Welcome to Hookah Forum

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

iron molly black

Vested Members
  • Content count

    161
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About iron molly black

  • Rank
    Emir - Of the Emerald Argileh

Contact Methods

  • ICQ 0

Profile Information

  • Gender Female
  • Location CT
  1. Mya Bambino New Hose Adapter

    QUOTE (deathbyfryingpan @ Jun 11 2008, 06:22 PM) Ah, i just re-sealed it up with teflon tape. I have it back to normal now with the one hose, I'm just gonna make due and use the spare hose and hose adapter on any other hookah we buy. Thanks for the input guys Heh, was curious of how you were going to do this, as I have a Bambino, but now I know not to mess with mine...lol. Learn from someone else's mistake I guess!
  2. Scorpion Tattoo Only For Scorpios?

    WOW, that's an awesome tarantula! I don't think the scorpion for a non-scorpio should be an issue. Like others have said, get what you want, just get a good artist.
  3. You Know What Really Grinds My Gears?

    QUOTE (.cOLt.45. @ Jun 11 2008, 01:32 PM) Lol you should post a video I should just take a picture of EVERY wreck for a year. THAT would be interesting! My neighbor (newish) called the town and asked if they were going to fix the road to take that curve out, and they just laughed hysterically at her. This town can hardly fix the potholes and plow, never mind reroute a whole section of road! It was a big deal when they put the guard rails in. Oh, I forgot to mention, the curve also has a slight grade to it...lol, just to add an extra degree of difficulty. And no streetlights, either.
  4. You Know What Really Grinds My Gears?

    QUOTE (ryno @ Jun 10 2008, 05:58 PM) QUOTE (iron molly black @ Jun 10 2008, 10:30 AM) QUOTE (Snoopy1966 @ Jun 10 2008, 08:18 AM) I have seen the driving comments, but here in Appleton I have never seen such bad drivers. They have no concept of Merge, what the fast lane is for or to move out of you way when they are in the fast lane and they going 60 in a 65... Then in winter they still drive fast and end up in the ditch. Yeah dude, you have 4 wheel drive, but that does help you stop better. wtf I'm with you on the 4WD thing. It does not work on ICE. Idiots. Nothing worse than having an out of control, giant SUV sliding at you at 60 mph on the ice. +1 to that. 4wd does not mean you can go as fast as you want on snow and ice. When I was 16 I put my mom's blazer in the ditch. It had just started snowing and I didnt bother with the 4wd, and went through a corner, and my shitty abs brakes locked up going 10 mph and I ended up partway in the ditch. While waiting for a tow, 3 suvs damn neat hit me, all stopped and said "wow that was close and i even have it in 4wd!" People just drive too fast for conditions and don't pay attention to road signs. I live right after a very, very bad "S" curve, a tight 90 degrees on each side. In the winter, we constantly hear a loud "bang", and look out, sure enough, someone has wracked their car into the guard rails. They don't seem to believe the signs. It was worse before they put up the rails, people ended up in the swamp. The lady that lives directly across from it has stopped calling the cops, because people have YELLED at her for doing it, they don't want an accident on their record. And that was when people were IN the swamp. Last year, two people managed to T-bone each other around the curve (it's narrow), in the fog. If people would just SLOW DOWN. I hear squealing tires around that damn curve every night.
  5. You Know What Really Grinds My Gears?

    QUOTE (Dom @ Jun 10 2008, 06:33 PM) QUOTE (iron molly black @ Jun 10 2008, 09:31 AM) QUOTE (Dom @ Jun 9 2008, 08:55 PM) QUOTE (Canon @ Jun 8 2008, 05:06 PM) people who wear clothes with the tags and stickers still on them. i've been saying that for years! you know, the first person to do that was some female celebrity in like the 1920's or 30's. i forget the name, but i remember my mother telling me about that many years ago. the woman accidentally left the price tag on her brand new hat and when she went out and the public saw it and took pictures, they asked her why she had done it. she was embarrassed at first, but then, just like any quick-witted individual, she said that it was the new style. of course, since she was a celeb, everyone believed it and women started doing that. what goes around comes around. haha lol that gavem me a chuckle for sure. Minnie Pearl was actually popular in the 70's on the television show Hee Haw. I remember her, and I'm old, but I ain't THAT old! She was a comedienne, and the price tag on her hat was her signature. She also used to yell HOWW-DEEEEEEEEE to the audience. wow, i wasn't even close. show's how great my memory is. lol It's OK, you just almost made me snarf my coffee on that one...lol. I remember my parents turning on Hee Haw on Sundays when I was little. If it was back in the '30's, I would be like 85 years old!
  6. You Know What Really Grinds My Gears?

    QUOTE (Snoopy1966 @ Jun 10 2008, 08:18 AM) I have seen the driving comments, but here in Appleton I have never seen such bad drivers. They have no concept of Merge, what the fast lane is for or to move out of you way when they are in the fast lane and they going 60 in a 65... Then in winter they still drive fast and end up in the ditch. Yeah dude, you have 4 wheel drive, but that does help you stop better. wtf I'm with you on the 4WD thing. It does not work on ICE. Idiots. Nothing worse than having an out of control, giant SUV sliding at you at 60 mph on the ice.
  7. You Know What Really Grinds My Gears?

    QUOTE (Dom @ Jun 9 2008, 08:55 PM) QUOTE (Canon @ Jun 8 2008, 05:06 PM) people who wear clothes with the tags and stickers still on them. i've been saying that for years! you know, the first person to do that was some female celebrity in like the 1920's or 30's. i forget the name, but i remember my mother telling me about that many years ago. the woman accidentally left the price tag on her brand new hat and when she went out and the public saw it and took pictures, they asked her why she had done it. she was embarrassed at first, but then, just like any quick-witted individual, she said that it was the new style. of course, since she was a celeb, everyone believed it and women started doing that. what goes around comes around. haha lol that gavem me a chuckle for sure. Minnie Pearl was actually popular in the 70's on the television show Hee Haw. I remember her, and I'm old, but I ain't THAT old! She was a comedienne, and the price tag on her hat was her signature. She also used to yell HOWW-DEEEEEEEEE to the audience.
  8. When Does One Forgo Pleasures In Life?

    We are in some very uncertain times, and things, unfortunately, don't look to be getting much better. My attitude is that if a purchase is going to give me a lot of enjoyment for the money, and the money is not THAT much, that I will sacrifice somewhere else to make up for it. Let's say to purchase a hookah or something like that. As far as education and what career to go into, that is a tough one. I will say if I had to do it over again, I would have gone into a trade (I have a Masters degree). It's pretty hard to export a trade overseas, and even though some trades depend on construction, existing systems need to be maintained. Just my two cents and hindsight. Maybe something you could do now relatively quickly, and then pursue a college degree later. I think things like heating and air conditioning don't take very long, and are in demand. Electrician pays more, and then you can go electrical engineering from there. Even if things go solar or alternative energy, they still need wiring. I think there will always be jobs in that field. I am very worried about the big crash that may possibly be coming our way, things are not looking good. Next year will probably be a veggie garden, and I am thinking about brushing up on my gun skills, and possibly hunting some deer. Not something I particularly like to do, but I figure I should know how and it is due to needing the food, not for sport. Am looking into some solar panels as well, and possibly a wood stove. The more I can do "off the grid" the better. BTW Blackadder, I love your work.
  9. You Know What Really Grinds My Gears?

    QUOTE (Canon @ Jun 8 2008, 04:06 PM) people that get stuff stuck under their skin to make it pop out OK, I've seen lots of body mods, but pics please? My driving pet peeves: 1. People who just HAVE to pass you, and then SLOW DOWN. 2. People who STOP on an entrance ramp before merging into traffic moving at 65 mph, when there is NO STOP SIGN. I will admit, though, that with my car, I kind of have fun going from 0 to 65 like that. But it messes with everyone else on the ramp. 3. People who drive down the breakdown lane in stopped traffic. What, are you SPECIAL? I love it when there is a cop waiting at the end. 4. Lane drifters. Pick a lane, any lane, please? 5. People who block the passing lane on a two-lane highway, going the same speed as the car next to them (which is generally at or under the speed limit). Instant traffic jam. 6. The idiot on 1-84 in New York State last summer, doing 40 mph in the right lane, at night, in the rain, in a black car, with no running lights. I almost hit him, and we both almost got hit by a semi doing 70 mph. Drive in the breakdown lane you MORON! I do a lot of long-distance driving, so I could probably continue the list on... *sigh* And for the record, I drive an Acura, which is a glorified Honda, and I love it because it is great fun to drive. It is an RSX Type-S. The gas mileage is pretty good, too, if I drive it mildly, which is hard to do, but I try... Another pet peeve of mine, and this may cause some controversy with some, we'll see, is the "child-friendlying" of everything. I don't like it. We see it at Ren Faire a lot. Can't have that act, it's not child friendly. Don't want to have beer, not child-friendly. Have to make allowances for people to bring children to places. Have to have screaming children in nice restaurants. Don't get me wrong, I don't hate children, I just find that people feel the need to take them EVERYWHERE lately. Infants and small children in evening R-rated movies tick me off. I want to HEAR the movie, thank you. Growing up, there were events and places that my parents went to, that were for ADULTS, and children just didn't go. And speaking of that, I think that we are increasingly doing teens a disservice by expecting less and less of them, as far as responsibility and independence. I think the "age of childhood" is expanding, and I don't think it's a good thing.
  10. Is The Cold War Over?

    Yes, the Cold War is over. It's no longer about the two major "superpowers", USSR and US, glaring at each other, pointing nuclear weapons at each other, and stockpiling and escalating the arms race. It's a whole new game now.
  11. Iraq Vs. Vietnam

    QUOTE (Bulldog_916 @ Jun 4 2008, 07:18 PM) I dont see any similarities either. The Cold War was over when we started this one. I've also heard from many sources that Saddam Hussein's reasoning behind not denying he had WMD was because if he acknowledged he destroyed them, it would have made his country vulnerable to Iranian attack. That explanation makes sense. Would you want your powerful enemy next door to know you have no weapons that would be useful against him? I see Iraq as a quagmire the same way as I see Vietnam as being a quagmire. This one just has fewer military deaths. I can agree with you on the quagmire. Both are that. Both cases it is difficult to determine friends from enemies for our troops. Both difficult to extricate ourselves from. Support will/did wane from both as time goes on. Vietnam, though, did ostensibly have a more clear goal, to rid South Vietnam of the communist North Vietnamese. Whether that was right or wrong, and what other things were guiding that, and whether it was wise of the U.S. to attempt it, is another matter. A lot of sources think we actually COULD have won, if we had stuck with it. But without the support of the populace, it wasn't happening. The North Koreans were overjoyed about the anti-war movement, it was just what they wished for in their wildest dreams. I wonder if that war were played out today, how it would turn out, assuming that we would even get into it in the first place (most likely we wouldn't). I guess what I'm saying to sum up is the lesson from Vietnam is that if you are going to fight a war, go in and FIGHT the darn thing, and then get out before support goes down the tubes. The lesson the US government learned was to not give the press unlimited and uncensored access to the military. The lesson the public should have learned is to be skeptical of what you hear from both the press AND the military/government. The war in Iraq started with a bang, and now it's sort of a fizzle. Public support is waning. We'll see what happens...
  12. Any Artists Out There?

    Try writing down/sketching your dreams right when you wake up and try painting one of those. I don't know if you have vivid dreams and stuff, I know some of mine would make really funky paintings...
  13. Iraq Vs. Vietnam

    And so you can see what I mean, here's a link to a YouTube vid of a CBS news report. One of the positve-slant ones. They lost a LOT of cameramen back then. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDy0Z3HSkTE
  14. Iraq Vs. Vietnam

    QUOTE (Johnny_D @ Jun 4 2008, 08:44 AM) QUOTE (iron molly black @ Jun 4 2008, 03:12 PM) Vietnam was the first "TV War" and I remember it well. The government did not have as much control over the media coverage back then that it does now. Molly can you expand on that?[1] The only reason I ask is that I would have expected it to be quite the opposite.... I remember my first real TV War being Gulf War#1 circ 1990. It was amazing. What with CNN and the like... CNN Reports BEFORE it happens I swear to god. So I'm interested as to how/why they had more control now than back then? JD [1] This is no way trying to slam IMB, I am genuinlly interested in her thoughts. No slam taken. VERY LONG post follows. From The Media and Vietnam by Erin Laughlin. Backs up my point without me researching/writing it out myself. QUOTE Why Television? By the mid-1960's, television was considered to be the most important source of news for the American public, and, possibly, the most powerful influence on public opinion itself. Throughout the Korean War, the television audience remained small. In 1950, only 9 percent of homes owned a television. By 1966, this figure rose to 93 percent (Bonior, Champlin, Kolly, 1984, p.18). As televisions became more popular in the home, more Americans began to get their news from television than from any other source. A series of surveys conducted by the Roper Organization for the Television Information Office from 1964 until 1972 demonstrates the growing power of television. With multiple answers allowed, respondents were asked from which medium they "got most of their news". In 1964, 58 percent said television; 56 percent, newspapers; 26 percent, radio; and 8 percent, magazines. By 1972, 64 percent said television while the number of respondents who primarily relied on newspapers dropped to 50 percent (Hallin, 1986, p.106). Thus, as the Vietnam War dragged on, more and more Americans turned to television as their primary source for news. While a large audience is crucial in influencing public opinion, credibility is a much more significant factor. The Roper surveys mentioned above also asked respondents which medium they would trust if the media gave conflicting accounts of a story. In 1972, 48 percent said television while only 21 percent said newspapers (Hallin, 1986, p.106). Television is "consistently evaluated as more attention-grabbing, interesting, personally relevant, emotionally involving, and surprising"(Neuman, Just, Crigler, 1992, p.56) because of two elements: visuals and personality. The visual element of television allows viewers to feel as if they are part of the action. When news programs aired images of battles and death, Americans at home felt as if they too were in the jungles of Vietnam. Additionally, intense visuals helped explain the complex nature of war to Americans who could not understand the military's technical language. Anchors and reporters quickly became trusted, household names because the public turned to them every night for the day's information; Walter Cronkite was even referred to as the "most trusted man in America" throughout the war (Hallin, 1986, p.106). This trust allowed the opinions and biases of television news personalities to have some influence on the way in which many Americans viewed the war. Thus, Americans increasingly depended on television for images and accurate accounts of the Vietnam War; what they were watching, however, were edited, thirty-minute versions of an extremely complex war. Early Coverage The television news industry is a business with a profit motive before it is a public service; consequently, producers and reporters attempt to make the news more entertaining by airing stories that involve conflict, human impact, or morality. Television news did not find material that was dramatic enough until the number of American troops was raised to 175, 000 in July 1965 (Hallin, 1986, p.115). Combat, interviews with American soldiers, and helicopter scenes all provided the television news industry with the drama that it required. The networks set up permanent bureaus in Saigon and sent hundred of correspondents there throughout the war. From 1965 through the Tet Offensive in 1968, 86 percent of the CBS and NBC nightly news programs covered the war, focusing mostly on ground and air combat (Bonior, Champlin, Kolly, 1984, p.4). This coverage was generally very supportive of U.S involvement in the war and of the soldier himself until 1967. The media labeled the conflict as a "good guys shooting Reds" story so that it could fit into the ongoing saga of the Cold War (Wyatt, 1995, p.81). As part of the human impact frame, network correspondents relied on American soldiers for their most important sources. During this early part of the war, the soldier was portrayed as a hero. One example is a striking story reported by TV correspondent Dean Brelis. As he was having his leg amputated, Marine colonel Michael Yunck said: "I said hell, they can't be right around in there. So I didn't call bombs and napalm on these people. But that's where they were. I'm sure that's where they were. God damn it. I hate to put napalm on these women and children. I just didn't do it. I said, they can't be there." (Bonior, Champlin, Kolly, 1984, p.13-14) Thus, the anti-communism frame significantly contributed to the positive coverage that vilified the war, not the soldier (Bonior, Champlin, and Kolly, 1984, p.13). The Turning Point By the fall of 1967, 90 percent of the evening news was devoted to the war and roughly 50 million people watched television news each night (Bonior, Champlin, Kolly, 1984, p.4-5). Up until this time, the war had strong support from the media, the public, and Congress. The military continuously reported that the U.S was making encouraging progress. Gradually, however, support for the war began to decrease. Because no military censorship was established, journalists could follow the military into combat and report their observations without formal censorship. Thus, as journalists saw more grisly combat, they presented the public with more graphic images. Also, for the first time, interviewed soldiers expressed their frustration with the progress of the war. Support began to decrease in the fall of 1967, but the major turning point in television's coverage of the war occurred during the Tet Offensive in late January 1968. Though North Vietnamese soldiers swept through more than one hundred Southern Vietnamese cities, Tet was actually a U.S victory because the North suffered enormous casualties. Television, however, portrayed the attack as a brutal defeat for the U.S; the media, not the military, confirmed the growing perception that the U.S was unable to win the war. The percent of television stories in which journalists editorialized news jumped from 5.9 percent before Tet to 20 percent in the two months after (Hallin, 1986, p.170). The most significant statement came from the "most trusted man in America", Walter Cronkite. In a CBS special, Cronkite concluded, 'To say that we are closer to victory today is to believe, in the face of the evidence, the optimists who have been wrong in the past.to say that we are mired in a bloody stalemate seems the only realistic, yet unsatisfactory conclusion" (Hallin, 1986, p.170). After the Tet Offensive and Cronkite's statement, coverage of American involvement in the war became predominantly negative. Before Tet, journalists described 62 percent of their stories as victories for the United States, 28 percent as defeats, and 2 percent as inconclusive. After Tet, 44 percent of the battles were deemed victories, 32 percent defeats, and 24 percent inconclusive (Hallin, 1986, p.161-162). Combat scenes were also more graphic. Films of civilian casualties increased from a pre-Tet average of 0.85 times per week to an average of 3.9 times per week. Films of military casualties also jumped from 2.4 to 6.8 times per week (Hallin, 1986, p.171). The most negative change in coverage was the portrayal of the U.S troops. Before the Tet Offensive, there were four television stories devoted entirely to the positive morale of the troops and zero negative stories. After Tet, two and a half stories mentioned positive morale while the number of negative morale stories increased to fourteen and a half (Hallin, 1986, p.180). Most of these negative references included increasing drug use, racial conflict, and disobedience among the U.S soldiers. Television coverage of the massacre at My Lai was perhaps the most damaging image for the U.S soldier's reputation. Though initial reports stated that the operation killed 100 enemy soldiers in March 1968, it was revealed a year later that First Lt. William Calley and his taskforce had killed up to 350 South Vietnamese civilians (Hammond, 1998, p.192). The massacre and Lt. Calley's trial became one of the war's leading stories. Moreover, it introduced the subject of American war crimes into television's remaining coverage of the war. Withdrawal from Vietnam The intensely negative coverage of the war influenced both politicians and the public. Americans depended on television to see and understand the war, but the death and destruction they saw appeared as irrational killing when prospects for the war became increasingly negative. Therefore, the majority of Americans withdrew their support for the war after the Tet Offensive. War coverage declined from 90 percent of all newscasts to 61 percent from Richard Nixon's election through February 1969 (Bonior, Champlin, Kolly, 1984, p.7). Though the media had been covering the anti-war movement before 1968, it now overshadowed the war itself. Draft-card burning and demonstrations provided television with fresher conflict, human impact, and moral issues. With the massive loss of public support for the war, politicians initiated withdrawal policies. Television no longer focused on combat, but on the political process. From 1965 to 1969, the percentage of combat stories had been 48 percent; from 1970 until the end of U.S involvement, only 13 percent of news stores involved soldiers in combat (Bonior, Champlin, Kolly, 1984, p.8). Thus, Bonior, Champlin, and Kolly (1984, p.16) best sum up the damage done to the Vietnam veteran's image: In the rush to declare the Vietnam War over through stories on Vietnamization and the Paris Peace Talks, in the rush to judgment without second thought on Tet, in the rush to avoid controversy at any cost, the U.S public was left with one climactic image of their soldiers in Vietnam-losing the Tet Offensive while massacring civilians at My Lai.
  15. Iraq Vs. Vietnam

    *sigh* Well, as I see it, there are both differences and similarities between the two wars. Let's face it, we are a much different country than we were back then. I will not get into the reasons for starting either war, because there are many, and a lot of them are below the surface of the thing, as always. This time around, at least there is support for our troops, which is the least we can do, as they are just doing their jobs. Vietnam was the first "TV War" and I remember it well. The government did not have as much control over the media coverage back then that it does now. Anyone that was around back then and saw the news every night knows what I'm talking about. I think that had a big influence over how the war was perceived by the American people. I find that to be a really interesting part of how the war played out. The footage of this war is very, very tame compared to what was broadcast during the Vietnam conflict.