On Sun, 22 May 2005 07:23:28 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

Irrelevant! I said that Sen. McCarthy never named more than ONE person
as a communist. The 83 people who took the fifth when being questioned
about the evidence that they may know about communist in the government
WERE named in public as having taken the fifth. The reason this was done
was to identify the problem that there were people in the state
department who would not cooperate with a background check, and yet,
they held security clearances.

Still not too bright, eh?
What qualified McCarthy to run background checks or
grant clearances?
His mouth & lies?

Any clues why he's reviled?
--
Cliff

On Sun, 22 May 2005 07:23:28 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

McCarthy didn't out them as communist.
The majority of them WERE communist or agents of the Soviet Union, but
they were identified as taking the fifth.

Do you know the difference between it being said that you took the
fifth, and it being said that you're a communist? It appears that you
and the other pro-communist cannot. Not while it serves your propaganda
at the moment, you can't.

So you are indeed STILL beating your wife or mother?
--
Cliff

On Sun, 22 May 2005 07:52:19 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

Well, finally Cliff comes out to defend the Communist Party.

Which is his real agenda. At least we can argue his issues directly
rather than having to cut through all his anti-U.S. lies.

The winger pills are working .... just like Rush's ....

Cliff wrote:
On Thu, 19 May 2005 12:33:34 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:


That being so, one has to ask, why are you still lying about it being a
"witch hunt" (which implies that there were not) and, more importantly,
since we didn't root out the commie *******s back in the 1950s because
of a well planned commie propaganda campaign, why would they commies be
gone now?


You are not very bright, right?

I'm a genius. Why do you ask? It sounds like you're making a childish
attempt at implying I'm not smart, as you have no rational argument and
have nothing left than to make unsupported argumentum ad hominem.

Which explains your dumb statements & blind claims parroted from
others.

Of course, I know that's what you're doing. You find it hard not to
speak in trite little phrases, don't you? I wonder how much of your
posts are your original thought, and how much are due to some Jewish
script writer for some television sitcom.

Large words, like concepts & education & facts, would just
confuse you more.

Things like the early xtian churches were communism.

No. You got that one from some old communist propaganda.

Like the history of the xtian churches?

The early Christians experimented with holding all property in common in
the community. They would take what they did not need, and put it in a
common store house for others in the community to take as they needed.

Yep. Communists.

This was similar to the communist belief that the government should hold
all property in the name of the people. The communist idea was just a
fiction: the government owned it, and it was disposed of according to
the whims of those who were in power.

Just like the churches did & do.

Even if you believe the communist
lie, there, the similarities ended.

You seem unusually confused.

The early Christians never held people into the communist system at
force of arms.

They murdered tens of thousands, if not millions.
Conversion by force was very common even into the 20th century
and, no doubt, is still going on in places.

Communist are famous for shooting people who tried to
escape their system of slavery. They racked up quite a body count at the
Iron Curtain, for example. I personally know a number of people who
escaped communist regimes under the threat of death.

Lots of people are escaping the neocons & fundies too.

The objective fact is that people under communist governments are held
as the slaves of the government.

Sort of like the IRS.
I see.

The early Christians did not hold
anyone as slaves,

LOTS of xtians owned slaves. Many probably still do.

and people were free to stay, leave, or not contribute
as they wished.

Stay & work or starve. Good system.

That is very different from communist.

Free medical care?

That portion of government spending that's done on infrastructure
& social programs is communism.

Social programs, yes. Of course, it has been my argument all along that
McCarthy was right, that there were Soviet Agents, Communist, and
Communist sympathizers in government. I am glad that you brought up that
they have instituted a number of socialist programs that are
unconstitutional, but they have done it and they have gotten away with it.

What warped winger fed you today?

The roads you drive on were paid for by communists,

Actually, they are paid for by federal and state gas taxes, which makes
them more like a fee for use.

Communism. About anyone can use them.

the
social security benefits you may get are paid for by them as well,

Now that is a socialist scam. It is no surprise that the man who put
that socialist ponzi scheme in place also harbored and protected the
communist in his administration; called a brutal, savage dictator “Uncle
Joe” and took orders from him; and made excuses for Stalin's
concentration camps.

Feel free to give yours back. Gunner may need more
health care ....

as is (in many places) the water you drink & the *clean* air
that you breathe.

If you had been in one of your worker's paradises, you'd be able to
choke on the air. It seems that the health of the people was second to
the needs of the state to have industrial wealth. The former Warsaw pact
countries are cesspools of pollution.

Too much State capitalism & too many wingers.
Nice of you to note that.

OOPS ... it's the liberals that want to clean it up & prevent it
.... for the benefit of all ..... dirty lowdown communists ....
--
Cliff

On Sun, 22 May 2005 09:07:27 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:


I believe that many Jews are socialist. Albert Einstein, who made his
case for socialism in his book "Ideas and Opinions" said that Jews tend
towards socialism. I think Albert Einstein was right; from a statistical
view point, that is a fact. From a cultural anthological viewpoint, it
follows. If you mean I don't like socialism/communism, that's correct.
That is the philosophy of slavery of all mankind.

I am for the state of Israel; I believe it has done and will do wonders
for Jewish people to have their own state.

What do you have against kibbutzs?

--
Cliff

On Sun, 22 May 2005 09:07:27 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

I am for any Jew who wants to
practice his religion in peace. The wall will do even more wonders.
God's chosen people have spent too long without a nation, among other
people. They need to change their culture to learn to live among
themselves.

So you are sending the Blacks back to Africa?
Have the camps set up?
--
Cliff

On Sun, 22 May 2005 09:07:27 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

Gunner share your political views or what ?

No. Gunner holds many misconceptions that have been put in place by the
socialist. He is not ready to handle real history. The facts are ugly
and troubling. I don't think he is ready for the entire truth, though he
does seem to realize that something isn't right with history as it is.

And you are just the person to rewrite it, right?

He's already seen through the lies the leftist have put in place about
McCarthy... he may come to other realizations in the future now that he
knows that history has been written by the leftist.

No camps in Germany either?

BTW, Do you have a full list of all the hate groups you belong to?
--
Cliff

On Sun, 22 May 2005 07:59:46 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

Cliff wrote:
On Thu, 19 May 2005 12:33:34 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:


If you say ANYTHING it's ALL fair game for the
hunters.
You don't have to be guilty of ANYTHING to take
the 5th.

So, this is your excuse for damning everything McCarthy did? Not only
does it not follow, your stupid excuse isn't even right.

The 5th says you cannot be compelled to testify against yourself.
Obviously, you cannot be made to testify against yourself when you,
yourself, are on trial for a crime. Another instance is when you are
testifying and to answer would incriminate yourself. There is no right
to refuse to answer if what you have to say will NOT incriminate
yourself.


And in a witch hunt ....

Have you stopped beating your wife?

A) Yes
B) No
C) Take the 5th & don't answer.

Your choice. What are YOU answering?


Witch Hunts
No, this is an example of a loaded question. A witch hunt is where
innocent people are persecuted for fictional crimes.

As you refuse to answer the question (you took the 5th)
YOU ARE A FILTHY COMMUNIST AND MUST BE DISCREDITED
AND LOSE YOU JOB & ANYTHING ELSE WE CAN GET !!!!

What a maroon.
--
Cliff

On Sun, 22 May 2005 08:10:26 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

Cliff wrote:
On Thu, 19 May 2005 12:41:57 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:


Cliff wrote:

On Wed, 18 May 2005 11:18:41 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:



What McCarthy was doing here was damning the
State Department for taking steps that allowed and empowered the
Communist to take over China, steps that McCarthy called
"traitorous
actions".


Mao & others were US State Department agents? Long before
Nixon & McCarthy?

Again, your selective stupidity is showing. If you are incapable of
determing what the meaning of what I said,


So not even you know? LOL ....


that there were those in the
U.S. State department that helped the communist in China take over,
really means that Mao was in the U.S. State department, then you're a
gibbering ape.


A great many helped China. So what?

http://www.ccds.charlotte.nc.us/Hist.../shklovsky.htm
http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/brochures...ff/chinoff.htm
http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/brochures/72-38/72-38.htm

What kind of total fool are you?

You know, I call you an idiot for using obviously invalid and unsound
arguments, and then you reply with an profoundly stupid post like this.
It's profoundly stupid because your argument isn't even wrong! It's
simply not an argument at all!

So many in the US did NOT help China?
This fool is getting amusing G.

I said that people in the U.S. State department helped the Communist
take over China.

So where's your foorp?

Got any revisions to history to make?

BTW, Why was the US supporting that corrupt dictator? I
sort of forgot that one ....

In reply, you say we helped China ... against the Japanese. Thus, you
concluded (actually, even you are so stupid as to explicitly state the
connection) that we did not help the communist? Or perhaps that we just
help people, and Chinese and communist both begins with C? I don't know
what your argument is, I'm guessing and you won't say. You splat gibber
in the newsgroups, and pretend that it means something.

Another day of confusion I see G.

I don't blame your lack of composition skills on you, I blame every
English teacher you ever had. She should have dunked your head in a
bucket and drowned you as an example to the rest of the class.

For YOUR lack of reading comprehension skills?
Is that also a sure sign of a lack of logic & reasoning
skills?

As for what kind of fool I am;

We are getting to know G.

like I said, so many people have fallen
for arguments are stupid as yours, I feel a need to point out their
obvious errors.

Just like your beloved witchunts?

I use to trust people's judgment, but they seem to need
a little help.

Who feeds you yours?

Are you calling for Nixon to be hung?

BTW, "Communism" is still doing just fine.

I think that I may have just insulted apes...


Half blind as well?

HTH

I guess if it's NIXON helping China it's fine & dandy.
Oops ... he was McCarthy's number one stooge.
--
Cliff
--
Cliff

In misc.survivalism Stuart Grey wrote:

Acting isn't that difficult. Most actors are idiots - it makes it easier
to act if you can't see what an idiot script you have. Too many actors
are ready for the casting couch; it was easy to add a political test.

So profits were secondary? And what difference did it make if the actor
had a particular political viewpoint, if their job was jsut simply to read
a script?

Next time I ask you for business advice, remind me to ignore it.



--
Words are flying out like endless rain into a paper cup.
They slither while they pass. They slip away across the universe.

--John Lennon

Follow-ups-to: alt.politics

Gunner wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2005 15:59:15 +0000 (UTC),

wrote:

In misc.survivalism Gunner wrote:

WASHINGTON ? The Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
has
just made public its hitherto sealed closed-door hearings 50 years
ago
showing widespread Soviet penetration of the U.S. government.
Despite
the negative media spin, the hearing transcripts show its
chairman,
Sen. Joseph R. McCarthy, was ahead of his time.


So it is settled: The fine old great wonderful actors of yesteryear
were
no better than the scum sucking bottom feeders of today.

Thanks, Gunner.

Most were wonderful actors of yesteryear. As you will notice if you
read the transcript of the hearings..it was mostly writers and
producers that were the communists, not the actors.


I don't know what country you live in, or would prefer to live in,
but here in the United States of America writers, producers, and
actors are free to be communists or not as they please. McCarthy's
efforts to transform America's guarantees of freedom into a pale
imitation of the empty Soviet guarantees of freedom ultimately failed.

--

FF

Stuart Grey wrote:
Well, finally Cliff comes out to defend the Communist Party.



An excellent organisation all things considered.



Cliff wrote:


You are not very bright, right?

I'm a genius. Why do you ask? It sounds like you're making a childish
attempt at implying I'm not smart, as you have no rational argument and
have nothing left than to make unsupported argumentum ad hominem.


Saying that you aren't very bright, or more acurately that you are a
total and absolute ****wit isn't an ad hominem.

Cliff wrote:
On Sun, 22 May 2005 07:23:28 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:


Irrelevant! I said that Sen. McCarthy never named more than ONE person
as a communist. The 83 people who took the fifth when being questioned
about the evidence that they may know about communist in the government
WERE named in public as having taken the fifth. The reason this was done
was to identify the problem that there were people in the state
department who would not cooperate with a background check, and yet,
they held security clearances.


Still not too bright, eh?
What qualified McCarthy to run background checks or
grant clearances?

What makes your idiot brain think that McCarthy was running background
checks and granting security clearances?!

Do you just sputter the first stupid thing that pops into your head?

McCarthy was investigating a concern raised by the state department that
there were communist and Soviet Agents being granted security clearances
in our government. The senate investigation that he started was part of
the Senate's power to check a President who was out of control. Such
investigations are within the power and duty of the United States senate.

Must you gibber ALL the time?!

His mouth & lies?

Any clues why he's reviled?

Because commie boys like you found him too effective, to be blunt.

Cliff wrote:
On Sun, 22 May 2005 09:07:27 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:


I believe that many Jews are socialist. Albert Einstein, who made his
case for socialism in his book "Ideas and Opinions" said that Jews tend
towards socialism. I think Albert Einstein was right; from a statistical
view point, that is a fact. From a cultural anthological viewpoint, it
follows. If you mean I don't like socialism/communism, that's correct.
That is the philosophy of slavery of all mankind.

I am for the state of Israel; I believe it has done and will do wonders
for Jewish people to have their own state.


What do you have against kibbutzs?


You are one incoherant ass.

wrote:
In misc.survivalism Stuart Grey wrote:


Acting isn't that difficult. Most actors are idiots - it makes it easier
to act if you can't see what an idiot script you have. Too many actors
are ready for the casting couch; it was easy to add a political test.


So profits were secondary?

Out of such a large population, it is no problem to pick people
according to their willingness to recline on the casting couch as well
as by their political beliefs.

There would be no major impact to the quality of films (which are
targeted for ninnies) due to reducing the pool of talent to the subset
of actors who are leftist.

Indeed, many actors are suckered into being leftist simply because it
bring more opportunities. Sadly, it is a fact that most people, if they
are around only people with one point of view, will quickly take on that
point of view, no matter how stupid or obviously false it is.

And what difference did it make if the actor
had a particular political viewpoint, if their job was jsut simply to
read
a script?

Why does it make the paper when Jane "Hanoi" Fonda makes a stupid
pro-communist spew? Why does it make news when Whoopie Goldberg makes
crude jokes, targeted to your immature level of intelect, about Bush's
name being the same as a vulgur referce to a woman's pubic hair?

You like it. You eat it up. You're not too bright, and you fall pretty
easy for crap like that. Sadly, it works.

Next time I ask you for business advice, remind me to ignore it.

Your loss.

Guido wrote:
Stuart Grey wrote:

Well, finally Cliff comes out to defend the Communist Party.



An excellent organisation all things considered.

If you hate freedom and enjoy being a slave, or hope to become a minor
slave driver, I suppose you would look at it like that.

Cliff wrote:


You are not very bright, right?

I'm a genius. Why do you ask? It sounds like you're making a childish
attempt at implying I'm not smart, as you have no rational argument
and have nothing left than to make unsupported argumentum ad hominem.


Saying that you aren't very bright, or more acurately that you are a
total and absolute ****wit isn't an ad hominem.

You have to back it up. You can't even explain where I made errors and
why you feel that I'm stupid. You just disagree, you can't explain your
own animal like emotions, and you squeel like an ape.

If you can't explain, you're not thinking, but operating on the level of
an animal. I don't care what a stupid beast emotes.

On Sun, 22 May 2005 08:15:36 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

Cliff wrote:
On Thu, 19 May 2005 13:13:27 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:


The difference between witches and communist is that communist exist.
There really may BE communist in the government.


Gee, so WHAT?

1)Communist are not allowed security clearances.

They very well are in most nations.

2)Communist work against the people of the United States

We call those "neocons".

3)The Communist party advocates murder and defacto slavery of the
innocent, and is thus evil.

Yep. Neocons. Can't put one past you anymore.

That's what they said about witches too for hunderds of years.
CLUE: There may be NEOCONS & WINGERS in government.

Yes. Neocons and Wingers can get security clearances.

And your head nas been ?

Neocon is a word coined by hard core leftist Jews to describe Jews who,
upon seeing the growing anti-Jewish movement of the left, have rejected
socialist/communist values.

LOL ..... More history revisions?
How fast can you spin?

Winger is a word invented by slope headed leftist who don't realize it
could apply to either left or right wing views.

Have you quit beating your wife & mother?
--
Cliff

On Sun, 22 May 2005 08:19:10 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

Cliff wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2005 05:07:35 GMT, Gunner
wrote:


American Communist Party


Has anyone signed up Gunner & Stuart Grey yet?
Or at the KKK?

This is the kind of gibber that one learns to expect from the left.

Did you check for you names on the lists? Gunner's?

Can we spot the communists?

Listen to one gibber G.
--
Cliff

On Sun, 22 May 2005 16:31:08 GMT, Gunner
wrote:

On Sun, 22 May 2005 08:19:10 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

Cliff wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2005 05:07:35 GMT, Gunner
wrote:


American Communist Party


Has anyone signed up Gunner & Stuart Grey yet?
Or at the KKK?

This is the kind of gibber that one learns to expect from the left.

I noted a similar response from UFO John. I suspect the use of the
word Jew, (in accurate discription of Neocon) set off the neurons in
both kneecaps and caused him to jerk out of his chair, reopening that
old brain injury that plagues him so badly.

Gunner

"Considering the events of recent years,
the world has a long way to go to regain
its credibility and reputation with the US."
unknown

NOW he wants to blame the Jews for Herr shrubbie
too ....
--
Cliff

On Sun, 22 May 2005 08:25:09 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

Cliff wrote:
On Thu, 19 May 2005 12:39:36 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:


I am supporting McCarthy


[
Main Entry: Mc·Car·thy·ism
Pronunciation: m&-'kär-thE-"i-z&m also -'kär-tE-
Function: noun
Etymology: Joseph R. McCarthy
Date: 1950
a mid-20th century political attitude characterized chiefly by
opposition to elements held to be subversive and by the use of tactics
involving personal attacks on individuals by means of widely
publicized indiscriminate allegations especially on the basis of
unsubstantiated charges
- Mc·Car·thy·ite /-"It/ noun or adjective
]

Yes. The whole POINT of the thread, however, is that this work of
communist propaganda was simply not true.

Have you considered calling for Webster to be tried?

Yes, this is what the leftist
have definded as "McCarthyism". It had nothing to do with Sen. McCarthy,
however, as I've proven in previous posts.

You've only proven that you are quite ignorant. But you did it
in an amusing way: two points.

And, as I said, that so many people swallow this leftist bull**** is the
reason why I feel I must soil myself talking to morons such as Cliff et al.

Unlike wasting your time on an honest education.
Was Darwin in on it too?

Leftist have also defined George Washington and Thomas Jefferson as evil
capitalist slave owners.

Neither are anymore.

The truth is, leftist lie. They re-write history. They use the big lie.

Which one owned no slaves? When?

Once you understand that, you start to look at the objective facts and
piece together what really happened. If, that is, you have a brain.

[
Main Entry: Mc·Car·thy·ism
Pronunciation: m&-'kär-thE-"i-z&m also -'kär-tE-
Function: noun
Etymology: Joseph R. McCarthy
Date: 1950
a mid-20th century political attitude characterized chiefly by
opposition to elements held to be subversive and by the use of tactics
involving personal attacks on individuals by means of widely
publicized indiscriminate allegations especially on the basis of
unsubstantiated charges
- Mc·Car·thy·ite /-"It/ noun or adjective
]

Does it hurt yet?
--
Cliff

On Sun, 22 May 2005 08:33:39 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

wrote:
In misc.survivalism Gunner wrote:


WASHINGTON ? The Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations has
just made public its hitherto sealed closed-door hearings 50 years ago
showing widespread Soviet penetration of the U.S. government. Despite
the negative media spin, the hearing transcripts show its chairman,
Sen. Joseph R. McCarthy, was ahead of his time.



So it is settled: The fine old great wonderful actors of yesteryear were
no better than the scum sucking bottom feeders of today.

The fine old great wonderful actors, directors and producers of
yesteryear put a politcal test right next to the casting couch.

Acting isn't that difficult. Most actors are idiots -

Making much money at it?

it makes it easier
to act if you can't see what an idiot script you have.

What winger gave it to you? Rush?

Too many actors
are ready for the casting couch; it was easy to add a political test.

Got any party flacks?

Once a few top people were in place, socialist/communist filled the
industry with like minds and useful idiots.

Let's see ..... do they pay droolers much? Cottage growth
industry in the US these days I've heard.

The same thing happened at our universities and colleges. In the 1960s
and 70s, leftist students demanded professors that held a different view
than the rational view of capitalism and freedom.

And crazed little you will be happy to refefine everything &
rewrite history ...

Once a few leftist
profs were in, they took over and booted most every sane prof out of the
department, and eventually out of the school. Now, it's hard to find a
prof who isn't a leftist.

Nasty thing, thinking & not licking boots.

Ditto for the news media. Ditto for the government.

Poor you ..... have you considered moving somewhere more
to you liking, like Russia or China?

Then people wonder why the schools, news media, and Hollywood are so
damned pro-communist and anti-American.

With you & your ilk as examples? What's to wonder at?

Thanks, Gunner.

--
Cliff

On Sun, 22 May 2005 13:53:13 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

Cliff wrote:
On Sun, 22 May 2005 07:23:28 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:


Irrelevant! I said that Sen. McCarthy never named more than ONE person
as a communist. The 83 people who took the fifth when being questioned
about the evidence that they may know about communist in the government
WERE named in public as having taken the fifth. The reason this was done
was to identify the problem that there were people in the state
department who would not cooperate with a background check, and yet,
they held security clearances.


Still not too bright, eh?
What qualified McCarthy to run background checks or
grant clearances?

What makes your idiot brain think that McCarthy was running background
checks and granting security clearances?!

Both brain cells are out of sync.

Do you just sputter the first stupid thing that pops into your head?

Yes, he does.

McCarthy was investigating a concern raised by the state department that
there were communist and Soviet Agents being granted security clearances
in our government. The senate investigation that he started was part of
the Senate's power to check a President who was out of control. Such
investigations are within the power and duty of the United States senate.

Must you gibber ALL the time?!

Thats all he has.

His mouth & lies?

Any clues why he's reviled?

Because commie boys like you found him too effective, to be blunt.

Indeed. And the smear campaign against him was devised and pushed by
the Communists. Even they admitted it.

Some fascinating stuff, files and data have come out of Dzerinsky
Square after the implosion of the USSR. When the KGB and Directorate
IV boys stopped getting paychecks..they were selling files to the
highest bidders.

Gunner

"Considering the events of recent years,
the world has a long way to go to regain
its credibility and reputation with the US."
unknown

On Sun, 22 May 2005 09:07:27 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

John Scheldroup wrote:
"Stuart Grey" wrote in message ...

Well, finally Cliff comes out to defend the Communist Party.

Which is his real agenda. At least we can argue his issues directly rather than having to cut through all his anti-U.S. lies.

Cliff wrote:

On Thu, 19 May 2005 12:33:34 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:


You are not very bright, right?

I'm a genius. Why do you ask? It sounds like you're making a childish attempt at implying I'm not smart, as you have no rational
argument and have nothing left than to make unsupported argumentum ad hominem.

Of course, I know that's what you're doing. You find it hard not to speak in trite little phrases, don't you? I wonder how much of
your posts are your original thought, and how much are due to some Jewish script writer for some television sitcom.



You are very anti-semitic right ?

No. You leftist like to start thowing around "bigot" and crap like that
every time you're losing an argument, don't you? As if, by some magic of
logic, that ends it.

I believe that many Jews are socialist. Albert Einstein, who made his
case for socialism in his book "Ideas and Opinions" said that Jews tend
towards socialism. I think Albert Einstein was right; from a statistical
view point, that is a fact. From a cultural anthological viewpoint, it
follows. If you mean I don't like socialism/communism, that's correct.
That is the philosophy of slavery of all mankind.

I am for the state of Israel; I believe it has done and will do wonders
for Jewish people to have their own state. I am for any Jew who wants to
practice his religion in peace. The wall will do even more wonders.
God's chosen people have spent too long without a nation, among other
people. They need to change their culture to learn to live among
themselves.

Gunner share your political views or what ?

No. Gunner holds many misconceptions that have been put in place by the
socialist. He is not ready to handle real history. The facts are ugly
and troubling. I don't think he is ready for the entire truth, though he
does seem to realize that something isn't right with history as it is.
He's already seen through the lies the leftist have put in place about
McCarthy... he may come to other realizations in the future now that he
knows that history has been written by the leftist.

Gunner is good at heart, and cannot accept the truth as it is as he
would find it ugly. He has been taught that it is ugly, and he believes it.

examples please?

gunner

"Considering the events of recent years,
the world has a long way to go to regain
its credibility and reputation with the US."
unknown

Cliff wrote:
On Sun, 22 May 2005 08:15:36 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:


Cliff wrote:

On Thu, 19 May 2005 13:13:27 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:



The difference between witches and communist is that communist exist.
There really may BE communist in the government.


Gee, so WHAT?

1)Communist are not allowed security clearances.


They very well are in most nations.

To dignify your little commie third world ********s as a "nation" is
really a misuse of the word.

2)Communist work against the people of the United States


We call those "neocons".

You're just going to revert to your smart ass, one line stupid reply
mode, aren't you?

Gunner wrote:
On Sun, 22 May 2005 09:07:27 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

Gunner is good at heart, and cannot accept the truth as it is as he
would find it ugly. He has been taught that it is ugly, and he believes it.


examples please?

I like you. I understand why there are many good people out there who
don't see the problem as it is. I understand their reluctance to have a
rational discussion about history. Some things, like our twisted view of
history that just doesn't seem consistant, stir strong emotions.

Just consider that what we knew about McCarthy for the last 50 years,
turned out to NOT be true. That history was a LIE, written by communist.

The same people who have written much of our history - a history full of
subjective interpretations that are not supported by the objective facts.

I mean, just look at the slander that guys like Cliff et al throw at
people just for pointing out that the facts now show McCarthy was correct.

I'll give you a hint: The United States got into WW II because Stalin
wanted us to get into the War.

Do you know why Hitler declared war on the United States?

What the hell is a Nazi anyway? Do you know? Some terrible form of sub
human I bet. What was their politics? Can you say? No, they were not a
form of what we would call socialist.

On Sun, 22 May 2005 18:29:50 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

Gunner wrote:
On Sun, 22 May 2005 09:07:27 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

Gunner is good at heart, and cannot accept the truth as it is as he
would find it ugly. He has been taught that it is ugly, and he believes it.


examples please?

I like you. I understand why there are many good people out there who
don't see the problem as it is. I understand their reluctance to have a
rational discussion about history. Some things, like our twisted view of
history that just doesn't seem consistant, stir strong emotions.

My twisted view of history? Please provide cites.

Just consider that what we knew about McCarthy for the last 50 years,
turned out to NOT be true. That history was a LIE, written by communist.

Indeed. Much of it was.

The same people who have written much of our history - a history full of
subjective interpretations that are not supported by the objective facts.

Depends on which book you read, or which text book which school uses.

I mean, just look at the slander that guys like Cliff et al throw at
people just for pointing out that the facts now show McCarthy was correct.

Thats all the Left has. They are unable to provide anything
constructive, so all they can try to do is destructive stuff. Same
with most current Leftwing politicians. Clintons bunch said we were
going to have a Social Security Crisis before long. So where are the
counter proposals from the Left today, in answer to Bush's ideas?

They dont have any.

I'll give you a hint: The United States got into WW II because Stalin
wanted us to get into the War.

Interesting concept. Might even be a a significant portion of the
myrid reasons we got into the war. But hardly the only one.

Do you know why Hitler declared war on the United States?

I know of several reasons. Which one are you talking about?

What the hell is a Nazi anyway? Do you know? Some terrible form of sub
human I bet. What was their politics? Can you say? No, they were not a
form of what we would call socialist.

Of course they wernt. They were racist totalitarians who sprang up in
response to the onerous conditions placed on "Germany" after WW1. The
squareheads have always been an odd people, very late to form a
unified nation, then going bugnuts nationalist.

The leadership of the Nazi Party of course were evil subhumans who
played on their subjects fears, pride and hope. Much like Democrats,
without the jackboots.


Now Im still waiting for examples of what you claimed.

Gunner

"Considering the events of recent years,
the world has a long way to go to regain
its credibility and reputation with the US."
unknown

On Sun, 22 May 2005 18:17:14 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

Cliff wrote:
On Sun, 22 May 2005 08:15:36 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:


Cliff wrote:

On Thu, 19 May 2005 13:13:27 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:



The difference between witches and communist is that communist exist.
There really may BE communist in the government.


Gee, so WHAT?

1)Communist are not allowed security clearances.


They very well are in most nations.

To dignify your little commie third world ********s as a "nation" is
really a misuse of the word.

2)Communist work against the people of the United States


We call those "neocons".

You're just going to revert to your smart ass, one line stupid reply
mode, aren't you?

Thats all he has. When you are butt ignorant of history, dumb as a box
of rocks and a socialist..one line stupid replys are de rigour.

Gunner

"Considering the events of recent years,
the world has a long way to go to regain
its credibility and reputation with the US."
unknown

On Sun, 22 May 2005 13:53:13 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

Cliff wrote:
On Sun, 22 May 2005 07:23:28 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:


Irrelevant! I said that Sen. McCarthy never named more than ONE person
as a communist. The 83 people who took the fifth when being questioned
about the evidence that they may know about communist in the government
WERE named in public as having taken the fifth. The reason this was done
was to identify the problem that there were people in the state
department who would not cooperate with a background check, and yet,
they held security clearances.


Still not too bright, eh?
What qualified McCarthy to run background checks or
grant clearances?

What makes your idiot brain think that McCarthy was running background
checks and granting security clearances?!

Was some not-too-bright idiot lying to us?

Do you just sputter the first stupid thing that pops into your head?

I observe & learn from the lies, errors & blunders of others.

McCarthy was investigating a concern raised by the state department that
there were communist and Soviet Agents being granted security clearances
in our government.

How many of your friends are still beating their wives & mothers?
How much do you charge each other to join your secret club?
Do you still swap?

The senate investigation that he started was part of
the Senate's power to check a President who was out of control.

Pity they could not seem to spell the word then & got so confused
that they went after Hollywood.
Was McCarthy a close relative? Was he still playing with Hoover
& the rubber undies?

Such
investigations are within the power and duty of the United States senate.

Wife & mother breatings in your town must be a plague.

Must you gibber ALL the time?!

Winger's Disease makes you foam in the later stages?
Did you get it from the blood?

His mouth & lies?

Any clues why he's reviled?

Because commie boys like you found him too effective, to be blunt.

"Too effective"?

Catch the film "Orwell rolls in his grave"?
--
Cliff

On Sun, 22 May 2005 13:54:51 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

Cliff wrote:
On Sun, 22 May 2005 09:07:27 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:


I believe that many Jews are socialist. Albert Einstein, who made his
case for socialism in his book "Ideas and Opinions" said that Jews tend
towards socialism. I think Albert Einstein was right; from a statistical
view point, that is a fact. From a cultural anthological viewpoint, it
follows. If you mean I don't like socialism/communism, that's correct.
That is the philosophy of slavery of all mankind.

I am for the state of Israel; I believe it has done and will do wonders
for Jewish people to have their own state.


What do you have against kibbutzs?


You are one incoherant ass.

I saw you coming.
Did the cure at wife & mother beaters anonymous
work?
What's wrong with their methods?

HTH
--
Cliff

On Sun, 22 May 2005 18:42:35 +0000 (UTC),
wrote:

In misc.survivalism Stuart Grey wrote:

Acting isn't that difficult. Most actors are idiots - it makes it easier
to act if you can't see what an idiot script you have. Too many actors
are ready for the casting couch; it was easy to add a political test.

So profits were secondary? And what difference did it make if the actor
had a particular political viewpoint, if their job was jsut simply to read
a script?

Next time I ask you for business advice, remind me to ignore it.

I doubt that there's much money to be made in wife & mother
beating. But it may be a comparative thing or Stuart may be
a real expert (or live really cheap in the nuthouse).

We had best ask him to be certain.
--
Cliff

On Sun, 22 May 2005 14:05:36 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

wrote:
In misc.survivalism Stuart Grey wrote:


Acting isn't that difficult. Most actors are idiots - it makes it easier
to act if you can't see what an idiot script you have. Too many actors
are ready for the casting couch; it was easy to add a political test.


So profits were secondary?

Out of such a large population, it is no problem to pick people
according to their willingness to recline on the casting couch as well
as by their political beliefs.

There would be no major impact to the quality of films (which are
targeted for ninnies) due to reducing the pool of talent to the subset
of actors who are leftist.

Indeed, many actors are suckered into being leftist simply because it
bring more opportunities. Sadly, it is a fact that most people, if they
are around only people with one point of view, will quickly take on that
point of view, no matter how stupid or obviously false it is.

And what difference did it make if the actor
had a particular political viewpoint, if their job was jsut simply to
read
a script?

Why does it make the paper when Jane "Hanoi" Fonda makes a stupid
pro-communist spew? Why does it make news when Whoopie Goldberg makes
crude jokes, targeted to your immature level of intelect, about Bush's
name being the same as a vulgur referce to a woman's pubic hair?

You like it. You eat it up. You're not too bright, and you fall pretty
easy for crap like that. Sadly, it works.

Next time I ask you for business advice, remind me to ignore it.

Your loss.

What's this about Bush's bad hair?
Personally, I thought the pink & purple eyeliner
& eyeshadow a bit garish.

OTOH The hump on his back ...
--
Cliff

On Sun, 22 May 2005 14:13:54 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

Guido wrote:
Stuart Grey wrote:

Well, finally Cliff comes out to defend the Communist Party.



An excellent organisation all things considered.

If you hate freedom and enjoy being a slave, or hope to become a minor
slave driver, I suppose you would look at it like that.

Cliff wrote:


You are not very bright, right?

I'm a genius. Why do you ask? It sounds like you're making a childish
attempt at implying I'm not smart, as you have no rational argument
and have nothing left than to make unsupported argumentum ad hominem.


Saying that you aren't very bright, or more acurately that you are a
total and absolute ****wit isn't an ad hominem.

You have to back it up. You can't even explain where I made errors and
why you feel that I'm stupid. You just disagree, you can't explain your
own animal like emotions, and you squeel like an ape.

If you can't explain, you're not thinking, but operating on the level of
an animal. I don't care what a stupid beast emotes.

How did your heaps of praise on EX-Sen. McCarthy and
McCarthyism and you bashing of Jews as Communuists
turn into support for Herr shrubbie?

BTW, Stuart took the fifth when asked if he's stopped beating
his wife & mother so he must be a communist.

HTH
--
Cliff

On Sun, 22 May 2005 23:24:58 GMT, Gunner
wrote:

Gunner is good at heart

examples please?

Cites?
--
Cliff

On Sun, 22 May 2005 18:29:50 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

Just consider that what we knew about McCarthy for the last 50 years,
turned out to NOT be true. That history was a LIE, written by communist.

Why are YOU a communist?
--
Cliff

On Sun, 22 May 2005 18:29:50 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

Gunner wrote:
On Sun, 22 May 2005 09:07:27 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

Gunner is good at heart, and cannot accept the truth as it is as he
would find it ugly. He has been taught that it is ugly, and he believes it.


examples please?

I like you. I understand why there are many good people out there who
don't see the problem as it is. I understand their reluctance to have a
rational discussion about history. Some things, like our twisted view of
history that just doesn't seem consistant, stir strong emotions.

Just consider that what we knew about McCarthy for the last 50 years,
turned out to NOT be true. That history was a LIE, written by communist.

The same people who have written much of our history - a history full of
subjective interpretations that are not supported by the objective facts.

I mean, just look at the slander that guys like Cliff et al throw at
people just for pointing out that the facts now show McCarthy was correct.

I'll give you a hint: The United States got into WW II because Stalin
wanted us to get into the War.

Do you know why Hitler declared war on the United States?

What the hell is a Nazi anyway? Do you know? Some terrible form of sub
human I bet. What was their politics? Can you say? No, they were not a
form of what we would call socialist.

Do tell.
Did Nazis beat their wives & mothers too?
--
Cliff

On Mon, 23 May 2005 05:37:40 GMT, Gunner
wrote:

On Sun, 22 May 2005 18:29:50 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

Gunner wrote:
On Sun, 22 May 2005 09:07:27 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:

Gunner is good at heart, and cannot accept the truth as it is as he
would find it ugly. He has been taught that it is ugly, and he believes it.


examples please?

I like you. I understand why there are many good people out there who
don't see the problem as it is. I understand their reluctance to have a
rational discussion about history. Some things, like our twisted view of
history that just doesn't seem consistant, stir strong emotions.

My twisted view of history? Please provide cites.

Just consider that what we knew about McCarthy for the last 50 years,
turned out to NOT be true. That history was a LIE, written by communist.

Indeed. Much of it was.

The same people who have written much of our history - a history full of
subjective interpretations that are not supported by the objective facts.

Depends on which book you read, or which text book which school uses.

I mean, just look at the slander that guys like Cliff et al throw at
people just for pointing out that the facts now show McCarthy was correct.

Thats all the Left has. They are unable to provide anything
constructive, so all they can try to do is destructive stuff. Same
with most current Leftwing politicians. Clintons bunch said we were
going to have a Social Security Crisis before long. So where are the
counter proposals from the Left today, in answer to Bush's ideas?

They dont have any.

I'll give you a hint: The United States got into WW II because Stalin
wanted us to get into the War.

Interesting concept. Might even be a a significant portion of the
myrid reasons we got into the war. But hardly the only one.

Do you know why Hitler declared war on the United States?

I know of several reasons. Which one are you talking about?

What the hell is a Nazi anyway? Do you know? Some terrible form of sub
human I bet. What was their politics? Can you say? No, they were not a
form of what we would call socialist.

Of course they wernt. They were racist totalitarians who sprang up in
response to the onerous conditions placed on "Germany" after WW1. The
squareheads have always been an odd people, very late to form a
unified nation, then going bugnuts nationalist.

The leadership of the Nazi Party of course were evil subhumans who
played on their subjects fears, pride and hope. Much like Democrats,
without the jackboots.


Now Im still waiting for examples of what you claimed.

Gunner

"Considering the events of recent years,
the world has a long way to go to regain
its credibility and reputation with the US."
unknown

The high toll taken by Winger's Disease ....
--
Cliff

Cliff wrote:
On Sun, 22 May 2005 13:53:13 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:


Cliff wrote:



I observe & learn from the lies, errors & blunders of others.


So that's how you come up with your own lies, errors & blunders? Wow,
you've been studying for a long time, you should take a vacation..

John

Gunner wrote:



Thats all he has. When you are butt ignorant of history, dumb as a box
of rocks and a socialist..one line stupid replys are de rigour.

Gunner

"Considering the events of recent years,
the world has a long way to go to regain
its credibility and reputation with the US."
unknown

Yeah, he's a strange little beast. Reminds me of my ex-wife a lot, she
had that same childish ability that Cliff's got- I think someone
complimented her when she was about 5 years old, told her that her
childish attempts at logic were "smart" or something and it stuck. I
suspect about the same thing with Cliff, I've been waiting to see if
he's sandbagging and finally comes up with something intelligent.. but
it doesn't seem likely.

John

JohnM wrote:

Gunner wrote:



Thats all he has. When you are butt ignorant of history, dumb as a box
of rocks and a socialist..one line stupid replys are de rigour.

Gunner

"Considering the events of recent years,
the world has a long way to go to regain
its credibility and reputation with the US."
unknown

Yeah, he's a strange little beast. Reminds me of my ex-wife a lot, she
had that same childish ability that Cliff's got- I think someone
complimented her when she was about 5 years old, told her that her
childish attempts at logic were "smart" or something and it stuck. I
suspect about the same thing with Cliff, I've been waiting to see if
he's sandbagging and finally comes up with something intelligent.. but
it doesn't seem likely.

If you make him look stupid...erm...stupider than his norm, he'll write your
ISP and whine a lot. The ISP's think it's funny though, so don't worry about
it, it gives them a little humor break during the day/night.

Strabo wrote:
In OT-Hollywierd Fact or fiction? on Sun, 22 May 2005
08:37:53 -0700, by Stuart Grey, we read:


Pope Secola VI wrote:

pyotr filipivich wrote:


Let the record show that Gunner wrote
back on
Fri, 20 May 2005 04:58:25 GMT in misc.survivalism :


On Thu, 19 May 2005 19:03:15 -0500, "John Scheldroup"
wrote:



"Stuart Grey" wrote in message
...


Cliff wrote:


On Wed, 18 May 2005 11:18:41 -0700, Stuart Grey
wrote:



If you stupid moronic *******s would ever read the Venona by John Earl
Haynes and Harvey Klehr, (about the breaking of the secret Russian
Diplomatic codes of world War) all of you would find is that you ****
birds haven't the foggiest clue what the **** you are talking about.

From Amazon

Editorial Reviews
Amazon.com
With this new volume, John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr build upon their
groundbreaking work in The Secret World of American Communism and
solidify their reputations as the foremost historians of Soviet
espionage in America. In Venona, they provide a detailed study of how
the United States decrypted top-secret Communist cables moving between
Washington and Moscow. This account, based on information unavailable to
researchers for decades, reveals the full extent of the Communist spy
network in the 1940s. At least 349 citizens, immigrants, and permanent
residents of the United States had a covert relationship with Soviet
intelligence agencies, among them Harry White (assistant secretary of
the treasury in FDR's administration and the Communists' highest-ranking
asset) and State Department official Alger Hiss, whose association with
the Soviets had been hotly debated since the moment he was first
publicly accused in 1948.

"The Soviet assault was of the type a nation directs at an enemy state,"
write Haynes and Klehr. They go on to suggest that Venona's
code-breaking "indicated that the Cold War was not a state of affairs
that had begun after World War II but a guerilla action that Stalin had
secretly started years earlier." Moreover, "espionage saved the USSR
great expense and industrial investment and thereby enabled the Soviets
to build a successful atomic bomb years before they otherwise would
have." Haynes and Klehr deliver what is at once a real-life spy thriller
and a vital piece of scholarship. A grand achievement. --John J.
Miller--This text refers to the Hardcover edition.


And they are still among us.

Yes, they are. Some of them even are full time usenet and web
propagandizers.

Fifty years from now will come an expose detailing the
thousands of enemies of the US republic that labor
daily in the roles of bureacrats, politicians and elected
officials, for the demise of America.

Fifty years from now will be after the **** hits the fan.
The survival of the United States is questionable, at best.
What ever myths will pass as history, will be written by the
winners.

Cliff wrote:


I doubt that there's much money to be made in wife & mother
beating. But it may be a comparative thing or Stuart may be
a real expert (or live really cheap in the nuthouse).


That's bizarre little fascination you have with violence toward women.
Must be your mommy was mean to you.. And all those pretty girls who
laughed at you.. Someday you'll show them, you'll show them all...

Consider. Here's your quote concerning McCarthyism;

a mid-20th century political attitude characterized chiefly by
opposition to elements held to be subversive and by the use of tactics
involving personal attacks on individuals by means of widely
publicized indiscriminate allegations especially on the basis of
unsubstantiated charges

Isn't' that what you're doing? Isn't' that exactly what you're doing
with your endless drivel concerning wife-beating? Congratulations,
you're a disciple of McCarthy.

John