|
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
all the congratulatory messages from Harry, jps, basskisser, gould, et al.
our capture of Saddam. Harry, I could imagine the glee in your eyes when you came across the video of the Iraqi getting (supposedly) murdered by a Marine after being wounded. Yes, I would call it murder, if it occurred. I have doubts about the authenticity of the video. For one thing, why has it not been shown on any of the networks? Surely, if it were substantiatable, NBC, ABC, CNN, etc. would showing it every five minutes. The US just fined a soldier about $5000 for shooting a pistol near a man's head. The officer is undoubtedly being forced to retire early. How do you reconcile this action with the "inaction" for the shooting depicted in your little video. Well guys, how do you turn this into a negative for the administration? This should be cute. John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
JohnH wrote:
all the congratulatory messages from Harry, jps, basskisser, gould, et al. our capture of Saddam. I don't know if I'm included in "et al" but I say congrats and job well done. I really hope the attacks in Iraq drop off now. If he was captured with $3/4 mill in cash then he was probably financing a lot of trouble (or perhaps it was merely his kitty for bribing people to help him hide). In any event, it's a big success. Harry, I could imagine the glee in your eyes when you came across the video of the Iraqi getting (supposedly) murdered by a Marine after being wounded. Yes, I would call it murder, if it occurred. I have doubts about the authenticity of the video. For one thing, why has it not been shown on any of the networks? Surely, if it were substantiatable, NBC, ABC, CNN, etc. would showing it every five minutes. The US just fined a soldier about $5000 for shooting a pistol near a man's head. The officer is undoubtedly being forced to retire early. How do you reconcile this action with the "inaction" for the shooting depicted in your little video. Same way I reconcile the My Lai massacre or the Phoenix program with the Memorial Wall. There are some bad people in every big organization. There are some good people who occasionally do bad things. Not everything that denigrates BushCo or the Army _has_ to be a fake just because you wish it to be so. What do you think about the blockbuster bomb they dropped to try and get Saddam at the war's opening? They bragged plenty about it for two or three days, then shut up quickly and haven't heard a word since. Does that mean it suddenly didn't happen, it's become un-history? The US murdered a whole block in downtown Baghdad to get one man. And didn't get that man until now. Let's see more denials about 'collateral damage.' Well guys, how do you turn this into a negative for the administration? This should be cute. That's already too long of a list. DSK |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 10:30:32 -0500, DSK wrote:
JohnH wrote: all the congratulatory messages from Harry, jps, basskisser, gould, et al. our capture of Saddam. I don't know if I'm included in "et al" but I say congrats and job well done. I really hope the attacks in Iraq drop off now. If he was captured with $3/4 mill in cash then he was probably financing a lot of trouble (or perhaps it was merely his kitty for bribing people to help him hide). In any event, it's a big success. Harry, I could imagine the glee in your eyes when you came across the video of the Iraqi getting (supposedly) murdered by a Marine after being wounded. Yes, I would call it murder, if it occurred. I have doubts about the authenticity of the video. For one thing, why has it not been shown on any of the networks? Surely, if it were substantiatable, NBC, ABC, CNN, etc. would showing it every five minutes. The US just fined a soldier about $5000 for shooting a pistol near a man's head. The officer is undoubtedly being forced to retire early. How do you reconcile this action with the "inaction" for the shooting depicted in your little video. Same way I reconcile the My Lai massacre or the Phoenix program with the Memorial Wall. There are some bad people in every big organization. There are some good people who occasionally do bad things. Not everything that denigrates BushCo or the Army _has_ to be a fake just because you wish it to be so. What do you think about the blockbuster bomb they dropped to try and get Saddam at the war's opening? They bragged plenty about it for two or three days, then shut up quickly and haven't heard a word since. Does that mean it suddenly didn't happen, it's become un-history? The US murdered a whole block in downtown Baghdad to get one man. And didn't get that man until now. Let's see more denials about 'collateral damage.' Well guys, how do you turn this into a negative for the administration? This should be cute. That's already too long of a list. DSK You miss the point, I think. If the Uniform Code of Military Justice is applied to a Colonel who fires a pistol to scare someone, then I would expect the UCMJ to be applied to a Marine who shoots a wounded, unarmed (if that be the case) Iraqi. That would not be collateral damage. It would, if it occurred as depicted, be murder. Collateral damage is, by definition, unintended. The shooting of the Iraqi, as depicted, was intended. I see no comparison. John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
JohnH wrote:
You miss the point, I think. Not at all. Why so quick to jump to that conclusion? Did you read all of my post? If the Uniform Code of Military Justice is applied to a Colonel who fires a pistol to scare someone, then I would expect the UCMJ to be applied to a Marine who shoots a wounded, unarmed (if that be the case) Iraqi. I would expect so too, but it doesn't always happen that way. All it would take is for the people who were there at the scene to be unwilling to step forward and put up charges. That would not be collateral damage. It would, if it occurred as depicted, be murder. Agreed. And it has happened many many times. Collateral damage is, by definition, unintended. The shooting of the Iraqi, as depicted, was intended. I see no comparison. My mention of collateral damage was referring to a different case entirely. DSK |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
John H wrote:
all the congratulatory messages from Harry, jps, basskisser, gould, et al. our capture of Saddam. You're not very patient. It's just after 8 AM on the W coast, on a Sunday morning. Go and fornicate yourself, John. Don't you ever dare to post an implication that I don't wish the best for this country and our 300 million fellow citizens. Your screwed up perspective is that you, only you, and those who think exactly like you have the only valid opinions about how our society should run and what direction national policies should take. You shouldn't believe everything you hear on Rush Limbaugh. The high percentage of Americans who disagree with your views are not traitors or national enemies. Yes, I'm damn glad he's caught. With the billions of dollars spent on an ill-advised war and the toll the entire adventure has taken on US credibility throughout the world, it's gratifiying to see that we have *something* tangible to show for it. But let me ask you this- does capturing a tyrant suddenly mean that all the statements Bush made to get us into Iraq in the firtst place are suddenly any more true than they were this time yesterday? Let's hope the insurgency tapers off in Iraq. If it does not, people will begin questioning the war more than ever - once the capture of SH is old news. |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
|
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
JohnH wrote:
Your bud, Harry, has made several posts without comment on the capture of Saddam. As yet, jps has had no comment. Wonder why? Could it be because they can't come up wit a way to put a negative spin on it? John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD I've commented on the capture of Saddam. It's good that he's been captured and will be the subject of a showy trial, but I don't think it is a big deal. He hasn't been the head of state in Iraq for what, seven months? And it took all of Bush's horses and all of Bush's men to find him? Our invasion of Iraq wasn't the equivalent of the liberation of Belgium or even the siege and relief of Bastogne during the Battle of the Bulge. In Iraq, we took on a fifth-rate power whose uniformed military forces collapsed shortly after we arrived. I know you Conservatives want to make the toppling of Saddam the greatest thing since sliced bread, but, in reality, all it is is a minor positive blip in a sadly mistaken U.S. misadventure, one aimed at propping up a failed US president in the popularity polls. -- Email sent to is never read. |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
Jeees. Where did I make this implication to which you refer?
With your comment that you're "still waiting".... (and the implication that you are likely waiting in vain)....for any comment from several people, myself specifically named in the group, expressing any satisfaction that Saddam Hussein has been brought to ground. Your bud, Harry, has made several posts without comment on the capture of Saddam. Nobody is responsible for Harry except Harry. As yet, jps has had no comment. Wonder why Could be because he's still asleep? Or, unlike some of us, doesn't respond to momentous news by making a bee line for rec.boats? http://www.tomorrowsbestseller.com/w...State/book.asp |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 12:02:51 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:
JohnH wrote: Your bud, Harry, has made several posts without comment on the capture of Saddam. As yet, jps has had no comment. Wonder why? Could it be because they can't come up wit a way to put a negative spin on it? John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD I've commented on the capture of Saddam. It's good that he's been captured and will be the subject of a showy trial, but I don't think it is a big deal. He hasn't been the head of state in Iraq for what, seven months? And it took all of Bush's horses and all of Bush's men to find him? I doubt if a trial will be held soon. I think he will undergo some interrogation first. Of course, many libs will say he's being mistreated, but we'll have to live with that. I'm sure there's a bunch already complaining about his 'lice check' being televised. Our invasion of Iraq wasn't the equivalent of the liberation of Belgium or even the siege and relief of Bastogne during the Battle of the Bulge. In Iraq, we took on a fifth-rate power whose uniformed military forces collapsed shortly after we arrived. Tell that to the next hundred thousand about to go into mass graves. I know you Conservatives want to make the toppling of Saddam the greatest thing since sliced bread, but, in reality, all it is is a minor positive blip in a sadly mistaken U.S. misadventure, one aimed at propping up a failed US president in the popularity polls. Well I'll be double-damned! You used the phrase "positive blip". That's the first positive thing I've heard from you about the military, the administration, or the USA. Times are indeed a'changing. John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
Wally, on the list of right wing people who seldom post anything except hate
mail to the NG, you're running a distant second to some broad from "down under" something. But keep it up. Practice makes perfect. You too can become a puking fountain of stinking negativity if you put whatever it is you use instead of a mind to it. The difference between your perspective and mine is very simple. I believe you have every right in the world to hold your opinions, (wrong as they are), and I do not consider your obviously defective opinion (insert grin here) any sort of threat to my own. When was the last time you heard anybody on the left call you right-wingers "traitors" or anti- American? . Your screwed up perspective is that you, only you, and those who think exactly like you have the only valid opinions about how our society should run and what direction national policies should take. LOL You leftists are the only "true word", we all know that by now. |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
Gould 0738 wrote: Nobody is responsible for Harry except Harry. Nope, you're implicated also as a sycophant. Stop being the apologist for this asshole. It makes you an asshole also. -- Charlie ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
Gould 0738 wrote: Wally, on the list of right wing people who seldom post anything except hate mail to the NG, you're running a distant second to some broad from "down under" something. No one compares to your left-wing hate-monger krause. Why is it that you liberals are such hypocrites? When was the last time you heard anybody on the left call you right-wingers "traitors" or anti- American? Are you serious? -- Charlie ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
|
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
Go to Aljazeera.net and see what the Arab reaction is. LOL! |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
Time will tell. What bothers me is those who seem to *want* an escallation of the conflict and more dead soldiers to nibble at Bush's aproval ratings. There are plenty of ways to oppose Bush without counting dead troops like trophies. -W "jps" wrote in message While I could hope this slows down the conflict I expect it'll only reinforce the anti-American sentiment in the region. |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
WaIIy wrote:
On 14 Dec 2003 18:19:07 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote: Wally, on the list of right wing people who seldom post anything except hate mail to the NG, you're running a distant second to some broad from "down under" something. "some broad" Nice turn of a phrase. Your respect for women is right along with your partner in hate. The KrauseBot © learns well. Karen Smith gets all the respect she deserves. The difference between your perspective and mine is very simple. I believe you have every right in the world to hold your opinions, (wrong as they are), and I do not consider your obviously defective opinion (insert grin here) any sort of threat to my own. When was the last time you heard anybody on the left call you right-wingers "traitors" or anti- American? Duh, I think you can figure out that answer all by yourself. . Your screwed up perspective is that you, only you, and those who think exactly like you have the only valid opinions about how our society should run and what direction national policies should take. LOL You leftists are the only "true word", we all know that by now. Worry not, Wally. No one on the left wants to usurp your position as the only true dumbfoch in rec.boats. -- Email sent to is never read. |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
Clams Canino wrote:
Time will tell. What bothers me is those who seem to *want* an escallation of the conflict and more dead soldiers to nibble at Bush's aproval ratings. There are plenty of ways to oppose Bush without counting dead troops like trophies. -W Who wants an escalation of the conflict in Iraq? I do wonder how many more body bags it will take before more Americans finally realize the idiocy of Bush's political war against Iraq. Saddam has been out of the picture as a player for many months now. Do you anticipate a drastic change in the *security* situation in Iraq? If so, why? Do you think with the capture of Saddam the attacks against American troops will cease? If so, why? Do you think the United States is any safer from international Moslem terrorists than it was before Saddam was captured? If so, why? Do you think the "show trial" of Saddam will be scheduled so as to impact the U.S. election campaigns next year? If not, why not? What do you think the impact might be of another serious and deadly Moslem terrorist attack on the U.S. before next fall's elections? Please elaborate. As I stated this morning, it is good that we've captured Saddam and can put him on trial, assuming the trial is run properly, but his capture has little to do with the terrorist threats against us. -- Email sent to is never read. |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message news:briob0$3od99$1@ID- Who wants an escalation of the conflict in Iraq? Any Bush detractor with a "beat Bush at any and all costs" mentality. I do wonder how many more body bags it will take before more Americans finally realize the idiocy of Bush's political war against Iraq. Only time will tell on that one. The costs will have to weighed out against the benifits. I'm afraid only after it's all over can we assess it properly. In light of any gains or losses made. It's hard to play armchair quarterback mid-game. Saddam has been out of the picture as a player for many months now. I don't know what he has or hasn't directed. I think capturing him has to be a hell of a demotivator for his supporters though. Do you anticipate a drastic change in the *security* situation in Iraq? If so, why? See above.... though I think at first there might be an escallation by ****ed off Saddam followers. But the head of the (that) snake is gone. Do you think with the capture of Saddam the attacks against American troops will cease? If so, why? No... I think there are more forces at play than just Baathists. I hope they will slow up a bit. Do you think the United States is any safer from international Moslem terrorists than it was before Saddam was captured? If so, why? No. Unless he divulges any intelligence - if he has any. Do you think the "show trial" of Saddam will be scheduled so as to impact the U.S. election campaigns next year? If not, why not? Given the fact that the new Iraqi Govt. will take power in late June - I can't see how the trial *won't* be in the summer or fall. I'm sure Bush would *like* to see Saddam hang the on the eve of balloting though. That's politics as usual. What do you think the impact might be of another serious and deadly Moslem terrorist attack on the U.S. before next fall's elections? Please elaborate. Tough call. On one hand it could cause a "rally round the flag and the Prez" mentality. On the other hand it could look like a big failure of Tom Ridge and his boss. I'm hoping that *if* it happens again we begin a close investigation and screening of all Middle Eastern types that have been here for 10 years or less. As I stated this morning, it is good that we've captured Saddam and can put him on trial, assuming the trial is run properly, but his capture has little to do with the terrorist threats against us. I'm not sure how to run the trial "improperly"? I mean, his past crimes against humanity are public and notorious already. I could think of a few hundred thousand reasons to hang him. I just hope we get all the intel we can *out* of him before he's tried and hung. It's important that any trial held has all the trappings of fairness though. And it's important that it be run by Iraq or the UN. And IMHO the death penalty is important here to give real closure. As for the fundie terrorists - no, little impact. Only upside is that they have US targets over there to strike at. I'd rather they strike at armed US warriors than airline passengers and businessment. -W |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
Clams Canino wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message news:briob0$3od99$1@ID- Who wants an escalation of the conflict in Iraq? Any Bush detractor with a "beat Bush at any and all costs" mentality. Absurd. I want Bush beaten, and beaten badly, but I don't want to see any more people killed in Iraq, on either side. I do wonder how many more body bags it will take before more Americans finally realize the idiocy of Bush's political war against Iraq. Only time will tell on that one. The costs will have to weighed out against the benifits. I'm afraid only after it's all over can we assess it properly. In light of any gains or losses made. It's hard to play armchair quarterback mid-game. Saddam has been out of the picture as a player for many months now. I don't know what he has or hasn't directed. I think capturing him has to be a hell of a demotivator for his supporters though. Do you anticipate a drastic change in the *security* situation in Iraq? If so, why? See above.... though I think at first there might be an escallation by ****ed off Saddam followers. But the head of the (that) snake is gone. Do you think with the capture of Saddam the attacks against American troops will cease? If so, why? No... I think there are more forces at play than just Baathists. I hope they will slow up a bit. Do you think the United States is any safer from international Moslem terrorists than it was before Saddam was captured? If so, why? No. Unless he divulges any intelligence - if he has any. Do you think the "show trial" of Saddam will be scheduled so as to impact the U.S. election campaigns next year? If not, why not? Given the fact that the new Iraqi Govt. will take power in late June - I can't see how the trial *won't* be in the summer or fall. I'm sure Bush would *like* to see Saddam hang the on the eve of balloting though. That's politics as usual. What do you think the impact might be of another serious and deadly Moslem terrorist attack on the U.S. before next fall's elections? Please elaborate. Tough call. On one hand it could cause a "rally round the flag and the Prez" mentality. On the other hand it could look like a big failure of Tom Ridge and his boss. I'm hoping that *if* it happens again we begin a close investigation and screening of all Middle Eastern types that have been here for 10 years or less. As I stated this morning, it is good that we've captured Saddam and can put him on trial, assuming the trial is run properly, but his capture has little to do with the terrorist threats against us. I'm not sure how to run the trial "improperly"? I mean, his past crimes against humanity are public and notorious already. I could think of a few hundred thousand reasons to hang him. I just hope we get all the intel we can *out* of him before he's tried and hung. It's important that any trial held has all the trappings of fairness though. And it's important that it be run by Iraq or the UN. And IMHO the death penalty is important here to give real closure. As for the fundie terrorists - no, little impact. Only upside is that they have US targets over there to strike at. I'd rather they strike at armed US warriors than airline passengers and businessment. -W -- Email sent to is never read. |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Clams Canino wrote: Time will tell. What bothers me is those who seem to *want* an escallation of the conflict and more dead soldiers to nibble at Bush's aproval ratings. There are plenty of ways to oppose Bush without counting dead troops like trophies. -W Who wants an escalation of the conflict in Iraq? I do wonder how many more body bags it will take before more Americans finally realize the idiocy of Bush's political war against Iraq. Saddam has been out of the picture as a player for many months now. Do you anticipate a drastic change in the *security* situation in Iraq? If so, why? Yes and no. The Iraqi resistance will all but evaporate now that their financier is in captivity. However, the battle-hardened al Qaeda insurgents flooding into Afghanistan and Chechnya will continue to fight. Fortunately, however, capturing Saddam will free up thousands of special ops forces to confront the supply lines (both equipment and manpower). |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
Nope, you're implicated also as a sycophant.
Stop being the apologist for this asshole. It makes you an asshole also. -- Charlie Sigh. Here we go again. Here's where I say, "Show me how I have apologized for Harry Krause," and your only response is, "You do it all the time." IOW, arguing the point is a total waste of time. There are 3-4 people who will agree with you- only because of an intense dislike for me and/or Krause. Everybody else will see your accusation for the bovine excrement it indeed is. |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
Wally, on the list of right wing people who seldom post anything except
hate mail to the NG, you're running a distant second to some broad from "down under" something. No one compares to your left-wing hate-monger krause. Why is it that you liberals are such hypocrites? Sometimes its important to read every word. "On the list of right wing people....." is a clause that limits the consideration to a subgroup. That subgroup consists of "right wing" people. I believe that "right wing" doesn't include Harry Krause. Harry can be exceptionally nasty. When he gets up a head of steam, he's as big a flamer as anybody. When was the last time you heard anybody on the left call you right-wingers "traitors" or anti- American? Are you serious? -- Charlie Darn right. You guys sit over in self-righteous heaven calling everybody who disagrees with your perspective "traitors" and etc. When was the last time anybody on the left called a right winger a "traitor"? The liberal philosophy acknowledges that there can be more than one sincere opinon, and that often times those opinions will disagree. (Don't worry- I have no expectation that you would ever understand such a radical concept.) |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
"some broad" Nice turn of a phrase. Your respect for women is right
along with your partner in hate. The KrauseBot © learns well. You know nothing about my "respect for women." Do I respect an *individual* who makes it her life's work to personally, viciously, and continuously insult everybody who disagrees with her. Nope. Not at all. Do you respect the whores hanging out on the corner? Apparently you must, if you feel all women are automatically entitled to respect. How 'bout these nasty little pieces of work that keep driving carloads of kids down boatramps and letting them drown? Hey, those are women too. No fair picking and choosing, right? Respect goes where it is earned. I respect ladies. Some women do not act like ladies and are unworthy of respect, as are many men who do not act like gentlemen. I have no respect for prejudice or stupidity, regardless of gender or political affiliation. |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
|
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
JohnH wrote in message . ..
all the congratulatory messages from Harry, jps, basskisser, gould, et al. our capture of Saddam. Harry, I could imagine the glee in your eyes when you came across the video of the Iraqi getting (supposedly) murdered by a Marine after being wounded. Yes, I would call it murder, if it occurred. I have doubts about the authenticity of the video. For one thing, why has it not been shown on any of the networks? Surely, if it were substantiatable, NBC, ABC, CNN, etc. would showing it every five minutes. The US just fined a soldier about $5000 for shooting a pistol near a man's head. The officer is undoubtedly being forced to retire early. How do you reconcile this action with the "inaction" for the shooting depicted in your little video. Well guys, how do you turn this into a negative for the administration? This should be cute. John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD Absolutely, congratulations on spending billions upon billions, upon billions of taxpayer's money to find a man that posed no harm to us, except for those pesky cardboard drones he had aimed at us!!! By the way, news this morning says that Saddam has stated he had NO weapons of mass destruction before the war. |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
"Joe" wrote in message .. .
Go to Aljazeera.net and see what the Arab reaction is. LOL! Do tell, what is so funny about that? Seeing how BushCo has there collectives heads up the collective asses of the Arabs, it should be interesting. Funny, the arabs are amassing weapons, has much more capability that Iraq ever had, are just as volitale, but we aren't screwing with them. Ever wonder why? |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
Gould 0738 wrote: Here's where I say, "Show me how I have apologized for Harry Krause," and your only response is, "You do it all the time." Yup, because he's of your political persuasion, he gets a pass from you. There are 3-4 people who will agree with you- only because of an intense dislike for me and/or Krause. Everybody else will see your accusation for the bovine excrement it indeed is. Ha ha ha. If only you could convince yourself of that. Stick a pin in yourself gould. You need to deflate a bit. -- Charlie ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
Gould 0738 wrote: Harry can be exceptionally nasty. When he gets up a head of steam, he's as big a flamer as anybody. He a sexist piece of filth, who has said he'd enjoy watching people he doesn't like die. When was the last time you heard anybody on the left call you right-wingers "traitors" or anti- American? Are you serious? Darn right. You guys sit over in self-righteous heaven calling everybody who disagrees with your perspective "traitors" and etc. I've never called anyone a traitor here. What makes you think I'm a right-winger? Because I point out the hypocrisy of one krause and his doggie gould? There's plenty of it on the right too, just look at your favorite whipping boy rush. In your blinding partisanship, you can't even stand on two legs any more. You'd do alot for your personal credibility if you'd quit playing fiddle to your boy krause. -- Charlie ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
"Charles" wrote in message ... Gould 0738 wrote: Harry can be exceptionally nasty. When he gets up a head of steam, he's as big a flamer as anybody. He a sexist piece of filth, who has said he'd enjoy watching people he doesn't like die. When was the last time you heard anybody on the left call you right-wingers "traitors" or anti- American? Are you serious? Darn right. You guys sit over in self-righteous heaven calling everybody who disagrees with your perspective "traitors" and etc. I call Harry a traitor for several reasons: (a) he gloats with every bit of bad news from the economy, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc., (b) he expresses "hope" that the next terrorist attack hits middle America, (c) he constantly disparages the capabilities of US troops. Although you and I rarely agree, Gould, you *do* seem to have the best interest of our country at heart. You're just a little bit misguided as to the best road to follow. |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
Yup, because he's of your political persuasion, he gets a pass from you.
Go see who was the very first person to pitch him crap about posting "White Trash Christmas" in honor of Karen, Wally, and NOYB. Suppose I hollered "foul" because any of those three are of my political persuasion? You cite no spicific examples where I have "apologized" for Harry, and ignore instances where I have protested his tactics. Very weak case. |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
Gould 0738 wrote: Go see who was the very first person to pitch him crap about posting "White Trash Christmas" in honor of Karen, Wally, and NOYB. Suppose I hollered "foul" because any of those three are of my political persuasion? You did so because krause even manages to embarrass you betimes. Doesn't mean you don't play favorite with him because he's your favorite attack ass. You cite no spicific examples where I have "apologized" for Harry, and ignore instances where I have protested his tactics. Very weak case. Weak case in your mind, a case nevertheless. You are an enabler of an extremely sick person who needs mental help. -- Charlie ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
|
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
|
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
NOYB wrote:
"Charles" wrote in message ... Gould 0738 wrote: Harry can be exceptionally nasty. When he gets up a head of steam, he's as big a flamer as anybody. He a sexist piece of filth, who has said he'd enjoy watching people he doesn't like die. When was the last time you heard anybody on the left call you right-wingers "traitors" or anti- American? Are you serious? Darn right. You guys sit over in self-righteous heaven calling everybody who disagrees with your perspective "traitors" and etc. I call Harry a traitor for several reasons: (a) he gloats with every bit of bad news from the economy, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc., Not true. I simply work to pin the bad news on the tail of the chief perpetrator...the Smirking Chimp. Nothing traitorous about expressing displeasure over the idiocy of George W. Bush. (b) he expresses "hope" that the next terrorist attack hits middle America Not true. I've stated that I hope there is not another attack, but that if there is, that it strike "Bush Country," where the conservatives hold forth. (c) he constantly disparages the capabilities of US troops. They haven't faced a serious enemy since Vietnam. I have no reason to believe they are capable against equal forces. -- Email sent to is never read. |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
"jps" wrote in message ... In article , says... Go to Aljazeera.net and see what the Arab reaction is. LOL! Yes, God forbid you actually look at the situation from the other camp's view. LOL!! You might learn something. LOL!!! What arrogance. LOL!!!! |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
In article ,
says... "jps" wrote in message ... In article , says... Go to Aljazeera.net and see what the Arab reaction is. LOL! Yes, God forbid you actually look at the situation from the other camp's view. LOL!! You might learn something. LOL!!! What arrogance. LOL!!!! I see you're easily amused. Have another hit Joe. http://english.aljazeera.net/HomePage Go for a visit Joe, you might learn something... |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
Every other news agency refers to the troops as "US soldiers, US forces, or
coalition forces". Aljazeera constantly refers to them as "occupation forces". As for the protestors in Tikrit and Ramadi... I'd say it's a pretty safe bet that those are the very same bad guys who keeping taking pot shots at our troops. Perhaps we can have one of those "accidental" bombings drop right in the middle of 'em. "jps" wrote in message ... In article , says... "jps" wrote in message ... In article , says... Go to Aljazeera.net and see what the Arab reaction is. LOL! Yes, God forbid you actually look at the situation from the other camp's view. LOL!! You might learn something. LOL!!! What arrogance. LOL!!!! I see you're easily amused. Have another hit Joe. http://english.aljazeera.net/HomePage Go for a visit Joe, you might learn something... |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
Aljazeera sounds an awful lot like Al Jazirah...a town in Syria that I
suspect you'll be hearing a lot more about in the near future. Can you say "WMD's"? ;-) "NOYB" wrote in message nk.net... Every other news agency refers to the troops as "US soldiers, US forces, or coalition forces". Aljazeera constantly refers to them as "occupation forces". As for the protestors in Tikrit and Ramadi... I'd say it's a pretty safe bet that those are the very same bad guys who keeping taking pot shots at our troops. Perhaps we can have one of those "accidental" bombings drop right in the middle of 'em. "jps" wrote in message ... In article , says... "jps" wrote in message ... In article , says... Go to Aljazeera.net and see what the Arab reaction is. LOL! Yes, God forbid you actually look at the situation from the other camp's view. LOL!! You might learn something. LOL!!! What arrogance. LOL!!!! I see you're easily amused. Have another hit Joe. http://english.aljazeera.net/HomePage Go for a visit Joe, you might learn something... |
Off the Topic. I'm waiting to see...
Aljazeera sounds an awful lot like Al Jazirah...a town in Syria that I
suspect you'll be hearing a lot more about in the near future. Can you say "WMD's"? ;-) After enough interrogation, Saddam Hussein will eventually be brought around to say anything and everything the administration hopes to hear. We'll all switch from a position that the lying ******* couldn't tell the truth if his life depended on it to believing every syllable he utters that exonerates our motives for invading Iraq. They say truth is the first casualty of war. First causualty of politics too, unfortunately. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:18 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com