|
Captain Klutz?
"Dave" wrote in message ... On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 23:55:09 -0000, "Donal" said: Fact! Bush, and his friends, have made enormous profits out of the war on Iraq. Would you like some more facts, Dave? Sure. OK! Fact! Bush's "War on Terrorism" is a dismal failure. Fact! Bush ignored warnings about the impending 9/11 attacks. Fact! When Bush ordered the air strike on the restaurant in Baghdad, he commited a war crime. That makes him as guilty as any other war criminal. More facts, Dave? Fact! DOD's position as to use of these pills (which is, after all the topic under discussion) remained unchanged through 3 administrations spanning 15 years, and both before and after extensive efforts were made to determine the effect of using them. Do you suppose that might be relevant in determining whether the decision to use the pills was motivated solely by profit as Doug hallucinates? No! Profit is a great motivator. Regards Donal -- |
Captain Klutz?
"OzOne" wrote in message ... On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 23:04:04 -0000, "Donal" scribbled thusly: I'm confused. I thought that Oz said that Agent Orange didn't cause cancer. Sorry, that wasn't clear from the bald statement that dioxin doesn't cause cancer. Once again, I think that Oz said that "Agent Orange" didn't cause cancer. Yup, that's what I said That's what I thought you said. I'm just a casual observer, though. So my opinion might be invalid - even if the record proves that I am correct. Regards Donal -- |
Captain Klutz?
You mean you don't know??
-- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Dave" wrote in message ... On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 17:37:28 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz" said: It sounds to me like the Republicans are so desperate to be in charge that they have to lie through their teeth at every opportunity. The relevance of that comment to the remarks made at the dinner is? Dave S/V Good Fortune CS27 |
Captain Klutz?
Joking about dead soldiers? Sorry, I don't find that funny.
-- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Dave" wrote in message ... On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 14:53:44 +1100, OzOne said: Chide themselves publicly? How about an apology to the world for the lies and deceit FIRST then they can start to make a joke of it...the families of the dead would appreciate the joke I'm sure. Hey Oz, you got a direct feed from the DNC? Let's not kid ourselves about the "families of the dead" trotted out by the spinmeisters. We know who's pulling their strings. Fact is, he made a series of jokes. Even the likes of NPR's Juan Williams found them funny and appropriate in the time and place made. Only a blind ideologue with stoppers in his ears would try to turn them into a political issue. Dave S/V Good Fortune CS27 |
Captain Klutz?
Don't have to prove it. Bush proved it. He invaded a country
on the premise that they had WMDs. It would be in his best political interest to find them and was unable to do so. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Horvath" wrote in message ... That's not a fact. It's your opinion. Can you prove it? Fact! Iraq had no connections at all with Al Qaeda. Not worth responding to because you're an idiot. That's also your opinion. Haven't you heard of Salmon Pak? Fact! Bush, and his friends, have made enormous profits out of the war on Iraq. No. It's a fact. That's your opinion. Would you like some more facts, Dave? That's a question. I'm Horvath and I approve of this post. |
Captain Klutz?
I think you're a very poor representative of a corporate lawyer. For
one thing, you're way too thin skinned. Sounds to me like you're now trying to defend yourself, because deep down you think you've done something that needs defending. Poor you. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Dave" wrote in message ... On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 17:38:23 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz" said: More war heros. Wonderful. Lawyers are just wonderful people, especially corporate lawyers. Jonathan, have you ever met a corporate lawyer? Do you have the foggiest idea what they do? Obviously not. The folks who try cases are litigators, not corporate lawyers. And yes, a lot of litigators are sleazy, particularly in the PI area, where I've overhead some (not related in any way to me) coaching plaintiffs essentially to lie. Those are the kind I was talking about when I said in another thread that it's the 99% that give the other 1% of us a bad name. In the case under discussion, I don't have a problem with the proposition that if the guvmint asks for a specific chemical formulation and a manufacturer supplies precisely that formulation, the financial burden should be borne by the guvmint and ultimately the taxpayers, and not by the manufacturer. Unless you're a rabid Robin Hood, that proposition seems like simple fairness. More importantly, whether or not you agree with the proposition it's just plain dumb to suggest that the manufacturer shouldn't have the chance to present the question to the court. But of course I'm sure that in your universe lawyers are the kind of automatic villains like Nazis, South Africans and drug manufacturers that Hollywood hauls out when it needs in immediately recognizable bad guy. Dave S/V Good Fortune CS27 |
Captain Klutz?
Chow down. Take a swim. Nothing will make you dumber than
you already are. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Horvath" wrote in message ... On Sun, 28 Mar 2004 00:04:37 -0000, "Donal" wrote this crap: I still think that he said that Agent Orange didn't cause cancer. Agent Orange doesn't cause cancer. It's still sold today. I can go into a farm supply store and buy it. Farmers put it on the food you eat. I'm Horvath and I approve of this post. |
Captain Klutz?
Apparently.
-- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Dave" wrote in message ... On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 07:42:03 +1000, OzOne said: "Agent Orange doesn't cause cancer" You must be a wizz at English if that needs clarification. Let's say I have a lot of experience recognizing an ambiguous statement. We've already identified three things you may have meant. I'm sure you know what you meant by it, but which one of the three isn't apparent to the casual observer. Dave S/V Good Fortune CS27 |
Captain Klutz?
Sorry, but you'll need to prove you know. I don't think you do.
-- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Dave" wrote in message ... On Sun, 28 Mar 2004 19:09:31 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz" said: You mean you don't know?? My question, Jonathan, was what's called a rhetorical question. Of course I know. Your remark had absolutely nothing, zero, zip to do with the topic under discussion. Dave S/V Good Fortune CS27 |
Captain Klutz?
Oh. I see. Joking about the death of hundreds of troops is
a funny thing. I guess that goes along with being a racist. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Dave" wrote in message ... On Sun, 28 Mar 2004 19:10:10 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz" said: Sorry, I don't find that funny. Ah, there's always a blind ideologue with stoppers in his ears. Dave S/V Good Fortune CS27 |
Captain Klutz?
Apparently you do since you keep responding to my posts.
-- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Dave" wrote in message ... On Sun, 28 Mar 2004 19:14:23 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz" said: I think you're a very poor representative of a corporate lawyer. Frankly, Jonathan, I don't give a damn what you think. Dave S/V Good Fortune CS27 |
Captain Klutz?
QED
-- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com wrote in message ... On 29 Mar 2004 17:06:14 -0600, Dave wrote: On Sun, 28 Mar 2004 19:14:23 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz" said: I think you're a very poor representative of a corporate lawyer. Frankly, Jonathan, I don't give a damn what you think. Then why on earth do you keep responding? It's pretty clear that you DO care a great deal what Jonathan thinks. BB Dave S/V Good Fortune CS27 |
Captain Klutz?
Sorry, but I think you're of the religious right not I.
-- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Dave" wrote in message ... On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 23:29:36 GMT, said: It's pretty clear that you DO care a great deal what Jonathan thinks. Nah. Jonathan's no more than the amen corner to the latest party line. I've long since given up on his ability to follow the sermon. Dave S/V Good Fortune CS27 |
Captain Klutz?
none of your posts do
"Dave" wrote My remark had absolutely nothing, zero, zip to do with the topic of sailing. |
Captain Klutz?
"Dave" wrote in message ... On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 00:33:24 +0100, "Donal" said: Profit is a great motivator. Ah, yes. I never had much success persuading children that the stories told by the Brothers Grimm were fantasy either. If someone wants to believe a fairy tale there's no point in trying to persuade him otherwise. I agree with you. People see what they *want* to see. I see that many of Bush's friends (and family) are making millions of dollars out of Iraq. I see that *no* WMD have been found. I see that Saddam had *no* links with Al Qaeda. I see that the world is becoming more dangerous as a result of Bush's arrogance. What do you see, Dave? Do you see an eloquent, well spoken, President? Do you see an end to International terrorism? Do you see an increase in civil liberties? Regards Donal -- |
Captain Klutz?
Dave wrote:
Your "Profit is a great motivator" is totally unpersuasive. Unless, that is, you're suggesting that DOD officials were on the take from the pharmaceutical industry throughout the Clinton administration. Wow! I smell another beautiful conspiracy theory here, DOD in bed with Glaxo-Welcome, got kind of a nice ring to it doesn't it? Do you suppose we could get Mel Gibson to do another movie? Cheers Marty ------------ And now a word from our sponsor ------------------ Want to have instant messaging, and chat rooms, and discussion groups for your local users or business, you need dbabble! -- See http://netwinsite.com/sponsor/sponsor_dbabble.htm ---- |
Captain Klutz?
"Dave" wrote in message ... On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 23:16:11 +0100, "Donal" said: What do you see, Dave? I the chanting of your mantra as totally unresponsive to the question I asked. I really hate to burst your bubble - but you didn't actually ask a question. Did you? Your "Profit is a great motivator" is totally unpersuasive. Are you some sort of communist? Unless, that is, you're suggesting that DOD officials were on the take from the pharmaceutical industry throughout the Clinton administration. Who cares if the Clinton administration was corrupt? At least they kept Al Qaeda out of New York. Regards Donal -- |
Captain Klutz?
Sounds to me like you have your own "disease," which has nothing
to do with me. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Dave" wrote in message ... On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 23:32:33 +0100, "Donal" said: I really hate to burst your bubble - but you didn't actually ask a question. Did you? Donal, you seem to be catching Ganz's disease. What I said was: Do you suppose that might be relevant in determining whether the decision to use the pills was motivated solely by profit as Doug hallucinates? That looks to me like a question. Anyway that's what the funny little thingy at the end is supposed to indicate. Unless, that is, you're suggesting that DOD officials were on the take from the pharmaceutical industry throughout the Clinton administration. Who cares if the Clinton administration was corrupt? At least they kept Al Qaeda out of New York. So you did indeed intend to say that the DOD was on the take from the pharmaceutical industry during the Clinton administration? I expect there are some folks who would have a keen interest in the evidence you have for that. However, I don't think they'd find "profit is a great motivator" to be very persuasive as evidence. Dave S/V Good Fortune CS27 |
Captain Klutz?
"Dave" wrote in message ... On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 23:32:33 +0100, "Donal" said: I really hate to burst your bubble - but you didn't actually ask a question. Did you? Donal, you seem to be catching Ganz's disease. What I said was: Do you suppose that might be relevant in determining whether the decision to use the pills was motivated solely by profit as Doug hallucinates? That looks to me like a question. Anyway that's what the funny little thingy at the end is supposed to indicate. Unless, that is, you're suggesting that DOD officials were on the take from the pharmaceutical industry throughout the Clinton administration. Who cares if the Clinton administration was corrupt? At least they kept Al Qaeda out of New York. So you did indeed intend to say that the DOD was on the take from the pharmaceutical industry during the Clinton administration? Nope! I intended to say "Who cares if the Clinton administration was corrupt? At least they kept Al Qaeda out of New York." In fact, that's exactly what I said! Let me try to explain it in simple terms. The Clinton administration was quite successful in it's efforts to keep Al Qaeda at bay. The Bush administration oversaw an attack which resulted in the deaths of over 3000 Americans. So, when I say "Who cares if the Clinton administration was corrupt? At least they kept Al Qaeda out of New York." - I am referring to the fact that Clinton did a much better job of protecting American lives. You seem to think that semen stains are worse than dead Americans!! Regards Donal -- I expect there are some folks who would have a keen interest in the evidence you have for that. However, I don't think they'd find "profit is a great motivator" to be very persuasive as evidence. Dave S/V Good Fortune CS27 |
Captain Klutz?
"Donal" wrote in message ... You seem to think that semen stains are worse than dead Americans!! Regards Donal Unfortunately that is what most Americans believe. John Cairns |
Captain Klutz?
Well, I guess it depends on the dress.
-- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Donal" wrote in message ... You seem to think that semen stains are worse than dead Americans!! |
Captain Klutz?
He was lucky! Not only that, he actually did something about it. Something
the Bush administration is claiming that they "kept doing" for 8 mos. Apparently, not very well, since they demoted Clarke to a non-cabinet post. Quite a great bunch of motivators aren't they. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Dave" wrote in message ... On Fri, 2 Apr 2004 00:07:57 +0100, "Donal" said: I am referring to the fact that Clinton did a much better job of protecting American lives. Just a coupla questions. Who was President on February 26, 1993, and what happened on that date? Who was President on April 19, 1995, and what happened on that date? Look it up, and then tell me that with the score two to one Clinton wasn't just lucky that even more people weren't killed in the two successful practice runs he was impotent to prevent. Dave S/V Good Fortune CS27 |
Captain Klutz?
I think the issue of 3000 people dead is slightly more important
than a few million dead sperm. Of course, that isn't true if you're part of the religious right. They're a friend of the fetus right up until it's born. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Dave" wrote in message ... On Fri, 2 Apr 2004 00:07:57 +0100, "Donal" said: You seem to think that semen stains are worse than dead Americans!! I do find it pretty funny that in the last couple of days so many Dems have suddenly begun to attach so much importance to testimony's being under oath. Dave S/V Good Fortune CS27 |
Captain Klutz?
"Dave" wrote
Right. That's why after the dry run in 1993 it happened again in 1995. The only thing he seems to have "done" is his intern. Ganzy thinks that's a bad thing. He's from San Fran, ya know. Scotty |
Captain Klutz?
Well, that's quite easy to say from the perspective of a right wing
freakazoid such as yourself. Seems to me that you just can't get enough of Clinton and his blowjob. Are you jealous from Monica's or Clinton's perspective? -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Dave" wrote in message ... On Thu, 1 Apr 2004 17:24:27 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz" said: He was lucky! Not only that, he actually did something about it. Right. That's why after the dry run in 1993 it happened again in 1995. The only thing he seems to have "done" is his intern. Dave S/V Good Fortune CS27 |
Captain Klutz?
Nah, never lived in SF.
-- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Scott Vernon" wrote in message ... "Dave" wrote Right. That's why after the dry run in 1993 it happened again in 1995. The only thing he seems to have "done" is his intern. Ganzy thinks that's a bad thing. He's from San Fran, ya know. Scotty |
Captain Klutz?
"Dave" wrote in message ... On Fri, 2 Apr 2004 00:07:57 +0100, "Donal" said: I am referring to the fact that Clinton did a much better job of protecting American lives. Just a coupla questions. Who was President on February 26, 1993, and what happened on that date? Who was President on April 19, 1995, and what happened on that date? Look it up, and then tell me that with the score two to one Hey, I've got better things to do with my time that go on a wild goose chase around the Internet in an effort to prove you right. Why don't you *tell* us what happened on those portentious dates? Clinton wasn't just lucky that even more people weren't killed in the two successful practice runs he was impotent to prevent. So you'd prefer to have an "unlucky" president, - even if it cost thousands of lives???? Regards Donal -- |
Captain Klutz?
Dave, don't be an ass. Clinton was in office a bit over a month.
Seems to me, it would have been planned on Bush Sr.'s watch. Oklahoma was perpetrated by an inbred sociopath. While he was a terrorist, he really did it pretty much on his own, unless you're now claiming that he an Osama were buddies. I guess this post of yours really shows your true colors. You're not interested in rational discourse. You're just interested in your own twisted agenda. Since your hero is fading fast in the polls, the first thing that comes to mind is blame Clinton. Or wait, maybe he's part of the stupid race. Only your hairdresser knows for sure. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Dave" wrote in message ... On Sun, 4 Apr 2004 00:14:54 +0100, "Donal" said: Who was President on February 26, 1993, and what happened on that date? Who was President on April 19, 1995, and what happened on that date? Look it up, and then tell me that with the score two to one [snip] Why don't you *tell* us what happened on those portentious dates? February 26, 1993, first World Trade Center bombing--occurring, of course, on Clinton's watch. April 19, 1995, Oklahoma City bombing--occurring again, of course, on Clinton's watch. Now could you 'splain again about how Clinton did such a great job of protecting us from terrorist attacks? Dave S/V Good Fortune CS27 |
Captain Klutz?
Dave, you're just being an asshole. When in doubt, right wing freakazoids
blame Clinton. There was a significant difference. Clinton didn't alienate the entire muslim world. Bush did. Clinton lied about a blowjob. Bush lied about a war. Clinton was an articulate president, capable of speaking without notes on just about every subject. Bush is inarticulate to say the least (even Reagan was better, which isn't saying much). Bush has to be coached on everything. He trying to appeal to the "common man," by claiming he doesn't read newspapers, which is another lie. He does. So, he's again lying. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Dave" wrote in message ... On Sat, 3 Apr 2004 23:05:00 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz" said: Dave, don't be an ass. Clinton was in office a bit over a month. Seems to me, it would have been planned on Bush Sr.'s watch. Oklahoma was perpetrated by an inbred sociopath. While he was a terrorist, he really did it pretty much on his own, unless you're now claiming that he an Osama were buddies. Actually, Jonathan, I was simply addressing Oz's absurd claim that there is a significant difference in favor of Clinton in the degree of protection against terrorism provided by either President before 9/11. There wasn't. And just as the first WTC bombing was no doubt planned to a large degree on Bush Sr.'s watch, the 9/11 attack was planned to a large degree on Clinton's watch. Al Qaeda didn't just say on January 20 "Bush is President now, so let's fly planes into the WTC. Oh, and better get some people into pilot training so they'll be ready in time." As to OC, a terrorist is a terrorist. It doesn't make any difference whether he has a foreign accent or talks like a hillbilly when you make the body count. The point again is not that that attack could have been prevented (though there are law enforcement types whose job is to prevent such things). Rather it's that Oz's statement is simply absurd on its face. Dave S/V Good Fortune CS27 |
Captain Klutz?
Oh come on. The hatred of us in muslim countries is off
the scale. After 9/11, there was a huge outpouring of sympathy all over the world, including a huge number of muslims. Now, they hate our guts like nobody's business... All thanks to Bush. What you're claiming is that the second WTC bombing is a result of hatred by the majority of muslims, which you know isn't true. They may not have loved us, but most wouldn't stoop to something so low. After then bombing, there was sympathy and empathy. Then Bush, Rummy, Condi, and Wolfy stepped in. Terror attacks have increased dramatically. Thanks Bush, you lying sack of sh*t. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Dave" wrote in message ... On Sun, 4 Apr 2004 11:59:06 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz" said: Clinton didn't alienate the entire muslim world. Bush did. Right. And that bomb under the WTC was really just a couple of Palestinians who accidentally dropped a match into a truck of fertilizer they were hauling to NJ. Bush must have done a helluva job of alienating in a mighty short time between the time he took office and the time planning of the second WTC attack was started, Mr. Grimm. Dave S/V Good Fortune CS27 |
Captain Klutz?
Well, that's certainly a carefully thougth out rejoinder to my comments.
As usual, you have nothing to contribute unless it's spewing right-wing bull. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Dave" wrote in message ... On Sun, 4 Apr 2004 19:12:34 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz" said: What you're claiming is that the second WTC bombing is a result of hatred by the majority of muslims, which you know isn't true. Jonathan, you're hearing voices again. Dave S/V Good Fortune CS27 |
Captain Klutz?
"Jonathan Ganz" wrote ...
Oh come on. The hatred of us in muslim countries is off the scale. After 9/11, there was a huge outpouring of sympathy all over the world, including a huge number of muslims. Now, they hate our guts like nobody's business... All thanks to Bush. so we should have let them bomb another city, then they'd really love us? SV |
Captain Klutz?
Dave,
What kind of mentality would would force damaging drugs on your own troops, as a antidote for weapons that have never been found? Sure seems, to me, a case of cutting off the nose to save the face? By the way, I take 240 mg of that medication every day for my Myastenia Gravis Ole Thom |
Captain Klutz?
You're the asshole, not I.
-- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Dave" wrote in message ... On Sun, 4 Apr 2004 21:14:16 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz" said: Well, that's certainly a carefully thougth out rejoinder to my comments. It was indeed. Create a reply to such an obvious straw man and I can only assume the straw man is the product of an overactive imagination. Dave S/V Good Fortune CS27 |
Captain Klutz?
What city do you live in?
-- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Scott Vernon" wrote in message ... "Jonathan Ganz" wrote ... Oh come on. The hatred of us in muslim countries is off the scale. After 9/11, there was a huge outpouring of sympathy all over the world, including a huge number of muslims. Now, they hate our guts like nobody's business... All thanks to Bush. so we should have let them bomb another city, then they'd really love us? SV |
Captain Klutz?
As usual, you contribute nothing. When the discussion doesn't
go your way, you fold. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Dave" wrote in message ... On Mon, 5 Apr 2004 11:09:09 -0400, "Scott Vernon" said: so we should have let them bomb another city, then they'd really love us? Nah. Jonathan's boy has that all worked out. We'll let Kofi take care of us. The world will love us and the erstwhile terrorists will put flowers in the barrels of their guns. Dave S/V Good Fortune CS27 |
Captain Klutz?
Yep. If you want a job in a fast food restaurant, employment is up.
Now we know where you work. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Dave" wrote in message ... On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 16:03:27 +1000, OzOne said: The opposition has made a small gaff and he is hoping against hope that it will be enough...Can't see it like I can't see Bush getting up again. As I've said before, we shall see. Interesting article in the WSJ this morning pointing out that the unemployment rate is currently very close to the 5.4% rate Clinton boasted about in seeking reelection in 1996, and the misery index (inflation rate plus unemployment rate) is lower than in any presidential re-election race in the last 30 years. Dave S/V Good Fortune CS27 |
Captain Klutz?
none.
"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message ... What city do you live in? |
Captain Klutz?
:o
wrote... On 5 Apr 2004 12:14:09 -0500, Dave wrote: On Mon, 5 Apr 2004 10:04:01 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz" You two should get a room with me. BB |
Captain Klutz?
I guess you're safe then...
-- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Scott Vernon" wrote in message ... none. "Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message ... What city do you live in? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:31 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com