It's never one thing...

[DreamTone7]

...but many factors involved.



news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051...NlYwMxNjk2



What gets me is that she has no idea what her son is up to, and yet she can still stand there with a straight face and claim he is innocent.

[HKRockChick]

Ohhh DT, the ultimate example of irony!!!!!!!!

[DreamTone7]

LOL...how poorly you know me, Deb.



The initial impression seems to be a lasting one for you...regardless of all else that points to the contrary. It's no wonder you change your mind about nothing! On the flip-side, you are certainly consistent.



BTW...how about a comment or two on the topic of the thread?

[HKRockChick]

Get real. This is a MOTHER. Dyu really expect a mother to say that her son is a criminal? I mean you aren't even RELATED to the criminals running your country and STILL you defend their illegitimate murderous actions, contrary to proven facts. ewwwwww.



As comment on the article - while I abhor child abuse, I would not live in a country that has a hotline for children to call the police if their parents discipline them - that to me is parental abuse by the children and state. I wish there was a middle road - its like punishing society for the sins of a few. We were very strictly disciplined as kids and although I don't condone striking kids and will likely establish different methods of discipline for my own, I am no worse off for it. I remember having a joyous childhood with some good discipline thrown in when I was naughty! I most certainly was NOT an abused child.



Another comment is this article further illustrates just how badly marginalised these people are. Things had to come to a head one day. I hope the govt has learnt its lesson and establishes programmes to draw these people into mainstream life.

Edited by: HKRockChick at: 11/13/05 14:01

[Galmin]

Mother: McVeigh not a 'monster'

[HKRockChick]

DT: " LOL...how poorly you know me, Deb. The initial impression seems to be a lasting one for you...regardless of all else that points to the contrary. It's no wonder you change your mind about nothing!"



Eh? what points to the contrary? I've seen no reason in any of your illogical arguments and insular world view for me to change my mind.



DT: "On the flip-side, you are certainly consistent." Yes, I'm known to be a combination of certain when I need to be and open and reasonable in the face of contrary but logical and reasonable evidence or arguments put forth by people whose integrity and intelligence I respect. However, I will not compromise my ethics and integrity just to be liked or appear "open". So bite me.

[DreamTone7]

HKRC - "I will not compromise my ethics and integrity just to be liked or appear "open". So bite me."



LOL Deb...nobody is asking you to compromise anything. Martyring yourself won't solve anything either, though.





HKRC - "Eh? what points to the contrary?"



Exactly. Once you have your initial impression, you can see nothing else.

[DreamTone7]

HKRC - "Dyu really expect a mother to say that her son is a criminal?"



You're darn right I do. If she knows it for a fact, that is. Parents turning a blind eye to what their kids do is irresponsible parenting. That's the way I see it. Are you trying to justify mothers lying about their sons activities, Deb? How about you, Galmin? I'm not saying it doesn't happen...I am saying that our attitudes need to be less accepting of it. When I posted my comments about the article, the reaction seemed to be "what did you expect?" (almost Debs exact words). I'll tell you what I expect. I expect adults to act like adults and stand for the truth. Be honest and say they don't know what they're kids have been doing...partly because the government fails to allow them to discipline them. Stop letting their emotions run their mouths...there is a place and time for that, and it's not in a court of law, or standing in front of the authorities!



Scream bloody murder if you THINK Bush lied, but then pass off on a woman lying about her son as OK when it HAS been proven to be a case of murder? Sounds like a double standard to me. Where's the integrity in that?

Melody and Instruments for the soul...

Edited by: DreamTone7  at: 11/13/05 19:37

[HKRockChick]

How do YOU know she was lying? Do you get some hidden message that we didnt from the article?



DT: "I'll tell you what I expect. I expect adults to act like adults and stand for the truth."



hahahahahaha another example of Mr. irony-DT.



We all KNOW Bush and Co. lied to go to war and create this horrible mess we're all in now (and please do some research so you can fill yourself in on the facts). Where do you stand on that? Ready to denounce them yet, or is the "Presidency" too sacred?







Oh - was the intent of your thread about parenting and disciplining or parental public condemnation of their child regardless of what they knew of the facts?? For some reason from your opening comments in this thread I thought it was the latter, silly me.



I agree with you on the former though, no question - see my post above.

Edited by: HKRockChick at: 11/14/05 2:12

[DreamTone7]

HKRC - "How do YOU know she was lying? Do you get some hidden message that we didnt from the article?"



Apparently so. If the woman did not know where her son was or what he was doing (as she admitted), anything else other than a statement to that effect is a lie. If she didn't know where he was or what he was doing, how does she know he didn't do it? She can't. She lied.





HKRC - "We all KNOW Bush and Co. lied to go to war..."



A lie is only a lie when it is an intentional misrepresentation of what is known (by the individual) to be true. It indeed may not be true, but if the person believes it to be true it is not a lie. If Bush actually thought what he was saying was true, regardless of any evidence that he was able to present to the public (which may not be as much as truly exists), then he was not lieing. That lady knew that she did not know...therefor, she was lieing. Now, if Bush knew that what he was saying was not true, then yes, he was lieing as well.



So why would Bush say something so potentially risky? Go back to the list of agendas I posted earlier concerning going to war. You will find that one of them is "public opinion". Public opinion was needed to justify going into Iraq. So Bush may have said something on shaky evidence (and I certainly would call it shaky) in order to help garner public support for what he thought to do.



My opinion? As for whether or not he lied, I can't say...and neither, really, can anybody but a very few. Not you or I, or the media for that matter. The media likes to push it as a lie because there are people like you, Deb, who want to hear it that way! It's part of the media's agenda. Anytime you listen to a politician you have to take into consideration his/her agenda(s) in order to understand why they are saying what they do. Whenever you listen to the media, you additionally have to take into account their agenda...something many people never do. People like you, Deb, seem to enjoy taking the media at face value...they prefer a simpler world...a black and white world. Reality is not so simple, I'm afraid.



As for going into Iraq, I am convinced that WMD existed there, that Sadam had used it before on the Kurds, that he had vehicles (rockets and remote controled jets) to carry it beyond his borders, and that he was nutty enough to potentially do so. On top of this, the majority of Iraqis wanted us there (and that should be enough for anybody). So I support our going in there...regardless of whether or not Bush was lieing about a nuclear weapons program in Iraq. It is also interesting to note that there exists a known Al-Quida cell in Iraq. Was it there previous to our going in? Nobody can say for sure, but it is hard to believe it sprang up overnight, or that Saddam did not know about it. So much for Iraq not being connected with terrorists. This terrorist group was the one responsible for the recent bombings in Jordan.

[HKRockChick]

There you go again, proving my point nicely for me. Your entire post aboves proves it and the double standards you live by.

Quote:

---

A lie is only a lie when it is an intentional misrepresentation of what is known (by the individual) to be true. It indeed may not be true, but if the person believes it to be true it is not a lie.

---

So the mother lied, but Bush did not. You know for a fact she knew her son was not innocent and lied, is that it???



And at the end of the day, who's lie cost the world peace and loss of over 100,000 lives and counting???



DT you are so full of it, its not funny.

[DreamTone7]

HKRC - "So the mother lied, but Bush did not. You know for a fact she knew her son was not innocent and lied, is that it???"



Nope. SHE knew for a fact that she did not know anything as to her sons innocence OR guilt (by her own admission). We do not know what Bush did or did not...and niether does the media that you apparently swear by.





What we DO know is that you openly expected the mother to claim something she could not possibly know for a fact, and did not batt an eyelash (that I know of, anyway). Yet when you can't say for sure or not if Bush was lieing, you're all over him. That's pretty much the definition of a double standard.



Time to revisit the word "integrity".

[HKRockChick]

"SHE knew for a fact that she did not know anything as to her sons innocence OR guilt"



So should she presume him innocent or guilty? What do YOUR laws say?



And how do you know whether Galmin or I think a mother lying about their childs innocence is right or wrong? we didnt enter into that discussion at all. YOU presumed it. tut tut.



You don't believe the media, the UN or anything else that proves the iraq war was based on fabricated BS, YET you seem to believe this article like it was God's truth.



LOL.

[DreamTone7]

HKRC - "You don't believe the media, the UN or anything else that proves the iraq war was based on fabricated BS, YET you seem to believe this article like it was God's truth."



That's because it's not something the media has an agenda about.





HKRC - "And how do you know whether Galmin or I think a mother lying about their childs innocence is right or wrong?"



I never said either of you thought is was right or wrong. I said YOU passed it off as something to be expected...while the thought of Bush, a politician, lieing about something doesn't recieve the same response? Is it not something to be expected as well? Face it...for you it's not about whether or not Bush lied or not...that's just a point of contention that you're using. You're ticked off at Bush for something else that doesn't involve lieing. So talk about that, and leave the "Bush lied" thing alone already.





HKRC - "So should she presume him innocent or guilty? What do YOUR laws say?"



N/A. This lady is in France. And I don't go by anybodies laws anyway when determining right or wrong. It has been said that law lies partly in the shadow of justice...they're not very well related. Unfortunately for all, laws are a necessary travesty to justice...some more functional than others. I keep my own counsel as to "right and wrong". But in direct answer to your question, she shouldn't assume anything!

[HKRockChick]

DT: "I said YOU passed it off as something to be expected...while the thought of Bush, a politician, lieing about something doesn't recieve the same response?"



Are you SERIOUS????? Christ Almighty.



DT: "The lady is in France"

I daresay french laws regarding presumed innocent until proven guilty are similar to US laws, and they likely uphold 'em better, if the current behaviour of your administration is anything to go by.



"And I don't go by anybodies laws anyway when determining right or wrong."



Yah. I knew dat.



Instead of focusing on the pathos of the situation and all the other socio-economic implications of the story, you come up with this tripe. And I'm supposed to suddenly change my mind about you?? Get real!

Edited by: HKRockChick at: 11/14/05 8:43