On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 14:24:56 -0400, trader4 is a moron
wrote:

" wrote:

Absent a link,
I say it's another lie.
Bush Derangement Syndrome
Bush Derangement Syndrome
and Monday morning quaterbacking
Bush Derangement Syndrome
Bush Derangement Syndrome and denial of the most basic
facts. Every year we've successfully derailed Al Qaeda plots
to rain destruction on the USA.
Bush Derangement Syndrome. First you bitch because
enough wasn't done to prevent 911. Now that we do have
much better programs that are working, why that's not good
either....

I'm not going to embarrass you any further.

What your feeble brain did not notice is that I gave a link to the
material I quoted, and that link includes links to every piece of
evidence that you are calling "bush derangement" and "lies".

So Mr. Bush ass-licker, apologist and sycophant - go and read the
original post, and follow the links:

http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed...administration

You can post your apology to everyone here once you've taken your foot
out of your mouth.

Interesting links, but the idea that it was all incompetence is
absurd. Those people were far from incompetent. The obvious conclusion
is that 9/11 was allowed to happen because it allowed powerful US
interests to achieve their goals. It is pretty much what I think
happened.

On Aug 28, 11:30*am, dgk wrote:
On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 14:24:56 -0400, trader4 is a moron





wrote:
" wrote:

Absent a link,
I say it's another lie.
Bush Derangement Syndrome
Bush Derangement Syndrome
and Monday morning quaterbacking
Bush Derangement Syndrome
Bush Derangement Syndrome and denial of the most basic
facts. *Every year we've successfully derailed Al Qaeda plots
to rain destruction on the USA.
Bush Derangement Syndrome. *First you bitch because
enough wasn't done to prevent 911. *Now that we do have
much better programs that are working, why that's not good
either....

I'm not going to embarrass you any further.

What your feeble brain did not notice is that I gave a link to the
material I quoted, and that link includes links to every piece of
evidence that you are calling "bush derangement" and "lies".

So Mr. Bush ass-licker, apologist and sycophant - go and read the
original post, and follow the links:

http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed...minal-incompet...

You can post your apology to everyone here once you've taken your foot
out of your mouth.

Interesting links, but the idea that it was all incompetence is
absurd. Those people were far from incompetent. The obvious conclusion
is that 9/11 was allowed to happen because it allowed powerful US
interests to achieve their goals. It is pretty much what I think
happened.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

In my world incompetence in govt is not unusual. In
fact, it's quite common. An example of the incompetence
that lead to 911 was the laws passed decades ago that
prohibited the CIA from sharing intelligence with the FBI.
Now it would be one hell of a vast and long conspiracy
for that to have been done decades ago in order for
911 to happen. The reality it was just a dumb thing the libs
did in their quest to make the world right.

And exactly what goals were achieved? Anything in
Afghanistan that looks attractive to you? With Iraq, the
conspiracy folks claimed a decade ago that it was the
Iraqi oil that the US was after. In fact, we've left Iraq
and the oil still belongs to the Iraqi people, so that
myth is shot.

On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 08:40:43 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Aug 28, 11:30*am, dgk wrote:
On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 14:24:56 -0400, trader4 is a moron





wrote:
" wrote:

Absent a link,
I say it's another lie.
Bush Derangement Syndrome
Bush Derangement Syndrome
and Monday morning quaterbacking
Bush Derangement Syndrome
Bush Derangement Syndrome and denial of the most basic
facts. *Every year we've successfully derailed Al Qaeda plots
to rain destruction on the USA.
Bush Derangement Syndrome. *First you bitch because
enough wasn't done to prevent 911. *Now that we do have
much better programs that are working, why that's not good
either....

I'm not going to embarrass you any further.

What your feeble brain did not notice is that I gave a link to the
material I quoted, and that link includes links to every piece of
evidence that you are calling "bush derangement" and "lies".

So Mr. Bush ass-licker, apologist and sycophant - go and read the
original post, and follow the links:

http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed...minal-incompet...

You can post your apology to everyone here once you've taken your foot
out of your mouth.

Interesting links, but the idea that it was all incompetence is
absurd. Those people were far from incompetent. The obvious conclusion
is that 9/11 was allowed to happen because it allowed powerful US
interests to achieve their goals. It is pretty much what I think
happened.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

In my world incompetence in govt is not unusual. In
fact, it's quite common. An example of the incompetence
that lead to 911 was the laws passed decades ago that
prohibited the CIA from sharing intelligence with the FBI.
Now it would be one hell of a vast and long conspiracy
for that to have been done decades ago in order for
911 to happen. The reality it was just a dumb thing the libs
did in their quest to make the world right.

And exactly what goals were achieved? Anything in
Afghanistan that looks attractive to you? With Iraq, the
conspiracy folks claimed a decade ago that it was the
Iraqi oil that the US was after. In fact, we've left Iraq
and the oil still belongs to the Iraqi people, so that
myth is shot.

That's because it didn't work out the way it was planned, We were
supposed to put in a nice subservient bunch of Quislings who would get
rich while screwing their people. It was supposed to be Chalabi and
his crew. But we're still hard at work getting those oil contracts.

Here is a quote from Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler
explaing why we go to war:

"I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil
interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the
National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping
of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall
Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua
for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912
(where have I heard that name before?). I brought light to the
Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I
helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested."

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

We don't go to war for Mom, Apple Pie, or Democracy. We go because
someone is making big money on it.

On Aug 29, 8:24*am, dgk wrote:
On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 08:40:43 -0700 (PDT), "





wrote:
On Aug 28, 11:30*am, dgk wrote:
On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 14:24:56 -0400, trader4 is a moron

wrote:
" wrote:

Absent a link,
I say it's another lie.
Bush Derangement Syndrome
Bush Derangement Syndrome
and Monday morning quaterbacking
Bush Derangement Syndrome
Bush Derangement Syndrome and denial of the most basic
facts. *Every year we've successfully derailed Al Qaeda plots
to rain destruction on the USA.
Bush Derangement Syndrome. *First you bitch because
enough wasn't done to prevent 911. *Now that we do have
much better programs that are working, why that's not good
either....

I'm not going to embarrass you any further.

What your feeble brain did not notice is that I gave a link to the
material I quoted, and that link includes links to every piece of
evidence that you are calling "bush derangement" and "lies".

So Mr. Bush ass-licker, apologist and sycophant - go and read the
original post, and follow the links:

http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed...minal-incompet....

You can post your apology to everyone here once you've taken your foot
out of your mouth.

Interesting links, but the idea that it was all incompetence is
absurd. Those people were far from incompetent. The obvious conclusion
is that 9/11 was allowed to happen because it allowed powerful US
interests to achieve their goals. It is pretty much what I think
happened.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

In my world incompetence in govt is not unusual. *In
fact, it's quite common. *An example of the incompetence
that lead to 911 was the laws passed decades ago that
prohibited the CIA from sharing intelligence with the FBI.
Now it would be one hell of a vast and long conspiracy
for that to have been done decades ago in order for
911 to happen. *The reality it was just a dumb thing the libs
did in their quest to make the world right.

And exactly what goals were achieved? *Anything in
Afghanistan that looks attractive to you? * With Iraq, the
conspiracy folks claimed a decade ago that it was the
Iraqi oil that the US was after. * In fact, we've left Iraq
and the oil still belongs to the Iraqi people, so that
myth is shot.

That's because it didn't work out the way it was planned,
We were
supposed to put in a nice subservient bunch of Quislings who would get
rich while screwing their people. It was supposed to be Chalabi and
his crew. But we're still hard at work getting those oil contracts.

Sure, more vast conspiracy theories with no foundation.
If we wanted the oil, all we had to do was TAKE the oil.
Put a fence around it, etc. and keep it. Actually, it would
have been very easy to justify. We could have kept an
interest in the oil until the cost of their war of liberation
was paid for.

The truth is, that unlike your
jaundiced view of the USA, we are not a conquering
people. What did we do after WWII?
Keep Germany? Keep Japan? Quite the opposite,
we rebuilt them gave them enormous aid, built
democratic governments and set them free.




Here is a quote from Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler
explaing why we go to war:

"I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil
interests in 1914.

Good example. Who owns Mexico's oil? The Mexican govt
or the USA?



I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the
National City Bank boys to collect revenues in.
I helped in the raping
of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall
Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua
for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912
(where have I heard that name before?). I brought light to the
Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I
helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested."

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

We don't go to war for Mom, Apple Pie, or Democracy. We go because
someone is making big money on it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Obviously another very jaundiced one-sided loon. Following
his logic, anytime the USA protects it's vital interests anywhere,
why we're just war mogering. Today he'd be bitching because
we're not about to let terrorists take over the Mideast oil.
If that is war mongering, count me and most Americans in.

You obviously can't even recognize when your own
conspiracy theories are proven wrong. The example of Iraq is
clear as day. All we heard from the conspiracy nuts for
years was that we went there for the oil. Well,
the war is over, the US troops are
gone. The oil still belongs to the Iraqis. And in fact,
they have awarded almost all the long term oil contracts
for their major fields to European, Russian, or Asian
companies. Yet, instead of recognizing it, you
continue to avoid the mountain of evidence and instead
now claim that the conspiracy just failed. Lame, very
lame.

It's like the 911 conspiracy nuts. The hole in the
Pentagon is too small, the wrong shape. The pieces
of airplane at Shanksville are too small. Of course
if the hole at the Pentagon were bigger and looked like
the shape of a plane, or the parts at Shanksville were
bigger, then they'd be claiming that was not right
either and it was obviously staged. In other words,
the conclusion is pre-determined, the facts ignored
and fabricated as needed in a pathetic attempt to
mislead.

On Wednesday, August 29, 2012 8:08:14 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Aug 29, 8:24*am, dgk wrote:

On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 08:40:43 -0700 (PDT), "











wrote:

On Aug 28, 11:30*am, dgk wrote:

On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 14:24:56 -0400, trader4 is a moron



wrote:

" wrote:



Absent a link,

I say it's another lie.

Bush Derangement Syndrome

Bush Derangement Syndrome

and Monday morning quaterbacking

Bush Derangement Syndrome

Bush Derangement Syndrome and denial of the most basic

facts. *Every year we've successfully derailed Al Qaeda plots

to rain destruction on the USA.

Bush Derangement Syndrome. *First you bitch because

enough wasn't done to prevent 911. *Now that we do have

much better programs that are working, why that's not good

either....



I'm not going to embarrass you any further.



What your feeble brain did not notice is that I gave a link to the

material I quoted, and that link includes links to every piece of

evidence that you are calling "bush derangement" and "lies".



So Mr. Bush ass-licker, apologist and sycophant - go and read the

original post, and follow the links:



http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed...minal-incompet...



You can post your apology to everyone here once you've taken your foot

out of your mouth.



Interesting links, but the idea that it was all incompetence is

absurd. Those people were far from incompetent. The obvious conclusion

is that 9/11 was allowed to happen because it allowed powerful US

interests to achieve their goals. It is pretty much what I think

happened.- Hide quoted text -



- Show quoted text -



In my world incompetence in govt is not unusual. *In

fact, it's quite common. *An example of the incompetence

that lead to 911 was the laws passed decades ago that

prohibited the CIA from sharing intelligence with the FBI.

Now it would be one hell of a vast and long conspiracy

for that to have been done decades ago in order for

911 to happen. *The reality it was just a dumb thing the libs

did in their quest to make the world right.



And exactly what goals were achieved? *Anything in

Afghanistan that looks attractive to you? * With Iraq, the

conspiracy folks claimed a decade ago that it was the

Iraqi oil that the US was after. * In fact, we've left Iraq

and the oil still belongs to the Iraqi people, so that

myth is shot.



That's because it didn't work out the way it was planned,

We were

supposed to put in a nice subservient bunch of Quislings who would get

rich while screwing their people. It was supposed to be Chalabi and

his crew. But we're still hard at work getting those oil contracts.



Sure, more vast conspiracy theories with no foundation.

If we wanted the oil, all we had to do was TAKE the oil.

Put a fence around it, etc. and keep it. Actually, it would

have been very easy to justify. We could have kept an

interest in the oil until the cost of their war of liberation

was paid for.



The truth is, that unlike your

jaundiced view of the USA, we are not a conquering

people. What did we do after WWII?

Keep Germany? Keep Japan? Quite the opposite,

we rebuilt them gave them enormous aid, built

democratic governments and set them free.









Here is a quote from Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler

explaing why we go to war:



"I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil

interests in 1914.



Good example. Who owns Mexico's oil? The Mexican govt

or the USA?







I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the

National City Bank boys to collect revenues in.

I helped in the raping

of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall

Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua

for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912

(where have I heard that name before?). I brought light to the

Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I

helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested."



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



We don't go to war for Mom, Apple Pie, or Democracy. We go because

someone is making big money on it.- Hide quoted text -



- Show quoted text -



Obviously another very jaundiced one-sided loon. Following

his logic, anytime the USA protects it's vital interests anywhere,

why we're just war mogering. Today he'd be bitching because

we're not about to let terrorists take over the Mideast oil.

If that is war mongering, count me and most Americans in.



You obviously can't even recognize when your own

conspiracy theories are proven wrong. The example of Iraq is

clear as day. All we heard from the conspiracy nuts for

years was that we went there for the oil. Well,

the war is over, the US troops are

gone. The oil still belongs to the Iraqis. And in fact,

they have awarded almost all the long term oil contracts

for their major fields to European, Russian, or Asian

companies. Yet, instead of recognizing it, you

continue to avoid the mountain of evidence and instead

now claim that the conspiracy just failed. Lame, very

lame.



It's like the 911 conspiracy nuts. The hole in the

Pentagon is too small, the wrong shape. The pieces

of airplane at Shanksville are too small. Of course

if the hole at the Pentagon were bigger and looked like

the shape of a plane, or the parts at Shanksville were

bigger, then they'd be claiming that was not right

either and it was obviously staged. In other words,

the conclusion is pre-determined, the facts ignored

and fabricated as needed in a pathetic attempt to

mislead.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egqqC...eature=related

wrote:

(..)

What this ass known as recyclebinned does is not only full-quote, but
double-space his full-quoted text.

Why are you being an ass by doing that, recyclebinned?

Do you not know that it's improper usenet message composition style to
full-quote the post you're replying to?

You'll catch more flies with honey, than vinegar.

--

Christopher Ass Young


Learn more about Jesus


www.lds.org


..

"Administrator" wrote in message
...


wrote:

(..)

What this ass known as recyclebinned does is not only full-quote, but



double-space his full-quoted text.



Why are you being an ass by doing that, recyclebinned?


Do you not know that it's improper usenet message composition style to



full-quote the post you're replying to?

On Wednesday, August 29, 2012 3:20:12 PM UTC-7, micky wrote:
OT, soldiers carrying loaded weapons.



In the past 2 or 3 days, American troops in Afghanistan have been

ordered to carry loaded weapons at all times while on base ,



What would the previous situiation have been?



That they didn't carry weapons at all, or that they carried unloaded

weapons?



And what base is referrred to? It sounds like it is the American

bases that are referred to, but maybe that part is written badly.



Where have the American killed in the last several incidents there,

may they rest in peace, been killed, on American bases or Afghani?





I thought that on an American base the only ones carrying weapons were

the guards at the gate and the perimeter or in front of some high

mucky-muck's office, soldiers leaving or returning to the base, those

going to the firing range to practice, those appearing for a few

minutes during (daily?) inpection by their commanding officer, and a

small number of others for misc. reasons, like going to the

quartermaster to get a replacement part.



And that when American military visited a foreign base, like an

Afghani base in Afghanistan, again, the miliarty guard would carry

weapons but officers carried no more than a side arm, if that, and

privates and NCOs brought just to carry things would not be armed at

all.



So my impression of the change in orders was that they should carry

weapons when they haven't been, not that they should load weapsons

they are already carrying. Comments?

We should all be carrying weapons when we go to a school, university, mall
or movie theater.

On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 08:13:32 -0400, Administrator
wrote:

wrote:

(..)

What this ass known as recyclebinned does is not only full-quote, but
double-space his full-quoted text.

Why are you being an ass by doing that, recyclebinned?

Do you not know that it's improper usenet message composition style to
full-quote the post you're replying to?


On the last tip.... BS but worthy to consider on some posts.
Personally I like to quote the entire orig post so others can see what
I am replying to without having to go back. On occasion I do snip
posts as I see fit. That's why I said BS but do consider what you
said worthy for consideration.

Last, I suggest if it bothers you this much, to skip over his posts.
Easy to do too.

On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 08:13:32 -0400 Administrator wrote
in Message id: :

wrote:

(..)

What this ass known as recyclebinned does is not only full-quote, but
double-space his full-quoted text.

Why are you being an ass by doing that, recyclebinned?

Do you not know that it's improper usenet message composition style to
full-quote the post you're replying to?

It's Google - Now more broken than ever.

On Wed, 29 Aug 2012 08:39:59 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Wednesday, August 29, 2012 8:08:14 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Aug 29, 8:24*am, dgk wrote:

On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 08:40:43 -0700 (PDT), "


It's like the 911 conspiracy nuts. The hole in the

Pentagon is too small, the wrong shape. The pieces

of airplane at Shanksville are too small. Of course

if the hole at the Pentagon were bigger and looked like

the shape of a plane, or the parts at Shanksville were

bigger, then they'd be claiming that was not right

either and it was obviously staged. In other words,

the conclusion is pre-determined, the facts ignored

and fabricated as needed in a pathetic attempt to

mislead.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egqqC...eature=related

Inconvenient facts.

On Wed, 29 Aug 2012 08:08:13 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

Obviously another very jaundiced one-sided loon. Following
his logic, anytime the USA protects it's vital interests anywhere,
why we're just war mogering. Today he'd be bitching because
we're not about to let terrorists take over the Mideast oil.
If that is war mongering, count me and most Americans in.

Ah, admitting it. We go to war, illegally, because someone gets rich.
Of course, what exactly is "vital interests" is the question here.
Mostly what my government does abroad is to protect the investments of
the 1%. Those interests do not often coincide with mine and often are
antagonistic. Our huge military budget has nothing to do with keeping
me safe, it's all about protecting the military-industrial complex.

9/11 was used as justification for invading Iraq, when they knew all
the time that 9/11 had nothing to do with Iraq. Iraq was all about the
neo-con dream of creating a "New American Century". I do not want an
empire. And I don't want us burning lots of fossil fuel, not only
because it is altering our climate but also because petroleum is too
valuable to be wasted that way. Much better to use it for plastics and
such. Our heirs may very well curse us for both reasons.

Administrator wrote:
wrote:

(..)

What this ass known as recyclebinned does is not only full-quote, but
double-space his full-quoted text.

Why are you being an ass by doing that, recyclebinned?

Do you not know that it's improper usenet message composition style
to
full-quote the post you're replying to?

and you're a morphing piece of ****, so I guess that makes you even

"Administrator" wrote in message
...
wrote:

(..)

What this ass known as recyclebinned does is not only full-quote, but
double-space his full-quoted text.

Why are you being an ass by doing that, recyclebinned?

Do you not know that it's improper usenet message composition style to
full-quote the post you're replying to?

Dear Whatever:

I notice you have taken to task a writer about whether or not a post is on
topic, is spelled correctly, or is correct in some other minute detail.

I would like to inform you that the post of Netnanny is already filled. It
is held by Newton Fillmore, of Pacoima, California, although Mr. Fillmore is
currently in a coma in a facility in Riverside, and has been for three
years, eight months now. We just could not bring ourselves to demote him
without a proper hearing and him being present.

Please be advised that there are currently over 500 applicants and wannabes
for the position. That does not include people like yourself who have
broken with protocol and currently act like they are in the cherished
position.

If and when and if ever the post becomes available, you will be required to
write an essay of no longer than 1500 words, single spaced, using the words
there, they're, their, your, you're, and any others you can come up with in
as many incorrect grammatical situations as possible.

You must also describe the difference between "lose" and "loose" in 25 words
or less.

You must also include the reason that you think entitles you the lifelong
right to hold this post, and review the rest of humanity on its daily
heretofore
unobserved unsupervised act of Usenet Posting.

Steve
3rd Poohbah and Grand Mucky Muck
of the Society of Netnannies.

Addended by 4/19/2011

You forgot three of my favorites, its and it's, lightning and
lightening, and to, too and two

"Administrator" wrote in message
...
wrote:

(..)

What this ass known as recyclebinned does is not only full-quote, but
double-space his full-quoted text.

Why are you being an ass by doing that, recyclebinned?

Do you not know that it's improper usenet message composition style to
full-quote the post you're replying to?

Just like Stormy, you can't fix stupid.................