No he won't... but you can bill to a third party ... :-)



OK, what's your number ?



Looks like he has yours!



RB
35s5
NY

Ringmaster wrote:

A few folks like Doug and Sloco grandstand .

Anybody else on the floor with the irony of this statement?

Not really, I've become rather accustomed to Bob's duplicitous nature.
Who's the first guy too jump all over someone for selling stuff on the
group?

Who's the first one to say that people shouldn't criticize his "sailing"
style because it's an individual thing and there's no "right" way, and
then turns around a lambastes someone else's sailing operandi?

The list goes on nearly ad infinitum.

Cheers
Marty

As opposed to starting a war for reasons that were untrue? As opposed to
listening in on millions of Americans? As opposed to supporting the removal
of Habeas Corpus?

If you're going to argue that Clinton was vile because he attempted to do
the right thing, what do you say about a bunch who lie, cheat, steal, and
prey on innoncents?????? My bet.. nothing. They're ok.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Gilligan" wrote in message
. ..

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
Yeah, he only tried to do good. I guess that makes him vile.



Ethics of Intentions
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

There is an ethical premise that holds the evaluation of actions by
the intentions of the actions. This idea is compatible with any standard
of value. It is the claim that the consequences of an action are not
important morally. Only the desired results.

If morality is a guide to living, it can only be so if the outcome of
action moral is in your interest. By claiming that only intentions matter,
ethics becomes useless. It is left strictly as a method of evaluating the
actions of others. It cannot act a a guide to your actions.

The Ethics of Intentions is derived from the understanding that
people who intend to harm will eventually succeed. It is a way of judging
them evil by the fact that they want to harm people, not that they do. But
this is faulty. It is the impending actions that are evil. The fact that
the person is malevolent implies they will take the actions. But it is the
actions that are destructive.

A newspaper article a few years ago portrayed a mother who had
murdered her young daughter. The mother had come to believe that the world
was a place of suffering, and happiness was impossible. She killed her
daughter in order to save her from the torment of living. Under the Ethics
of Intentions, she should be praised as a hero.


Copyright © 2001 by Jeff Landauer and Joseph Rowlands

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
As opposed to starting a war for reasons that were untrue?

Gulf of Tonkin?

As opposed to listening in on millions of Americans?

Hillary's FBI files?

As opposed to supporting the removal
of Habeas Corpus?

Vince Foster?



If you're going to argue that Clinton was vile because he attempted to do
the right thing

Clinton was vile because he did not do the right thing.


, what do you say about a bunch who lie, cheat, steal, and
prey on innoncents??????

Clinton lied, Clinton cheated on his wife, Clinton stole from the White
House, Clinton preyed on innocent women - some while their husbands were
dying!

Vile! Vile!! Vile man!!!


My bet.. nothing. They're ok.

Clinton is ok in your book?

Where he failed, he was ok because his intentions were good!

Where he suceeded it didn't matter what he did because the end justifies the
means!

The following statement is true
The preceeding statement is false.

LBJ???? He's dead Jim.

Which file? There are so many!

Ah the Vince Foster conspiracy theory. I think the N. Koreans were in on
that one.

What right thing did Clinton not do?

Stole from the White House? That's a new one... what, pray tell, did he
steal?

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Gilligan" wrote in message
. ..

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
As opposed to starting a war for reasons that were untrue?

Gulf of Tonkin?

As opposed to listening in on millions of Americans?

Hillary's FBI files?

As opposed to supporting the removal
of Habeas Corpus?

Vince Foster?



If you're going to argue that Clinton was vile because he attempted to do
the right thing

Clinton was vile because he did not do the right thing.


, what do you say about a bunch who lie, cheat, steal, and
prey on innoncents??????

Clinton lied, Clinton cheated on his wife, Clinton stole from the White
House, Clinton preyed on innocent women - some while their husbands were
dying!

Vile! Vile!! Vile man!!!


My bet.. nothing. They're ok.

Clinton is ok in your book?

Where he failed, he was ok because his intentions were good!

Where he suceeded it didn't matter what he did because the end justifies
the means!

The following statement is true
The preceeding statement is false.

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
LBJ???? He's dead Jim.

I can give you impulse power but you can forget about the warp drive.


Which file? There are so many!

Can't see the forest for the trees!


Ah the Vince Foster conspiracy theory. I think the N. Koreans were in on
that one.

They were.


What right thing did Clinton not do?

Tell the truth under oath.



Stole from the White House? That's a new one... what, pray tell, did he
steal?

When they movedout. They actually had to return stuff.


--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Gilligan" wrote in message
. ..

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
As opposed to starting a war for reasons that were untrue?

Gulf of Tonkin?

As opposed to listening in on millions of Americans?

Hillary's FBI files?

As opposed to supporting the removal
of Habeas Corpus?

Vince Foster?



If you're going to argue that Clinton was vile because he attempted to
do the right thing

Clinton was vile because he did not do the right thing.


, what do you say about a bunch who lie, cheat, steal, and
prey on innoncents??????

Clinton lied, Clinton cheated on his wife, Clinton stole from the White
House, Clinton preyed on innocent women - some while their husbands were
dying!

Vile! Vile!! Vile man!!!


My bet.. nothing. They're ok.

Clinton is ok in your book?

Where he failed, he was ok because his intentions were good!

Where he suceeded it didn't matter what he did because the end justifies
the means!

The following statement is true
The preceeding statement is false.

Oh, the blow job lie. I guess that's worse than near 3000 dead, thousands
more wounded, not to mention 10s of thousand of Iraqis dead and the whole
world hating us. You're right!

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Gilligan" wrote in message
. ..

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
LBJ???? He's dead Jim.

I can give you impulse power but you can forget about the warp drive.


Which file? There are so many!

Can't see the forest for the trees!


Ah the Vince Foster conspiracy theory. I think the N. Koreans were in on
that one.

They were.


What right thing did Clinton not do?

Tell the truth under oath.



Stole from the White House? That's a new one... what, pray tell, did he
steal?

When they movedout. They actually had to return stuff.


--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Gilligan" wrote in message
. ..

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
As opposed to starting a war for reasons that were untrue?

Gulf of Tonkin?

As opposed to listening in on millions of Americans?

Hillary's FBI files?

As opposed to supporting the removal
of Habeas Corpus?

Vince Foster?



If you're going to argue that Clinton was vile because he attempted to
do the right thing

Clinton was vile because he did not do the right thing.


, what do you say about a bunch who lie, cheat, steal, and
prey on innoncents??????

Clinton lied, Clinton cheated on his wife, Clinton stole from the White
House, Clinton preyed on innocent women - some while their husbands were
dying!

Vile! Vile!! Vile man!!!


My bet.. nothing. They're ok.

Clinton is ok in your book?

Where he failed, he was ok because his intentions were good!

Where he suceeded it didn't matter what he did because the end justifies
the means!

The following statement is true
The preceeding statement is false.

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
Oh, the blow job lie. I guess that's worse than near 3000 dead, thousands
more wounded, not to mention 10s of thousand of Iraqis dead and the whole
world hating us. You're right!


The whole world doesn't hate us. The British, Australians, Canadians are
still loyal lap dogs and the rest of the world fears us.

I don't give a crap about dead Iraqis. Neither do you or you would be
thankful Hussien is gone.

American dead make me mad. I've always said from day 1 to nuke the ragheads.
It's less expensive and drives the point home..

Fears and despises us. Just what we need to succeed in the war on terror.

I know you don't care about dead innocents. That's obvious. You're some
human being to say such a thing. You should be ashamed of yourself.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Gilligan" wrote in message
. ..

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
Oh, the blow job lie. I guess that's worse than near 3000 dead, thousands
more wounded, not to mention 10s of thousand of Iraqis dead and the whole
world hating us. You're right!


The whole world doesn't hate us. The British, Australians, Canadians are
still loyal lap dogs and the rest of the world fears us.

I don't give a crap about dead Iraqis. Neither do you or you would be
thankful Hussien is gone.

American dead make me mad. I've always said from day 1 to nuke the
ragheads. It's less expensive and drives the point home..

"Gilligan" wrote in message

The whole world doesn't hate us.

Pretty much the whole world does hate the USA's international policy... yes.

The British, Australians, Canadians are
still loyal lap dogs and the rest of the world fears us.

I believe Canada told you where to get off the wagon on the Iraq invasion.


I don't give a crap about dead Iraqis. Neither do you or you would be
thankful Hussien is gone.

Saddam should have been left alone. Better the devil you know...


American dead make me mad. I've always said from day 1 to nuke the
ragheads. It's less expensive and drives the point home..

So what's it like to spend billions on a weapon you can never use?

CM-