Electronic Schematics (alt.binaries.schematics.electronic) A place to show and share your electronics schematic drawings.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #41   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 426
Default For Eeyore and Friends

On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 17:16:01 +0000, Michael A. Terrell wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:
Genome wrote:

Go buy some viagra and then GFY.

You lowlife, ****ed up moron. I had to watch as a family member died
of cancer, and its something you never forget. Since you think cancer is
so ****ing funny, you should die of Colon Rectal cancer, after a couple
years of chemotherapy and radiation treatments that leave you so sick
that you beg people to help you die.


Yet despite all that, Thompson is happy to suggest that foreigners should die
nasty painful deaths in order that US influence should prevail (plus keep the
price of gas down) and he'll happily sacrifice a few of 'his own' to the same
end too, whilst of course sitting pretty himself.

Isn't that actually more cruel ?


They need to up your meds, donkey.


Speaking of that, how are your meds working, Michael?

Cheers!
Rich


  #42   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 121
Default For Eeyore and Friends

On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 01:52:57 +0100, Eeyore wrote:
Richard The Dreaded Libertarian wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Jim Thompson wrote:

The Demoncrats are out to show "W" as a failure.

He *IS* a failure.


Nah, he's quite successful at ****ing over the country.

Well, he and his puppeteers.


Who really does have their hand up GWB's backside ?


Big Oil, isn't it obvious?

Thanks,
Rich

  #43   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 396
Default For Eeyore and Friends


"Richard The Dreaded Libertarian" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 14:56:59 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 19:59:00 GMT, "Genome"

[snip]

And your contribution was a son who shat his cancerous arse.


And don't forget the autistic grandsprog.

GFY. No more help from me.


Ahhh! Finally!!! Thank GAWD!!!!!!!

Cheers!
Rich


Actually he's quite a clever bloke - during his occasional lucid moments.


  #44   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 121
Default For Eeyore and Friends

On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:22:23 +1000, Lionel wrote:
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:17:21 -0700, Jim Thompson

For Eeyore and Friends......


If you really lack the self-control & manners to overcome your
obsession with posting massively off-topic trollbait in technical
groups, you could at least be polite enough to put '[OT]' in the
subject line.


He's so tightly in the grip of neocon brain-lock, he wouldn't know
"polite" if it jumped up and bit him in Fred Mertz pants.

Thanks,
Rich

  #45   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,770
Default For Eeyore and Friends



ian field wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote in message
ian field wrote:

It might be to the advantage of all coalition members to use this as an
excuse to enter Iran


With what troops ?


Ending the supply of arms from Iran to Iraqi insurgents would not only save
a lot of troops lives but also allow re-deployment of a huge number of
troops currently kept busy cleaning up the problem after its already
occurred.


My point being however that there's currently no spare troops to hand to do so,
no matter how well advised such a course of action might be (or not even) in the
long term.


Graham




  #46   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,924
Default For Eeyore and Friends

Eeyore wrote:

My point being however that there's currently no spare troops to hand to do so,
no matter how well advised such a course of action might be (or not even) in the
long term.



So, you expect us to believe that you are a world renowned expert in
military strategy?


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
  #47   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 130
Default For Eeyore and Friends

"Jim Thompson" wrote
in message

ALL Anglo-Saxons have lost their balls :-(


But the Saxons much more so if it's any consolation.


--

Reply in group, but if emailing add another
zero, and remove the last word.


  #48   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 130
Default For Eeyore and Friends

"Genome" wrote in message


And your contribution was a son who shat his cancerous arse.

DNA


I liked you better when you were incomprehensible.

Maybe you shouldn't take the meds after all.


--

Reply in group, but if emailing add another
zero, and remove the last word.


  #49   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,770
Default For Eeyore and Friends



"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

My point being however that there's currently no spare troops to hand to do so,
no matter how well advised such a course of action might be (or not even) in the
long term.


So, you expect us to believe that you are a world renowned expert in
military strategy?


If that's what tickles your fancy !

It rather seems to me that it's simply a statement of fact actually.

Graham

  #50   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,924
Default For Eeyore and Friends

Eeyore wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

My point being however that there's currently no spare troops to hand to do so,
no matter how well advised such a course of action might be (or not even) in the
long term.


So, you expect us to believe that you are a world renowned expert in
military strategy?


If that's what tickles your fancy !

It rather seems to me that it's simply a statement of fact actually.

Graham



Actually, you're as believable as Rosie O’Donnell and her conspiracy
theories about why the world trade center building collapse.

You have no concept of WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR THE MISSION, so its
simply more you you braying like an overfed jackass.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida


  #51   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,770
Default For Eeyore and Friends



"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:
Eeyore wrote:

My point being however that there's currently no spare troops to hand to do

so, no matter how well advised such a course of action might be (or not even) in
the long term.

So, you expect us to believe that you are a world renowned expert in
military strategy?


If that's what tickles your fancy !

It rather seems to me that it's simply a statement of fact actually.



Actually, you're as believable as Rosie O’Donnell and her conspiracy
theories about why the world trade center building collapse.

You have no concept of WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR THE MISSION


I know exactly what would be required and an important element is MORE TROOPS ! Ours are
almost completely tied up with existing commitments.

If USAans are prepared to die for US for a change do let me know. Somehow I suspect you
lot wouldn't be up for that.

Graham

  #52   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 396
Default For Eeyore and Friends


"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:
Eeyore wrote:

My point being however that there's currently no spare troops to
hand to do

so, no matter how well advised such a course of action might be (or not
even) in
the long term.

So, you expect us to believe that you are a world renowned expert
in
military strategy?

If that's what tickles your fancy !

It rather seems to me that it's simply a statement of fact actually.



Actually, you're as believable as Rosie O'Donnell and her conspiracy
theories about why the world trade center building collapse.

You have no concept of WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR THE MISSION


I know exactly what would be required and an important element is MORE
TROOPS ! Ours are
almost completely tied up with existing commitments.

If USAans are prepared to die for US for a change do let me know. Somehow
I suspect you
lot wouldn't be up for that.

Graham


From what I've seen, the Americans would like nothing better than a good
excuse to enter Iran with a very large tanker full of whoopass!


  #53   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,770
Default For Eeyore and Friends



ian field wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote

If USAans are prepared to die for US for a change do let me know. Somehow
I suspect you lot wouldn't be up for that.



From what I've seen, the Americans would like nothing better than a good
excuse to enter Iran with a very large tanker full of whoopass!


Bring 'em on ! ;~)

I'll believe it when I see it though.

Graham.


  #54   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,022
Default For Eeyore and Friends

On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 00:01:24 +0100, Eeyore
wrote:



Jim Thompson wrote:

The Demoncrats are out to show "W" as a failure.


He *IS* a failure.


---
Well, let's see...

He's the President of the United States of America, and you are...?

Close to nothing, it seems to me.


--
JF
  #55   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,022
Default For Eeyore and Friends

On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 00:10:37 +0100, Eeyore
wrote:



ian field wrote:

It might be to the advantage of all coalition members to use this as an
excuse to enter Iran and put a stop once and for all of the supply of
armaments to Iraqi insurgents.


If indeed that's a significant issue.

After the WMD fiasco is anything that US 'Intelligence' says believable ?


---
I'd certainly put a lot more credence in what US Intelligence has to
say than in the **** _you_ perpetually spew, dumb ass.


--
JF


  #56   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,022
Default For Eeyore and Friends

On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 00:11:12 +0100, Eeyore
wrote:



ian field wrote:

It might be to the advantage of all coalition members to use this as an
excuse to enter Iran


With what troops ?


---
Ever hear of "conscription", dumb ass?


--
JF
  #57   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,770
Default For Eeyore and Friends



John Fields wrote:

Well, let's see...

He's the President of the United States of America, and you are...?


I'm a famous character.

In ten years from now, GWB will be thankfully forgotten whilst I'll still be a
popular and much loved character in several children's books and a film or two.

Graham

  #58   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,022
Default For Eeyore and Friends

On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 01:52:57 +0100, Eeyore
wrote:



Richard The Dreaded Libertarian wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Jim Thompson wrote:

The Demoncrats are out to show "W" as a failure.

He *IS* a failure.


Nah, he's quite successful at ****ing over the country.

Well, he and his puppeteers.


Who really does have their hand up GWB's backside ?


---
Thank God _you_ don't, otherwise we'd really be in deep ****.


--
JF
  #59   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 396
Default For Eeyore and Friends


"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


John Fields wrote:

Well, let's see...

He's the President of the United States of America, and you are...?


I'm a famous character.

In ten years from now, GWB will be thankfully forgotten whilst I'll still
be a
popular and much loved character in several children's books and a film or
two.

Graham


Mad donkey disease!


  #60   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,022
Default For Eeyore and Friends

On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:22:23 +1000, Lionel
wrote:

On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:17:21 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

For Eeyore and Friends......


If you really lack the self-control & manners to overcome your
obsession with posting massively off-topic trollbait in technical
groups, you could at least be polite enough to put '[OT]' in the
subject line.


---
Speaking of trollbait, PKB?


--
JF


  #61   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,770
Default For Eeyore and Friends



John Fields wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
ian field wrote:

It might be to the advantage of all coalition members to use this as an
excuse to enter Iran


With what troops ?


---
Ever hear of "conscription", dumb ass?


Conscripts make lousy soldiers you IDIOT.

Graham

  #62   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,022
Default [OT] For Eeyore and Friends

On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 15:25:16 +1000, Lionel
wrote:

On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 01:05:03 -0400, Chuck Harris
wrote:

Lionel wrote:
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:17:21 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

For Eeyore and Friends......

If you really lack the self-control & manners to overcome your
obsession with posting massively off-topic trollbait in technical
groups, you could at least be polite enough to put '[OT]' in the
subject line.


With a title like "For Eeyore and Friends" you couldn't figure that
out?


Not if I didn't already know that the loon was obsessed with those
people. It's junk like that that makes a group unreadable & useless to
new people.


---
Calling someone a "loon" is hardly aspiring to the manners and
politeness you keep parroting that you practice.

Besides, netkopp, since when have you become the arbiter of what's
readable and useful for new people?

If you have such a problem with the way things are going in these
groups and you have soooo... much experience with newsgroups in
general, why don't you start your own moderated group where, I'm
sure, everyone will flock to in order to find an environment more to
their liking.

Plus, we'll be well rid of you.





--
JF
  #63   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,022
Default [OT] For Eeyore and Friends

On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 10:12:03 -0400, Chuck Harris
wrote:

Lionel wrote:
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 07:57:46 -0400, Chuck Harris
wrote:

Lionel wrote:
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 01:05:03 -0400, Chuck Harris
wrote:

Lionel wrote:
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:17:21 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

For Eeyore and Friends......
If you really lack the self-control & manners to overcome your
obsession with posting massively off-topic trollbait in technical
groups, you could at least be polite enough to put '[OT]' in the
subject line.
With a title like "For Eeyore and Friends" you couldn't figure that
out?
Not if I didn't already know that the loon was obsessed with those
people. It's junk like that that makes a group unreadable & useless to
new people.
You don't give "new people" much credit.


Really? How could someone new to the group be expected to know that a
thread with the subject line: "For Eeyore and Friends" consists of
nothing but the cheapest kind of political flamebait? Despite knowing
the names of the OP & his target de jeur, I - perhaps naively -
assumed it'd contain /some/ sort of electronics content.

Don't you really mean that
it's junk like that that makes me want to play net cop?


I don't know you well enough to have the faintest idea what sort of
thing makes you feel like playing net cop, Chuck.


Read the sentence. It starts: Don't you really mean..." The object
of the sentence, "me", is someone named Lionel.

As to not giving "new people" enough credit, how many of these posts
did you have to read before you figured out that they were off topic?

One or two messages should suffice. I would imagine the typical user
looking for a schematic or design would have something in mind before
he started searching these groups. The only folks that would be fooled
into reading this off topic trash are those that were looking for something
that "Eeyore" might like.


---
Indeed.

Also, someone new coming to the group might be doing so because they
have a question they need answered or a problem they need to have
solved, in which case they'd more than likely post and wait for
replies to that subject.

Unfortunately, someone like Graham (and now this "Lionel" goon)
would more than likely get on their case and try to derail the
thread with their asinine antics.




--
JF
  #64   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,022
Default [OT] For Eeyore and Friends

On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 00:43:19 +1000, Lionel
wrote:

On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 10:12:03 -0400, Chuck Harris
wrote:

Lionel wrote:
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 07:57:46 -0400, Chuck Harris
wrote:

Lionel wrote:
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 01:05:03 -0400, Chuck Harris
wrote:

Lionel wrote:
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:17:21 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

For Eeyore and Friends......
If you really lack the self-control & manners to overcome your
obsession with posting massively off-topic trollbait in technical
groups, you could at least be polite enough to put '[OT]' in the
subject line.
With a title like "For Eeyore and Friends" you couldn't figure that
out?
Not if I didn't already know that the loon was obsessed with those
people. It's junk like that that makes a group unreadable & useless to
new people.
You don't give "new people" much credit.

Really? How could someone new to the group be expected to know that a
thread with the subject line: "For Eeyore and Friends" consists of
nothing but the cheapest kind of political flamebait? Despite knowing
the names of the OP & his target de jeur, I - perhaps naively -
assumed it'd contain /some/ sort of electronics content.

Don't you really mean that
it's junk like that that makes me want to play net cop?

I don't know you well enough to have the faintest idea what sort of
thing makes you feel like playing net cop, Chuck.


Read the sentence. It starts: Don't you really mean..." The object
of the sentence, "me", is someone named Lionel.

As to not giving "new people" enough credit, how many of these posts
did you have to read before you figured out that they were off topic?

One or two messages should suffice. I would imagine the typical user
looking for a schematic or design would have something in mind before
he started searching these groups. The only folks that would be fooled
into reading this off topic trash are those that were looking for something
that "Eeyore" might like.


Alternatively, the obnoxious idiots who think that they're entitled to
shove their political rants in other peoples faces could simply keep
them to themselves, or at least tag them with [OT], the way polite
people do with their off-topic chatter.


---
_Really_ polite people refrain from calling those with whom they
disagree "obnoxious idiots", and the obnoxious idiots who don't
refrain, and _do_ complain about them, often prolong the life of an
otherwise exhausted thread by providing fuel for the fire.


--
JF
  #65   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,770
Default [OT] For Eeyore and Friends



John Fields wrote:


_Really_ polite people refrain from calling those with whom they
disagree "obnoxious idiots"


Given that you say far worse, that clearly makes you impolite.

Graham



  #66   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,022
Default For Eeyore and Friends

On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 08:57:12 +0100, Eeyore
wrote:



"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

My point being however that there's currently no spare troops to hand to do so,
no matter how well advised such a course of action might be (or not even) in the
long term.


So, you expect us to believe that you are a world renowned expert in
military strategy?


If that's what tickles your fancy !

It rather seems to me that it's simply a statement of fact actually.


---
You seem to think that everything you say is simply a statement of
fact, when in actuality it's mostly just opinionated garbage.


--
JF
  #67   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 632
Default For Eeyore and Friends

On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 10:15:04 -0500, John Fields
Gave us:

On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:22:23 +1000, Lionel
wrote:

On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:17:21 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

For Eeyore and Friends......


If you really lack the self-control & manners to overcome your
obsession with posting massively off-topic trollbait in technical
groups, you could at least be polite enough to put '[OT]' in the
subject line.


---
Speaking of trollbait, PKB?



The idiot hangs out in the KookTard group, so what would you expect.

All the idiots over there do is **** over other groups with floods
of their baby bull****.

And they actually think they are superior.

Sure... to a Dung beetle... maybe.

After The Lionel Tard adds the kooktard group to his relpies (like
you know he will) you can prepare for the flood of their sub-human
stupidity.
  #68   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 632
Default [OT] For Eeyore and Friends

On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 17:01:47 +0100, Eeyore
Gave us:



John Fields wrote:


_Really_ polite people refrain from calling those with whom they
disagree "obnoxious idiots"


Given that you say far worse, that clearly makes you impolite.


Since the dialog between you and John is typically tit-for-tat, you
are referring to a different circumstance.

Show me where John has ever attacked a new poster or any on topic
poster that didn't act like the ass that the LionelTard does.
  #69   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 632
Default For Eeyore and Friends

On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 11:04:08 -0500, John Fields
Gave us:

On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 08:57:12 +0100, Eeyore
wrote:



"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

My point being however that there's currently no spare troops to hand to do so,
no matter how well advised such a course of action might be (or not even) in the
long term.

So, you expect us to believe that you are a world renowned expert in
military strategy?


If that's what tickles your fancy !

It rather seems to me that it's simply a statement of fact actually.


---
You seem to think that everything you say is simply a statement of
fact, when in actuality it's mostly just opinionated garbage.



I firm;y believe that there were WMDs, and that they were spirited
off to Syria, and that those trailers we saw pics of WERE in fact
mobile chem/bio weapon facilities.

Why would they have posted perimeter and guards around them if they
were mere "aspirin factories"?

Our job is not complete, and it won't be till the trash has been
taken out.
  #70   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,770
Default [OT] For Eeyore and Friends



MassiveProng wrote:

Eeyore Gave us:
John Fields wrote:

_Really_ polite people refrain from calling those with whom they
disagree "obnoxious idiots"


Given that you say far worse, that clearly makes you impolite.


Since the dialog between you and John is typically tit-for-tat, you
are referring to a different circumstance.

Show me where John has ever attacked a new poster or any on topic
poster that didn't act like the ass that the LionelTard does.


If that's what he meant he should have said so IMHO.

Graham




  #71   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,022
Default For Eeyore and Friends

On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 16:07:48 +0100, Eeyore
wrote:



John Fields wrote:

Well, let's see...

He's the President of the United States of America, and you are...?


I'm a famous character.

In ten years from now, GWB will be thankfully forgotten whilst I'll still be a
popular and much loved character in several children's books and a film or two.


---
In ten years, neither Bush will have been forgotten while you'll
still be merely posing as a much-loved cartoon character wondering
why so little of it comes your way.


--
JF
  #72   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,022
Default For Eeyore and Friends

On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 16:07:48 +0100, Eeyore
wrote:



John Fields wrote:

Well, let's see...

He's the President of the United States of America, and you are...?


I'm a famous character.


---
No, you're not. You're merely _posing_ as a cartoon character.


--
JF
  #73   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,770
Default For Eeyore and Friends



MassiveProng wrote:

I firm;y believe that there were WMDs,


Your opinion isn't shared by the weapons inspectors. They were actually there and you're
just guessing. Guess whose opinion I take more seriously ?


and that they were spirited off to Syria, and that those trailers we saw pics of WERE in
fact mobile chem/bio weapon facilities.


UK weapons inspector Dr David Kelly (he of the 'sexed-up dossier' claim) for example found
an alleged Iraqi mobile chemical wepaons lab to be a facility for launching weather
balloons.


Why would they have posted perimeter and guards around them if they
were mere "aspirin factories"?


Cite ?

Graham

  #74   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,770
Default For Eeyore and Friends



John Fields wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

I'm a famous character.


---
No, you're not. You're merely _posing_ as a cartoon character.


God, I *love* Usenet !

Graham

  #75   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,022
Default For Eeyore and Friends

On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 16:18:05 +0100, Eeyore
wrote:



John Fields wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
ian field wrote:

It might be to the advantage of all coalition members to use this as an
excuse to enter Iran

With what troops ?


---
Ever hear of "conscription", dumb ass?


Conscripts make lousy soldiers you IDIOT.


---
They're what saved your ass in WW2, dumb ass.


--
JF


  #76   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,022
Default [OT] For Eeyore and Friends

On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 17:01:47 +0100, Eeyore
wrote:



John Fields wrote:


_Really_ polite people refrain from calling those with whom they
disagree "obnoxious idiots"


Given that you say far worse, that clearly makes you impolite.


---
I never said _I_ was polite, did I, dumb ass?


--
JF
  #77   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,924
Default For Eeyore and Friends

Eeyore wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:
Eeyore wrote:

My point being however that there's currently no spare troops to hand to do

so, no matter how well advised such a course of action might be (or not even) in
the long term.

So, you expect us to believe that you are a world renowned expert in
military strategy?

If that's what tickles your fancy !

It rather seems to me that it's simply a statement of fact actually.



Actually, you're as believable as Rosie O’Donnell and her conspiracy
theories about why the world trade center building collapse.

You have no concept of WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR THE MISSION


I know exactly what would be required and an important element is MORE TROOPS ! Ours are
almost completely tied up with existing commitments.

If USAans are prepared to die for US for a change do let me know. Somehow I suspect you
lot wouldn't be up for that.

Graham



What's wrong, Donkey? You don't even have the balls to call us
AMERICANS? Why should we be willing to die for a bunch of fat, lazy and
stupid losers? If we ignore what's going on, the UK is likely to be the
first to have Muslim nuclear warhead detonated on their soil. If you
aren't willing to defend yourself, why should we?


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
  #78   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,924
Default For Eeyore and Friends

Eeyore wrote:

John Fields wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
ian field wrote:

It might be to the advantage of all coalition members to use this as an
excuse to enter Iran

With what troops ?


---
Ever hear of "conscription", dumb ass?


Conscripts make lousy soldiers you IDIOT.



Then you are saying that we should just build a HUGE pile of dead
donkeys to block Iran's path? Its simply a statement of fact, dumbASS.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
  #79   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,924
Default For Eeyore and Friends

MassiveProng wrote:

On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 11:04:08 -0500, John Fields
Gave us:

On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 08:57:12 +0100, Eeyore
wrote:



"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

My point being however that there's currently no spare troops to hand to do so,
no matter how well advised such a course of action might be (or not even) in the
long term.

So, you expect us to believe that you are a world renowned expert in
military strategy?

If that's what tickles your fancy !

It rather seems to me that it's simply a statement of fact actually.


---
You seem to think that everything you say is simply a statement of
fact, when in actuality it's mostly just opinionated garbage.


I firm;y believe that there were WMDs, and that they were spirited
off to Syria, and that those trailers we saw pics of WERE in fact
mobile chem/bio weapon facilities.

Why would they have posted perimeter and guards around them if they
were mere "aspirin factories"?

Our job is not complete, and it won't be till the trash has been
taken out.



Don't leave any rabid donkeys laying around.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
  #80   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,924
Default For Eeyore and Friends

Eyesore wrote:

John Fields wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

I'm a famous character.


---
No, you're not. You're merely _posing_ as a cartoon character.


God, I *love* Usenet !

Graham




Sure you do. Its the only place in the universe that you can prove
how stupid you are, every time you hit "SEND".

--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
hi friends ss007 Metalworking 0 May 19th 06 03:55 PM
hi friends ss007 Home Repair 0 May 16th 06 02:41 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:20 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 DIYbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about DIY & home improvement"