Generation Terrorists » Forum
Sign up   |   Start new thread   |   Lost password?   |   Edit profile   |   Member List   |   myGT   |   Blog
Keyword
From
To
 

Something you probably didn't know
ifihadahif Posted: Tue May 29 21:41:31 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  I thought this was very interesting, hopefully some of you will too, though I'm sure not all of you, but that's OK:

Unless you know all four stanzas of the Star Spangled Banner, you may find this most interesting. Perhaps most of you didn't realize what Francis Scott Key's profession was or what he was doing on a ship. This is a good brush-up on your history.

(Editor's Note - Near the end of his life, the great science fiction author Isaac Asimov wrote a short story about the four stanzas of our national anthem. However brief, this well-circulated piece is an eye opener from the dearly departed doctor...) "I have a weakness -- I am crazy, absolutely nuts, about our national anthem. The words are difficult and the tune is almost impossible; but frequently when I'm taking a shower, I sing it with as much power and emotion as I can. It shakes me up every time."

NO REFUGE COULD SAVE: BY DR. ISAAC ASIMOV

I was once asked to speak at a luncheon. Taking my life in my hands, I announced I was going to sing our national anthem -- all four stanzas. This was greeted with loud groans. One man closed the door to the kitchen, where the noise of dishes and cutlery was loud and distracting. "Thanks, Herb," I said.

"That's all right," he said. "It was at the request of the kitchen staff."

I explained the background of the anthem and then sang all four stanzas. Let me tell you, those people had never heard it before -- or had never really listened. I got a standing ovation. But it was not me; it was the anthem.

More recently, while conducting a seminar, I told my students the story of the anthem and sang all four stanzas. Again there was a wild ovation and prolonged applause. And again, it was the anthem and not me.

So now let me tell you how it came to be written.

In 1812, the United States went to war with Great Britain, primarily over freedom of the seas. We were in the right. For two years, we held off the British, even though we were still a rather weak country. Great Britain was in a life and death struggle with Napoleon. In fact, just as the United States declared war, Napoleon marched off to invade Russia. If he won, as everyone expected, he would control Europe, and Great Britain would be isolated. It was no time for her to be involved in an American war.

At first, our seamen proved better than the British. After we won a battle on Lake Erie in 1813, the American commander, Oliver Hazard Perry, sent the message, "We have met the enemy and they are ours." However, the weight of the British navy beat down our ships eventually. New England, hard-hit by a tightening blockade, threatened secession.

Meanwhile, Napoleon was beaten in Russia and in 1814 was forced to abdicate. Great Britain now turned its attention to the United States, launching a three-pronged attack.

The northern prong was to come down Lake Champlain toward New York and seize parts of New England.

The southern prong was to go up the Mississippi, take New Orleans and paralyze the west.

The central prong was to head for the mid-Atlantic states and then attack Baltimore, the greatest port south of New York. If Baltimore was taken, the nation, which still hugged the Atlantic coast, could be split in two. The fate of the United States, then, rested to a large extent on the success or failure of the central prong.

The British reached the American coast, and on August 24, 1814, took Washington, D.C. Then they moved up the Chesapeake Bay toward Baltimore. On September 12, they arrived and found 1,000 men in Fort McHenry, whose guns controlled the harbor. If the British wished to take Baltimore, they would have to take the fort.

On one of the British ships was an aged physician, William Beanes, who had been arrested in Maryland and brought along as a prisoner. Francis Scott Key, a lawyer and friend of the physician, had come to the ship to negotiate his release.

The British captain was willing, but the two Americans would have to wait. It was now the night of September 13, and the bombardment of Fort McHenry was about to start.

As twilight deepened, Key and Beanes saw the American flag flying over Fort McHenry Through the night, they heard bombs bursting and saw the red glare of rockets. They knew the fort was resisting and the American flag was still flying. But toward morning the bombardment ceased, and a dread silence fell. Either Fort McHenry had surrendered and the British flag flew above it, or the bombardment had failed and the American flag still flew.

As dawn began to brighten the eastern sky, Key and Beanes stared out at the fort, trying to see which flag flew over it. He and the physician must have asked each other over and over, "Can you see the flag?"

After it was all finished, Key wrote a four stanza poem telling the events of the night. Called "The Defense of Fort McHenry," it was published in newspapers and swept the nation. Someone noted that the words fit an old English tune called, "To Anacreon in Heaven" -- a difficult melody with an uncomfortably large vocal range. For obvious reasons, Key's work became known as "The Star Spangled Banner," and in 1931 Congress declared it the official anthem of the United States.

Now that you know the story, here are the words. Presumably, the old doctor is speaking. This is what he asks Key:

Oh! say, can you see, by the dawn's early light,
What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming?
Whose broad stripes and bright stars, through the perilous fight,
O'er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming?
And the rocket's red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof thro' the night that our flag was still there.
Oh! say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave,
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

("Ramparts," in case you don't know, are the protective walls or other elevations that surround a fort.) The first stanza asks a question. The second gives an answer:

On the shore, dimly seen thro' the mist of the deep
Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence reposes,
What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering steep.
As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?
Now it catches the gleam of the morning's first beam,
In full glory reflected, now shines on the stream
'Tis the star-spangled banner. Oh! long may it wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

"The towering steep" is again, the ramparts. The bombardment has failed, and the British can do nothing more but sail away, their mission a failure. In the third stanza I feel Key allows himself to gloat over the American triumph. In the aftermath of the bombardment, Key probably was in no mood to act otherwise? During World War I when the British were our Staunchest allies, this third stanza was not sung. However, I know it, so here it is:

And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion
A home and a country should leave us no more?
Their blood has washed out their foul footstep's pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave,
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

(The fourth stanza, a pious hope for the future, should be sung more slowly than the other three and with even deeper feeling):

Oh! thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand
Between their loved homes and the war's desolation,
Blest with victory and peace, may the Heaven - rescued land
Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation.
Then conquer we must, for our cause is just,
And this be our motto --"In God is our trust."
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

I hope you will look at the national anthem with new eyes. Listen to it, the next time you have a chance, with new ears. Pay attention to the words. And don't let them ever take it away ... not even one word of it.





 
innocenceNonus Posted: Wed May 30 00:44:00 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  i'll be honest: i didn't bother reading this post.

i just wanted to share this with you, hif:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/house.asp

i'm not sure if it's been posted or not, and i don't know if you've seen it or not... but i figured you'd appreciate it.

might read this thread later. its length kinda intimidates me... especially in the face of a latin quiz and laundry and cleaning and math to do.

much love.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Wed May 30 06:23:13 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  innocenceNonus said:
>i'll be honest: i didn't bother reading this post.
>
>i just wanted to share this with you, hif:
>
>http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/house.asp
>
>i'm not sure if it's been posted or not, and i don't know if you've seen it or not... but i figured you'd appreciate it.
>
>might read this thread later. its length kinda intimidates me... especially in the face of a latin quiz and laundry and cleaning and math to do.
>
>much love.
>
Thanks Innocence, I had seen that one before and was planning to post it myself, just never got around to it.

My post above is lengthy, but not really political, it's more like a history lesson than anything. And it's not as long as it looks.


 
addi Posted: Wed May 30 07:16:02 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  I didn't know the entire story behind the song..interesting, but only because I'm a history buff and an American with personal interest. I can imagine GTers here from other countries thinking "So what?" I'm guessing that if Christophe made a post going into detail about Belgium's national anthem it might interest him, Mark, and Just Imagine, and leave all us Yankees thinking, "So what?"

But this is just me being Addi, so nevermind : )

As far as innocence's post I have this to say about that:

Bush's Texas House: 1
Gore's Mansion: 0

Bush's 6 year record on environmental policies: 0
Gore's (had he been elected) environmental policies: 1,000

So good for Dubya that he chose to build an eco-friendly house when he's away from the White House. But on the really big and critical matters of national and global environmantal policy the tiny bit of good he does in Texas is dwarfed in comparison to the damage and woeful neglect he's demonstrated towards the earth...and there are public records to back this up..it's not just the lunatic rants of a liberal Bush hater.

So what was the point, innocence?


 
addi Posted: Wed May 30 10:53:42 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  that came out much nastier than intended. sorry

must be the full moon


 
Posted: Wed May 30 11:25:53 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Great post, Hif - While we're on the Asimov kick, I thought I might as well share one of my favourite works of his:

What Is Intelligence, Anyway?
Isaac Asimov

What is intelligence, anyway? When I was in the army, I received the kind of aptitude test that all soldiers took and, against a normal of 100, scored 160. No one at the base had ever seen a figure like that, and for two hours they made a big fuss over me. (It didn't mean anything. The next day I was still a buck private with KP - kitchen police - as my highest duty.)

All my life I've been registering scores like that, so that I have the complacent feeling that I'm highly intelligent, and I expect other people to think so too. Actually, though, don't such scores simply mean that I am very good at answering the type of academic questions that are considered worthy of answers by people who make up the intelligence tests - people with intellectual bents similar to mine?

For instance, I had an auto-repair man once, who, on these intelligence tests, could not possibly have scored more than 80, by my estimate. I always took it for granted that I was far more intelligent than he was. Yet, when anything went wrong with my car I hastened to him with it, watched him anxiously as he explored its vitals, and listened to his pronouncements as though they were divine oracles - and he always fixed my car.

Well, then, suppose my auto-repair man devised questions for an intelligence test. Or suppose a carpenter did, or a farmer, or, indeed, almost anyone but an academician. By every one of those tests, I'd prove myself a moron, and I'd be a moron, too. In a world where I could not use my academic training and my verbal talents but had to do something intricate or hard, working with my hands, I would do poorly. My intelligence, then, is not absolute but is a function of the society I live in and of the fact that a small subsection of that society has managed to foist itself on the rest as an arbiter of such matters.

Consider my auto-repair man, again. He had a habit of telling me jokes whenever he saw me. One time he raised his head from under the automobile hood to say: "Doc, a deaf-and-mute guy went into a hardware store to ask for some nails. He put two fingers together on the counter and made hammering motions with the other hand. The clerk brought him a hammer. He shook his head and pointed to the two fingers he was hammering. The clerk brought him nails. He picked out the sizes he wanted, and left. Well, doc, the next guy who came in was a blind man. He wanted scissors. How do you suppose he asked for them?"

Indulgently, I lifted by right hand and made scissoring motions with my first two fingers. Whereupon my auto-repair man laughed raucously and said, "Why, you dumb jerk, He used his voice and asked for them." Then he said smugly, "I've been trying that on all my customers today." "Did you catch many?" I asked. "Quite a few," he said, "but I knew for sure I'd catch you." "Why is that?" I asked. "Because you're so goddamned educated, doc, I knew you couldn't be very smart."

And I have an uneasy feeling he had something there.



 
PackMan Posted: Wed May 30 12:56:27 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  addi said:
>Bush's 6 year record on environmental policies: 0
>Gore's (had he been elected) environmental policies: 1,000

I will agree mostly, save one exception:

http://www.vallevidal.org/news.html

I will quote the good news:
President Bush signed legislation yesterday (December 12, 2006) prohibiting oil drilling and mining in the Valle Vidal area of New Mexico's Carson National Forest.

I know it doesn't matter to most of you, but this is where I had been working as a backpacking guide for 3 years, and I had been very involved in stopping the drilling in the Valle. I helped orgainize petitions, pamphlets, rallies, and so on towards saving this awesome piece of land. So I can say, after years of struggle, WE DID IT!!

so yeah, addi, at least for me the score runs:
Bush's 6 year record on environmental policies: 1
Gore's (had he been elected) environmental policies: 1,000


 
PackMan Posted: Wed May 30 14:56:34 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Also, related to the thread, I did NOT know all the verses to the song, but I had recently learned there were 4. I like the history of the song a lot. Thanks


 
mat_j Posted: Wed May 30 14:59:28 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  lousy rockets and bombs


 
addi Posted: Wed May 30 20:16:28 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  mat_j said:
>lousy rockets and bombs

gotta love the Welsh outlook on life
: )


 
innocenceNonus Posted: Thu May 31 03:48:06 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  addi said:
>So what was the point, innocence?

lol. the point was that the story isn't circulated very much and does seem to be in itself an inconvenient truth.

i am well aware that bush has done little if anything for the environment. and i'm well aware what Gore has done. actually, he came to UCSD about a week or so ago to talk about the environment and to screen An Inconvenient Truth. Not to mention the fact that I own the movie [though admittedly, haven't watched it yet. am waiting to watch it with a friend.]

i just think the contradiction between their policies and their personal lives is really interesting. i mean, all of us are hypocrites, but few of us are under the public eye. and just as some people are dragged into stories of Brangelina and Tomkat and Bennifer [1 and 2], surely I'm allowed to muse on the lives of Al Gore and George Bush, no?? And am I not allowed to share what starts those musings??

i guess if we wanted to put it into really snarky terms, we could say that I had no point. : ) but not everything in life does.

plus, when things don't seem to fit into the regular edges, [like how Blacks are 11% of the American population and compose approximately 60% to 70% of our jails... or that people on welfare are predominately White as opposed to Black, yet Blacks have a lower employment rate... or when Gore's house eats energy like I eat babies...] it keeps life interesting. plus, if it's a political issue especially, we should pay attention to those incongruences.

actually, after some thought, i'd like to point out that just because a political figure expounds something for policies' sake but does little to nothing about it in his personal life doesn't sit well with me. I'm not writing off the things the political figure has done, but I can't sit here and nod my head and say that the person is an honest-to-goodness [insert issue]ist either. Take for example the issue of civil rights: If a political figure spent all his time campaigning for civil rights but personally didn't hold up to them, I'd want an explanation. I'd want to know why. And that person would NOT sit well with me because there is something inherently duplicitous about it. Preach one thing but do another??

I mean, if Gore didn't have the money or if his home wasn't using so much energy, i wouldn't care so much. but the beast eats energy! and how many people LIVE in this house?! maybe if he were housing Ugandan refugees or something... but really? It's hard to reconcile his home with his policies. I mean, if he HONESTLY was all for it, why not downsize his home? Why not conserve energy or make renovations to reduce energy consumption??

Just kinda funny... You gotta wonder why...

Again, don't mistake this for trying to downplay his environmental role or the good he has done for the environment. I'm not bringing that into question. If anything, I'm bringing into question his motives and character... which I think I'm allowed to do since he HAS established himself as a public figure and we DO all do that to Bush.

Soooooooooooooo yeah... I think that sums up my point.


 
FN Posted: Thu May 31 05:12:14 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  I've seen the movie (inconvenient truth) and it does more to discredit the problem than anything else for even the most slightly critical viewer.

Seriously, the interwoven propaganda and personal glorification combined with the kitsch style of how it was being forced through the viewer's throat at some points made the image of Goebbels flash through my mind.


 
FN Posted: Thu May 31 05:18:57 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  innocenceNonus said:
>I'm bringing into question his motives and character...

Well I guess he might be in it for the fees he gets for running his slide show / sales of dvd's / cinema income, and the fact that he has.

Also, there's the thing with his stocks:

http://billhobbs.com/2007/02/more_on_gore.html


 
addi Posted: Thu May 31 07:55:31 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  innocenceNonus said:
>Soooooooooooooo yeah... I think that sums up my point.

okay...okay...point made : )

However...few things in life are as simple and straightforward as they seem. The smear reports out to get Gore are guilty of taking certain points and highlighting them, and then leaving out other facts. I've seen this "Rove" tactic used over and over by the right wing folks.
They conveniently leave out things like Gore's use of the Tennessee Valley Authorities "Green Swith" to provide energy to his house. He sends extra money out of his pocket to support clean renewable energy, and keep his "carbon footprint" as close to zero as possible.
Within the geographic climate zone Gore lives in his average energy consumption is 3 times the average...not the reported 20 times higher.
His energy consumption per square foot (19.83 kwh per square foot is actually LESS than average for the area he lives in.
He uses only energy efficient lighting and is adding solar panel energy to offset his dependence on carbon based energy.
It's not just he and Tipper living there either. He frequently has guests there (as befitting an international public figure) and both he and his wife have offices at their home that they work out of. He also has a pool. If the haters are going to go after him for living in a mansion then they need to include a large number of their own that live in huge houses that leave a much greater carbon footprint.

Wonder why these things were left out of the initial report that made it public written by a Right wing Gore hater? Hmmm...
So bring out the hypocracy when you see it, innocence, whether by liberals or conservatives, but when you do don't take one article at face value and gospel truth without first doing some added research to discover whether it presents all the facts on the issue in question, and who's biases are behind the attack.

I'm not letting Gore off the hook for this. I do see some hypocracy in it, but the conservatives are guilty yet again of finding an issue and making it black and white, when there are facts that make it anything but.

*on a non-related issue I do have to admit that the democrats really let me down recently (just so you right-wingers out there know that I'm not blinded by my left leaning ways).
The recent vote in congress to give in to Bush on the Iraq War funding by the Democrats just shows me most have no back bone. Only a few dared to vote against it, even though a good majority of Americans have made it very clear that we are against the war and don't think we should be there. Shame on them. I'm beginning to think the difference between Dems and republicans is less than I hoped, and that's a depressing thought.
Why it's almost enough to make me want to vote Libertarian
Oh Dear!

: )




 
FN Posted: Thu May 31 08:36:23 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  On topic:

The belgian national anthem:

History

According to legend, the Belgian national anthem was written in September 1830, during the Belgian Revolution, by a young revolutionary called Jenneval, who read the lyrics during a meeting at the Aigle d'Or café.

Jenneval, a Frenchman whose real name was Alexandre Dechet (sometimes known as Louis-Alexandre Dechet), did in fact write the Brabançonne. He was at the time an actor at the theatre where, in August 1830, the revolution started which led to independence from the Netherlands. Jenneval died in the war of independence. François Van Campenhout composed the accompanying score and it was first performed in September 1830.

In 1860, Belgium formally adopted the song and music as its national anthem, although the prime minister at the time edited lyrics attacking the Dutch Prince of Orange.



Lyrics

[edit] Official French-language text

O Belgique, ô mère chérie,
A toi nos cœurs, à toi nos bras,
A toi notre sang, ô Patrie !
Nous le jurons tous, tu vivras !
Tu vivras toujours grande et belle
Et ton invincible unité
Aura pour devise immortelle :
le Roi, la Loi, la Liberté !
le Roi, la Loi, la Liberté ! (2x)

[edit] Official Dutch-language text

O dierbaar België, O heilig land der Vad'ren,
Onze ziel en ons hart zijn u gewijd.
Aanvaard ons kracht en bloed van ons ad'ren,
Wees ons doel in arbeid en in strijd.
Bloei, o land, in eendracht niet te breken;
Wees immer uzelf en ongeknecht,
Het woord getrouw, dat g' onbevreesd moogt spreken,
Voor Vorst, voor Vrijheid en voor Recht. :
| Voor Vorst, voor Vrijheid en voor Recht. (2x)


[edit] Official German-language text

O liebes Land, o Belgiens Erde,
Dir unser Herz, Dir unsere Hand,
Dir unser Blut, dem Heimatherde,
wir schworen's Dir, o Vaterland!
So blühe froh in voller Schöne,
zu der die Freiheit Dich erzog,
und fortan singen Deine Söhne:
"Gesetz und König und die Freiheit hoch!"

(the 3 official belgian languages)


Unofficial translation of the Dutch lyrics

O beloved Belgium, O holy land of our Fathers
Our souls and hearts to thee are consecrated.
Accept our strength and the blood of our veins,
Be our purpose in work and struggle.
Prosper, O country, in harmony unbreakable;
Be forever thyself and never servile,
True to the word that thou shouldst fearlessly declare:
For King, for Freedom, and for Justice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Braban%C3%A7onne




However, I'm more drawn to the Flemish "national" anthem:

Composition

The words of this anthem were written in July 1847 by Hippoliet Van Peene (1811—1864) who was clearly inspired by the song Sie sollen ihn nicht haben, / den freien Deutschen Rhein, / So lang sich Herzen laben / An seinem Feuerwein (They must never get our free German Rhine, As long as hearts relish its fiery wine) by the German author Nikolaus Beckers.

The music, by Karel Miry (1823—1899), is apparently influenced by Robert Schumann’s Sonntags am Rhein.

De Vlaamse Leeuw is a strijdlied, a nationalist ‘battle-song’, like France’s Marseillaise. Franco-Belgian political tension in the mid-19th century made the Flemish public mood ripe for such an expression of regional feeling. At the time it was not meant as anti-Belgian (as it often came to be seen by Flemish separatists and their Belgicist opponents), for the ‘enemy’ it refers to is Belgium’s southwestern neighbour France, as in the 1302 Battle of the Golden Spurs.

Around 1900 the anthem was in general use among Flemish militants.

On 6 July 1973, a decree by the then Raad voor de Nederlandse Cultuurgemeenschap (the precursor of the present Flemish regional Parliament) proclaimed the first two stanzas to be the official ‘national’ anthem of Flanders. The text and musical notation were officially published on 11 July 1985.



Text (in Dutch)

Zij zullen hem niet temmen, de fiere Vlaamse Leeuw,
Al dreigen zij zijn vrijheid met kluisters en geschreeuw.
Zij zullen hem niet temmen, zolang een Vlaming leeft,
Zolang de Leeuw kan klauwen, zolang hij tanden heeft.

Chorus:
Zij zullen hem niet temmen, zolang een Vlaming leeft,
Zolang de Leeuw kan klauwen, zolang hij tanden heeft.

De tijd verslindt de steden, geen tronen blijven staan:
De legerbenden sneven, een volk zal nooit vergaan.
De vijand trekt te velde, omringd van doodsgevaar.
Wij lachen met zijn woede, de Vlaamse Leeuw is daar.

Chorus

Only the text above is actually song on official occasions, not the following stanzas:

Hij strijdt nu duizend jaren voor vrijheid, land en God;
En nog zijn zijne krachten in al haar jeugdgenot.
Als zij hem machteloos denken en tergen met een schop,
Dan richt hij zich bedreigend en vrees'lijk voor hen op.

Chorus

Wee hem, de onbezonnen', die vals en vol verraad,
De Vlaamse Leeuw komt strelen en trouweloos hem slaat.
Geen enkle handbeweging die hij uit 't oog verliest:
En voelt hij zich getroffen, hij stelt zijn maan en briest.

Chorus

Het wraaksein is gegeven, hij is hun tergen moe;
Met vuur in't oog, met woede springt hij den vijand toe.
Hij scheurt, vernielt, verplettert, bedekt met bloed en slijk
En zegepralend grijnst hij op's vijands trillend lijk.

Chorus



[edit] English translation - The Flemish Lion

(This quite literal translation does not fully reflect the true intentions of some poetic phrasings in the Dutch original)

They will never tame him, the proud Flemish Lion,
Even if they threaten his freedom with fetters and with shouts.
They will never tame him, as long as a Fleming lives.
As long as the Lion can claw, as long as he has teeth.

Chorus:
They will never tame him, as long as a Fleming lives.
As long as the Lion can claw, as long as he has teeth.

Time devours cities, no thrones will ever last,
Armies may go under, but a people never dies.
The enemy comes marching in; surrounded by mortal danger
We laugh at his anger: the Flemish Lion is here!

Chorus

Only the text above is actually sung on official occasions, not the following stanzas:

For a thousand years now has he fought, for freedom, land and God,
And yet his strength is as youthful as ever.
Should anyone think him powerless, and taunt him with a kick,
Both menacing and fearsome will he rise.

Chorus

Pity the mindless who, deceptive and full of treason,
Comes to pet the Flemish Lion and hit him faithlessly.
Not a single movement he does not see:
And if he feels offended, he will raise his manes and roar.

Chorus

The sign of revenge has been given, he is tired of their bait;
With fire in the eye, in anger he jumps towards the enemy.
He tears, destroys, crushes, covers in blood and mud
And in victory grins over his enemy's trembling corpse.

Chorus



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Vlaamse_Leeuw


 
addi Posted: Thu May 31 08:54:47 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  "So what?"


: )


 
FN Posted: Thu May 31 09:04:23 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  addi said:
>"So what?"
>
>
>: )

My thoughts exactly


 
addi Posted: Thu May 31 10:12:38 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Christophe said:

>My thoughts exactly

lol!

and "lol" to your pic too : )


 
beetlebum Posted: Thu May 31 10:50:25 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  addi said:

>

>The recent vote in congress to give in to Bush on the Iraq War funding by the Democrats just shows me most have no back bone. Only a few dared to vote against it, even though a good majority of Americans have made it very clear that we are against the war and don't think we should be there. Shame on them. I'm beginning to think the difference between Dems and republicans is less than I hoped, and that's a depressing thought.
>Why it's almost enough to make me want to vote Libertarian
>Oh Dear!
>
>: )


hey, i like libertarians! also, i think that democratic support was posturing for the upcoming race. (mebbe?) i don't think they wanted to, and it's unfortunate that politics work this way, but it kind of makes sense for them to support bush now so that when he goes down in flames it's not their fault. otherwise, every conservative would be yelling that the reason the mission in iraq failed was not because bush didn't have a plan, but because the democrats let "politics" get in the way of winning. like i said, it's despicable that if they don't believe in the war that they didn't vote against the proposal, but just the same, i think there's probably a "greater good, means to ends" strategy. no?


 
~Just Imagine~ Posted: Thu May 31 15:38:09 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Christophe said:
>addi said:
>>"So what?"
>>
>>
>>: )
>
>My thoughts exactly

Actually didn't know that, so I read it with intrest :D
But now our anthem is in my head, Just spinning around and I can't get it back out, and it's driving me crazy
Christophe, you're pure evil ! ;)

But to the rest, i'd have to say "so what" ;)


 
addi Posted: Thu May 31 23:03:48 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  beetlebum said:

>hey, i like libertarians!

I'm a big man. I can overlook that fault : )


>also, i think that democratic support was posturing for the upcoming race. (mebbe?)

you make a valid point as far as what the rationale might have been behind their vote, however I'm just sick of the vabrado over the past years and when push comes to shove they back down. A lack of principles and courage in my book, with more concern over their personal interests and not what's best for the country.


 
innocenceNonus Posted: Fri Jun 1 02:43:31 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  well said.

i was more wondering what was going on than anything. thanks for clearing some stuff up, addi.

i can always count on you!!


 
addi Posted: Fri Jun 1 08:09:47 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  innocenceNonus said:

>i can always count on you!!

:)

I don't know about that, but thanks, innocence. I can always count on you to be open-minded and forgiving when I sometimes stumble over my words here.


 
addi Posted: Fri Jun 1 08:30:17 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  something you didn't know and probably don't need to know....

but I'm off on vacation (holiday for you europeans)tomorrow, so no posting from Addi for the next 8 days.

Just be thankful that I don't make a post here everytime I get up to go to the bathroom : )

Behave good people


 



[ Reply to this thread ] [ Start new thread ]