On Nov 3, 7:25*am, "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!"
wrote:
On Nov 3, 1:58*am, Tom Francis - SWSports

wrote:
"And few have put as much money behind their advocacy as Mr. Gore and
are as well positioned to profit from this green transformation, if
and when it comes."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/bu...ronment/03gore....

Many of us have known about the GW Scam for a long time. Really not
much different than the Y2K scam that destroyed the chip industry
about a year and a half later or so....

Where in that article does it say that global warming isn't happening
and is a scam?

In article 27f68d78-3f3c-402a-8719-b5104d433cf7
@c3g2000yqd.googlegroups.com, says...

On Nov 3, 7:25*am, "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!"
wrote:
On Nov 3, 1:58*am, Tom Francis - SWSports

wrote:
"And few have put as much money behind their advocacy as Mr. Gore and
are as well positioned to profit from this green transformation, if
and when it comes."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/bu...ronment/03gore....

Many of us have known about the GW Scam for a long time. Really not
much different than the Y2K scam that destroyed the chip industry
about a year and a half later or so....

Where in that article does it say that global warming isn't happening
and is a scam?

Doesn't, it's my opinion. Al Gore has been milking this for years while
preaching to us, and living like a self indulgent king...

--
Wafa free again.

On 11/3/09 8:59 AM, Tosk wrote:
In article27f68d78-3f3c-402a-8719-b5104d433cf7
@c3g2000yqd.googlegroups.com, says...

On Nov 3, 7:25 am, "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!"
wrote:
On Nov 3, 1:58 am, Tom Francis - SWSports

wrote:
"And few have put as much money behind their advocacy as Mr. Gore and
are as well positioned to profit from this green transformation, if
and when it comes."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/bu...ronment/03gore....

Many of us have known about the GW Scam for a long time. Really not
much different than the Y2K scam that destroyed the chip industry
about a year and a half later or so....

Where in that article does it say that global warming isn't happening
and is a scam?

Doesn't, it's my opinion. Al Gore has been milking this for years while
preaching to us, and living like a self indulgent king...



Your opinion? You are an ill-educated moron. Why is your opinion on a
scientific matter relevant

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 09:02:03 -0500, H the K
wrote:

On 11/3/09 8:59 AM, Tosk wrote:
In article27f68d78-3f3c-402a-8719-b5104d433cf7
@c3g2000yqd.googlegroups.com, says...

On Nov 3, 7:25 am, "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!"
wrote:
On Nov 3, 1:58 am, Tom Francis - SWSports

wrote:
"And few have put as much money behind their advocacy as Mr. Gore and
are as well positioned to profit from this green transformation, if
and when it comes."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/bu...ronment/03gore....

Many of us have known about the GW Scam for a long time. Really not
much different than the Y2K scam that destroyed the chip industry
about a year and a half later or so....

Where in that article does it say that global warming isn't happening
and is a scam?

Doesn't, it's my opinion. Al Gore has been milking this for years while
preaching to us, and living like a self indulgent king...



Your opinion? You are an ill-educated moron. Why is your opinion on a
scientific matter relevant

Self-indulgent king? Al Gore? Enron, Countrywide, Adelphia, Global
Crossing, Worldcom, Goldman Sachs, Lehman, Washington Mutual, etc.,
etc., etc.

Most of 'em Republican pigs.

He picks Al Gore as the self-indulgent king?

****ing idiot.

On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 05:48:24 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker
wrote:

On Nov 3, 7:25*am, "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!"
wrote:
On Nov 3, 1:58*am, Tom Francis - SWSports

wrote:
"And few have put as much money behind their advocacy as Mr. Gore and
are as well positioned to profit from this green transformation, if
and when it comes."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/bu...ronment/03gore....

Many of us have known about the GW Scam for a long time. Really not
much different than the Y2K scam that destroyed the chip industry
about a year and a half later or so....

Where in that article does it say that global warming isn't happening
and is a scam?

We're discussing anthropogenic global warming, the non-existent
variety. Maybe one day you'll understand the difference, and why the
scam is making folks like Gore, et al (mostly Democrats) very rich.

On Nov 3, 4:33*pm, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 05:48:24 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker





wrote:
On Nov 3, 7:25*am, "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!"
wrote:
On Nov 3, 1:58*am, Tom Francis - SWSports

wrote:
"And few have put as much money behind their advocacy as Mr. Gore and
are as well positioned to profit from this green transformation, if
and when it comes."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/bu...ronment/03gore.....

Many of us have known about the GW Scam for a long time. Really not
much different than the Y2K scam that destroyed the chip industry
about a year and a half later or so....

Where in that article does it say that global warming isn't happening
and is a scam?

We're discussing anthropogenic global warming, the non-existent
variety. Maybe one day you'll understand the difference, and why the
scam is making folks like Gore, et al (mostly Democrats) very rich.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Again, where does it say in the article that global warming doesn't
exist? So, despite reams and reams of data proving otherwise, you
still would rather believe what the RNC tells you as opposed to what
scientists are telling you?

On 11/3/09 10:39 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 05:48:24 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker
wrote:

Where in that article does it say that global warming isn't happening
and is a scam?

The scam is what activists are saying we need to do to "fix" it.
Basically, what ever their agenda was 30 years ago is now revived to
stop global warming. (higher gas taxes, stop eating meat. ban cars,
ZPG or whatever)


Higher gas taxes, eating less meat, driving smaller cares and
controlling population would benefit all of us, whatever the motivation.

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 12:10:33 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 10:51:53 -0500, H the K
wrote:

The scam is what activists are saying we need to do to "fix" it.
Basically, what ever their agenda was 30 years ago is now revived to
stop global warming. (higher gas taxes, stop eating meat. ban cars,
ZPG or whatever)


Higher gas taxes, eating less meat, driving smaller cars and
controlling population would benefit all of us, whatever the motivation.


So sell it that way and stop making up lies that this will stop global
climate change in any way at all.

It is like the Iraq war. If we had just said at the outset, this was
to stop an Iraqi/Isreali war, we could have made a rational decision.
As it was we had a lie, compounded by obfuscation and denial.
It certainly had noting to do with oil but that was what the left
said. (Saddam would have been more than happy to sell us oil at a
bargain price)
The right talked about direct threats to the US and that is BS too.

Huh? Dick Cheney and George Bush in office and it had nothing to do
with oil? It was to prevent Israel going to war with Saddam?

Over what, Saddam's payments to jihadists?

You've got to be kidding...

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:45:37 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 09:34:01 -0800, jps wrote:

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 12:10:33 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 10:51:53 -0500, H the K
wrote:

The scam is what activists are saying we need to do to "fix" it.
Basically, what ever their agenda was 30 years ago is now revived to
stop global warming. (higher gas taxes, stop eating meat. ban cars,
ZPG or whatever)


Higher gas taxes, eating less meat, driving smaller cars and
controlling population would benefit all of us, whatever the motivation.


So sell it that way and stop making up lies that this will stop global
climate change in any way at all.

It is like the Iraq war. If we had just said at the outset, this was
to stop an Iraqi/Isreali war, we could have made a rational decision.
As it was we had a lie, compounded by obfuscation and denial.
It certainly had noting to do with oil but that was what the left
said. (Saddam would have been more than happy to sell us oil at a
bargain price)
The right talked about direct threats to the US and that is BS too.

Huh? Dick Cheney and George Bush in office and it had nothing to do
with oil? It was to prevent Israel going to war with Saddam?

Over what, Saddam's payments to jihadists?

You've got to be kidding...

We went to war with Saddam so Israel wouldn't attack them ... again.
(you do remember that?)

I remember that in the litany of excuses about why we were there.

I don't understand why you didn't pick any of the others?
WMD, drones, Winnebagos, Terrorist training camps, the poor trampled
Iraqi masses, mass graves, nuclear weapons materials, yellowcake,
tubes, etc.

Why isn't the big pool of oil under the country your focus. They knew
Saddam was hobbled. They knew the country would be taken over by Iran
if someone didn't fill the void first. Kissinger has been telling
every administration for four decades to go in and occupy the mid-east
so no one else gets their hands on that oil.

You assume it's because we were protecting Israel from getting their
hands dirty?

That dog won't hunt.

We are threatening Iran right now for exactly the same reason.
If we don't stop their nuclear program Israel will.

We are not acting as surrogates for Israel. They will act on their
own as the need dictates, as we've seen many times before. They may
seek our approval but they will move on their own as needed.

Saddam would have sold us cheap oil forever.

Not if he lost control of the country.

The problem is he would
have used the money to buy arms to fight Israel with.

Baloney. He was our stooge and all he wanted was more oil.

As long as he
was just fighting with Iran we were in love with him.

The writing was on the wall. The embargos had weakened him. He was
on his knees and lots inside and out of his circle knew it. You think
neither the US nor Iran knew it? Don't fool yourself.

While you are looking up the Israeli attack on Saddams nuclear plant,
look up Gerald Bull.

I'll do that.

On 11/3/09 12:10 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 10:51:53 -0500, H the
wrote:

The scam is what activists are saying we need to do to "fix" it.
Basically, what ever their agenda was 30 years ago is now revived to
stop global warming. (higher gas taxes, stop eating meat. ban cars,
ZPG or whatever)


Higher gas taxes, eating less meat, driving smaller cars and
controlling population would benefit all of us, whatever the motivation.


So sell it that way and stop making up lies that this will stop global
climate change in any way at all.

It is like the Iraq war. If we had just said at the outset, this was
to stop an Iraqi/Isreali war, we could have made a rational decision.
As it was we had a lie, compounded by obfuscation and denial.
It certainly had noting to do with oil but that was what the left
said. (Saddam would have been more than happy to sell us oil at a
bargain price)
The right talked about direct threats to the US and that is BS too.



Sell it *that* way? There are many reasons to support higher gas taxes,
eating less meat, driving smaller cars and controlling population growth.

As for the Iraq war, I don't buy the reason you gave, either. It wasn't
about oil and it wasn't about preventing an Israeli/Iraqi war.

What it was about: a fallback for the Bush Administration, which, up
until the time it decided to invade Iraq, had utterly failed in its
promise to catch those responsible for planning and implementing the
9-11 attacks. It was neocon meat thrown to boobus Americanus, and meant
to help avoid a GOP debacle in the 2002 congressional elections.

It was a war started for the most cynical of reasons. Cheney should have
been indicted, arrested, convicted and imprisoned.