Piano World Home Page Forums Restricted and Archives The Coffee Room Best Interests

Susan Sontag is one of the worse traitors this country has ever produced. She went to Hanoi in support of the North Vietnamese during the Vietnam War and protested against the United States. Her comments about 9/11 were that the hijackers were brave men and it is U.S. Airmen that are cowards.

Here is her exact words to the New Yorker,

Susan Sontag, The New Yorker, September 24, 2001

The disconnect between last Tuesday's monstrous dose of reality and the self-righteous drivel and outright deceptions being peddled by public figures and TV commentators is startling, depressing. The voices licensed to follow the event seem to have joined together in a campaign to infantilize the public. Where is the acknowledgement that this was not a "cowardly" attack on "civilization" or "liberty" or "humanity" or "the free world" but an attack on the world's self-proclaimed super-power, undertaken as a consequence of specific American alliances and actions? How many citizens are aware of the ongoing American bombing of Iraq? And if the word "cowardly" is to be used, it might be more aptly applied to those who kill from beyond the range of retaliation, high in the sky, than to those willing to die themselves in order to kill others. In the matter of courage (a morally neutral virtue): whatever may be said of the perpetrators of Tuesday's slaughter, they were not cowards.

The reason I mention Susan Sontag, is to put some opinions here into perspective. pique admires Susan Sontag to the point of idolizing her. She tries to emulate her in her opinions and her writing.

lb

another voice from a distant planet.

i've never read a thing susan sontag has written, and i don't know a thing about her political views. i couldn't name a single one of her books or articles.

any resemblance between me and my writing and susan sontag and her writing is a complete coincidence.

and until i've read susan sontag, which i have no plans to do, i really can't comment on if i would agree with anything she has to say or not.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

ib's post is so typical of him: he belongs to the dirty pool school of politics. i watched him do the same thing a while back, trying to spread baseless rumors about the health and viability of the estonia piano company, intimating through rumor and innuendo that there was a problem. like whispering "fire" in a crowded theater. then people pick up on it. create false associations in people's minds, and then they'll pick it up and run with it.

what an *******.

It's not polite to personally attack people or their qualifications when one doesn't agree with what they've said. Not only does it make the person who is being 'attacked' feel bad it is casts the asperser in an unbecoming light.

tell you what, apple. if you, tomk, jolly, larry, jbryan, dt, ib, and everyone else here wants to unanimously agree right now that there can be no further personal attacks in the coffee room, and no one's credentials or ethics can be questioned based on what they said, and every one of you will abide by that and in future be perfectly polite, then i'll agree to that, too.



that means jolly cannot any longer post that he thinks i'm unethical (which he has done for a very long time).

ib cannot post that i'm the only excuse for abortion he's ever encountered.

tomk cannot call me a bitch.

etc. etc. etc.

it is ridiculous how all of you close ranks when someone makes a legitimate observation that criticizes one of you, but you don't make a peep about the level of gratuitous insults some of the rest of us have endured at your hands. insults that are far more outrageous.

your indignation is hypocritical. but i'm willing to make the bargain i stated above.

Pique

Baseless rumors, I think not. I have documentation to support those rumors. There was some dancing around by supporter, but the rumors were never proven wrong.

The problem with you pique is you let your emotions rule you. You take your stands based on your oposition, not the situation. Being so shallow wouldn't be so bad, but you have such a big mouth. Bad combination, very bad.

lb

see what i mean, apple? why don't you have a word with the man?

and take back all the bad things you've said too?

if everyone else will retract all the nasty things they've said, not only about me and to me, but about and to everyone else who has participated here--including bernard, benedict, ariel, john andrew, kathy, george, lazypianist (forgive me if i've forgotten anyone who has been personally attacked in the coffee room)--if they will retract every meanspirited, vicious, nasty thing they've ever said, and sincerely apologize--all of you--then yes, i'll retract anything i've said that has offended anyone.

Pique

You have never offended me, in fact you have provided a lot of entertainment.

But if it will help, I'm sorry I find you such a disgusting human being.

There, is that better?

lb

Pique,

What I objected to is very clear cut and unmistakable. Calling into question a person's professional ethics or competence should not be tolerated and I will agree to that. In that vein, what Jolly posted above is clearly the same as what I have been talking about and should not be tolerated.

"Personal attacks", on the other hand, are not always so clear cut. There have been a number of times when members have been accused of personal attacks when there was little more than disagreement. I am not prepared to go into muzzling people when they are expressing their disagreement in perhaps a disagreeable manner. I try not to engage in it but I am not particularly offended by it. We do not need to put the manners police on Larry or kathyk or any of the others who tend to get a little sarcastic, snide, and yes at times, downright insulting. But going into a person's professional ethics is not any of this.

In short, I will agree to your proposition with regard to the matter I have been addressing with you. Let's not get into policing people's manners however. That will end up going no where.

On the matter of hypocrisy, I find it ironic that the very people who are constantly harping on the congeniality of others are the ones who can be the nastiest themselves. I suppose it would grate on me less if they did not moan about it so much.

I would have to make an exception for this.

maybe i decided if i'm going to participate here i should play by the same rules everyone else is playing by, otherwise i am at a distinct disadvantage.

i don't find anything i have ever written here nearly so offensive as some of the things that have been said here about me, and others here. i would not stoop that low.

people's professional credentials have been called into question here in the past, including my own. why that should all of a sudden be so verboten is a bit of a mystery.

i do note the singular lack of protest, however, against those who are being gratuitously nasty towards me. the silence is rather deafening, especially considering how loudly and how much bandwith you've expended defending one of your own against what was really not such a big deal.

you know, i really don't like having conversations here after all, i've decided. there are much better uses i can put my energies towards. the benefits are definitely outweighed by the negatives at this point. i've got better things to do.

have fun. y'all.

And I have apologized for it, on numerous occasions and let me apologize again: I am contrite. (Besides I thought you forgave me and said we were, "friends.")

On the other hand I say LOTS of really nice and sweet thing about you--all forgotten.

(In the middle all this [a post or two up] I STOPPED talking abortion and just gratitiously said something nice to kathy--no need--just being nice. When was the last time anybody on the left ever did something nice--just nice?)

You say: and it's business as usual, just meanness, meanness, meanness.

You think I don't have feelings, too?

As far as I know, only on the Piano Forum.

tom,
i apologized. as so many of you here like to say, don't dish it out if you can't take it. you can quit beating up on gay people, some of whom hang out here, for starters.

as for the nice things you say to me, i can never tell when you are going to just turn around and negate them all by being nasty again. it does have a way of inhibiting trust.

Just to try to put this topic back on track (God knows, Picque can have a sharp toungue when she's provoked, but in my observation, it takes quite a lot of provocation and some of you seem to revel in doing just that. Picque you really shouldn't waste your breath on defending yourself - this Susan Sontag thing and your lack of capital letters takes the cake!), may I remind you that one of our most mild-mannered and admired forum members (I remember someone once tagging Lucy as one of the few forumites that everyone likes) expressed her share of indignation over John's initial responses to this thread. John, I like you and respect you as a physician, but your remarks here have been very patronizing. When you get Lucy's dander up, IMO it's time for a little introspection. I think you really owe us women a bit more credit for understanding and being on top of OB/Gyn issues than you acknowledge - after all, how many visits have you had with your Ob/Gyn over the years?

An interesting aside. I remember awhile back there was a women's movement that was decrying the lack of research done on women's cancers relative to the amount of money poured into that done on men's cancers. Isn't amazing now that some right wing, champion of anti-abortionists in Kansas is fighting for research on this narrow little issue. What would we poor, dumb, weak little women do without such champions!

Can't wait!

Dear pique,

Fine.

As to gays, I tease them like I would anyone else--NO EXCEPTIONS I am probably the most egalitarian person on the Forum--And READ what I way about them, Bernard may not always understand--but is it the gays I'm really making fun of?

We're not always going to agree on politics--that's life, nothing personal when I argue with you or you argue with me.

On the other hand, personally, I don't treat you as some cardboard cutout liberal poster. Sometimes I'm mad at you, sometimes I love you, sometimes I hate you, sometimes you are a genius and sometimes, not so genius. Sometimes I tease you.

I treat you like a friend who's opinion I respect, but maybe not always agree with. I don't patronize you; say something stupid--I'll be all over you as I know you'd be on me if I said something stupid.

Want me to be a butt kisser, I can do that, too. More fun the way we have it, don't you think?

Your friend,

Tom

That's the only reason we put up with you!

All right kathyk, now I am going to call you on this one too. What exactly "provoked" Pique to say this:


Your back handed way of justifying this by saying she was "provoked" will not wash. There was nothing that came before this that should have "provoked" this.