Screw Colombia U
 

They won't let ROTC on campus because they feel the militarys don't
ask don't tell policy is discriminatory. Yet they let the coward bitch
of Iran talk while his regime simply jails and kills gays. But watch
the so called tolerant liberals defend this guy and Colombia to the
world. Remember this is the same school that allowed LaRaza to speak
for 1 1/2 hours then ran the Minute men off the stage with no voice,
no tolerance,

Screw Colombia U
 

Screw Colombia U
 

On Sep 24, 2:27 pm, HK wrote:
wrote:
They won't let ROTC on campus because they feel the militarys don't
ask don't tell policy is discriminatory. Yet they let the coward bitch
of Iran talk while his regime simply jails and kills gays. But watch
the so called tolerant liberals defend this guy and Colombia to the
world. Remember this is the same school that allowed LaRaza to speak
for 1 1/2 hours then ran the Minute men off the stage with no voice,
no tolerance,

The president of the university just spent 20 minutes cutting the
president of iran a new rectal opening. He used a chainsaw. I doubt the
little dictator ever heard anything like it before.

As for the ROTC denial, all the military has to do is get over its
idiotic sexual preference discrimination.

The so-called "Minutemen" movement has been exposed for what it is, a
pack of mostly white, racist, vigilantes.

So, if Columbia allows the Iranian pres to visit, why not allow the
head of the Minutemen? This seems a little (ok, a lot)
hypocritical. Columbia does not seem to value free speech so as it
values allowing anti-USA voices. I have no objection to listening to
this nutjob but INVITING him when they would not allow the Minutmen
head to speak and have not invited him back is totally at odds with
any notion of free speech. Why not invite David Duke? This is
nothing but liberal hypocrisy ( a virtue among them) at its most
obvious. They do not allow ROTC but they INVITE someone who executes
gays and stones women to death, only a liberal would think that is
reasonable.

Screw Colombia U
 

Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:27 pm, HK wrote:
wrote:
They won't let ROTC on campus because they feel the militarys don't
ask don't tell policy is discriminatory. Yet they let the coward bitch
of Iran talk while his regime simply jails and kills gays. But watch
the so called tolerant liberals defend this guy and Colombia to the
world. Remember this is the same school that allowed LaRaza to speak
for 1 1/2 hours then ran the Minute men off the stage with no voice,
no tolerance,
The president of the university just spent 20 minutes cutting the
president of iran a new rectal opening. He used a chainsaw. I doubt the
little dictator ever heard anything like it before.

As for the ROTC denial, all the military has to do is get over its
idiotic sexual preference discrimination.

The so-called "Minutemen" movement has been exposed for what it is, a
pack of mostly white, racist, vigilantes.

So, if Columbia allows the Iranian pres to visit, why not allow the
head of the Minutemen? This seems a little (ok, a lot)
hypocritical. Columbia does not seem to value free speech so as it
values allowing anti-USA voices. I have no objection to listening to
this nutjob but INVITING him when they would not allow the Minutmen
head to speak and have not invited him back is totally at odds with
any notion of free speech. Why not invite David Duke? This is
nothing but liberal hypocrisy ( a virtue among them) at its most
obvious. They do not allow ROTC but they INVITE someone who executes
gays and stones women to death, only a liberal would think that is
reasonable.



I'm sure if the military ends its official discrimination on the basis
of sexuality, it will be welcome where it isn't welcome now.

Screw Colombia U
 

On Sep 24, 2:55 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:27 pm, HK wrote:
wrote:
They won't let ROTC on campus because they feel the militarys don't
ask don't tell policy is discriminatory. Yet they let the coward bitch
of Iran talk while his regime simply jails and kills gays. But watch
the so called tolerant liberals defend this guy and Colombia to the
world. Remember this is the same school that allowed LaRaza to speak
for 1 1/2 hours then ran the Minute men off the stage with no voice,
no tolerance,
The president of the university just spent 20 minutes cutting the
president of iran a new rectal opening. He used a chainsaw. I doubt the
little dictator ever heard anything like it before.

As for the ROTC denial, all the military has to do is get over its
idiotic sexual preference discrimination.

The so-called "Minutemen" movement has been exposed for what it is, a
pack of mostly white, racist, vigilantes.

So, if Columbia allows the Iranian pres to visit, why not allow the
head of the Minutemen? This seems a little (ok, a lot)
hypocritical. Columbia does not seem to value free speech so as it
values allowing anti-USA voices. I have no objection to listening to
this nutjob but INVITING him when they would not allow the Minutmen
head to speak and have not invited him back is totally at odds with
any notion of free speech. Why not invite David Duke? This is
nothing but liberal hypocrisy ( a virtue among them) at its most
obvious. They do not allow ROTC but they INVITE someone who executes
gays and stones women to death, only a liberal would think that is
reasonable.

I'm sure if the military ends its official discrimination on the basis
of sexuality, it will be welcome where it isn't welcome now.

So, The Iranian nutjob who kills gays is welcome but ROTC isnt? This
is liberal logic I s'pose, not obvious to us rednecks.

Screw Colombia U
 

Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:55 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:27 pm, HK wrote:
wrote:
They won't let ROTC on campus because they feel the militarys don't
ask don't tell policy is discriminatory. Yet they let the coward bitch
of Iran talk while his regime simply jails and kills gays. But watch
the so called tolerant liberals defend this guy and Colombia to the
world. Remember this is the same school that allowed LaRaza to speak
for 1 1/2 hours then ran the Minute men off the stage with no voice,
no tolerance,
The president of the university just spent 20 minutes cutting the
president of iran a new rectal opening. He used a chainsaw. I doubt the
little dictator ever heard anything like it before.
As for the ROTC denial, all the military has to do is get over its
idiotic sexual preference discrimination.
The so-called "Minutemen" movement has been exposed for what it is, a
pack of mostly white, racist, vigilantes.
So, if Columbia allows the Iranian pres to visit, why not allow the
head of the Minutemen? This seems a little (ok, a lot)
hypocritical. Columbia does not seem to value free speech so as it
values allowing anti-USA voices. I have no objection to listening to
this nutjob but INVITING him when they would not allow the Minutmen
head to speak and have not invited him back is totally at odds with
any notion of free speech. Why not invite David Duke? This is
nothing but liberal hypocrisy ( a virtue among them) at its most
obvious. They do not allow ROTC but they INVITE someone who executes
gays and stones women to death, only a liberal would think that is
reasonable.
I'm sure if the military ends its official discrimination on the basis
of sexuality, it will be welcome where it isn't welcome now.

So, The Iranian nutjob who kills gays is welcome but ROTC isnt? This
is liberal logic I s'pose, not obvious to us rednecks.

Screw Colombia U
 

On Sep 24, 3:02 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:55 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:27 pm, HK wrote:
wrote:
They won't let ROTC on campus because they feel the militarys don't
ask don't tell policy is discriminatory. Yet they let the coward bitch
of Iran talk while his regime simply jails and kills gays. But watch
the so called tolerant liberals defend this guy and Colombia to the
world. Remember this is the same school that allowed LaRaza to speak
for 1 1/2 hours then ran the Minute men off the stage with no voice,
no tolerance,
The president of the university just spent 20 minutes cutting the
president of iran a new rectal opening. He used a chainsaw. I doubt the
little dictator ever heard anything like it before.
As for the ROTC denial, all the military has to do is get over its
idiotic sexual preference discrimination.
The so-called "Minutemen" movement has been exposed for what it is, a
pack of mostly white, racist, vigilantes.
So, if Columbia allows the Iranian pres to visit, why not allow the
head of the Minutemen? This seems a little (ok, a lot)
hypocritical. Columbia does not seem to value free speech so as it
values allowing anti-USA voices. I have no objection to listening to
this nutjob but INVITING him when they would not allow the Minutmen
head to speak and have not invited him back is totally at odds with
any notion of free speech. Why not invite David Duke? This is
nothing but liberal hypocrisy ( a virtue among them) at its most
obvious. They do not allow ROTC but they INVITE someone who executes
gays and stones women to death, only a liberal would think that is
reasonable.
I'm sure if the military ends its official discrimination on the basis
of sexuality, it will be welcome where it isn't welcome now.

So, The Iranian nutjob who kills gays is welcome but ROTC isnt? This
is liberal logic I s'pose, not obvious to us rednecks.

I'll take that as an admission of their hypocrisy.

Screw Colombia U
 

Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:27 pm, HK wrote:
wrote:
They won't let ROTC on campus because they feel the militarys don't
ask don't tell policy is discriminatory. Yet they let the coward bitch
of Iran talk while his regime simply jails and kills gays. But watch
the so called tolerant liberals defend this guy and Colombia to the
world. Remember this is the same school that allowed LaRaza to speak
for 1 1/2 hours then ran the Minute men off the stage with no voice,
no tolerance,
The president of the university just spent 20 minutes cutting the
president of iran a new rectal opening. He used a chainsaw. I doubt the
little dictator ever heard anything like it before.

As for the ROTC denial, all the military has to do is get over its
idiotic sexual preference discrimination.

The so-called "Minutemen" movement has been exposed for what it is, a
pack of mostly white, racist, vigilantes.

So, if Columbia allows the Iranian pres to visit, why not allow the
head of the Minutemen? This seems a little (ok, a lot)
hypocritical. Columbia does not seem to value free speech so as it
values allowing anti-USA voices. I have no objection to listening to
this nutjob but INVITING him when they would not allow the Minutmen
head to speak and have not invited him back is totally at odds with
any notion of free speech. Why not invite David Duke? This is
nothing but liberal hypocrisy ( a virtue among them) at its most
obvious. They do not allow ROTC but they INVITE someone who executes
gays and stones women to death, only a liberal would think that is
reasonable.


Columbia did allow the Minutemen to come to the Campus. A few stupid
kids rushed the stage to disrupt the speech. These kids were chastised
(I think they were given some sort of punishment for their behavior) by
the college administration. The administration used the Minutemen
fiasco as an opportunity to emphasize the importance of free speech, and
that includes allowing those you disagree.

Screw Colombia U
 

Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 3:02 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:55 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:27 pm, HK wrote:
wrote:
They won't let ROTC on campus because they feel the militarys don't
ask don't tell policy is discriminatory. Yet they let the coward bitch
of Iran talk while his regime simply jails and kills gays. But watch
the so called tolerant liberals defend this guy and Colombia to the
world. Remember this is the same school that allowed LaRaza to speak
for 1 1/2 hours then ran the Minute men off the stage with no voice,
no tolerance,
The president of the university just spent 20 minutes cutting the
president of iran a new rectal opening. He used a chainsaw. I doubt the
little dictator ever heard anything like it before.
As for the ROTC denial, all the military has to do is get over its
idiotic sexual preference discrimination.
The so-called "Minutemen" movement has been exposed for what it is, a
pack of mostly white, racist, vigilantes.
So, if Columbia allows the Iranian pres to visit, why not allow the
head of the Minutemen? This seems a little (ok, a lot)
hypocritical. Columbia does not seem to value free speech so as it
values allowing anti-USA voices. I have no objection to listening to
this nutjob but INVITING him when they would not allow the Minutmen
head to speak and have not invited him back is totally at odds with
any notion of free speech. Why not invite David Duke? This is
nothing but liberal hypocrisy ( a virtue among them) at its most
obvious. They do not allow ROTC but they INVITE someone who executes
gays and stones women to death, only a liberal would think that is
reasonable.
I'm sure if the military ends its official discrimination on the basis
of sexuality, it will be welcome where it isn't welcome now.
So, The Iranian nutjob who kills gays is welcome but ROTC isnt? This
is liberal logic I s'pose, not obvious to us rednecks.

I'll take that as an admission of their hypocrisy.


Huh?

Gilchrist lost control of his pack of racist vigilantes. Is he back in
charge there? Is David Duke still a spokesman for his branch of the GOP?

Screw Colombia U
 

On Sep 24, 3:09 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 3:02 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:55 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:27 pm, HK wrote:
wrote:
They won't let ROTC on campus because they feel the militarys don't
ask don't tell policy is discriminatory. Yet they let the coward bitch
of Iran talk while his regime simply jails and kills gays. But watch
the so called tolerant liberals defend this guy and Colombia to the
world. Remember this is the same school that allowed LaRaza to speak
for 1 1/2 hours then ran the Minute men off the stage with no voice,
no tolerance,
The president of the university just spent 20 minutes cutting the
president of iran a new rectal opening. He used a chainsaw. I doubt the
little dictator ever heard anything like it before.
As for the ROTC denial, all the military has to do is get over its
idiotic sexual preference discrimination.
The so-called "Minutemen" movement has been exposed for what it is, a
pack of mostly white, racist, vigilantes.
So, if Columbia allows the Iranian pres to visit, why not allow the
head of the Minutemen? This seems a little (ok, a lot)
hypocritical. Columbia does not seem to value free speech so as it
values allowing anti-USA voices. I have no objection to listening to
this nutjob but INVITING him when they would not allow the Minutmen
head to speak and have not invited him back is totally at odds with
any notion of free speech. Why not invite David Duke? This is
nothing but liberal hypocrisy ( a virtue among them) at its most
obvious. They do not allow ROTC but they INVITE someone who executes
gays and stones women to death, only a liberal would think that is
reasonable.
I'm sure if the military ends its official discrimination on the basis
of sexuality, it will be welcome where it isn't welcome now.
So, The Iranian nutjob who kills gays is welcome but ROTC isnt? This
is liberal logic I s'pose, not obvious to us rednecks.

I'll take that as an admission of their hypocrisy.

Huh?

Gilchrist lost control of his pack of racist vigilantes. Is he back in
charge there? Is David Duke still a spokesman for his branch of the GOP?

Harry cannot find any way to defend the hypocrisy. In fact, following
the logic of Columbia, if the US military started executing gays (as
does Iran) ROTC would be invited to Columbia.
Columbia HAS NOT invited the Minutemen back, so much for freedom of
speech there.

Screw Colombia U
 

Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 3:09 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 3:02 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:55 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:27 pm, HK wrote:
wrote:
They won't let ROTC on campus because they feel the militarys don't
ask don't tell policy is discriminatory. Yet they let the coward bitch
of Iran talk while his regime simply jails and kills gays. But watch
the so called tolerant liberals defend this guy and Colombia to the
world. Remember this is the same school that allowed LaRaza to speak
for 1 1/2 hours then ran the Minute men off the stage with no voice,
no tolerance,
The president of the university just spent 20 minutes cutting the
president of iran a new rectal opening. He used a chainsaw. I doubt the
little dictator ever heard anything like it before.
As for the ROTC denial, all the military has to do is get over its
idiotic sexual preference discrimination.
The so-called "Minutemen" movement has been exposed for what it is, a
pack of mostly white, racist, vigilantes.
So, if Columbia allows the Iranian pres to visit, why not allow the
head of the Minutemen? This seems a little (ok, a lot)
hypocritical. Columbia does not seem to value free speech so as it
values allowing anti-USA voices. I have no objection to listening to
this nutjob but INVITING him when they would not allow the Minutmen
head to speak and have not invited him back is totally at odds with
any notion of free speech. Why not invite David Duke? This is
nothing but liberal hypocrisy ( a virtue among them) at its most
obvious. They do not allow ROTC but they INVITE someone who executes
gays and stones women to death, only a liberal would think that is
reasonable.
I'm sure if the military ends its official discrimination on the basis
of sexuality, it will be welcome where it isn't welcome now.
So, The Iranian nutjob who kills gays is welcome but ROTC isnt? This
is liberal logic I s'pose, not obvious to us rednecks.
I'll take that as an admission of their hypocrisy.
Huh?

Gilchrist lost control of his pack of racist vigilantes. Is he back in
charge there? Is David Duke still a spokesman for his branch of the GOP?

Harry cannot find any way to defend the hypocrisy. In fact, following
the logic of Columbia, if the US military started executing gays (as
does Iran) ROTC would be invited to Columbia.
Columbia HAS NOT invited the Minutemen back, so much for freedom of
speech there.



I'm sorry, but I cannot find even an atom of logic in what you are
posting here regarding that group that insulted the name of a fine
organization of revolutionary war Bostonians. Have a nice day.

Screw Colombia U
 

On Sep 24, 3:16 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 3:09 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 3:02 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:55 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:27 pm, HK wrote:
wrote:
They won't let ROTC on campus because they feel the militarys don't
ask don't tell policy is discriminatory. Yet they let the coward bitch
of Iran talk while his regime simply jails and kills gays. But watch
the so called tolerant liberals defend this guy and Colombia to the
world. Remember this is the same school that allowed LaRaza to speak
for 1 1/2 hours then ran the Minute men off the stage with no voice,
no tolerance,
The president of the university just spent 20 minutes cutting the
president of iran a new rectal opening. He used a chainsaw. I doubt the
little dictator ever heard anything like it before.
As for the ROTC denial, all the military has to do is get over its
idiotic sexual preference discrimination.
The so-called "Minutemen" movement has been exposed for what it is, a
pack of mostly white, racist, vigilantes.
So, if Columbia allows the Iranian pres to visit, why not allow the
head of the Minutemen? This seems a little (ok, a lot)
hypocritical. Columbia does not seem to value free speech so as it
values allowing anti-USA voices. I have no objection to listening to
this nutjob but INVITING him when they would not allow the Minutmen
head to speak and have not invited him back is totally at odds with
any notion of free speech. Why not invite David Duke? This is
nothing but liberal hypocrisy ( a virtue among them) at its most
obvious. They do not allow ROTC but they INVITE someone who executes
gays and stones women to death, only a liberal would think that is
reasonable.
I'm sure if the military ends its official discrimination on the basis
of sexuality, it will be welcome where it isn't welcome now.
So, The Iranian nutjob who kills gays is welcome but ROTC isnt? This
is liberal logic I s'pose, not obvious to us rednecks.
I'll take that as an admission of their hypocrisy.
Huh?

Gilchrist lost control of his pack of racist vigilantes. Is he back in
charge there? Is David Duke still a spokesman for his branch of the GOP?

Harry cannot find any way to defend the hypocrisy. In fact, following
the logic of Columbia, if the US military started executing gays (as
does Iran) ROTC would be invited to Columbia.
Columbia HAS NOT invited the Minutemen back, so much for freedom of
speech there.

I'm sorry, but I cannot find even an atom of logic in what you are
posting here regarding that group that insulted the name of a fine
organization of revolutionary war Bostonians. Have a nice day.

C'mon Harry, at least try to defend yourself. Columbia invites a guy
who executes gays but somehow you think Columbia will like ROTC if
they allow gays. This makes no sense.

Screw Colombia U
 

On Sep 24, 3:24 pm, Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 3:16 pm, HK wrote:



Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 3:09 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 3:02 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:55 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:27 pm, HK wrote:
wrote:
They won't let ROTC on campus because they feel the militarys don't
ask don't tell policy is discriminatory. Yet they let the coward bitch
of Iran talk while his regime simply jails and kills gays. But watch
the so called tolerant liberals defend this guy and Colombia to the
world. Remember this is the same school that allowed LaRaza to speak
for 1 1/2 hours then ran the Minute men off the stage with no voice,
no tolerance,
The president of the university just spent 20 minutes cutting the
president of iran a new rectal opening. He used a chainsaw. I doubt the
little dictator ever heard anything like it before.
As for the ROTC denial, all the military has to do is get over its
idiotic sexual preference discrimination.
The so-called "Minutemen" movement has been exposed for what it is, a
pack of mostly white, racist, vigilantes.
So, if Columbia allows the Iranian pres to visit, why not allow the
head of the Minutemen? This seems a little (ok, a lot)
hypocritical. Columbia does not seem to value free speech so as it
values allowing anti-USA voices. I have no objection to listening to
this nutjob but INVITING him when they would not allow the Minutmen
head to speak and have not invited him back is totally at odds with
any notion of free speech. Why not invite David Duke? This is
nothing but liberal hypocrisy ( a virtue among them) at its most
obvious. They do not allow ROTC but they INVITE someone who executes
gays and stones women to death, only a liberal would think that is
reasonable.
I'm sure if the military ends its official discrimination on the basis
of sexuality, it will be welcome where it isn't welcome now.
So, The Iranian nutjob who kills gays is welcome but ROTC isnt? This
is liberal logic I s'pose, not obvious to us rednecks.
I'll take that as an admission of their hypocrisy.
Huh?

Gilchrist lost control of his pack of racist vigilantes. Is he back in
charge there? Is David Duke still a spokesman for his branch of the GOP?

Harry cannot find any way to defend the hypocrisy. In fact, following
the logic of Columbia, if the US military started executing gays (as
does Iran) ROTC would be invited to Columbia.
Columbia HAS NOT invited the Minutemen back, so much for freedom of
speech there.

I'm sorry, but I cannot find even an atom of logic in what you are
posting here regarding that group that insulted the name of a fine
organization of revolutionary war Bostonians. Have a nice day.

C'mon Harry, at least try to defend yourself. Columbia invites a guy
who executes gays but somehow you think Columbia will like ROTC if
they allow gays. This makes no sense.

I'll let it go Harry, I know I gotcha. Us N. FL rednecks are not too
stupid.

Screw Colombia U
 

"Frogwatch" wrote in message
ups.com...


C'mon Harry, at least try to defend yourself. Columbia invites a guy
who executes gays but somehow you think Columbia will like ROTC if
they allow gays. This makes no sense.

I'll let it go Harry, I know I gotcha. Us N. FL rednecks are not too
stupid.


To his credit and contrary to much of the media predictions, the president
of Columbia didn't lob softball questions or otherwise go easy on the nut
from Iran. Surprised a lot of people.

Eisboch

Screw Colombia U
 

wrote in news:1190656758.707442.17350@
50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com:

They won't let ROTC on campus because they feel the militarys don't
ask don't tell policy is discriminatory. Yet they let the coward bitch
of Iran talk while his regime simply jails and kills gays. But watch
the so called tolerant liberals defend this guy and Colombia to the
world. Remember this is the same school that allowed LaRaza to speak
for 1 1/2 hours then ran the Minute men off the stage with no voice,
no tolerance,



Humans are the worst animals on the planet:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ybZ1YLYfYVI

Religion is the worst form of child abuse. Those kids in the video have
been brainwashed by their religion from birth to throw those stones.
Professor Richard Dawkins is dead-on right in this respect. America is
no different. There are brainwashing schools across the country doing
the same thing to keep the religious bureaucracy's money rolling
in....perpetually.

Over 5000 humans are murdered every day by one religion or another "in
the name of God". Humans are the only self-destructive creatures on the
planet and are doing a very good job at it.

Larry
--
What ****es me off is the warning not to let young people watch these
atrocities. Why? They watch atrocities all across cable TV and are
taught religious atrocities at their schools. What's the difference?
They play video games that are 90% committing atrocities....murders,
maiming, etc.

They don't want the young to watch because they have not completed their
religious indoctrination, yet, and they might turn away while they can
still think for themselves and stop it.

I want to show this video, in its entirety, across every cable and
broadcast TV channel in the country...Tonight at 8PM, without warning,
especially at Columbia U....

Bosnia-Serbs, Al Arish 1000 Egyptian POWs dug their own graves then were
machine gunned into them by Zionists in '67, Abu Grahb Americans, it's
all the same.....genocide....the Killing Fields.

http://www.liveleak.com/?ogr=1
Here, take a little time at LiveLeak and watch with your kids something
besides the Zionist Illuminati propaganda on the cable.......
Don't watch during dinner....gruesome.

Screw Colombia U
 

On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 14:27:57 -0400, HK wrote:

wrote:
They won't let ROTC on campus because they feel the militarys don't
ask don't tell policy is discriminatory. Yet they let the coward bitch
of Iran talk while his regime simply jails and kills gays. But watch
the so called tolerant liberals defend this guy and Colombia to the
world. Remember this is the same school that allowed LaRaza to speak
for 1 1/2 hours then ran the Minute men off the stage with no voice,
no tolerance,



The president of the university just spent 20 minutes cutting the
president of iran a new rectal opening. He used a chainsaw. I doubt the
little dictator ever heard anything like it before.

Wrong.

As for the ROTC denial, all the military has to do is get over its
idiotic sexual preference discrimination.

Wrong.

The so-called "Minutemen" movement has been exposed for what it is, a
pack of mostly white, racist, vigilantes.

Wrong.
Three strikes. Yer out!

--
Vic

Screw Colombia U
 

On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 14:27:57 -0400, HK wrote:

wrote:
They won't let ROTC on campus because they feel the militarys don't
ask don't tell policy is discriminatory. Yet they let the coward bitch
of Iran talk while his regime simply jails and kills gays. But watch
the so called tolerant liberals defend this guy and Colombia to the
world. Remember this is the same school that allowed LaRaza to speak
for 1 1/2 hours then ran the Minute men off the stage with no voice,
no tolerance,



The president of the university just spent 20 minutes cutting the
president of iran a new rectal opening. He used a chainsaw. I doubt the
little dictator ever heard anything like it before.

As for the ROTC denial, all the military has to do is get over its
idiotic sexual preference discrimination.

The so-called "Minutemen" movement has been exposed for what it is, a
pack of mostly white, racist, vigilantes.

I thought the twenty minute lecture (sermon) given to the students was
quite funny. It was very interesting to learn that there are absolutely
*no* homosexuals in Iran. Mr. A picked up some heavy 'boos' with that
statement. Obviously there's no sexual preference discrimination in Iran!

Screw Colombia U
 

Frogwatch wrote:


C'mon Harry, at least try to defend yourself. Columbia invites a guy
who executes gays but somehow you think Columbia will like ROTC if
they allow gays. This makes no sense.


There are lots of things in this world that make no sense. Example: why
hasn't Dick Cheney been indicted?

Screw Colombia U
 

On Sep 24, 12:24?pm, Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 3:16 pm, HK wrote:





Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 3:09 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 3:02 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:55 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:27 pm, HK wrote:
wrote:
They won't let ROTC on campus because they feel the militarys don't
ask don't tell policy is discriminatory. Yet they let the coward bitch
of Iran talk while his regime simply jails and kills gays. But watch
the so called tolerant liberals defend this guy and Colombia to the
world. Remember this is the same school that allowed LaRaza to speak
for 1 1/2 hours then ran the Minute men off the stage with no voice,
no tolerance,
The president of the university just spent 20 minutes cutting the
president of iran a new rectal opening. He used a chainsaw. I doubt the
little dictator ever heard anything like it before.
As for the ROTC denial, all the military has to do is get over its
idiotic sexual preference discrimination.
The so-called "Minutemen" movement has been exposed for what it is, a
pack of mostly white, racist, vigilantes.
So, if Columbia allows the Iranian pres to visit, why not allow the
head of the Minutemen? This seems a little (ok, a lot)
hypocritical. Columbia does not seem to value free speech so as it
values allowing anti-USA voices. I have no objection to listening to
this nutjob but INVITING him when they would not allow the Minutmen
head to speak and have not invited him back is totally at odds with
any notion of free speech. Why not invite David Duke? This is
nothing but liberal hypocrisy ( a virtue among them) at its most
obvious. They do not allow ROTC but they INVITE someone who executes
gays and stones women to death, only a liberal would think that is
reasonable.
I'm sure if the military ends its official discrimination on the basis
of sexuality, it will be welcome where it isn't welcome now.
So, The Iranian nutjob who kills gays is welcome but ROTC isnt? This
is liberal logic I s'pose, not obvious to us rednecks.
I'll take that as an admission of their hypocrisy.
Huh?

Gilchrist lost control of his pack of racist vigilantes. Is he back in
charge there? Is David Duke still a spokesman for his branch of the GOP?

Harry cannot find any way to defend the hypocrisy. In fact, following
the logic of Columbia, if the US military started executing gays (as
does Iran) ROTC would be invited to Columbia.
Columbia HAS NOT invited the Minutemen back, so much for freedom of
speech there.

I'm sorry, but I cannot find even an atom of logic in what you are
posting here regarding that group that insulted the name of a fine
organization of revolutionary war Bostonians. Have a nice day.

C'mon Harry, at least try to defend yourself. Columbia invites a guy
who executes gays but somehow you think Columbia will like ROTC if
they allow gays. This makes no sense.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Wrong newsgroup. I'd offer the same comment to left wing posters who
put something equivalent here, (and have, lately), so you guys on the
right are entitled to equal treatment. If I might be allowed to
suggest- we should try to avoid getting back to the bad old days when
this group was 60% politics, 20% personal feud, and 20% boats. The way
to do that is to exercise some self control- put your political
opinions in the proper forums and talk about boats here.

The President of Iran is not a nice guy, and it's likely that a
majority of folks from all portions of the spectrun would agree. But
the rant should go where it's appropriate unless it has something to
do with boating. IMO.

Screw Colombia U
 

Chuck Gould wrote:


Wrong newsgroup. I'd offer the same comment to left wing posters who
put something equivalent here, (and have, lately), so you guys on the
right are entitled to equal treatment. If I might be allowed to
suggest- we should try to avoid getting back to the bad old days when
this group was 60% politics, 20% personal feud, and 20% boats. T


Yeah, now it is 5% boats, 20% advertorial, 10% politics, and 65%
personal insults.

Screw Colombia U
 

HK wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:


Wrong newsgroup. I'd offer the same comment to left wing posters who
put something equivalent here, (and have, lately), so you guys on the
right are entitled to equal treatment. If I might be allowed to
suggest- we should try to avoid getting back to the bad old days when
this group was 60% politics, 20% personal feud, and 20% boats. T


Yeah, now it is 5% boats, 20% advertorial, 10% politics, and 65%
personal insults.

Harry,
If you stop the personal insults, you can get the personal insults
number back to the 5% range.

Screw Colombia U
 

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:


Wrong newsgroup. I'd offer the same comment to left wing posters who
put something equivalent here, (and have, lately), so you guys on the
right are entitled to equal treatment. If I might be allowed to
suggest- we should try to avoid getting back to the bad old days when
this group was 60% politics, 20% personal feud, and 20% boats. T


Yeah, now it is 5% boats, 20% advertorial, 10% politics, and 65%
personal insults.

Harry,
If you stop the personal insults, you can get the personal insults
number back to the 5% range.



All I am doing now is pointing out the incessant personal insulters,
especially the ones who lob insults in couched language, and then say,
"Who, me?"

Boating
 

HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:

Sounds like a great idea. So when is your next trip in your new boat?

Screw Colombia U
 

On Sep 24, 2:37?pm, HK wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:

Wrong newsgroup. I'd offer the same comment to left wing posters who
put something equivalent here, (and have, lately), so you guys on the
right are entitled to equal treatment. If I might be allowed to
suggest- we should try to avoid getting back to the bad old days when
this group was 60% politics, 20% personal feud, and 20% boats. T

Yeah, now it is 5% boats, 20% advertorial, 10% politics, and 65%
personal insults.

Historically, most of the personal insults in rec.boats have cropped
up in the course of what passes for "political debate" on this forum.
After 2-3 exchanges, one side or the other runs of out Rush Limbaugh
or moveon.org talking points to repeat and in the ensuing frustration
the insults begin.

Then there are those who get their kicks out of insulting everybody in
sight regardless of the issue. There's no real hope for people in that
position, but by sticking closer to topic those folks normally able to
control themselves in a public setting won't be as inclined to call
names and hurl insults in pursuit of a personal political agenda.
Again, just my opinion.

Screw Colombia U
 

JimH wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
Frogwatch wrote:

C'mon Harry, at least try to defend yourself. Columbia invites a guy
who executes gays but somehow you think Columbia will like ROTC if
they allow gays. This makes no sense.

There are lots of things in this world that make no sense. Example: why
hasn't Dick Cheney been indicted?

Trying to deflect the original topic so you can dump on the current
Administration?




The current administration is a dump. Worst in our history. By far.

Screw Colombia U
 

On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 14:35:58 -0700, Chuck Gould
wrote:



Wrong newsgroup. I'd offer the same comment to left wing posters who
put something equivalent here, (and have, lately), so you guys on the
right are entitled to equal treatment.

Yep, not appropriate to boats, but don't think for a minute you know
who is "left" or "right."
That's one of the reasons these arguments take on a life.

--Vic

Screw Colombia U
 

On Sep 24, 6:02 pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 14:35:58 -0700, Chuck Gould

wrote:

Wrong newsgroup. I'd offer the same comment to left wing posters who
put something equivalent here, (and have, lately), so you guys on the
right are entitled to equal treatment.

Yep, not appropriate to boats, but don't think for a minute you know
who is "left" or "right."
That's one of the reasons these arguments take on a life.

--Vic

instead of "left" or "right", would "starboard" and "port" be more
fitting?

Screw Colombia U
 

On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 16:21:35 -0700, Tim wrote:

On Sep 24, 6:02 pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 14:35:58 -0700, Chuck Gould

wrote:

Wrong newsgroup. I'd offer the same comment to left wing posters who
put something equivalent here, (and have, lately), so you guys on the
right are entitled to equal treatment.

Yep, not appropriate to boats, but don't think for a minute you know
who is "left" or "right."
That's one of the reasons these arguments take on a life.

--Vic

instead of "left" or "right", would "starboard" and "port" be more
fitting?

Maybe. I'm left-handed, and get no flack about it. Sure, some people
are jealous, but it's not their fault they were born wrong-handed.

--Vic

Screw Colombia U
 

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...


Maybe. I'm left-handed, and get no flack about it. Sure, some people
are jealous, but it's not their fault they were born wrong-handed.

--Vic

Explain to me why most left-handed people hold a fishing rod with the reel
up rather than down like it's supposed to be.

Most reels have crank handles that may be swapped to the other side.

Eisboch

Screw Colombia U
 

On Sep 24, 4:02?pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 14:35:58 -0700, Chuck Gould

wrote:

Wrong newsgroup. I'd offer the same comment to left wing posters who
put something equivalent here, (and have, lately), so you guys on the
right are entitled to equal treatment.

Yep, not appropriate to boats, but don't think for a minute you know
who is "left" or "right."
That's one of the reasons these arguments take on a life.

--Vic

Scotty has posted here for years, and his political sentiments are
well known. He and I would disagree on nearly every possible issue,
but the place to do that isn't here in rec.boats. I don't think he's a
bad guy for holding opinions that I believe are wrong, and I hope he
doesn't think I'm a bad guy for holding opinions that I'm sure he
believes are equally wrong. Twenty years after we're both dead history
will reveal that he was right about some things and I was right about
others. In the meantime, the reason we both gravitate to a boating
newsgroup is to discuss a *common* interest- and that's a good thing.

You're correct, Vic. I wouldn't know if you are left or right of
center nor do I care. Nor should anybody care about a person's
politics when discussing boating. When I talk to somebody at a yacht
club meeting or just across the dock at a marina or state park, we
would never think of beginning the conversation with, "Before I answer
your question about where I got those spiffy leather fender hangers I
need to know how you feel about George Bush, the war in Iraq, illegal
immigrants, global warming, Hillary Clinton, etc.........." So why
here? Point; there's no need or reason at all.

Screw Colombia U
 

HK wrote:
JimH wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
Frogwatch wrote:

C'mon Harry, at least try to defend yourself. Columbia invites a guy
who executes gays but somehow you think Columbia will like ROTC if
they allow gays. This makes no sense.

There are lots of things in this world that make no sense. Example:
why hasn't Dick Cheney been indicted?

Trying to deflect the original topic so you can dump on the current
Administration?



The current administration is a dump. Worst in our history. By far.

Harry,
Speaking of NYC, have you done any boating on the Hudson. When my son
was looking at colleges, we went all over the NE, but I thought it would
be great to travel up the river.

Screw Colombia U
 

Eisboch wrote:
"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...

Maybe. I'm left-handed, and get no flack about it. Sure, some people
are jealous, but it's not their fault they were born wrong-handed.

--Vic

Explain to me why most left-handed people hold a fishing rod with the reel
up rather than down like it's supposed to be.

Most reels have crank handles that may be swapped to the other side.

Eisboch



Eisboch,
The reason is simple, left handed people are dumb as dirt. ;)

Screw Colombia U
 

On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 18:18:14 -0400, "JimH" ask wrote:


"HK" wrote in message
...
Frogwatch wrote:


C'mon Harry, at least try to defend yourself. Columbia invites a guy
who executes gays but somehow you think Columbia will like ROTC if
they allow gays. This makes no sense.


There are lots of things in this world that make no sense. Example: why
hasn't Dick Cheney been indicted?

Trying to deflect the original topic so you can dump on the current
Administration?


Good reason to leave the politics to alt.politics.
WalMart...Balls....Courage.

Screw Colombia U
 

On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 19:37:52 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:


"Vic Smith" wrote in message
.. .


Maybe. I'm left-handed, and get no flack about it. Sure, some people
are jealous, but it's not their fault they were born wrong-handed.

--Vic

Explain to me why most left-handed people hold a fishing rod with the reel
up rather than down like it's supposed to be.

Most reels have crank handles that may be swapped to the other side.

It's simple.

Most left handed people are morons.

Well, except for those who post here that is.

Well, on second thought, all of us here are morons.

Otherwise why would we be here? :)

Screw Colombia U
 

On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 16:39:16 -0700, Chuck Gould
wrote:

Twenty years after we're both dead history
will reveal that he was right about some things and I was right about
others.

WHAT?!?!?!?

You were wrong?

Another hero gone from my life.

~~ sigh ~~ :)

Screw Colombia U
 

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 19:37:52 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...

Maybe. I'm left-handed, and get no flack about it. Sure, some people
are jealous, but it's not their fault they were born wrong-handed.

--Vic
Explain to me why most left-handed people hold a fishing rod with the reel
up rather than down like it's supposed to be.

Most reels have crank handles that may be swapped to the other side.

It's simple.

Most left handed people are morons.

Well, except for those who post here that is.

Well, on second thought, all of us here are morons.

Otherwise why would we be here? :)


Most decent spinning reels have handles that can be reversed. I haven't
seen too many traditional casting reels on which you can switch the
crank handle.

I'm left handed for handwriting and holding a fork. I throw a baseball
right-handed, shoot right-handed, bowl right handed. I cast with my
right hand and reel with my left.

Screw Colombia U
 

On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 19:37:52 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:


"Vic Smith" wrote in message
.. .


Maybe. I'm left-handed, and get no flack about it. Sure, some people
are jealous, but it's not their fault they were born wrong-handed.

--Vic

Explain to me why most left-handed people hold a fishing rod with the reel
up rather than down like it's supposed to be.

Most reels have crank handles that may be swapped to the other side.

I don't change the handle on spinning reels, because I've adjusted to
changing hands after casting. Probably was by the time I was 5 years
old. Besides, I usually fish with righty family member and we swap
rods a lot. I don't want to inconvenience them, since it's no problem
for me. No problem cranking with my left hand, but since my right arm
is weaker it might affect hauling in a really big fish. That's only
happened to me once. Sob.
I've never seen anybody holding a rod with spinning reel on top, and
that is probably a figment of your imagination. Perhaps some type of
compensation deal that a right-hander uses to cope.
I do put the crank on the right side of my casting reels, and NOBODY
uses my pets but me.
Did you know that scissors don't work well for left-handers?
That's no accident of design. We don't like being a seamstress.

--Vic

Screw Colombia U
 

On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 16:39:16 -0700, Chuck Gould
wrote:

On Sep 24, 4:02?pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 14:35:58 -0700, Chuck Gould

wrote:

Wrong newsgroup. I'd offer the same comment to left wing posters who
put something equivalent here, (and have, lately), so you guys on the
right are entitled to equal treatment.

Yep, not appropriate to boats, but don't think for a minute you know
who is "left" or "right."
That's one of the reasons these arguments take on a life.

--Vic

Scotty has posted here for years, and his political sentiments are
well known. He and I would disagree on nearly every possible issue,

I doubt that, and that's all I was saying. We just have a way of
letting differences become grossly exaggerated.

--Vic

Screw Colombia U
 

On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 20:03:26 -0400, HK wrote:



Most decent spinning reels have handles that can be reversed. I haven't
seen too many traditional casting reels on which you can switch the
crank handle.

I never bother changing the spinners. I should note that my casters
are baitcasters, lightweight and made to sit on top. I've had 2 Abu
Garcias, a 5000C and 6000C and changed the handles, but I think there
are Penn models that have the option.
I never owned a big sea caster, just used them on charters.
But if I buy one I would want a right side crank. Didn't know
convertibles were rare.

I'm left handed for handwriting and holding a fork. I throw a baseball
right-handed, shoot right-handed, bowl right handed. I cast with my
right hand and reel with my left.

You're weird.
I do everything left, except mousing. Most of this could be changed
if necessary. It's in large part practice and habit.
I think plenty of leftys have been changed to rightys by nuns slapping
a ruler on their hand.

--Vic

Screw Colombia U
 

On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 20:56:53 -0400, "JimH" ask wrote:


I've never seen anybody holding a rod with spinning reel on top, and
that is probably a figment of your imagination.

I have, in fact I saw that very thing last Friday.

I suspect it was a novice fisherperson.
It's just impractical and clumsy, whether you're left of right handed.

--Vic