In hopefully a final "somewhat" friendlier explanation ...

Kakki wrote: 
> You can't see what I meant and choose to personalize it.  

Are you suggesting I am obtuse?  JK!  Loving the reoccurrence of that word here these 
days and
trying to keep it rolling.  But seriously I do personalize it - you bet Kakki!  But no 
more than I
have seen you do here and take it so hard sometimes. Not that I am trying to make it 
personal, but
we BOTH do take it that way - LEO!

Kakki wrote:
I was trying to defend where I am coming from since Mary was questioning me. When you 
have posted
often about your motivations being love and peace and understanding, have I or others 
ever leapt
out at you with outrage and said "who are you to accuse us who disagree with you of 
being hateful,
warmonging peace-destroyers?" 

Seems I do recall a lecture to me about why that (peace,love & understanding) was such 
a pipe
dream - so it may not have been outrage but I felt it was condescending.  In fact 
without bringing
up old stuff, I was a little insulted at the way that was handled but I chose to let 
it go.  And I
don't even like that I brought it up now, except to say, from opposite sides we're not 
that
different.  Although I really think many things implied or inuendos are IMHO worse 
than speaking
directly and plainly, because I feel that particular method weakens trust. 

I said:
> > How dare anyone imply that I am anti-American.
> 
Kakki said:
> For the 50th or so time, I do not think you or anyone else here protesting a
> war are anti-American.  What I would consider anti-American sentiment would
> NOT be related Americans here dissenting war. 

How stupid of all of us, cause how many here now have felt that implication?  You 
probably don't
mean that, just as I don't remember directly calling you a war monger but maybe I did. 
 Again
innuendos and implications Kakki.  Your ire at our negativity of America's war 
position is
personalized in your repsonses.
This isn't to say tit for tat, but I see little understanding from your side til you 
are faced,
then I feel you become passive/aggresive in your rebuttals.  So while my style and 
emotion may not
suit you, yours irks me as well.  Again, I remember a time when you and I could agree 
to disagree,
but I am beginning to wonder if I was just dreaming that or maybe I was quieter and 
more
emotionally weak in those early days. I would like to think we could still do that, 
but there is
definitley an air of mistrust here these days.  And that is sad.  

Kakki:
 Now if Osama himself was on
> here ranting "death to America," I would not feel it was improper to make
> the charge against him. 

Nor would I.  But somehow, and again it would not be fair to discount our feelings 
either, many
here felt you made that implication or correlation. Some by the way, much smarter & 
better
educated than I! 

Now as I have tried not to be "too" inflamatory, let's hope we can move forward ... 
and ask
ourselves ...
What IS so funny bout peace, love and understanding? Doh!  Guzzi you just can't keep 
your mouth
shut - can you!?

In all seriousness ...

Peace,
Susan

NPIMH: Imagine all the people sharing all the oil you whooo ...
Yahoo! Shopping - Send Flowers for Valentine's Day
http://shopping.yahoo.com

Reply via email to