IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

IWETHEY Home / IWETHEY Board / News Picks Forum / Even easier solution.
Post #20,803
by Brandioch
12/8/01 8:47:54 PM
Reply
New Even easier solution.
No military personnel will ever be out of uniform.

That way, she can walk outside, IN UNIFORM.

If some local idiot decides that she's affronting him, he will KNOW that she's US military before he throws the first stone.

If we can't handle that situation, the NO ONE leaves the base.

Solidarity with your own people FIRST.

No male will leave the base, no female will leave the base.

On the base, you wear the uniform.

But we do not have two standards for our own people.
Post #20,813
by Ashton
12/9/01 12:40:47 AM
Reply
New "The play's the thing wherein we'll catch the conscience of
the King" - theirs and ours.

Yep, add your variation to Mike's delicious one; now they have several ways to actually deal with the implications.

Personally I believe this small tempest cuts close to the heart of our [oil-] and our Principle- follies, of many years (if not decades) duration. Seen on that scale; if we weasel and just trash her (and thus her suit) with State force:

Add that to Jimmy Carter's (even!) neat encapsulation of the effects of our new 'justice' upon the rest of the world's opinion of the "character of the Lone Superpower"?

This tiny 'suit' might emulate the effects of another tiny thing: an Anthrax spore, noted within every next negotiation with each local despot we wish to seduce: For Us or Agin Us.

As to what our home-grown women come to think of how this is finally handled, and the implications? And how the theology lobby likes Muricans adopting religious camouflage for [oil] and comfort?

Let the games begin.


Ashton
now.. how to follow this - see if it gets buried with the truss ads. After all: this was a 12/3 story which BeeP dug up. Wonder if I can contribute to her lawsuit expenses?
     Does anyone else think... - (bepatient) - (57) - Dec. 7, 2001, 02:50:38 AM EST
         (giggles) Nice change. But back to topic, - (wharris2) - (1) - Dec. 7, 2001, 03:37:13 AM EST
             When in Rome, do as the Romans do. - (nking) - Dec. 7, 2001, 08:19:21 AM EST
         Takes just one test case.. - (Ashton) - (39) - Dec. 7, 2001, 04:04:25 AM EST
             The problem is... - (jb4) - Dec. 7, 2001, 08:49:51 AM EST
             And just how... - (bepatient) - (37) - Dec. 7, 2001, 10:37:30 AM EST
                 Dunno if I can put it in teerms simple enough for Econ. - (Ashton) - (36) - Dec. 7, 2001, 06:04:46 PM EST
                     Weird - (bepatient) - Dec. 7, 2001, 07:24:27 PM EST
                     Sure...fine...whatever. - (bepatient) - (34) - Dec. 7, 2001, 07:23:41 PM EST
                         Of course she is. - (Ashton) - (27) - Dec. 7, 2001, 09:28:32 PM EST
                             Presumption - (imric) - (26) - Dec. 7, 2001, 09:45:47 PM EST
                                 comfort? utter BS. - (Ashton) - (25) - Dec. 7, 2001, 10:34:05 PM EST
                                     Get this. - (imric) - (24) - Dec. 8, 2001, 12:48:42 AM EST
                                         These are quite 'special' circumstances. - (Ashton) - (23) - Dec. 8, 2001, 06:21:30 AM EST
                                             Insolent? - (imric) - (20) - Dec. 8, 2001, 08:46:48 AM EST
                                                 Ah how EZ it would all be if.. logic alone were enough! - (Ashton) - (14) - Dec. 8, 2001, 07:37:23 PM EST
                                                     Logic alone? - (imric) - (13) - Dec. 10, 2001, 10:26:18 AM EST
                                                         Piffle - (Silverlock) - (12) - Dec. 10, 2001, 11:42:49 AM EST
                                                             *chortle* -NT - (imric) - Dec. 10, 2001, 11:50:54 AM EST
                                                             Not quite. - (bepatient) - (10) - Dec. 10, 2001, 11:58:19 AM EST
                                                                 anti-piffle - (Silverlock) - (9) - Dec. 10, 2001, 12:50:21 PM EST
                                                                     Reinstate it - BeeP (of all people) corroborated it! - (CRConrad) - (8) - Dec. 10, 2001, 05:03:20 PM EST
                                                                         Yup. - (imric) - Dec. 10, 2001, 06:01:58 PM EST
                                                                         not really... - (bepatient) - (6) - Dec. 10, 2001, 08:59:03 PM EST
                                                                             Seems it only notes that they DO; doesn't say HAVE TO. - (CRConrad) - (5) - Dec. 12, 2001, 07:36:18 AM EST
                                                                                 So you are all in favor... - (bepatient) - (4) - Dec. 12, 2001, 09:32:10 AM EST
                                                                                     Nice two step - (Silverlock) - (2) - Dec. 12, 2001, 10:01:00 AM EST
                                                                                         Upthread - (bepatient) - (1) - Dec. 12, 2001, 10:19:35 AM EST
                                                                                             Yeah. And? - (Silverlock) - Dec. 12, 2001, 10:46:24 AM EST
                                                                                     You're making Marlowe's mistake: Conflating... - (CRConrad) - Dec. 12, 2001, 10:21:23 AM EST
                                                 Hey Maggie! - (Ashton) - (4) - Dec. 8, 2001, 07:41:16 PM EST
                                                     Hey Ash! - (slugbug) - (3) - Dec. 8, 2001, 10:29:20 PM EST
                                                         Thanks. - (Ashton) - (2) - Dec. 9, 2001, 12:57:38 AM EST
                                                             not 100% - (slugbug) - (1) - Dec. 9, 2001, 01:08:21 AM EST
                                                                 Well, then, start a new topic. - (Andrew Grygus) - Dec. 9, 2001, 05:12:30 PM EST
                                             Even easier solution. - (Brandioch) - (1) - Dec. 8, 2001, 08:47:54 PM EST
                                                 "The play's the thing wherein we'll catch the conscience of - (Ashton) - Dec. 9, 2001, 12:40:47 AM EST
                         Third option: - (mhuber) - (3) - Dec. 7, 2001, 10:02:59 PM EST
                             That would be the Decent, the Honorable, the American thing - (Ashton) - (2) - Dec. 7, 2001, 10:45:11 PM EST
                                 And I suspect - (mhuber) - (1) - Dec. 9, 2001, 02:20:38 PM EST
                                     Thanks, Mike.__ Al punte, as usual. - (Ashton) - Dec. 9, 2001, 03:15:45 PM EST
                         Two thoughts comes to mind.... - (Simon_Jester) - (1) - Dec. 8, 2001, 11:00:44 AM EST
                             Third: What (?) do we 'Stand For' _...if anything at all (?) -NT - (Ashton) - Dec. 8, 2001, 07:44:05 PM EST
         [OT]Ad on the page... - (inthane-chan) - Dec. 7, 2001, 11:07:55 AM EST
         Fine point - (tuberculosis) - (2) - Dec. 7, 2001, 12:29:26 PM EST
             In that case - (nking) - (1) - Dec. 7, 2001, 04:22:27 PM EST
                 Yes You Can, Norm - (Ashton) - Dec. 7, 2001, 06:14:15 PM EST
         having met some AF wimmen it may give a renewal of the term - (boxley) - (6) - Dec. 7, 2001, 08:20:02 PM EST
             Maybe glamour + toughness aren't a common mix; and for sure, - (Ashton) - (5) - Dec. 7, 2001, 09:48:43 PM EST
                 Re: Maybe glamour + toughness aren't a common mix; and for s - (wharris2) - (4) - Dec. 7, 2001, 10:32:30 PM EST
                     No need for 'Duck' if that were his meaning (?) - (Ashton) - (3) - Dec. 7, 2001, 10:50:11 PM EST
                         As the Huron said to his soup, e tu Brule? - (boxley) - (2) - Dec. 9, 2001, 10:40:44 PM EST
                             Yeah well, I figure in any *real* misogynist situation, - (Ashton) - (1) - Dec. 10, 2001, 11:21:30 PM EST
                                 define "underdog" :) -NT - (boxley) - Dec. 11, 2001, 09:40:47 PM EST
         Take from the Soapbox - (bepatient) - (3) - Dec. 10, 2001, 12:02:40 PM EST
             More info - (bepatient) - Dec. 10, 2001, 12:07:29 PM EST
             It becomes more apparent that, the State Dept. presumes its - (Ashton) - (1) - Dec. 10, 2001, 11:51:05 PM EST
                 No...actually... - (bepatient) - Dec. 11, 2001, 10:13:13 AM EST

Laugh self to death.
147 ms