http://www.kybeline.com/2011/10/20/b...bend-gepfahlt/

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 11:36:03 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote:

http://www.kybeline.com/2011/10/20/b...bend-gepfahlt/

Oh good, and Libya plans on throwing out the secular laws and putting
in Sharia. Another huge victory.

In article ,
dgk wrote:

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 11:36:03 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote:

http://www.kybeline.com/2011/10/20/b...-lebend-gepfah
lt/

Oh good, and Libya plans on throwing out the secular laws and putting
in Sharia. Another huge victory.

SO, you want to send troops to stop it? Although from the Shah of Iran
forward, I have never been convinced that the Devil we know is worse
than the one we don't know.

--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz

"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message newsP6dnYI5mO-
dgk wrote:

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 11:36:03 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote:


http://www.kybeline.com/2011/10/20/b...er-lebend-gepf
ah
lt/

Oh good, and Libya plans on throwing out the secular laws and putting
in Sharia. Another huge victory.

SO, you want to send troops to stop it? Although from the Shah of Iran
forward, I have never been convinced that the Devil we know is worse
than the one we don't know.

Agreed. One of my first jobs was building A7 flight sims for the Libyans
back when Quaddafy Duck was still our friend in the 70's. Once upon a time
Saddam was our ally, too. Remember Batista in Cuba? Diem in Vietnam?
Karzai?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulgencio_Batista

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ngo_Dinh_Diem

When I heard we were supporting people we didn't really know in Libya I
realized we had learned very little from Iraq. Sharia courts and the Muslim
Brotherhood. Yeah, that's progress. Progress on the road to hell, which is
paved with some very expensive "good intentions" and mortared with the blood
of US soldiers. We should, instead, have big bonfires on the Mall where we
can just set fire to billions of dollars and cut out all the middlemen and
military casualties.

Now we're getting in neck-deep in Pakistan thinking that by firing missiles
at their tribal areas, whom Pakistanis see as their countrymen regardless of
what we say or think, we're going to end terrorism. Why? Would killing our
political rulers end the US? No, of course not. We would just find more,
just like they're doing. Very little of our current anti-terror strategy
even passes a basic common sense test.

We're going to deny Al-Qaeda a place to gather and train, said Bush and
Obama in a delusion that appears to come with the job of POTUS. That region
of the world has so many failed states, inaccessible regions and other
hiding places, it's a bald-faced lie from the very start. They'll just move
somewhere else - like Pakistan. Push them out of there (which I don't think
we'll EVER be able to do without declaring war on Pakistan) and they just go
to some other remote region. As my mother said: "If you look for trouble
long enough, you'll find it." The worse part is that the terrorist KNOW
that they can lead us around by the nose, forcing our way into countries
like Pakistan and turning the whole country against us.

The saddest part is we are constantly assured only evil people are being
killed. Except, of course, when we kill our own troops with drones because
we can allegedly target bad guys perfectly. Those two Americans were killed
right after TPTB made their proclamation of having a "perfect record" when
it comes to killing only the bad guys. That obvious lie is handily disproved
by the WikiLeaks film of American soldiers killing news reporters. As if to
punish their mendacity, fate made sure the obscene lie of not killing a
single innocent was proven false as the predictable happened and we killed
our own troops with drones.

http://www.10news.com/news/27525714/detail.html

We'll eventually turn Pakistan from a flighty ally into a full-fledged enemy
by the constant incursions into their country, a condition we would denounce
as intolerable. We're getting to be like that guy that's only allowed in to
the same place twice - the second time to apologize for what he did the
first time.

Hell, Midwesterners won't even let Canada ram their newest pipeline through
without a hard fight. Imagine how they'd feel if some other country was
launching deadly robotic planes into our country, looking for people they
"believed" were terrorists based on the kind of intel that assured us Saddam
had WMDs. Did the US intel community suddenly become instant geniuses,
going from missing the ENTIRE 9/11 plot to being perfect in the killing of
people by remote control? Logic and history both say that's doubtful.

With nukes and religious zealots, our foolishness in violating another
country's sovereign borders may come to bite our asses very hard. It has
the potential to make the Libyan "error" look like good foreign policy.

We think we can end terror by using terror - and drones are as terrifying as
the V1 and V2 rockets of WWII. No country in the world has ever eliminated
terrorism, including "locked down" states like Russian. We're going to
change the whole world and eliminate all the political grievances that lead
to terrorism? NOT!!!.

We won't even learn a thing from Libya when their Sharia courts start
chopping off heads, hands and feet. They're just another in a long line of
countries like Iraq that are more than happy to take as much money as they
can from us before we inevitably get kicked out and they turn on us. What
brilliant strategy. Sending our citizen-soldiers to die for countries that
hate our guts.

--
Bobby G.

On Oct 29, 12:56*pm, "Robert Green"
wrote:
"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message newsP6dnYI5mO-
*dgk wrote:

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 11:36:03 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote:

[...lots of good stuff snipped...]

Hell, Midwesterners won't even let Canada ram their newest pipeline through
without a hard fight.

[...]

***Bobby, it isn't just Midwesterners who oppose the ghastly proposed
XL pipeline to bring tar sands oil from Canada straight through the
U.S. to ports where Our ***Corporate Masters are all set to refine and
export the product overseas The fix is in so far on this (US State
Department kissing the Canadian XL butt) that it ***behooves ALL
Americans to do the minimal research required to illuminate the
horrendous environmental damage the XL pipeline would do to us. Then
get REAL mad and have at your elected whores -- pardon,
representatives -- to drop this hot potato ASAP.

***Many Web sites, some obviously favoring interested parties who
would profit handsomely. Others clarifying the **overwhelming**
downsides. Start with good ole' ***Wikipedia and go from the

***http://www.ask.com/wiki/Keystone_Pipeline

***Do it for your children and grandchildren. Water tables are not
forever.

HB

Higgs Boson wrote:

Hell, Midwesterners won't even let Canada ram their newest
pipeline through without a hard fight.

***Bobby, it isn't just Midwesterners who oppose the ghastly
proposed XL pipeline to bring tar sands oil from Canada straight
through the U.S. to ports where Our ***Corporate Masters are all
set to refine and export the product overseas

What's so gastly about the XL pipeline vs other pipelines that already
criss-cross your country?

The fix is in so far on this (US State Department kissing the
Canadian XL butt)

You're a nation dependant on oil and your way of life would grind to a
halt if you don't get enough of it. You send your children overseas to
die in the desert sands to insure you get enough oil back home.

So don't go overboard with the hyperbole that it's XL's butt that is
being kissed here. It's your butt (the average citizen) that's being
placated here, to keep the oil flowing to you, to lubricate your way of
life.

that it ***behooves ALL Americans to do the minimal research
required to illuminate the horrendous environmental damage
the XL pipeline would do to us.

We'd just as quickly welcome your investment dollars up here in Canada
to build all the refineries up here so that you can buy the finished
distilate products from us instead of the messy raw crude. We might
even let some of your unemployed come up here to Alberta to work at
these new refining plants.

Higgs Boson wrote:
On Oct 29, 12:56 pm, "Robert Green"
wrote:
"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message
newsP6dnYI5mO-
dgk wrote:

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 11:36:03 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote:

[...lots of good stuff snipped...]

Hell, Midwesterners won't even let Canada ram their newest pipeline
through without a hard fight.

[...]

***Bobby, it isn't just Midwesterners who oppose the ghastly proposed
XL pipeline to bring tar sands oil from Canada straight through the
U.S. to ports where Our ***Corporate Masters are all set to refine and
export the product overseas The fix is in so far on this (US State
Department kissing the Canadian XL butt) that it ***behooves ALL
Americans to do the minimal research required to illuminate the
horrendous environmental damage the XL pipeline would do to us. Then
get REAL mad and have at your elected whores -- pardon,
representatives -- to drop this hot potato ASAP.


The pipeline is not going to bring "tar sands," it's designed to bring OIL.
It's not taking the oil to "ports" (if that were the case the pipline would
stop somewhere in the Great Lakes); it's taking it to refineries. There's
very little chance the refined product will go overseas when our need is so
great.

Environmental damage? Heh! There are already over 55,000 miles of crude-oil
pipelines in this country, including an 800-mile one in Alaska!* The amount
of damage they do to the environment is virtually non-existent.

Frankly, the only people opposed to the XL pipeline are Luddites who want us
to live off of sunbeams and eat arugula.

-------
* Check map at:
http://www.pipeline101.com/Overview/crude-pl.html

On 10/29/2011 7:47 PM, HeyBub wrote:
Higgs Boson wrote:
On Oct 29, 12:56 pm, "Robert
wrote:
"Kurt wrote in message
newsP6dnYI5mO-
wrote:

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 11:36:03 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote:

[...lots of good stuff snipped...]

Hell, Midwesterners won't even let Canada ram their newest pipeline
through without a hard fight.

[...]

***Bobby, it isn't just Midwesterners who oppose the ghastly proposed
XL pipeline to bring tar sands oil from Canada straight through the
U.S. to ports where Our ***Corporate Masters are all set to refine and
export the product overseas The fix is in so far on this (US State
Department kissing the Canadian XL butt) that it ***behooves ALL
Americans to do the minimal research required to illuminate the
horrendous environmental damage the XL pipeline would do to us. Then
get REAL mad and have at your elected whores -- pardon,
representatives -- to drop this hot potato ASAP.


The pipeline is not going to bring "tar sands," it's designed to bring OIL.
It's not taking the oil to "ports" (if that were the case the pipline would
stop somewhere in the Great Lakes); it's taking it to refineries. There's
very little chance the refined product will go overseas when our need is so
great.

Environmental damage? Heh! There are already over 55,000 miles of crude-oil
pipelines in this country, including an 800-mile one in Alaska!* The amount
of damage they do to the environment is virtually non-existent.

Google 'Michigan' and "Enbridge' and 'Kalamazoo River'. Day after it
happened, I opened kitchen door to garage, over a mile from river, and
about gagged from the smell. River is still closed to public use over a
year later, and my favorite little riverfront park may never reopen.
Enbridge is carpet-bombing area with cash to placate people, but so much
oil soaked into creekbed and marsh areas, that it may not be cleanable
with current technology, short of removing strip-mine size swaths of
dirt and trucking it away somewhere, and then terraforming the water
path to look something like it did.

And this is ONE little stretch of ONE ****ant pipeline. No, I'm not too
worried about brand-new mega-pipelines with constant monitoring and good
upkeep. I'm worried about the 20-30 YO ones that have passed through a
couple owners, as has the land they run through, with poorly mapped and
marked easements. The path may be out in the boonies when they are
built, but as the urban sprawl overtakes them, suddenly they are under
populated areas.

--
aem sends...