Moral acceptablity

[Invader Zim]

If say for example you had the oppertunity to kill Bush, but was forced to kill others, would you take it?

Say for example you had the oppertunity to poison his food at a big party, but knew that at least 10 people would eat the food as well. Would you take the oppatunity, which may never appear again?

This leads me on to another interesting extension of this discussion. In Iraq a massive car bomb was detonated, its main target was the Shi'a leader Ayatollah Hakim, who tollerated if not actually liked the US occupation. This bomb however also killed others, the death toll has now risen to over 100 people.

How many of you would be willing to kill 100 civillians in order to kill one other person?

[elijahcraig]

What exactly would killing a puppet politician accomplish beyond furthering the fear-grip the administration has enveloped amongst the people?

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2003, 02:55 AM
What exactly would killing a puppet politician accomplish beyond furthering the fear-grip the administration has enveloped amongst the people?
In the case of Ayatollah Hakim, it really upset the Shi'a, and understandably. The Shi'a also blame the US for attack because they felt (and rightly) that the US should have protected them agaist those who wished to see Saddam reinstated.

So it did the bombers cause some good, in a twisted kind of way.

As for the US, i think quite a lot of people would want to see Bush killed, so you would have to ask them.

[Dhul Fiqar]

I would take the fucker out, no one sitting down to dinner with a fascist is innocent. Think of all the weapons makers and oil executives we could take out in the same attack!! ;)

--- G.

[Bolshevika]

On Che-Lives I may seem like a "Stalinist-baby-eating-maniac-murdering-dictator", but I have a lot of consideration for innocent human life. I would not kill any civilians in order to end the lives of one of those scumbags. Bombs are a cowardly way of assassinating people, I would rather walk up to the guy and shoot him in the face.

[Dhul Fiqar]

And if that is not possible you just let the guy go on being a murderous bastard?

--- G.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

Killing Bush would acomplish very little, it would just be another assasination os a president, they would find me, kill me, and call me a nazi/communist (they make no differentiation) and it would just be another "fact" to use in American brainwashing. But in a similar revolutionary situation, i would.

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by Dhul [email protected] 31 2003, 02:14 AM
I would take the fucker out, no one sitting down to dinner with a fascist is innocent. Think of all the weapons makers and oil executives we could take out in the same attack!! ;)

--- G.
I agree with this, I would kill hundreds, at least, If it was the only way to destroy the Bush administration. Their death count is 1000 times that and will only rise but I would take the chance to execute them personally, if given a good oppertunity. I may hate killing "innocent" bystanders but I will not allow millions more to die for their sake. If you kill all of the puppets, they will need new ones. I think this will help our cause. I should hope Bush is already failing in the polls but should like to see him pay for his crimes against humanity. To quote the Offspring song "lets kill the president!"

[synthesis]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2003, 01:55 AM
What exactly would killing a puppet politician accomplish beyond furthering the fear-grip the administration has enveloped amongst the people?

Exactly what I planned to say. Bush is merely a shell for corporate interests to inhabit.

I would prefer to poison the food of a major corporation's board of directors meeting. I'd probably go for Ford or Pepsi.

[EneME]

I definently would if it was Papa Bush...he's supported and advocated for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of ppl around the world. He...in my opinion...is one of the most evil persons alive. Whoever was eating dinner with him would of course be other ppl like him who only care about thier financial interests like Cheney and Rice. While Bush Jr. is just an idiot with a good last name. The lights are on but no one's home...papa bush is the real president behind the scenes.

[sliverchrist]

This question goes beyond <I would think at least> everyone here on this board. No one can know what they will do with blood on their hands, murderous or otherwise. The consequences are unfathomable for even the wisest.

[Invader Zim]

Guys you take me way to litteraly, the killing bush situation is mearly hypothetical. If you can think of a better example, then sure. I am mearly attempting to see what is moraly acceptable, as it is an interesting question.

[Purple]

hell with morality.... :D

[sliverchrist]

whew :rolleyes:

it is an interesting question, to be sure AK. the kind of responses that have been drawn thus far are not at all revealing though.

:lol:

[Fever]

I dont really think we have the right to decide how much human life is worth. My morals wouldnt allow me to do it...

[Vinny Rafarino]

I takes a very specific character to be able to accomplish these types of goals. It&#39;s not for everybody.

[Bianconero]

I agree on what someone already said. Bush or some corporation capitalist ... it doesn&#39;t matter really. The Capital will soon enough find a replacement to continue it&#39;s dirty work. Single people are of no relevance.

On the topic, I&#39;ll have to say that every Socialist/Communist, who realizes that only revolution will lead to the expropriation of the Capital must also realize that people will die. Of course this is not funny, of course it&#39;s not &#39;good&#39; to kill, but it is necessary to end the worldwide suffering.

[Inti]

I would take the poison, dressed as the waiter and punch that motherfucking poison in his fat mouth... No matter if others got me afterwards, I would die happily knowing that I ended the life of a big murderer, responsible for many executions, bombings and so on.. And Im not even muslim so I dont think I would get all the ladies in heaven.. hell with that..

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2003, 09:08 AM
Guys you take me way to litteraly, the killing bush situation is mearly hypothetical. If you can think of a better example, then sure. I am mearly attempting to see what is moraly acceptable, as it is an interesting question.
I know what you meant ;) :hammer:, twas a good question.

[redstar2000]

Since I&#39;m not a "moral philosopher" and, indeed, have little interest in such matters, I will ignore the question.

Historically, assassination has not proven to be useful in the struggle for proletarian revolution.

Therefore, I think it is a tactic that communists should reject.

Communists, however, are a very small minority of the world&#39;s population and there are many non-communists with major grievances against the ruling classes of this world.

They will use the tactics that seem most appropriate to them...and, to the extent that they are actually resisting the ruling classes, I refuse to condemn them as a matter of principle.

"When" they ask "my advice", I will offer it freely...with the understanding that the decisions are theirs to make. Until "then", I encourage all resistance to the international capitalist system and, especially, resistance to U.S. imperialism.

I don&#39;t think its "our place" to do anything less...or more.

http://www.sawu.org/redgreenleft/YaBBImages/smoking.gif
___________________________

U.S. GET OUT OF IRAQ NOW&#33;
___________________________

"...a disgusting and frightening website"
The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.sawu.org/redstar2000)
A site about communist ideas

[elijahcraig]

BOld and quotes, quotes and bold; RS loves it all. A little too much.

[caliban]

You know the funny thing is, l can bet that when the good old boys get together to plan an operation(to kill somebody or to invade a counrty) they ask the very same question. What was that old saying about great minds thinking alike, and fools seldom differ. The solution is in the power of the pen. If the person is a fucking tyrant or George Bush(the same thing) just remember when it&#39;s time to vote. But to answer the question, not one innocent life should be wasted on that piece of shit. Just my humble opinion.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

:lol: :lol:
GAAHHHAHHAHAHGAHHAGGAHGAHAGHAGAHGAHAGHAGAHGHAGAHGA HAGHAGHAGAHGAHAGHAGAHGAHAGHAGAHGAHAGHAGGAH
HAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHA&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33; &#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33; &#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;

redstar, i went to your website, it&#39;s fucking hilarius&#33;&#33; Okay, I&#39;m not poking fun at your theories which I regard highly, but your "random quotes" are fucking hysterical&#33;&#33;&#33; :lol: "Dialectics are like silly putty, you can mold it to conform to anything you want." or something to that effect. You should write fortune cookies, comarde. that was the fucking hilarious&#33; :lol: :lol:

[elijahcraig]

RS likes to play the "leninists are sheep-herders", but from the discussion I&#39;ve seen on economics...he don&#39;t know shit about marxist economy or the workings of the laws of economics. His talk of "abolishing" things is very funny, maybe he should read Stalin&#39;s "Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR".

[redstar2000]

...maybe he should read Stalin&#39;s "Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR".

I read it back in 1965 or thereabouts. Is there anything new in it? :lol:

And you are wannabe sheep-herders...you&#39;ve said as much on more than one occasion.

Why do you wish to hide from the logic of your politics? It&#39;s easy enough to say that someone "don&#39;t know shit about economics"--I haven&#39;t noticed any "pearls of wisdom" coming from your direction either.

You want to replace the existing class system with a slight variant...with you (the vanguard party) occupying the same position and exercising the same functions as the capitalist class does now.

You think that the "laws of economics" make that the "only way to go"...completely overlooking the fact that there are no "general" laws of economics. Every form of class society has its own specific economic laws.

And communism is a classless society in which your silly bourgeois preoccupations are irrelevant.

http://www.sawu.org/redgreenleft/YaBBImages/smoking.gif
___________________________

U.S. GET OUT OF IRAQ NOW&#33;
___________________________

"...a disgusting and frightening website"
The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.sawu.org/redstar2000)
A site about communist ideas

[dopediana]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2003, 01:29 AM
Say for example you had the oppertunity to poison his food at a big party, but knew that at least 10 people would eat the food as well. Would you take the oppatunity, which may never appear again?

yes, as long as the other people were

cheney
ashcroft
powell
rice
and any 6 other evil-doers........


but then again, i might not.

[elijahcraig]

There&#39;s something wrong when a person (RS) avoids all of my points, and uses the phrase "sheep herders" on nearly every thread I post in. Pathetic.

[redstar2000]

I&#39;m a poor little lamb
who&#39;s gone astray.
baahhh, baahhh, baahhh.

http://www.sawu.org/redgreenleft/YaBBImages/smoking.gif
___________________________

U.S. GET OUT OF IRAQ NOW&#33;
___________________________

"...a disgusting and frightening website"
The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.sawu.org/redstar2000)
A site about communist ideas

[elijahcraig]

Pig faced clowns, utopian and ready to dodge dodge dodge :lol:

[redstar2000]

This is Dodge City, boy. Don&#39;t let the sun set on your stalinist ass&#33; :lol:

http://www.sawu.org/redgreenleft/YaBBImages/smoking.gif
___________________________

U.S. GET OUT OF IRAQ NOW&#33;
___________________________

"...a disgusting and frightening website"
The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.sawu.org/redstar2000)
A site about communist ideas

[Invader Zim]

Well Redstar and Elijah both be happy knowing I think little good of both of you, however as much as I find your petty insults amuzing could you take it to chit chat where your flames will be appriciated.

:redstar2000:

[elijahcraig]

I don&#39;t think I can post in Chit Chat.

[redstar2000]

Greetings, Colonel Blimp&#33;

elijahcraig wants to know if you will let Joseph Stalin into your heart. :wub:

http://www.sawu.org/redgreenleft/YaBBImages/smoking.gif
___________________________

U.S. GET OUT OF IRAQ NOW&#33;
___________________________

"...a disgusting and frightening website"
The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.sawu.org/redstar2000)
A site about communist ideas

[Blackberry]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2003, 01:10 AM
Well Redstar and Elijah both be happy knowing I think little good of both of you, however as much as I find your petty insults amuzing could you take it to chit chat where your flames will be appriciated.

:redstar2000:
Still sore after making a mockery of yourself in the Commie Club?

:redstar2000:

[elijahcraig]

Who are you referring to? I knew I was to be banned the minute someone noticed the Stalinists were "in the CC".

RS, tisk tisk tisk...it&#39;s sad that a 60+ year old man can&#39;t even debate simple economics.

[Desert Fox]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2003, 01:29 AM
How many of you would be willing to kill 100 civillians in order to kill one other person?
If you would kill the man, and you would stop him of killing millions of people then what are 100 people. The goal divines the means :angry:

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by Comrade James+Sep 9 2003, 02:55 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Comrade James @ Sep 9 2003, 02:55 AM)
[email protected] 9 2003, 01:10 AM
Well Redstar and Elijah both be happy knowing I think little good of both of you, however as much as I find your petty insults amuzing could you take it to chit chat where your flames will be appriciated.

:redstar2000:
Still sore after making a mockery of yourself in the Commie Club?

:redstar2000: [/b]
Still sore after giving birth to a king size piece of shit called your post...

Whoops, I shouldn&#39;t attack those who cant defend themselves. I will leave you alone, afer all its not your fault you an idiot.

[Saint-Just]

And you are wannabe sheep-herders...you&#39;ve said as much on more than one occasion.

It was elijahcraig who said: -“I turn sheep into wolves to kill the pigs."

I am certain you have extensive life experience redstar2000. In which case I would think you would know that most people are sheep. My ex-partner once said that there were no poor people in China or the UK. I have friends who unlike most people here think Stalin was nothing but a communist since they know virtually nothing of communism and little of the western propaganda surrounding Stalin. Most people are like this; leaders but not followers, who need intellectuals and those who are strong and charismatic to lead them.

You&#39;re going to say this is a bourgeois ideas. Regardless, we value the masses over everything and our goal is to improve the lives of working people and create a society founded on working-class ideals. People are just as valuable whether they are sheep with little political knowledge in this capitalist society or revolutionaries. The people who are not valuable are the bourgeois thinkers who exploit people and wish to hold back the progression of the masses of people.

[redstar2000]

I am certain you have extensive life experience redstar2000. In which case I would think you would know that most people are sheep.

Well, as to the origins of "sheep-ness", the sheep-herder thinks it&#39;s genetic...and that&#39;s certainly bourgeois ideological trash. (The reformist agrees with him about that, I&#39;m pretty sure.)

We certainly have a social order which heavily propagandizes the "virtue" of "sheep-like" behavior. Except for the most elite schools where ruling class kids are taught how to rule, the educational system emphasizes unthinking obedience to authority..."sheep behavior".

I think the real question is: is this kind of conditioning so deeply embedded in people that material events cannot overcome that childhood/adolescent conditioning?

If that were the case, then you&#39;d be right; only a "charismatic leader"--a "better" authority--would be able to force the overthrow of the existing order.

What I assert is that historical events like the February 1917 revolution in Russia or the May 1968 General Strike in France prove that under certain material circumstances, huge numbers of workers spontaneously stop being "sheep" without shepherds of any kind to "lead" them.

There are not many "iron laws" of history, but one of them certainly is what has happened can happen.

Regardless, we value the masses over everything and our goal is to improve the lives of working people and create a society founded on working-class ideals.

It&#39;s always "nice" to have good intentions, to be well-meaning, etc. Every charity says that or something like that.

But that has nothing to do with Marxism or proletarian revolution or communism. These ideas are not about "helping people"--they are rather about an entire enslaved class rising up and smashing those chains (all of them&#33;).

It is not a matter of someone "converting sheep into wolves" through "inspired leadership" or "correct ideas"--it is a historical process shaped by changes in material reality that destroys the "sheep-like" mentality throughout the class.

In periods of reaction (like this one), most people do behave "as if they were sheep" and it&#39;s easy to leap to the conclusion that this behavior reflects their "essential nature" or even that it&#39;s "genetic".

What I argue is that in revolutionary periods, yesterday&#39;s "sheep" rather suddenly becomes today&#39;s "wolf"...and would do so if Marx had never lived and if there were no conscious communists at all. Material reality would create them&#33;

Indeed, I think this is obvious when you ask yourself why are there conscious communists at all? If it were just a matter of "natural born leaders" or "supermen" with an odd inclination towards altruism--"be nice to the sheep...they&#39;re so cute"--there would be no need for communist ideas or advocates of communism to exist at all. The minority of sheep-herders would gravitate towards positions of authority in the existing system and then use their power to "be nice"...like Robert Owen, for example.

No, communist consciousness originated in capitalist material reality. Those who came to the ideas first, did so by chance. There is nothing "special" about communists now...except that we are "early" for the festivities. And that is also a matter of chance.

What we have done is "do-able" by anyone of normal intelligence who is persuaded by the events in their life to actually think about their situation in class society.

"Sheep-ness" is a temporal illusion; the "inner wolf" will prevail.

http://www.sawu.org/redgreenleft/YaBBImages/smoking.gif
___________________________

U.S. GET OUT OF IRAQ NOW&#33;
___________________________

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.sawu.org/redstar2000)
A site about communist ideas

[RyeN]

Life is the only important thing. To take the life of the presidant you would become a murderer. No one should be able to prematurley end someone elses life. However we have to have consequences for bad actions. So 10 or 20 years of non stop torture might work out for Bush.

[elijahcraig]

I see Utopianism is in high style tonight, eh?

[synthesis]

I think the real question is: is this kind of conditioning so deeply embedded in people that material events cannot overcome that childhood/adolescent conditioning?

I&#39;m usually not one to arbitrarily bust out random Marx quotes, but I thought this one was relatively applicable to the debate on whether it is nature or nurture that determines man&#39;s capacity behave like a sheep.

The materialist doctrine that men are products of circumstances and upbringing, and that, therefore, changed men are products of other circumstances and changed upbringing, forgets that it is men who change circumstances and that it is essential to educate the educator himself. Hence, this doctrine necessarily arrives at dividing society into two parts, one of which is superior to society.

I always liked that one.

[redstar2000]

The materialist doctrine that men are products of circumstances and upbringing, and that, therefore, changed men are products of other circumstances and changed upbringing, forgets that it is men who change circumstances and that it is essential to educate the educator himself. Hence, this doctrine necessarily arrives at dividing society into two parts, one of which is superior to society.

Perhaps. But then there&#39;s this...

http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?a...&f=6&t=16521&s= (http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=6&t=16521&s=)

Marx himself was a product of his era and however farsighted he was, he did not see far enough.

No one can.

http://www.sawu.org/redgreenleft/YaBBImages/smoking.gif
___________________________

U.S. GET OUT OF IRAQ NOW&#33;
___________________________

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.sawu.org/redstar2000)
A site about communist ideas

[kylie]

If killing one person will result in the future in others not dying, then surely it must be done. This is the reason why under socialism persecuting capitalists too was in the past, and should be in the future, considered. While it may result in some of them dying, many more would die if they were to suceed in causing counter-revolution, re-instating the capitalist economic system of exploitation.
As for the idea of morals, they are a capitalist tool, and should be rejected. The basis of them seems to be that there are set rules, that are constant and stay the same whatever the situation. When really this is not the case for anything. In some cases killing a person is completely unacceptable and unecessary, while in others it may be of the utmost importance, for example. Morals are used to serve the bourgeosie, they are a list of essentially what is acceptable, and what is not, imposed on the working class, and of course used to make certain things &#39;immoral&#39;.
Trotsky wrote a very good essay on the idea of morals, Thier morals and Ours. (http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/works/1936/1936-mor.htm)

[Vinny Rafarino]

Well, as to the origins of "sheep-ness", the sheep-herder thinks it&#39;s genetic...and that&#39;s certainly bourgeois ideological trash. (The reformist agrees with him about that, I&#39;m pretty sure.)


This seems to be The Hack&#39;s M.O. lately. That wich he is unable to comprehend, he simply dismisses as "bourgeois ideological trash" or "bourgeois wage-slavery."

How may people have you in their pocket now Mr. Hack?

Because it seems to me the Hack&#39;s little crowd of disciples is steadily growing smaller and smaller as people finally realise The Hack is nothing but mere flash with little or no substance.

The Hack was profoundly correct when he made this statement;

I&#39;m a poor little lamb who&#39;s gone astray. baahhh, baahhh, baahhh


Now finally the Hack and I have something we both can agree on&#33;

:redstar2000:

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by COMRADE [email protected] 20 2003, 12:56 AM
Well, as to the origins of "sheep-ness", the sheep-herder thinks it&#39;s genetic...and that&#39;s certainly bourgeois ideological trash. (The reformist agrees with him about that, I&#39;m pretty sure.)


This seems to be The Hack&#39;s M.O. lately. That wich he is unable to comprehend, he simply dismisses as "bourgeois ideological trash" or "bourgeois wage-slavery."

How may people have you in their pocket now Mr. Hack?

Because it seems to me the Hack&#39;s little crowd of disciples is steadily growing smaller and smaller as people finally realise The Hack is nothing but mere flash with little or no substance.

The Hack was profoundly correct when he made this statement;

I&#39;m a poor little lamb who&#39;s gone astray. baahhh, baahhh, baahhh


Now finally the Hack and I have something we both can agree on&#33;

:redstar2000:
He still has a few idiots who follow him like puppys, I wonder if he could make them fetch? They really are his "*****es".

[Vinny Rafarino]

I&#39;m sure it would not be to hard. I reckon dangling something shiny in front of them may be involved.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by COMRADE [email protected] 19 2003, 06:56 PM
Well, as to the origins of "sheep-ness", the sheep-herder thinks it&#39;s genetic...and that&#39;s certainly bourgeois ideological trash. (The reformist agrees with him about that, I&#39;m pretty sure.)


This seems to be The Hack&#39;s M.O. lately. That which he is unable to comprehend, he simply dismisses as "bourgeois ideological trash" or "bourgeois wage-slavery."

How may people have you in their pocket now Mr. Hack?

Because it seems to me the Hack&#39;s little crowd of disciples is steadily growing smaller and smaller as people finally realise The Hack is nothing but mere flash with little or no substance.

The Hack was profoundly correct when he made this statement;

I&#39;m a poor little lamb who&#39;s gone astray. baahhh, baahhh, baahhh


Now finally the Hack and I have something we both can agree on&#33;
A brilliant response from the sheep-herder&#33;

Lacking substance, of course...nothing unusual about that.

Yes, I will often "take a look" at the latest fashions in bourgeois "science" but it generally doesn&#39;t take long to see what they&#39;re really getting at: they want to "justify" their own "natural superiority" and you wish to borrow their new clothing to "justify" "yours".

All I see is a bunch of pompous and arrogant...naked guys&#33; :lol:

Do I have "disciples"? Are they "redstarist scum"?

If the historical practices of Leninism (not to mention its theoretical shortcomings) have made it...um, difficult for you to successfully "recruit" here, is the credit mine?

Naturally, I&#39;d be very flattered by such a suggestion...but I&#39;d know it was not really true. There were people here before me, there are people here now, and there will be people here after me who will be more than competent to sink your extravagant vessels of baroque vanguardist fantasies.

And in the real world, the working class is uninterested in your views...the unkindest cut of all. They are not "in the market" for a new boss.

Considering your track record, I can&#39;t say I blame them.

http://www.sawu.org/redgreenleft/YaBBImages/smoking.gif
___________________________

U.S. GET OUT OF IRAQ NOW&#33;
___________________________

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.sawu.org/redstar2000)
A site about communist ideas

[Vinny Rafarino]

If the historical practices of Leninism (not to mention its theoretical shortcomings) have made it...um, difficult for you to successfully "recruit" here, is the credit mine

actually The Hack&#39;s relative ignorance to anything real and practical has made recruitment for the party quite easy in reality.

I suppose the Hack does indeed deserve a nice pat on the back and perhaps a little prize or something from the communist party.

That would be the Marxist/Leninist parties boys and girls, not this sham of political ineptness the Hack "calls" a "platform".


Three cheers for the Hack;

Hip-hip-hooray&#33;

Hip-hip-hooray&#33;

Hip-hip-hooray&#33;


Lacking substance, of course...nothing unusual about that.


I completely agree with the Hack here, there is definitely nothing unusual about any of his statements lacking substance&#33;


All I see is a bunch of pompous and arrogant...naked guys

I wonder how those "naked guys" make the Hack feel. We already know his "eclectic tastes" are a bit extreme.


And in the real world, the working class is uninterested in your views...the unkindest cut of all. They are not "in the market" for a new boss

Of course&#33; How could I have ever been so blind&#33; :lol:


:redstar2000:

[Saint-Just]

Originally posted by [email protected] 20 2003, 12:48 AM
He still has a few idiots who follow him like puppys, I wonder if he could make them fetch? They really are his "*****es".
Who are these Puppies. I know one. I think you told me before Enigma but I have forgotten.