Just die? Pfft. That's all?

Tonight I'm gonna fuckin die and as soon as they put me 6 feet down Ima gonna rape me some deaders at knifepoint while dessecrating their own 15 year old graves and then come back to life because the dead don't want me. That's how brutal my night's going to be. I gotta finish off my 2-week late essay, create an entire comprehensive website from scratch (by noon tomorrow) and somehow find time to study for the final exam which is for the same class my late essay is due. Did I mention I haven't been to that class in 4 weeks?

Did I mention I haven't done any of the readings?

As my "new favourite band" would say: "You're better off dead than makin a mess of me!!!" 10 points to whoever figures out which awesome song by which awesome band that's from. Hint: it's awesome.

i'll put in my two cents worth on Ecoterrorism after i'm done my paper on Lethal and Non-Lethal weapons. possibly the last Soc thing i do. eerie
but tonight, as "my new favourite band" the Hives would say, I'm gonna DIE, ALRIGHT!

Courtney Love on Scott Stapp:

"I played him [my song] mono on the phone once and he said, 'can you help my 16 year old sister be a rock star?' and I'm like NO, but I can help you ditch your dumb songs!"


haha.

BUG REPORT FOR PARAS:

How come when I search this page for "breasts" and "boobs" all I get is 2 lousy posts from Alison? I think your search function is prone to one of two possible errors, paras:

1. It's broke.
2. It sucks fat asses.


Fix that shit. I want boobs NOW!

hmmmm normally my horniess is considered a hindrance because it impairs the normal function of my brain but perhaps if i could only focus that energy in the right way i would be unstoppable....

yes taylor i apologize my friend... to me proper grammatical structure is a nuisance and i also noticed a few typos on a quick scan such as flount instead of flout..... ah well cest la vie as they say

Also, I'd like to point out that this issue of violent vs. non-violent protest would be best solved in a one-on-one cage match. Though alison may have the upper hand with the brute forest-ranger strength, I think tom would be a worthy opponent in light of his long reach and dirty fighting techniques.

If this was super streetfighter II turbo edition, I think we'd have a stalemate. In a more reality based situation however (much akin to bloodsport II), I'd put my Gs on tom because he would win the mental game through sheer mastery of ninja trash-talk and his undaunted horniness.

What are your opinions of this subject?

If tom and alison aren't up for settling this dispute in the civilized manner that I have proposed, then I volunteer to host the necessary cock fight in my backyard to settle it once and for all. And then after the chickens have killed each other, we can totally all have the other kind of cock fight in celebration of our democratic prowess. All for, say "aye"?

Though I agree with the points you made, it took me a while to decipher them. Your internet shorthand is atrocious at best, my friend. That shit is a bitch to read.

hmmmm the question of utilizing violence as part of a political or social or environmental or racial struggle.... thats a question thats been debated in one form or another for thousands of years so why not wade into the fray here myself... first of all i agree with mary when i say that alison, from ur post it is clear u sympathize with ecoterrorists so why not come out and say it, u shouldnt talk out of both sides of ur mouth uve been spending too much time in and around the su.... but i guess u learned ur leason from knisely, be careful what u write on the internet otherwise next day in the gateway its reported that the head of ecos supports ecoterrorism.... so i guess it never hurts to cover ur ass one way or another but still if ure going to post ur views u should at least be honest about them or else keep them to urself..... but congratulations anyway ure turning into a very good politician in spite of urself... now to wade into this minefield of an argument but since hugo will tell u that im an expert minesweeper i should have no problem... violence is a very effective tool bar none and although it is never pretty to deny its effectiveness is to be blind to historical facts.... i take a pretty amoral view to me violence is just one mean out of many to a given end... first of all i will preface my comments by saying that violence is everywhere absolutely everywhere u look, history is awash in it and most modern states are built upon it..... violence is ultimately the guarantor of state authority even in canada, if u push the canadian state far enough or flount its authority u will eventually end up being met with violence, extreme violence (such as forcible confinement)... also ever notice that all cops carry guns and have the right to kill u... im no libertarian but im not so naive to think that the governemnt is created "for the people by the people" there is definitely a separation imo, so for the state to claim the only right to violence is hypocritical... but is it wrong for the state to use violence, no, because the state is like any other organism when it is threatened it will defend itself with as much force as the threat necessitates... therefore violence is sometimes necessary to enact social change especially when the opponent is a governemnt backed by a repressive state appartus (to use a little althusser all love to my engl 216 prof julie rak)... do u honestly think the two greatest and most improtant moments in the last 500 years, the french revolution and russian revolution, would have been possible if peaceful rather than violent means had been undertaken... clearly not.... even many social changes in our continent have been born out of violent struggle..... we would not have civil rights and labour rights to the same degree we do had it not been for the violent strikes in the early twentieth cent and black liberation movements such as the black panthers.... mlk jr gets a lot of credit which he 150% deserves, but at the same time groups like the black panthers played an equal role (i wont say more important) which is rarely acknowledged (gee i wonder why).... somebody will pull out gandhi, another one of historys greatest men, but i will just say that the situation in india was totally different than in say eighteenth century france or early twentieth cent russia, and the wider global context of decolonisation definitely played a role... so in the ned i will just say that violence is never preferrable to peaceful means to effect meanigful social or political change, but it should never ever be ruled illegitimate

Alison, most of the land that is now occupied by that city called Edmonton was originally farmland. The land were your house was, where my parent's house is, and where most of the people we know live was once very fertile (yes, as fertile land as that land in the north east) farmland. If you're upset that farmland is being bought up and turned into housing for people like you and me (and I'm guessing that there will be people living in those subdivisions) then perhaps you should look at where you yourself live?

Oh...and I know I may be disagreeing with you here, but I believe that there are always peaceful alternatives that will result in greater positive action than would from violent ones. There is always something else to do, no matter how frustrated you are. Now I know you said you don't condone ecoterrorism, but it sure as heck sounded like you do. And there is always another alternative to that kind of action.