From: gln@cs.arizona.edu (Gary L. Newell)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.celtic
Subject: Re: My Ugly American post for the year....
Date: 6 Oct 92 19:14:35 GMT
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson

In article <1992Oct6.164246.2471@philmtl.philips.ca>, ray@philmtl.philips.ca (Ray Dunn) writes:
> > Surely I could care less. Go to another board? Because you don't like what I
> >have to say? My my - for such a large group of enlightened souls who have
> >risen above the physical world of the rest of us, you folks sure don't care 
> >hearing opposing views do you? Hypocrites...
> 
> He certainly manages to set us up so he can fire off this diatribe
> with monotonous regularity.

Almost as regular as the 2-3 US-bashing episodes we have forced upon us from
folks like you - can pretty much set your clock by em - can't wait for
the world-cup related bashing that should be coming hot and heavy in
the not so distant future... it amazes me that anyone can sit back and read 
rubbish about how Celtic culture is hurting due to the US and then see
fit to attack me - but this is s.c.c.....

> It has to be the fourth or fifth time I've seen similar comments from him
> in this and other groups over the years, and it's just as bogus this time
> as it always is.

 Yes - I regularly get into it in r.s.bb.pro over the issue of racism. 
Almost as regularly as US-bashing makes the rounds here, some bozo will
attempt to claim that "blacks are better at basketball due to genetic
differences" - much like the American bashing of s.c.c it quickly
deteriorates to simple bias where the implication is that blacks
are better atheletes but whites are smarter - I find that the normal
bashing in s.c.c tends to go the same way with outrageous claims and
implications usually coming from British sites. Let's see, first it was
that the British are beyond flag-waiving, nationalism (but the Falklands
proved that premise to be a load of crap) then it was that the US was 
responsible for the downfall of small cultures around the world including
Celtic culture (one doesn't need a particularly good history book to
see where the finger of blame should be pointed when the topic of the
fall of celtic culture comes up - and it isn't at the US) - so, I guess
you're right - I see hidden agendas and like to see how far people are
willing to go with a pseudo-belief that actually disguises their own 
prejudice.... glad to be of service Ray...

> He posts an intentionally annoying article, maliciously provocative, gives

No offense but what exactly do you think Matthew's article and one or two
others were to many Americans? I'd certainly say that one isn't going
too far to call it "intentionally annoying", certainly "provocative" and
I would claim maliciously so, but those articles don't count right Ray?
Face it - if I had taken an extreme position you believed in we wouldn't
be hearing from you right now would we? We'll only hear from the likes
of you when someone strongly stands up for something you don't like - then
and only then does it become a "diatribe" filled with "intentionally
annoying" "crap".

> it a Subject that ensures he gets everyone's attention and makes them rise
> to the bait, manipulates the discussion, and then produces this

 Geez - if I'm this good I better get on the ticket for a run for the senate.
I simply played the extreme right wing response (and frankly I was probably
relatively mild in my rhetoric - I'd hate to see the likes of say
Rush Limbaugh respond to some of the outrageous remarks that were made
here about the US and Americans in general. That doesn't force anyone to
"rise to the bait". It might bother you that it was then that most of the
arguments that had been directed at americans fell apart at the seams but
I certainly didn't force anyone to blame Coca Cola or bikini-clad blondes
for the ills of the world. As for "manipulating" the discussion - I believe 
that is what one does when arguing a point - no?

> What a scam!  And he has the nerve to call _us_ hypocrits!

 Sure do - in fact, I have long felt that this group has the largest
collection of pompous self-righteous individuals on the net. 
It also, of course has
a large group of people who seem to really care about issues and don't
do things like scream that topics related to NI are out of place here but
somehow US-bashing is legitimate. What angers you, I believe, is that I
am willing to question views that you feel strongly about. I for one
do not believe that s.c.c or any of its readers benefits from a one-sided
discussion about the horrors of the US - an opposing view to those
spouted by a handful of UK posters seems to be in order if anyone is to
truly decide upon the merits of the argument... wouldn't you agree?

> Let's try it again, eh?  Everybody, all together now, one, two, three:
> "Piss off Gary."

 It is difficult to piss me off Ray. Huh?    OH .... I see you meant for
me to piss off? Oh - I get it.... sorry.... I thought you were trying
to give orders....


			gln