Grex Storage Item 6: Welcome to the 2nd edition of the Worldnews conference. [linked]
Entered by aa8ij on Sat Sep 4 05:46:07 UTC 1993:

     Welcome to my world...news conf that is. I hope that this conference
will be one of the most active on Grex. I hope that in our discussions can
make each of us better people in our daily lives. 
     This conf will not only deal with World issues, but those that face our
nation, state, city and even Detroit ;). Do not be afraid to rant, rave,
or ral for your cause. Who knows? you might just change someone`s point
of view on a topic. 
     My personal politics are those of Ed Asner and Martin Sheen, who are
both liberals. I will defend that point ardently. But in my fairwitnessing.
I will be niether liberal or conseravativ

41 responses total.



#1 of 41 by tnt on Tue Sep 7 02:48:05 1993:

 Who's 'world' is it?


#2 of 41 by aa8ij on Tue Sep 7 05:08:35 1993:

  I didn't mean mine in that sense, I meant it in the sense of fairwitnessing.
This is still everyone's conference.


#3 of 41 by wh on Wed Sep 15 18:55:18 1993:

Let us continue.


#4 of 41 by msu on Sun Dec 19 20:14:11 1993:

what did happen today in the world?  I haven't seen the sunday paper yet.


#5 of 41 by remmers on Mon Dec 20 13:37:38 1993:

Do you want the long version or the synopsis?  :)


#6 of 41 by msu on Thu Dec 23 23:29:58 1993:

well, i'm wondering what the buzzzz is on Clinton's alleged escapades...
(maybe I should address this in the sexuality con...)  Being from Arkansas
originally, I was upset but not terrible surprised.
Any thoughts on this?


#7 of 41 by aa8ij on Fri Dec 24 03:08:18 1993:

 Being that the president is a citizen of this country, I give him the 
benifit of innocence before assuming him guilty.


#8 of 41 by tnt on Fri Dec 24 23:11:57 1993:

 Which means that if he wasn't a citizen, Jim would go straight to guilty
without his "benifit of innocence" first.


#9 of 41 by aa8ij on Sat Dec 25 03:36:01 1993:

 Wrongo, Timbo. 

    Stop smoking before you come to Grex. Or at least be sure the effects
have worn off.

   Citizen or not, everyone is entitled to the benifit of innocence.
I was merely expressing things in my particular lexicon.


#10 of 41 by ecy on Sat Dec 25 07:14:40 1993:

Ah, ah.  We should assume that Tim is a citizen, and therefore deserves b
benefit of innocence, and not assume that he was smoking something.  Although,
if he's not a citizen, nail him to the wall...  or send him to Florida at
any rate....

Seriously, I guess my questions about the issue aren't so much that he did
or didn't do it (and given the events and lies that took place during his
campaign, I guess I tend to believe that he did do it), but the reaction
of the white house and the president to the charges.  I mean, calling one 
of the involved men and offering to make him the local FEMA honcho (whether
or not that's a good bribe is debateable...) doesn't look to good.  The best
way would probably have benn to issue the standard denial, and try to ignore
it.  Maybe the press is trying to make up for being so quiet about Jack the
Zipper?


#11 of 41 by tnt on Sat Dec 25 21:02:30 1993:

  I really don't think we should ask Jimbo to practice what he preaches. Most
of the ideas are warped enough just to read.


#12 of 41 by aa8ij on Sun Dec 26 05:43:20 1993:

 I don't smoke nor do I drink anything alcoholic, and I have been sober for
well over 12 yrs. If my ideas sound idealistic, radical, or idiotic, it is
probably the result of my liberalism, or my failure to attend college.
 But it has nothing whatsoever on what I put into my body.

replace on with the phrase "to do with"
sorry about that.


#13 of 41 by aaron on Sun Dec 26 17:05:38 1993:

(Ever see the episode of "Sledgehammer" when Sledge turns down a donut?....)


#14 of 41 by aa8ij on Sun Dec 26 21:34:06 1993:

 no, and I will not stand for anymore of this personal ridicule between
Mr Tyler and myself. Any further discussions will result in the immeadiate
freezing of this item.


#15 of 41 by ecy on Mon Dec 27 20:40:23 1993:

Why do you equate conservatism with college?  It is generally held to 
cause the opposite reaction in attendees.  We have examples right here 
on grex, so you shouldn't need to research too far.




#16 of 41 by other on Wed Feb 9 20:44:29 1994:

Depends entirely upon the college you attend, and what your background is...


#17 of 41 by omni on Sun Feb 27 21:24:01 1994:

 In the interest of keeping the peace on Grex, I have killed item 17.

Further pieces that cause inflammatory feelings, and those that attack
other individuals will also be killed. THIS IS THE WORLDNEWS CONFERENCE
IN WHICH WE DISCUSS WORLD NEWS AND HOW IT AFFECTS YOU. NOT SALACIOUS 
EDITIORIAL AND RANTS ABOUT HOW ONE GROUP OR ANOTHER IS BEING HELD BACK
AND DENIED. 

I HAVE SPOKEN.
,


#18 of 41 by kentn on Sun Feb 27 22:26:21 1994:

I'm not sure I'm in agreement with this action.  Perhaps its time for
a new Worldnews Conference.  The Olympics are world news and debating
their intent (both historically and currently) seems a good current
world news topic.  Because others take the opportunity to make ad
hominem attacks, or because an item's text is tongue-in-cheek is no
reason to censor.  And BTW, people are being held back and denied all
over the world.  And that is news worthy of debate.  Please reconsider
your action.


#19 of 41 by tnt on Mon Feb 28 03:23:34 1994:

 To really keep peace, perhaps someone should kill Jim Reuter?
 
   I'll renter the item.  Any disturbance of peace was solely made by 
Big Jim.


#20 of 41 by gidget on Sat Jun 25 02:27:54 1994:

stop picking on Jim


#21 of 41 by carson on Tue Aug 30 08:02:52 1994:

(I wish I'd known what item #17 was about. It wouldn't have been the
first time a FW has killed an item, though.)

(doesn't anyone care about what's happening in the world anymore?)


#22 of 41 by lioncort on Mon Oct 31 04:17:25 1994:

Yes I care!!


#23 of 41 by carson on Sat Nov 5 10:39:07 1994:

I think I care, too. I think I'm mortified that a nation's heartstrings
could be tugged so callously by a mother who drowned her own children.
I'm a little tiffed that the Secret Service has allowed loonies to get
so close to the President *twice*  (that we know about). I'm glad that
the Middle East is moving in the right direction for peace, although
the Nobel Peace Prize seemed like a sick joke in light of the bombing
in Israel that followed its award.


#24 of 41 by srw on Sat Nov 5 20:39:13 1994:

That was just an unfortunate juxtaposition. Despite all of the anti-peace
sentiment in some quarters, there is an important change taking place,
and the peace prize was (IMO legitimately) recognizing it.


#25 of 41 by carson on Mon Nov 7 06:11:53 1994:

I tend to think that awarding the Peace Prize so soon was a bit
premature, although I must admit I can't think of who I'd have
givien it to this year. History hasn't shown this year's 
recipients as worthy yet.


#26 of 41 by srw on Mon Nov 7 08:10:12 1994:

I guess that's where we disagree. The middle east has been festering during 
my entire lifetime, and for all but the last year or so, there really
hasn't been any sign of an end to it.

I wouldn't let Terrorism, or responses to terrorism prevent me from seeing
that there is a big change over there.


#27 of 41 by tsty on Wed Nov 16 02:55:21 1994:

carson, any nation can have its heartstrings pulled by
a mother's plea. You seem to have difficulty recognizing that
the heartstrings were pulled due to insufficient information,
not an unlikely occurrance.


#28 of 41 by srw on Sat Nov 19 16:37:13 1994:

On the other hand, the precarious position Arafat now finds himself in 
is a true danger to the promise of peace. If he suppresses Hamas,
the people turn against him. If he goes over to Hamas, the Israelis will
turn against him. He has to walk this tightrope. It may not be possible.
Peace is very much at risk here, now.


#29 of 41 by tsty on Sat Nov 19 20:06:44 1994:

If Arafat can convince enough of his people that Hamas is
not in the best interests of the people, in either the
short term or the long term, (which is what I believe) then
he may be able to get his peope to break the back of Hamas.
  
Right now, he +is+ in an extremey precarious position. He
has to sabatoge the Hamas movement by using the mass of
Palistinians to do it for him/them.
  
And since this latest violence was Palistinian against
P{alistinian, Arafat has an even tougher row to hoe. I would
hope that there would arise another spokesman, from the
mass of Palistinians, who would rally the populace against
Hamas. 


#30 of 41 by srw on Tue Nov 22 08:06:58 1994:

I would hope so, too. But right now, I can't say it seems likely.


#31 of 41 by thekid on Thu Dec 29 03:08:54 1994:

I constantly hear of the palistinians and Hammas.  I don't know of the
situation tuation there and nor do have a cure for it.  In efforts to
understand it more I would ask that you could post a breif disposition of the
events that have led to the situation as it is happenning.  I thought that
everyone would sort of gang up on the hammas group after all the harm they do
on the news but then again it is difficult to assess the situation from an
outside potison depending on the media and personal statements above the news
coverage. Excuse the typos but I would like to be more informed of the
situation in a breif 1 to 2 page backgrouond without all the personal
opinionated things that one tends to hear echoed daily by most all americans. 
Plain and dismple Hammas HAS to do some good or else they would not be here.  A
trushs must condist of both sides settleing. Thank you and have a GREAT day!


#32 of 41 by other on Thu Dec 29 04:45:35 1994:

The US federal government exists, but what good is *it* doing?!


#33 of 41 by tsty on Tue Jan 3 19:51:31 1995:

There isn't a 1-2 page summary, except for the few words, "they
lived, suffered and died."
  
Functionally though, Hammas wants to keep the conflict going
agaist Israel until Israel ceases to exist - much like the Nazis
agiast the Jews. 


#34 of 41 by lsee on Sat Feb 4 05:54:51 1995:

Not a woard on OJ. Today Nicole's relation got on the stand and told a really
tearful story. I mean you can watch the stupid drama even without watching it,
as it is on all the newc scasts and stuff. I also wonder about other local
things. Later


#35 of 41 by tnt on Sat Feb 4 07:01:50 1995:

 The whole Brown family graciously accepted all the $$$ they squeezed out
of the Juice for many years.


#36 of 41 by carson on Mon Feb 27 13:54:08 1995:

For that matter, the Nazis accepted all the $$$ they squeezed out of the
Jews for several years.


#37 of 41 by tnt on Mon Feb 27 20:07:12 1995:

 Wow, I didn't know that the Brown family were known to be Nazis, nor did
I know Orenthal was Jewish!

        Thanks for enlightening me, Carson.


#38 of 41 by omni on Tue Feb 28 06:29:57 1995:

re 34-37

   Take this to the appropriate item, please.


#39 of 41 by aaron on Sun Mar 5 07:01:21 1995:

This is the most appropriate item, no?


Last 2 Responses and Response Form.
No Next Item No Next Conference Can't Favor Can't Forget Item List Conference Home Entrance    Help

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss