"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...


No, it would not be worse. Bush was referring to something which had
already happened: 2.7% of the actual goal had been achieved when he said
"mission accomplished".


What goal?

To the crew of the ship, *their* current deployment mission had been
accomplished.
You still don't get it.

Eisboch

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...


No, it would not be worse. Bush was referring to something which had
already happened: 2.7% of the actual goal had been achieved when he said
"mission accomplished".


What goal?

To the crew of the ship, *their* current deployment mission had been
accomplished.
You still don't get it.

Eisboch



See how the meaning of words (and even actions) can be received differently
than they were sent? A pretty huge chunk of the country read the Shrub's
little show differently than you did. There's more, though: The president
does NOTHING in public view that wasn't planned for effect. I seriously
doubt his minders didn't take into account the various meanings that little
show might have to the world.

On Thu, 07 Feb 2008 17:49:51 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:



Here we go again.

Which measures do you feel have been most effective in preventing another
attack?

You keep asking this question, but I haven't seen anybody answer it.
The answer is simple, but since you like to go in circles, I won't
tell you until you put your view out here first.
To assure you I'm not afraid of taking a position, my answer on the
measures are below, in modified tap code, but "encrypted" by a simple
number substitution.
Easy enough to break if were important, but it's not.
The tap table is below.
When you provide your answer, I will provide the number key.
The measures are listed in order of increasing importance as I see it.


1. 13 11 41 24 34 41 31 32 33 12 44 41 11 31 42
2.
3.
4.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 E A N D W V ?
2 T I R M B .
3 O H U P Z
4 S C Y Q
5 L G X
6 F J
7 K

Okay, I only did the first measure. Tap code is a bitch.
You'll have to trust me on measures 2-4, which I pasted into notepad,
and will reveal if you come through with anything meaningful.

--Vic

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 07 Feb 2008 17:49:51 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:



Here we go again.

Which measures do you feel have been most effective in preventing another
attack?

You keep asking this question, but I haven't seen anybody answer it.
The answer is simple, but since you like to go in circles, I won't
tell you until you put your view out here first.
To assure you I'm not afraid of taking a position, my answer on the
measures are below, in modified tap code, but "encrypted" by a simple
number substitution.
Easy enough to break if were important, but it's not.
The tap table is below.
When you provide your answer, I will provide the number key.
The measures are listed in order of increasing importance as I see it.


1. 13 11 41 24 34 41 31 32 33 12 44 41 11 31 42
2.
3.
4.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 E A N D W V ?
2 T I R M B .
3 O H U P Z
4 S C Y Q
5 L G X
6 F J
7 K

Okay, I only did the first measure. Tap code is a bitch.
You'll have to trust me on measures 2-4, which I pasted into notepad,
and will reveal if you come through with anything meaningful.

--Vic


Holy ****. If this is what the military is doing to veterans, we need to
divert the entire budget to mental health care for those veterans.

On Thu, 07 Feb 2008 18:55:26 -0500, Eisboch wrote:


What goal?

To the crew of the ship, *their* current deployment mission had been
accomplished.
You still don't get it.

Eisboch

Well, it's easy to get confused when Bush's speech, given that day,
included, "In the Battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have
prevailed." While the *final* copy of the speech did not include
"mission accomplished", that is due to Rumsfeld, who stated, "I was in
Baghdad, and I was given a draft of that thing to look at. And I just
died, and I said my God, it's too conclusive. And I fixed it and sent it
back… they fixed the speech, but not the sign."

On Feb 7, 7:00*pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
"Vic Smith" wrote in message

...





On Thu, 07 Feb 2008 17:49:51 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

Here we go again.

Which measures do you feel have been most effective in preventing another
attack?

You keep asking this question, but I haven't seen anybody answer it.
The answer is simple, but since you like to go in circles, I won't
tell you until you put your view out here first.
To assure you I'm not afraid of taking a position, my answer on the
measures are below, in modified tap code, but "encrypted" by a simple
number substitution.
Easy enough to break if were important, but it's not.
The tap table is below.
When you provide your answer, I will provide the number key.
The measures are listed in order of increasing importance as I see it.

1. *13 *11 *41 *24 *34 *41 31 * *32 33 12 44 41 11 31 42
2.
3.
4.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 E A N D W V *?
2 T I R M B .
3 O H U P Z
4 S C Y Q
5 L G X
6 F J
7 K

Okay, I only did the first measure. *Tap code is a bitch.
You'll have to trust me on measures 2-4, which I pasted into notepad,
and will reveal if you come through with anything meaningful.

--Vic

Holy ****. If this is what the military is doing to veterans, we need to
divert the entire budget to mental health care for those veterans.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No, this is what the veteran is doing to you.

On Feb 7, 6:27*pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Thu, 07 Feb 2008 17:49:51 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"

wrote:

Here we go again.

Which measures do you feel have been most effective in preventing another
attack?

You keep asking this question, but I haven't seen anybody answer it.
The answer is simple, but since you like to go in circles, I won't
tell you until you put your view out here first.
To assure you I'm not afraid of taking a position, my answer on the
measures are below, in modified tap code, but "encrypted" by a simple
number substitution.
Easy enough to break if were important, but it's not.
The tap table is below. *
When you provide your answer, I will provide the number key.
The measures are listed in order of increasing importance as I see it.

1. *13 *11 *41 *24 *34 *41 31 * *32 33 12 44 41 11 31 42
2.
3.
4.

*1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 E A N D W V *?
2 T I R M B .
3 O H U P Z *
4 S C Y Q *
5 L G X * *
6 F J * *
7 K *

Okay, I only did the first measure. *Tap code is a bitch.
You'll have to trust me on measures 2-4, which I pasted into notepad,
and will reveal if you come through with anything meaningful.

--Vic

52 54 44 34 22 34 51 13

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...


No, it would not be worse. Bush was referring to something which had
already happened: 2.7% of the actual goal had been achieved when he
said "mission accomplished".


What goal?

To the crew of the ship, *their* current deployment mission had been
accomplished.
You still don't get it.

Eisboch



See how the meaning of words (and even actions) can be received
differently than they were sent? A pretty huge chunk of the country read
the Shrub's little show differently than you did. There's more, though:
The president does NOTHING in public view that wasn't planned for effect.
I seriously doubt his minders didn't take into account the various
meanings that little show might have to the world.


You obviously know very little about the military.
That's ok though. Others take care of it for you.

The reason a pretty huge chunk of the country read the Shrub's little show
differently is because the media wants them to read it differently. And
people like you jump right into line.

Eisboch

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 07 Feb 2008 18:55:26 -0500, Eisboch wrote:


What goal?

To the crew of the ship, *their* current deployment mission had been
accomplished.
You still don't get it.

Eisboch

Well, it's easy to get confused when Bush's speech, given that day,
included, "In the Battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have
prevailed." While the *final* copy of the speech did not include
"mission accomplished", that is due to Rumsfeld, who stated, "I was in
Baghdad, and I was given a draft of that thing to look at. And I just
died, and I said my God, it's too conclusive. And I fixed it and sent it
back. they fixed the speech, but not the sign."




Believe what you want. Doug's in the same line.
It doesn't matter.

Eisboch

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...


No, it would not be worse. Bush was referring to something which had
already happened: 2.7% of the actual goal had been achieved when he
said "mission accomplished".


What goal?

To the crew of the ship, *their* current deployment mission had been
accomplished.
You still don't get it.

Eisboch



See how the meaning of words (and even actions) can be received
differently than they were sent? A pretty huge chunk of the country read
the Shrub's little show differently than you did. There's more, though:
The president does NOTHING in public view that wasn't planned for effect.
I seriously doubt his minders didn't take into account the various
meanings that little show might have to the world.


You obviously know very little about the military.
That's ok though. Others take care of it for you.

The reason a pretty huge chunk of the country read the Shrub's little show
differently is because the media wants them to read it differently. And
people like you jump right into line.

Eisboch




And you're obviously assuming "the military", meaning all soldiers, did NOT
think the "mission accomplished" statement was premature, or just plain
absurd.