European Jihad? Challenge?
 

Harry Krause wrote:

Some years ago, Skipper tried his damnedest to "entice" me to trailer a
boat about 2500 miles from the east coast of Florida (or maybe it was
after I moved to the Chesapeake Bay area) to the Gulf of California,
where he would meet me with his imaginary Bayliner to see which boat was
the better cruiser. Or some such nonsense. Why I would want to waste
days of my life towing a boat those distances to meet up with asshole
with a Bayliner was something I couldn't parse.

Actually, Krause had made specific allegations regarding galvanized
Escort trailers, the Cortez, his open water skills, Bayliners, the San
Carlos area, and Skippers boat. The ONLY way to test his claims was in
this specific Challenge. Harry failed this shake 'n bake verification
and has carried that chip ever since.

--
Skipper

European Jihad? Challenge?
 

Harry Krause wrote:

Early on Krause was presented an opportunity to backup his assertions
regarding certain boating and trailering products and verify his boating
skills. As it came time for rubber to hit the road in this reasonable
test, Harry whimpered off. That's the thing about Harry, when
Challenged, he seems unable to stand tall.

You still are trying to sell this b.s.? Your "challenge" required me to
tow a boat what, 2000-2500 miles? For what? To meet up with an ass like
you who allegedly owned a 22' Crappyliner? Maybe stupid works in Derby,
Kansas, but not in my zipcodes.

No doubt, taking on such a Challenge with your skill set and unsuitable
equipment would indeed have been a stupid and futile undertaking. Point
is, when given the opportunity to back up *your* words, you puked out.
It's in the archives.

--
Skipper

European Jihad?
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Jeff Rigby wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Jeff Rigby wrote:
"DSK" wrote in message
...
Perhaps, due to the way the present America was taken by force from
the original inhabitants, war is in the cultural heritage of the us
somewhat seen as a legitimate and effective means to an end, much
more
than in europe.
That's an interesting idea, maybe true.


Jeff Rigby wrote:
There was a vacumn here as 80% of the origional indians in the
eastern and south easteren continental US were killed by dieases
brought in by spanish explorers.
???

Do you actually believe this stuff, or do you pick it up on some
secret "wishful thinking" history website for fascist morons?

I suggest reading a basic U.S. history text... 5th grade is probably
about right.

DSK
Maybe you should read those books again. You have a selective memory
as indeed these facts were taught in my history books in Florida in the
Fifth grade. The Indians must have been killed by violence because the
white man is evil and the US government practices genocide. That is
your world view..... The truth is man is NOT inherently evil just
stupid.

See:
http://www.uic.edu/classes/osci/osci...%20World. htm
18 million Indians die as a result of the first wave of diseases
brought to the new world by the Spanish

See: http://www.thefurtrapper.com/indian_smallpox.htm Rocky mountain
Indians decimated by white man diseases

See: http://www.kporterfield.com/aicttw/a...s/disease.html For a
timeline of diseases spread thru the continental US by European
explorers

To be historically accurate Europeans are responsible for the deaths of
most of the Indians killed in the Continental United States.

So, you're claiming the diseases of your ancestors killed the majority
of native Americans, and then your ancestors robbed, pillaged and raped
most of the rest?

Nope I'm claiming based on FACTS posted that European diseases decimated
the Indian population. The available lands were then settled by
Europeans and when the settlers started encroaching on Indian lands (some
100 years after the start of immigration to the continental US) the
Indians attacked the settlers. Being the stupid humans we are we didn't
deal with them. We militarily defeated them pushed them into smaller and
smaller areas until they attacked us again and the process started all
over again.

Indians were the ones that "robbed, pillaged and raped" only because
other than lands they had nothing we wanted to rob. The Indians were
human too and lived up to our comman heritage.

There is enough blame to go around.

There were three tribes (fuzzy on this) that integrated with the European
settlers (partly because there weren't enough of them left). They did
this because they were constantly being attacked by those tribes to the
west that were more aggressive and violent and they had more in common
with us than the Indian tribes to the west. Several of our constitutions
founding philosophies were taken from the constitution of those Indian
tribes ( as well of course from English law).


Oh, I get it now. First your ancestors infected the native Americans, then
your ancestors raped, pillaged and looted the native American survivors
while stealing their land, and part of it was the fault of the native
Americans because some of them fought back.

What's a good term for this? Manifest Destiny?

Harry, I'm part Indian. My grandmother was 1/2 American Indian. My Uncle
(no blood relation) is 1/2 American Indian. So the blame line is a little
blurred in my family tree. I prefer to take the problem tribe by tribe and
incident by incident. Some were the white mans fault, some the Indians.
ENOUGH BLAME TO GO AROUND!!!!!!!

Most Americans, at least the ones whose ancestors have been here for several
hundred years have Indian blood in them. There are some exceptions due to
geology or religion (Jewish for example).

Life is not as simple as you seem to believe. Harry, just as with life,
history is gray not black and white.

European Jihad?
 

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
Jeff Rigby wrote:
...The Indians must have been killed by violence because the white man
is evil and the US government practices genocide. That is your world
view.....

Excuse me? Where did I say any such thing?

Oh wait, I forgot, you prefer too ignore reality.



See:
http://www.uic.edu/classes/osci/osci...%20World. htm
18 million Indians die as a result of the first wave of diseases brought
to the new world by the Spanish

Yep... it says 50%, which is a *very* high mortality rate for such
plagues.

Nowhere does it say that diseases brought by Europeans wiped out 80% of
the Indians.

FIRST wave...was 50%, then the second wave more and the third wave, and on
and on Those that survived the first wave because they had an immunity to
the first disease might be killed by the second disease and so on. If they
happend to have a bad winter and many were undernourish disease would
revisit and many more would be killed. Remember we had a mini ice age just
as the first explorers and settlers were visiting this country. We had for
several years pemafrost as far south as Georgia.

One link says that one Caribbean island might have had that
high a mortality rate. The Black Death sweeping medieval Europe is now
believed to have had a mortality rate of about 30%.

And if you followed up that disease with another totally different
disease....


Another funny thing, these issues were studied and the figures derived by
the same egg-head professional scholars that you scream about when they
talk about pollution & global warming & evolution. I guess you can pick
your own science to believe in, as convenient at the moment?

In this case we have historical records (written and pictographs) as well as
sites in this country to study. Also mass graves with carbon dating.
As to pollution I don't call excess nutrients pollution, mercury and lead
yes and you can google and see my views on that. Evolution as a theory, yes
I believe in it but don't think that GOD would leave that tool out of
his(her) collection of building blocks for our universe just because it
allows us a trail of his works. Global warming, oh, yes any thinking person
will believe in the theory just not the only cause being MAN or the doomsday
senerios used to scare for political purposes.

Thanks for the interesting links.

DSK

European Jihad? Challenge?
 

Why don't you guys meet on some neutral turf and duke it out for bragging
rights since it appears that neither one of you have boats.

"Skipper" wrote in message
...
Harry Krause wrote:

Early on Krause was presented an opportunity to backup his assertions
regarding certain boating and trailering products and verify his boating
skills. As it came time for rubber to hit the road in this reasonable
test, Harry whimpered off. That's the thing about Harry, when
Challenged, he seems unable to stand tall.

You still are trying to sell this b.s.? Your "challenge" required me to
tow a boat what, 2000-2500 miles? For what? To meet up with an ass like
you who allegedly owned a 22' Crappyliner? Maybe stupid works in Derby,
Kansas, but not in my zipcodes.

No doubt, taking on such a Challenge with your skill set and unsuitable
equipment would indeed have been a stupid and futile undertaking. Point
is, when given the opportunity to back up *your* words, you puked out.
It's in the archives.

--
Skipper

European Jihad?
 

"Jeff Rigby" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 14:22:17 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

Len wrote:
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 13:45:21 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

May the children of all the warmongers here suffer the same horrific
fate.

Got a cold chill reading this Harry.
But I agree 100% with what you mean.

Regards, Len.


It is immoral to sit safe in your house while you urge that the sons and
daughters of other families be sent off to foreign lands to fight and
die in a war based on a president's incompetency, stupidity, and deceit.

Harry, are you really one who should be talking of sitting safely in
your house
while others are being sent to foreign lands to fight and die?

I think not.

For a non-participant, you are quick with the moral judgements.
--
John H

I disagree, John. I think that if an elected official votes in favor of
the war, whether to signify agreement or to provide funding, that
person's kids should be the first to enlist. They should have 7 days to
do this, or be arrested. People who voted for a candidate who declared
the war - same thing. Off with their children, or the voters themselves,
if they're otherwise eligible for service (age & health). A little over
half the country voted for Nookular Boy. Take away those who are too old
to serve or have no kids and I'd imagine we could still come up with
what.....maybe 10-20 million new soldiers? End of recruiting problem.

If there's a good reason not to think this way, I haven't heard it yet.

Sounds good to me as long as the military funding has been directed by
those same people long enough for it to be properly equipped so that we
have the LOW mortality rates we have now.

Do you realize how concerned the military mind is about their guys. Speed
limits and the belt law are RIGIDLY enforced on bases to prevent deaths
from car accidents. You only heard about shaped charges in regards to
taking out tanks in the past, now terrorists are using them against jeeps
because of the armor the troop carriers have installed to protect the
crew.


I'm not saying the military doesn't try and protect its people. I'm talking
about the politicians who arrange for a prank like this war, and then go
back to their fancy lunches while other peoples' kids are killed for
absolutely no friggin' reason except to satisfy a president who had no
chance of leaving any sort of positive legacy.

European Jihad?
 

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 17:02:52 +0100, Len
wrote:

On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 15:49:26 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:

Wake up, Europe, you've a war on your hands

What? where? Oh, now you mention it... Tought it were just some boys
having a bit of fun...

Well, we always turn to the US when it's to do with fighting, don't
we? So, what do you suggest...,
Make firearms more accessible to the people?
Say it's Al Qaeda and invade Pakistan?
Call 'm illegal warriors, open up some camp on an island and put all
these guys in there for years without a trial?

Surprise me,

Regards, Len.

What's the Netherlands doing about the problems they're having with
Muslims,
Len? My friend in Stolwyjk seems to think there *is* a developing problem
over
there, and that taxes can be raised only so far to keep giving money to
folks
who aren't earning it.

Your friend is right. There is a problem developing over there. It's pretty
much the same problem that developed here in the early 1960s when we were
ignoring them pesky Negroes in places like Watts and Detroit. Now, there's
them pesky brown people who just happen to be Muslims.

European Jihad?
 

Nowhere does it say that diseases brought by Europeans wiped out 80% of
the Indians.


Jeff Rigby wrote:
FIRST wave...was 50%, then the second wave more and the third wave, and on
and on

And yet, you made the claim that 80% of the North American Indians (even
the Eskimos??) were wiped out by disease brought by the Spanish by 1700.
That's ridiculous and the reason your cited web sites (interesting and
fact-filled though they be) do not support your claim.

I suggest you look up some more history, like the Tuscarora War or King
Phillip's War... wars in which the Indians drove white settlers out of
large areas of their lands... temporarily, to be sure... doesn't really
fit your picture, does it? I wonder why?

Now, if you had said that the Indians suffered massive depopulation,
mostly from deisease, starting when the Spanish explorers arrived....
*that* would be truthful. Instead you have to make up some exaggerated
claim and start hurling insults.

And you wonder why you can't get any grown-ups to play.

DSK

European Jihad?
 

On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 08:20:16 -0500, Jeff Rigby wrote:


Harry, I'm part Indian. My grandmother was 1/2 American Indian. My Uncle
(no blood relation) is 1/2 American Indian. So the blame line is a
little blurred in my family tree. I prefer to take the problem tribe by
tribe and incident by incident. Some were the white mans fault, some the
Indians. ENOUGH BLAME TO GO AROUND!!!!!!!

There's fascinating history involved. Have you checked out this site?

http://www.dickshovel.com/up.html

European Jihad?
 

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Nowhere does it say that diseases brought by Europeans wiped out 80% of
the Indians.


Jeff Rigby wrote:
FIRST wave...was 50%, then the second wave more and the third wave, and
on and on

And yet, you made the claim that 80% of the North American Indians (even
the Eskimos??) were wiped out by disease brought by the Spanish by 1700.
That's ridiculous and the reason your cited web sites (interesting and
fact-filled though they be) do not support your claim.

I'm just sort of lurking in this part of the debate. Natives in places like
Minnesota were wiped out by the Spanish?