"RkyMtnHootOwl" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 17:50:24 -0500, KMAN wrote:

"RkyMtnHootOwl" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 13:40:06 -0500, KMAN wrote:

"RkyMtnHootOwl" wrote in message
.. .
snip

Er. What makes me a "liberal" ??!?

I haven't the foggiest idea why anyone would want to be a liberal!
Beats me, someone with a gun pointed at your head! I give up!

How did you arrive at the conclusion that I am a fit for that label? And
what does "liberal" mean according to Tinkernhootowl.

Go look in the mirror, what you see staring back, - Liberal - !

Am I a Liberal or a liberal?

Whichever it is, how is it defined, and how did you determine that I am a
fit?

Or is this just another of your baseless smears?

snip
and the reg book starts growing thicker.

A small price to pay.

Thanks, I will have them send you the invoice!

snip
Why are you being
such an arse in discussing a similarly obvious scenario as this one?

Maybe just to be a pain in yours!

I see. I thought you were looking for serious discussion?


But then again I said "maybe" ! I know, evasive, sorry about that!
Not!

What's clear is that your whining about lack of serious discussion
demonstrates the highest levels of hypocrisy.

Yes, you are speculating. There are no facts to support your statement.

You are confusing motive and instrumentation!

No, there's no such confusion here.

Your motive is to display your asshole persona, and your instrument is a
speculative smear campaign.

My motive was to
understand if possible, what their motivation was to make certain bad
decisions.

To say that speculative smears are a means of developing understanding is
dishonest and/or idiotic.

My instrument of choice was to speculate. Speculation by
nature, does not require a full set of facts, only a couple facts,
from which certain projections can be drawn. Short of knowing all the
facts, you can only project by speculation, which was what the
original question of this thread was about. Someone ask "why?", and we
set about in the discussion trying to acertain an answer. Some
speculated more than others, but all was within the bounds of the
discussion.

And we are back to my point about my theory that you are being bashed in the
skull every time you post here.

If they put themselves in a
compromising situation as well, then we can learn that it is best to
avoid the appearance of compromise as well personally, if we feel
uncomfortable with the insinuation of a particular situation. However,
this may or may not have been an issue in this circumstance!

Yes, you are speculating. There are no facts to support your statement.

see above

Seen it. My statement stands.

snip

How would you feel about someone smearing you if your female companion
died?

Well now if she was my wife, it would be different than if she was any
other female companion, that's for sure!

How would you feel about someone smearing you if your non-wife female
companion died?

But then if it happened now,
it would be my wife, or my wife would be very close at hand. That way
I would not have to worry about any potential conflict of interest or
resulting smear campaign! How about you?

There's is nothing that can be done about idiots like yourself who would
smear someone just to get their jollies. I would not refuse to go paddling
with a non-wife female just because scum like you might choose to engage in
a smear campaign.

However, neither am I in the military, though my wife was. She is the
one who has informed me that this was a compromising situation that
the Master Sergeant should have known to avoid. Apart from him dying,
he could easily have lost rank, pay, etc. My wife is an upright moral
person, but they were constantly warned and made aware of putting
themselves in a compromising fraternizing position, if for no other
reason, that it could affect their readiness status.

What the hell are you talking about? Are you saying it is a fact that the
two individuals actually did anything wrong?

No

You need to put a period right there, and then move on. But being an idiot,
you can't do that.

we have no facts to indicate they were involve in any illicit
behavior of a sexual nature, if I understand your question. They may
have been long term friends, of whom the wife was very aware, and the
young woman was like a daughter. However, it could still be considered
fraternizing because of the appearance of possible impropriety.

Let's try again.

Are you saying it is a fact that the two individuals actually did anything
wrong? Anything includes anything.

The "appearance of possible impropriety" does not count as "dong something
wrong."

My wife was a cute young thing at 22 in the Army, serving under a
Chief Master Sergeant, who had served with my wife's dad 30 years
earlier. They were good friends, before my wife went into the service.
However, the Chief was very diligent to do nothing to compromise my
wifes reputation, if anything, he was harder on her than anyone else.
And they never went out to dinner, or any other such activity either.
It is all a matter of appearances, which the military takes very
seriously!

The fact that the military takes certain things seriously (generally
unimportant things, whereas big things - like invading other countries and
blowing people up - are taken lightly) really has nothing to do with your
smear campaign. The military isn't smearing these people - you are!

It could also make them vulnerable to blackmail by hostile agents. I
do not have any facts of the specifics of what training this group was
involved in, but let us suppose he was dealing with arming nuclear
weapons being put on a bomber at Travis Air Force base. Would you want
him to have made himself vulnerable to dereliction of duty because he
got involved in a compromising personal situation.

What evidence is that that he was in a compromising personal situation?

He was in a compromising situation as soon as he was alone with her

They were with a guide, as I recall.

And are you saying that no male who is in the military can be alone with a
female who is in the military?

If you are saying that, please point us to the relevant policy document.

and though there may not have had anything going on between them, it
put them in jeopardy!

Only in the sense that a scum like yourself might choose to smear them.

Maybe he did programming, and was forced to enter a small back door in
a program that allowed someone to access the program and steal
millions of dollars worth of high priced government toilet seats. Who
knows what is the limit of this type of activity.

That is the problem with situations like this, it might seem to have
been a disconnected accidental death, but then a lot of other issues
come into play. It would just have been better to avoid the situation
entirely. The Master Sergeant may have gone paddling by himself and
drowned anyway, but at least the suggest scenario would be less
likely!

You are speculating. There are no facts to support your statement.

Definitely, but that is the nature of speculation.

Especially with smear campaigns.

You get up in the
morning, and not knowing exactly what is going to happen to you, you
go out to face the day. That is speculation that you will make it
through the day, and back to the safety of your bed! Of course that is
speculation that your bed is a safe place as well.

Um. What you mean is it is not possible to predict the future.

We are talking about a kayaking incident and a news report about it. There
are no facts of any kind in the report to indicate that the two people were
doing anything wrong, other than not wearing PFDs.

Take the people who went through the earthquake in Afganistan. They
might not be so inclined to think their bed is a safe place. They have
had the walls fall down on their head. Their data base of facts, leads
them to speculate that the earth is not as safe a place to lay their
head, as they thought prior to the earthquake.

At this time, I must ask: is someone currently bashing your skull with a
baseball bat?

Obviously we don't have all the facts regarding this current
situation, so we speculate as to what may have affected their decision
making ability. If more facts come to light, we can change our
speculation, no problem.

To choose to speculate that they were doing something wrong (other than not
wearing PFDs) is a rather scummy thing to do. I'm not sure why you feel
compelled to do so, or to think it appropriate or even relevant. I believe
you mentioned that you yourself sometimes go out on the water without a PFD.
Does that mean you must be having sex with young boys or something!?!?

Well thanks to you it has not been fun, and very little amusement
except what you have provided!

If you had not been such an assclown - and simply explained your
comments -
your humiliation would have been over long ago.

Clowns know no humilation, we just paint on a bigger silly ass grin!

OK, so your whining about wanting serious conversation was just more of your
assclown act then? This is fine. You are just here to clown around, and have
no interest in serious discussion. It all makes sense no. I didn't think it
was possible for someone to be so idiotic as a matter of everyday practice.

I suppose the Canadian military never polishes their brass!

Who gives a ****?

Well evidently the generals who have all those boys shining their
buttons. The closest I came to military service was ROTC during the
Vietnam war. Personally all the button polishing did not do anything
for me, but some got excited about it. I chose not to pursue a
military career, which I have a hunch I would have struggled with
being a joiner and going along with all the hoop-la!!!

Who gives a ****?

Typical liberal, hates the military! hates what is important to the
military, you know like spit and polish, and blowing up things! Not
only hates, but beyond their comprehension!

Um. Where is the hatred of the military? My comment is there to indicate
that I see no relevance in that windbag paragraph to what is being
discussed.

snip
The problem is not the sex, but prior commitments!

Do you have evidence that the two individuals had sex?

None about sex, yes about prior commitments!

What prior commitments?

snip
What are the relevant facts?

They were both in the military,
The man was married!

Which proves what?!?!?!?

The bit about prior commitments.

What prior commitments?

snip
I like to kiss my wife whenever!

Good grief.

No that would be if I had to kiss your wife!!!

She would, I am quite certain, bash your skull. She suffers assclown fools
like you much less gladly than I.

As far as I know, I have not heard anything about a UFO, so if you
have some info along that line, I am sure the investigators would be
interested in hearing from you!

You've just heard about it from me. There is as much evidence that there
was
a UFO involved as there was to support your smears.

Be sure and call your Congressman! Wait, you're a Canadian, you don't
have a Congressman to call, sorry about that! I guess you could call
your PM, whoever that is this week!

I see you are as uninformed about politics as you are about everything else.

Prime Minister is to President as Member of Paliament is to Congressman.

Welcome to international politics!

snip

Ridiculous. I have suggested many times that you are an asshole. You
responded. I guess that means you understand that you are an asshole!

Let's see, you have called me and idiot, an asshole, stupid, and I am
sure a few other descriptive terms. So how do I respond to such non
contributory, articulate pronouncements? Oh, I know, FLUSH !!!!

But according to you, since you responded to those comments, they are
true!

No, there was no enuendo about you calling me an asshole, the
conclusion I may deduce is that you are limited in your verbal skills!
So I FLUSH!!!! that is my only response! If there had been enuendo,
then I would have had to speculate as to what you mean, but there was
little or no doubt! Don't forget to FLUSH!!

How interesting that an asshole like yourself has a toilet obsession.

snip
snip

And yet, you are worse than ever.

and yet I have a paintless silly ass grin painted all over my face, so
I must not be doing to badly, OvO

Crack addicts dying on the streets of Amercia often have a smile on their
face. You seem addicted to being an asshole, maybe there's a similar affect.