C James

I don't know how you do it. I've tried editing and I'm not good at it, and let me say right off, I feel that editing is harder than writing. Typing with Talons would be tricky... And speaking of putting in some hours, I get nothing done on LTMP 16 yesterday, so time for me to go remedy that.

Awww, Kevin, I know you can't mean me; I've NEVER called anyone a postwhore... Postaholic, yes, but never a postwhore!

Ahhhh, 6 to 6, I feel that my lurkish nature is about to be confirmed!

Hrmmm, I do know that until the 70's, it was quite common in US Schools to try and "re-train" left-handed to be right-handed. It was believed, at the time, that being left-handed was somehow wrong, in large part due to "societal norms". Hrmmm, now why does that argument sound so familiar?

Well, I do admit that The Scar and Dimitri have a few little unlikable aspects (like Dimitri bringing down an airliner). But we don't know why they want nukes... Maybe, like Graeme said, they want to help the environment?

Typo fixed! Thanks!!!! (whew!) Hrmmm, I see some wonderful predictions from you and others in this thread, (and some, though I won't say which, are spot-on) but I do notice one recurring and puzzling theme; people seem to be assuming that The Scar and Dimitri are bad guys. While I do grant that they aren't perfect, don't they come across as nice, lovable characters? I tried a few, well, one, "cock-chasing", the only one I could think of, but it didn't seem to fit, especially as they had used the word before. I also needed to make Jon's statement about "keeping them apart" as something Chase would misunderstand. If they'd used more of a slur, it would have not been so much of a misunderstanding. In other words, I cleverly wrote myself into a corner. I have a knack for doing that... probably the worst case so far was back in FTL: After the stake-out, when Eric (not the same Eric as in LTMP, LoL) needed to steal the Charger, I ran into a huge problem; I'd previously mentioned (in a very early chapter) that the car had an alarm, and I couldn't initially think of a way that Eric could purloin the key AND an alarm fob. I think I spent more time figuring a way out of that box than in any other I've written myself into. That's what I was wondering, back before the first mention of "promiscuous". I did look for another word, but couldn't find one. That by no means indicates there isn't one; wording is definitly NOT my strong suit! I'll never be an eloquent writer, I'm more of a storyteller, i think. And BTW, a shout-out to Ishewar; he (I think) noticed that first mention, and wondered why. Now we know. Good catch, Ishewar!

Ahhem! First off, THANK YOU for calling me a lurker! Secondly, I've read some of your writing, and I like it. Thirdly (didn't think i could count this high, now did ya?) the anthology isn't about "going up against". I remember my first attempt at putting a story online; the 2006 summer anthology, with my story "No Shirt? No Problem!" I was VERY nervous, and had I thought it was some kind of competition, I'd have never entered. Come to think of it, that's true of the other anthologies since, including this one! Come on and join in, it's fun!!! CJ

I am disappointed that you think so. It implies, that you are simply dismissing everyone who is not your opinion, has a different set of rules, or a different cultural background. That is a rather gross mischaracterization, to put it mildly. I am dismissing the so-called "rights" of a tyrannical dictatorship, just as I dismiss the "rights" of, say, a serial killer to practice what he does. Believe me, i am as offended by this ahmadineshit as you are. I am in no way trying to defend any crimes that he or his mediavel fundamentalist friends are commiting. I am nonetheless trying to point out, why i think your obviously prefered politics are wrong and will cause more harm than good to everybody. I've said at least once, earlier in this thread, that I am opposed to a US invasion of Iran, yet that bumper sticker you linked to clearly indicates the opposite. It would be preposterous for me to support such a move; Looked at solely as a matter of practicality, the US could not invade and occupy Iran; we don't have the uncommitted forces to do so. (for every deployed soldier, you need two on rest and retraining). This would be true even without Iraq; Iran is a far larger country in both population and area. And yes, I was preoccupied with other things in the 70;s too, like Kindergarten, which for some reason dimmed my political awareness at that time. I'm with Bondwriter on this one; vote for whom you believe is best able to handle the situation (though it is quite possible that my opinion differs from his as to whom). Old Bob has a good point on the practical limitations of what can be done, and also about giving the mouthpiece (I'm too lazy to look up the spelling of his name) a podium at Columbia university. As to the latter, I have very mixed feelings. One one hand, I'm disgusted. On the other, it allowed the lunatic the opportunity to further expose himself for what he is, including that "we have no homosexuals in Iran" line, bringing needed public awareness to the issue. I'd like to clarify my remarks here: I am condemning the regime in Iran, not Iranians in general, nor any religion. My sole point was, as I've said, to decry what that regime is doing.

Ouch... Joe, that's horrible. I hope you are doing better soon.

They might have other reasons, or reasons in addition to that, but all I can say is, they snuck them out. And of course I'd never use blackmail, and I'm a lurker, and never use cliffhanger. (and thank you, I'll be quoting you often.) Aww, Emoe, surely you don't doubt me too? Good point!!! Dimitri was just trying to keep Vladimir occupied, but yes, you're quite right (and my apologies to Bondwriter) it could be that they both are mezmerized by the hoppers. Actually, so was I, the first time I saw them in the wild.

Thanks Steve! I can't say anything about the future, but I will mention one scene that's in this chapter; Remember how Jon and Eric left the party with the girls? Hi Jack! I can't really comment on any of that, so therefor I'm not typing this sentence. bTW, you're right about how the gossip trade works, though. Cliffhanger? Cliffhanger? What cliffhanger? Now, if I was really inclined to do a cliffhanger, think what I could have done with Eric's escapades, drunk and leaning between the two balconies, 20 stories up? Remember, he did slip... the chapter could have ended something like this; Eric, clutching at the rail to steady himself as he struggled to extend the mirror, stretched further out over the abyss. Losing his grip, Eric pitched headlong over the rail, Jpn's frantic grab coming just a split-second too late. Racing to the rail, Jon, saw his brother, one last and final time, clinging by one hand to the rail of the opposite balcony, dangling over twenty stories of nothingness, as the rail slowly pulled free from the wall... See what a cliffhanger that could have been? But fortunately, I never use cliffhangers... As Brandon said to him, "Remind me to never piss you off..." He does have a way of getting hos own back, doesn't he? Thanks Camy! Well, as Eric was thinking while chase had the drum, perhaps now would not be the most auspicious of occasions to inform them of the fact. Thanks Woody! this scene was what I had in mind when I plotted out the story years ago, and it's a big part of why Chase is the drummer. ROFL!!! Graeme, that was brilliant!

IMHO, yes, "popular fiction" has an influence on many, an influence I often decry. So many times I've heard someone state something as a historical fact, and then cite a movie or TV show when questioned on said fact's veracity. This drives me up the wall.

ERk, yes, in a few days in fact... But that shouldn't add more than 30 posts to my total.

Thank you Susan! This was my favorite chapter of those posted so far. What we'd seen of the guys so far had been pretty tame, so in 11 we got a peek at what they're like when they let loose. As Chase said, they're more prone to doing things like that while on tour. It's Vladimir (the engineer) who has the interest in Kangaroos, but you're right. I like to try and give my characters depth, and that includes a few quirks. Dimitri, The Scar, and Vladimir might not be perfect goody-two-shoes types, but they do have their little quirks, like Dimitri's fear of heights. Expect to see more Kangaroos. You may be right about the drunken conversations, but I tried it using more "natural language" and deleted it. To me, it detracted a little, becuase I needed to keep the dialog in that section very brief. We'll find out a bit more regarding the fan demographics in 12, but you are correct; were they to be outed now, it would not be a good thing. I blame Shadowgod. Thanks Kevin!!! I may not have written the part about Chase's intial reaction clearly enough; he was a little miffed at the meddling, just enough to go mess with them a little (not the drum). It was Jon's remark about promiscuity, and keeping them apart, that set Chase off. Remember though, Jon was trying to screen for possible "one night stands", and Jon had just phoned to get Chase to help ditch the girls after another of his own. Of course I deny it; I never use cliffhangers! Will Jon and Eric end up singing soprano? Oh, BTW, notice who it was who finally pushed Brandon and Chase together, with his talk to Brandon and the bottle of bubbly? :jerry: :jerry:

Welcome to our forum, WriteInCode! And thank you!!! Sorry about that; it's fixed now! Chase put his drumming talents to very good use. Yep, Jon thinking Brandon was promiscious, especially after his one-night-stand with two girls, was not designed to please Chase. LoL BTW, one of the reasons that part was in there is exactly what you pointed out; the stereotype. Thanks! Hi Ieshwar!!! I do hope that having them kiss in the 11th chapter wasn't too fast... You were indeed very, very close (Or right) on a lot of things! However, Ieshwar, as for them being outed, I'm afraid you are wrong with your blame there; it's not my fault and I can prove it! Their outing is a bad thing, right? And now what is our #1 (and only) forum rule? "All bad things are Shadowgod's fault." So, now, who is to blame for this outing? Shadowgod! Oh, BTW, early in the story, remember how Brandon got outed back in Phoenix? Because he'd been reading gay fiction about a dirt-bike rider? Yep, Shot of Bourbon, by Shadowgod! So, Shadowgod is to blame for Brandon's outing, TWICE!

Following the links you offered, I got to read several testimonies of gay men in Iran. Of course, their situation is far from being fun. It didn't read as they were systematically hunted or murdered, though of course they belong to a minority that is oppressed. As are any people who enjoy life, arts, freedom, etc. As for genocidal activities: here is the legal definition, found in the 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG). Article 2 of the CPPCG defines genocide as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group." So, deliberate murder. Breaks of basic Human Rights. Not genocide. But I agree with 97a, and you didn't reply to this: this is a 2-year-old news. Should we then all wholeheartedly agree that the next set of bombings is meant to defend our "race"? Hrmmm, I thought most any gay person would support the concept that making homosexuality a capitol offence and acting on it would be considered genocide? We decry often enough the fact that we aren't granted the same legal protections against discrimination as race or age, so do we really want to sign on to a definition that does not happen to list sexual orientation when it clealry should? I don't think so, but, its a moot point anyway; National groups are listed, and I think wanting to exterminate a nation would count? They've pledged to destroy Isriel, to "Drive them into the sea", and its not mere rhetoric; they founded, manage, and supply and support Hezzbolah, which has the same stated aim and acts on it often. Trying to exterminate a country is genocide, so my claim of "Genocidal Regime" stands, regardless of the semantics regarding whether gays should be considered a group under the definition for genocide. And yes, I did answer that part of 97A's post; I said that the execution was unique only becuase it was photographed; there have been at least hundreds more. One quick peek at the International Gay and Lesbian Human Right's commission's page gives us this excerpt;

Requiem by C James :nuke: :nuke: Spoilers Below!!! :nuke: :nuke:

"SNAP" said the trap... Alright, let's give a little perspective to this. Look back some years... back to ... well, lets start with the 70ies. Iran was considered a "good country" back then. During the cold war us-government supported every government and every unscrupulous dictator in the world they could find to build bulwarks against communism. The shah of Iran was put into power by a CIA-Operation back in the 1950ies. The Shah was strongly supported and armed by especially the usa and uk up until 1978. During these years, the Shah enslaved, gagged and bled to death his own people so bad 'till Iranians in black despair crowded around a religious leader, Ayatholla Khomeini. Millions of people have been on the streets against the oppressor in 1978/79, it was called the "white revolution". You probably remember the Iran hostage crisis. Anyway, the shahs army retreated, and he had to flee. (of course these are my own words. For more detailed look in history books or here) After that, everyone was angry. Iranias were angry because of all the us-support for the shah, usa were angry because now all their weapons have been passed to the hands of islamic fundamentalists and the loss of control over the oil in the middle east. Iran went from "good country" to "evil country". To regain control, us-government searched out another sympathetic young man in the region, just around the corner: Saddam Hussein. Hussein was not a communist and did good business with a lot of western countries back then. He was very willing to jump at the opportunity to boost the seize of his country and his ego, and so the Iran-Iraq war began. Soon the usa openly supported Hussein. The war continued for 8 years, hundreds of thousands people died on both sides; the only ones who won anything during this war, have been the companies that are producing arms and ammunition. Look up where the worlds biggest arms manufacturers reside (and when you're at it, you can also look up the keyword "Iran-Contra Affair"). I'm quite familiar with Middle Eastern history and politics, and I take issue with some things you claim, but not others. Was the Shah a corrupt and ruthless dictator? Yes. Was he as bad as the current despots? No. He was at least trying to modernize the country, whereas the current regime seems well-rooted in the dark ages. Dis the Shah har oceans of Iranian blud on his hands via the tactics of SAVIK (his secret police) and others? Sure he did. The problem with all this moralizing and hand-wringing over the Shah is what followed was worse, both for the US and the people in Iran. I'm afraid there is a very deep logical flaw in your argument; Hezzbolah is primarily dedicated to exterminating Israel. I don't much care what their excuses are; they are funding a terrorist organization that has as its stated goal a new holocaust. Even if they had a legitimate grievance against the US, creating and supporting Hezbollah is inexcusable. How do you know that? Oh wait... is it possible you got that information from the fine people that told you Iraq is threatening us with weapons of mass destruction? A reliable source indeed... Ummm, do bear in mind that the Clinton administration warned about Saddam's WMD's. That said, I was opposed to going into Iraq, becuase Saddam was a minor irritant compared to Iran. I also felt, at the time, that the focus on WMD's was foolish in the extreme; not only did it set us up for one hell of a "gotcha" if Iraq removed the WMD's to Syria (there is strong evidence that they did exactly this) but chemical weapons just aren't that big a threat and Biologicals are helaciously hard to use effectively. I felt that *if* there was a geostrategic case for Iraq, it should have been laid out instead of putting all our eggs into the sound-byte-oriented overly simplistic WMD claim. Regardless, as for Iran's nuclear program. Look at the facts; They have a nuclear program that is enriching Uranium. There is no dispute on this; they claim it often. Second point; they are building and/or have built cascading cernterfuge arrays, which by their design are not optimized at low-level enrichment (the few percent needed for reactor fuel) but for higher enrichment, which has but ONE purpose, and that's inside a bomb case. Secondly, ask yourself this; WHY are they persuing a nuclear program? They sit atop a sea of oil, yet they want nuclear power, for what exactly? They claim they seek "energy independence" yet they can't even be bothered to build enough refining capacity to refine their domestic gasoline; they, one of the world's leading petroleum exporters, have to import over half their gasoline. (From as far away as Venezuela) Another proof of their lie; they claim they want to enrich their own uranium so they can control the entire nuclear fuel loop, ignoring the fact that they don't have a domestic source of uranium; they import it. They have to; there are no known uranium ore deposits in Iran. No, I don't need the Bush admin to tell me that Iran is after nuclear weapons; the evidence is out there in plain sight if you look and use common sense. Oh come on! A regime of genocidal fanatics, and you think we should take them at their word? I'd suggest taking a look at another genocidal regime, and it's protestations of peaceful intent, and their denial of the concentration camps, etc, etc, etc. But, why shouldn't we have trusted Hitler? Surely he wouldn't lie? Yes, Genocidal activities, because as i said the first time; the only unique thing about that execution was that it was photographed. In Iran, homosexuality is a capitol offense, and their regemes' mouthpiece said that they don't have homosexuality in Iran (Should we trust them on that, too?) There have been at least hundreds of others in recent years. Don't take my word for it, check with the human rights organizations, which are hardly friends of the current US administration. Also, they have repeatedly pledged to wipe out Israel. That would be genocide, and if you don't believe me, check a dictionary. So too is trying to exterminate gays as a group, which is exactly what they are doing. Oh come on, "do unto others", that's absurd. That only works (and often not even then) if you are dealing with rational and decent people, which that regime clearly is not. I'm also not overly concerned about some spurious notion of "rights" regarding a genocidal fanatical dictatorship. The entire focus of my post is that, as a gay man, I take serious exception (understatement alert) to a regime that systematically executes people for being gay, and that I feel any such regime (and Iran isn't the only one) ought to be the avowed enemy of gay people. That's my opinion and I'm entitled to have it. What bought Iran into this is the mouthpiece of the regeme, in a speech at Columbia University, denied that there were any homosexuals in Iran, while at the same time being part of a regime that executes them.

James, I can't ever agree with a generalization of an entire group (There are good people from the middle east, too) , but regarding Saudi, I will say that they are, indeed, amongst the worst offenders in a lot of ways; one of which is that they, just like Iran, follow Sharia law in all it's particulars, including the execution of gays. I certainly include them on my list. While I don't buy the kidnap theory as you describe it, there are indeed many Americans being held against their will in that country, in many cases Children when the non-custodial parent has taken them, and also American women who have been married to Saudis and entered the country. Anyone dealing with a Saudi should be aware; in Saudi, they would be the official "host" of the visiting American, and as such under Saudi law the "guest" cannot leave Saudi without their permission. Lucy, No, I'm not falling into any trap. The trap here is very well illustrated by your statement that "a particular country which is right now trying to stay out of an unprovoked war with the United States." Anyone who believes that is soundly in a tarp his or her self. Let's look at the facts; I mentioned Iran in particular becuase of their president's statements in New York; they are the same as if Hitler had said "We don't have any Jews in Germans" becuase his regime is actively exterminating them. Secondly, though not my reason in this case, Iran has been designated as the #1 terror-supporting nation by five US administrations going back over 20 years. This isn't propaganda, it's a cold, hard fact. For example, they openly fund and manage Hezzbolah, and Hezzbolah has a lot of American blood on its hands. They are attempting to develop nuclear weapons. If allowed to obtain them, they will be untouchable. Given their current genocidal activities, this would be folly of the highest order, and it must be stopped, by any means necessary. Back during the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, I was opposed to it, for a very simple reason; I felt Iran was by far the greatest danger. History has proven me correct. I don't favor a ground occupation, I never did, for reasons Iraq has proven. There are, however, better ways to remove that regime, or at least render it toothless. I also mentioned all regimes and groups that practice and support the systematic execution of gay people. I said those should be our avowed enemy. If you disagree, I'd very much like to know why?

The cartoon is linked to the cox and forkum article, which lists several websites with stories about the two gay teens executed. I must warn everyone; some of the photos of the execution are very graphic, but IMHO they need to be seen. Incidentally, this wasn't a hanging in the sense of a gallows and trap door, with a quick death from a broken neck (bad enough). They stood them on the back of a truck, put the nooses on very loosely, removed their blindfolds (to make it worse) and drove away, making for a slow death by gradual strangulation. What makes this exaction unique is not the brutality (it is not especially brutal compared to some of the methods used there for executing gays) but that it was photographed. This is all too common a fate for gay teens in Iran and some other countries as well. In many cases, they add "rape" to the charges (this has been documented my many human-rights organizations) to make the sentences a little less noteworthy, but those are tumped-up charges. In this case, the teens (about 15 at the time) confessed under torture. They were beaten and tortured repeatedly in the two years before their execution, knowing all along that they would be executed in the end. I'll say this plainly; any regime that has homosexuality as a capitol offense (remember, the above was an official government trial and execution) should be the avowed enemy of every gay man and woman, as should any group that supports such an outrage.

Actually, IMHO, there have been very few; most chapters, nothing turns up. If anyone does spot a goof, please do let me know; all I do is edit the HTML and then send the page to Joe along when I send the next chapter, so it will be fixed. If I didn't make so many typos, we wouldn't have this problem. I do proofread and use Word's spell-check, and have a list of common goofs i run through the "find" feature, but goofs like the one on "shirtless" do slip by; more than half my pages have at least one goof of some kind when the team gets the chapter. I've never managed to send in a goof-free chapter or story.

Shhh, it's a secret... And I'm a long way from 5k! Yes, Joe is very close, about 78 posts shy of 2k... Kevin, I do note that you're less than a thousand behind Myr, which means you are likely to catch him before the end of the month.

Yes indeed! Totally agreed. Typing with hooves isn't easy...

Thanks Kevin!! Yes, we will be seeing more of Barbara is coming chapters, and her dynamic with Helen. I can't really be positive whether I planned this in advance or not (I don't really remember) but including Lesbians in both my serials seemed like a natural thing to do; most gay men I know (myself included) seem to know some Lesbians, so I figured they'd be a natural part of a gay story. BTW, the next chapter. "Wild Wild Night" should be online later today (Tuesday).

Teenagers in Iran tortured and executed in Iran, for being gay. May they rest in peace. Let it not be forgotten that those two executed gay young men were not alone; there have been at least hundreds executed in Iran for homosexuality in recent years. There's a word for that, it's called genocide. For anyone who doesn't know, Iran's president recently said that they don't have homosexuals in Iran. He and his ilk are trying to make that into a fact, one gallows at a time. This isn't a political issue; it's a gay issue, because in Iran, (and Iran is not alone, just one of the worst offenders), being gay is a capitol offense. I'm sure as heck no fan of the bigots in this country, but it kind of puts things in perspective, ya know?