On Sat, 21 May 2005 18:43:02 GMT, BottleBob
wrote:

sittingduck wrote:

Nutjobs like gunner, jb, and cliff belong in groups like that, but they would
be drowned out by the dozens more just like them. This is why they stay in
the groups they normally frequent, thre is very little competition for
attention.

SD:

"Nutjobs like gunner, jb, and cliff..." But, but, I thought you and
Cliff were buds? Left wing feathers flocking together, or something
like that. Did you become disillusioned for some reason?

BB,
You don't have to be "left" anything to pick apart the
favored sayings, lies & claims of nutjobs like Gunner, most of
the braindead wingers, gunnutz, fundies or jb.
--
Cliff

"Cliff" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 21 May 2005 18:43:02 GMT, BottleBob
wrote:

sittingduck wrote:

Nutjobs like gunner, jb, and cliff belong in groups like that, but they
would
be drowned out by the dozens more just like them. This is why they stay
in
the groups they normally frequent, thre is very little competition for
attention.

SD:

"Nutjobs like gunner, jb, and cliff..." But, but, I thought you and
Cliff were buds? Left wing feathers flocking together, or something
like that. Did you become disillusioned for some reason?

BB,
You don't have to be "left" anything to pick apart the
favored sayings, lies & claims of nutjobs like Gunner, most of
the braindead wingers, gunnutz, fundies or jb.
--
Cliff

HATE, INTOLERANCE, BIGOTRY AND STUPIDITY...STILL THE SAME CRYBABBY CRAP!!!

On Sat, 21 May 2005 21:30:54 GMT, "Tom Gardner"
wrote:

"Cliff" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 21 May 2005 18:43:02 GMT, BottleBob
wrote:

sittingduck wrote:

Nutjobs like gunner, jb, and cliff belong in groups like that, but they
would
be drowned out by the dozens more just like them. This is why they stay
in
the groups they normally frequent, thre is very little competition for
attention.

SD:

"Nutjobs like gunner, jb, and cliff..." But, but, I thought you and
Cliff were buds? Left wing feathers flocking together, or something
like that. Did you become disillusioned for some reason?

BB,
You don't have to be "left" anything to pick apart the
favored sayings, lies & claims of nutjobs like Gunner, most of
the braindead wingers, gunnutz, fundies or jb.
--
Cliff

HATE, INTOLERANCE, BIGOTRY AND STUPIDITY...STILL THE SAME CRYBABBY CRAP!!!

~100,000 + murdered so far and he's happy as a clam .... his
hatred, love of being fed lies & winger BS shines thru like
the words of neocons & TV & radio preachers telling him to give
& bend over while they do his "thinking" for him ...
--
Cliff

On Sat, 21 May 2005 17:46:05 -0500, "shu" wrote:


"Cliff" wrote in message
.. .
[
"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security,
unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs,
you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There
is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these
things. Among them are [a] few other Texas oil millionaires, and an
occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number
is negligible and they are stupid." -- Eisenhower in '54
]


Hi

I'm going to offer you two choices,


Other than dumping Outbreak Distress?
New Army boots?



1, You can take all the money you earn and do with it as you please, You may
stick it in a bank, you may stuff it under your mattress, you can buy
stocks, you can even give it away, it's your money, and you may do with it
as you please.



The downside* is that you will be responsible for saving a portion for your
retiremet. What you save is exactly what you'll have, after you die your
money will be given to whomever you list in your will





2, I'm going to take a percentage of your money from you. What I do with it
is none of your business; you will have no control over it. That being said,
I will likely use your money to empower myself, I will use it to spend on
collection agencies that will enforce your donation to me. If at any point
you wish to stop donating money to me, I will throw you in jail, or levy
fines against you as punishment.



After you retire you will receive some money back from me, this money will
not be anywhere near the amount that you gave me. How much I give back is
completely at my discretion, it is only limited by how much I can use force
to prevent you from taking it back. Since I have most of the force, it is by
my sheer generosity that I give ANY back. I can and will change the
retirement age at my discretion, thus also limiting how much money I decide
to give back to you. Minority groups, will get the worst return on their
(enforced) donation, as statistically speaking, they simply die at a younger
age. If you should die before you retire, I will keep your money, your
children will inherit nothing, thus helping to keep you and your family poor
for generations while I grow richer.

I also will guarantee that I will ridicule and discredit anyone who
advocates choice number 1. All this will ensure dependency on me for decades
to come!



I hope you choose wisely



* this is only a downside if you're irresponsible

http://www.stewsstripped.com/

BTW, Take a look ...... it failed & failed very
badly everyplace else it was tried (which the
neocons hold up as shining examples).
--
Cliff

"Cliff" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 21 May 2005 17:46:05 -0500, "shu" wrote:


"Cliff" wrote in message
.. .
[
"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security,
unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs,
you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There
is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these
things. Among them are [a] few other Texas oil millionaires, and an
occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number
is negligible and they are stupid." -- Eisenhower in '54
]


Hi

I'm going to offer you two choices,


Other than dumping Outbreak Distress?
New Army boots?



1, You can take all the money you earn and do with it as you please, You
may
stick it in a bank, you may stuff it under your mattress, you can buy
stocks, you can even give it away, it's your money, and you may do with
it
as you please.



The downside* is that you will be responsible for saving a portion for
your
retiremet. What you save is exactly what you'll have, after you die your
money will be given to whomever you list in your will





2, I'm going to take a percentage of your money from you. What I do with
it
is none of your business; you will have no control over it. That being
said,
I will likely use your money to empower myself, I will use it to spend on
collection agencies that will enforce your donation to me. If at any
point
you wish to stop donating money to me, I will throw you in jail, or levy
fines against you as punishment.



After you retire you will receive some money back from me, this money
will
not be anywhere near the amount that you gave me. How much I give back is
completely at my discretion, it is only limited by how much I can use
force
to prevent you from taking it back. Since I have most of the force, it is
by
my sheer generosity that I give ANY back. I can and will change the
retirement age at my discretion, thus also limiting how much money I
decide
to give back to you. Minority groups, will get the worst return on their
(enforced) donation, as statistically speaking, they simply die at a
younger
age. If you should die before you retire, I will keep your money, your
children will inherit nothing, thus helping to keep you and your family
poor
for generations while I grow richer.

I also will guarantee that I will ridicule and discredit anyone who
advocates choice number 1. All this will ensure dependency on me for
decades
to come!



I hope you choose wisely



* this is only a downside if you're irresponsible

http://www.stewsstripped.com/

BTW, Take a look ...... it failed & failed very
badly everyplace else it was tried (which the
neocons hold up as shining examples).
--
Cliff


well cliffy, how bout just taking your money, and putting it in a bank?
failing that, how about sticking it under a mattress? either way you'll end
up with a lot more then what's returned back


if *you* want, you can have the govt force you to stick it in the bank for
you, but a lot of us don't want that
btw. my example has nothing to do with pensions,, you're grasping for
straws, personally i would never stick a lot of money in a pension fund in
an industry that is so heavily unionized, GM is a wonderfull example of what
happens with too much unionized labor.. too many "benefits" not enough real
cash, and no way to reverse it.

*******
shu

On Sat, 21 May 2005 22:59:46 -0500, "shu" wrote:

well cliffy, how bout just taking your money, and putting it in a bank?
failing that, how about sticking it under a mattress? either way you'll end
up with a lot more then what's returned back

On average, you are wrong. In both of your cases you lose to
inflation & to taxes as well in the bank.
Social Security is *supposed* to be indexed for inflation.

if *you* want, you can have the govt force you to stick it in the bank for
you, but a lot of us don't want that

You'd rather have them decide *what* you can "invest" in & under
what rules, paying which brokers how much each year to trade it
for you?

btw. my example has nothing to do with pensions,,

Oh?

you're grasping for
straws, personally i would never stick a lot of money in a pension fund

But setting up private ones was exactly your subject.

in
an industry that is so heavily unionized, GM is a wonderfull example of what
happens with too much unionized labor.. too many "benefits" not enough real
cash, and no way to reverse it.

Their major problem, much like everyone else's, seems to be the
cost of health care.
And trusting the government .... those private accounts that you
are advocating can be raided at any time by the government, just
as SS has been.

Clearly you also missed what has happened in every other nation
that has tried it ..... your trust in big & bigger government, stock
brokers (big shrubbie donors, like the medical firms), etc. is,
however, very touching indeed.

BTW, Your spelling & suchlike seems to have improved.
On the wagon? LOL ...
--
Cliff

--
**********
shu

"Cliff" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 21 May 2005 22:59:46 -0500, "shu" wrote:

well cliffy, how bout just taking your money, and putting it in a bank?
failing that, how about sticking it under a mattress? either way you'll
end
up with a lot more then what's returned back

On average, you are wrong. In both of your cases you lose to
inflation & to taxes as well in the bank.
Social Security is *supposed* to be indexed for inflation.


herm. that's just plain wrong, it's almost a guarantee that you'll lose
money,
maybe when it was first started up you got back out what you put it, but not
anymore,

if *you* want, you can have the govt force you to stick it in the bank
for
you, but a lot of us don't want that

You'd rather have them decide *what* you can "invest" in & under
what rules, paying which brokers how much each year to trade it
for you?

not at all,. *I* would rather decide what to do with *MY* money

you lib's are very funny, you bitch and moan how private stocks are risky,
yet the stock market just keeps going up up up.
have you heard of diversifying your account?
it's a crying shame that you're pitting "the poor" against the stock market,
and private industry.. thankfully thou your message is largely going
ignored, as more and more people are investing each and every year

what the hell do you libs have against private industry anyway? what the
hell do you think made this country the number one power in the world? it
sure as hell wasn't high taxes and govt interference..
you guys bitch and moan against the very things that have allowed you to
live in your nice home, with your nice car, with plenty of food, while other
socialist, tyranical empires are having mass starvation,
explain to yourself why a small tiny country such as taiwan, with ..
relatlivly speaking very little in the way of natural resources, can do far
better.. oh say.. zimbabwe,, which has abundant natural resources..

http://www.zimbabwesituation.com/




btw. my example has nothing to do with pensions,,

Oh?

you're grasping for
straws, personally i would never stick a lot of money in a pension fund

But setting up private ones was exactly your subject.

in
an industry that is so heavily unionized, GM is a wonderfull example of
what
happens with too much unionized labor.. too many "benefits" not enough
real
cash, and no way to reverse it.

Their major problem, much like everyone else's, seems to be the
cost of health care.
And trusting the government .... those private accounts that you
are advocating can be raided at any time by the government, just
as SS has been.

Clearly you also missed what has happened in every other nation
that has tried it ..... your trust in big & bigger government, stock
brokers (big shrubbie donors, like the medical firms), etc. is,
however, very touching indeed.

lol, what makes you think I trust in big govts?



BTW, Your spelling & suchlike seems to have improved.
On the wagon? LOL ...
sod off, ******.

********
shu

On Sun, 22 May 2005 17:24:55 -0500, "shu" wrote:

what the hell do you libs have against private industry anyway? what the
hell do you think made this country the number one power in the world? it
sure as hell wasn't high taxes and govt interference..
you guys bitch and moan against the very things that have allowed you to
live in your nice home, with your nice car, with plenty of food, while other
socialist, tyranical empires are having mass starvation,
explain to yourself why a small tiny country such as taiwan, with ..
relatlivly speaking very little in the way of natural resources, can do far
better.. oh say.. zimbabwe,, which has abundant natural resources..

http://www.zimbabwesituation.com/

Libs believe in taxing the nation into prosperity.

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 17:24:55 -0500, "shu" wrote:

Shu, PLEASE LEARN HOW TO POST !!!
REMOVE PRIOR CUTLINED SIGS !!

THEN TRY NOT TOP-POSTING CUTLINES.

"Cliff" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 21 May 2005 22:59:46 -0500, "shu" wrote:

well cliffy, how bout just taking your money, and putting it in a bank?
failing that, how about sticking it under a mattress? either way you'll
end
up with a lot more then what's returned back

On average, you are wrong. In both of your cases you lose to
inflation & to taxes as well in the bank.
Social Security is *supposed* to be indexed for inflation.


herm. that's just plain wrong, it's almost a guarantee that you'll lose
money,

Oops ... after all the nice things I said you lost the caps key &
stuff again.
I give. Who really wrote that other post that you posted?

Making money is not the point of it, now is it?

maybe when it was first started up you got back out what you put it, but not
anymore,

I gather that "inflation" is a difficult concept for you.


if *you* want, you can have the govt force you to stick it in the bank
for
you, but a lot of us don't want that

You'd rather have them decide *what* you can "invest" in & under
what rules, paying which brokers how much each year to trade it
for you?

not at all,. *I* would rather decide what to do with *MY* money

So would everyone else.
You REALLY need a new Hummer, right?

you lib's are very funny, you bitch and moan how private stocks are risky,
yet the stock market just keeps going up up up.

This is a very ignorant set of comments.

have you heard of diversifying your account?

Under the plan it's NOT you that gets to decide
which stocks to buy. Missed that, eh?

And, no matter how "diversified", you can easily lose
a great deal.

How much, if ANYTHING, do YOU have "invested in the stock
market" NOW? For how long? Starting when?

it's a crying shame that you're pitting "the poor" against the stock market,
and private industry.. thankfully thou your message is largely going
ignored, as more and more people are investing each and every year

A great many that invested in the last decade lost most of it.
I know quite a few with 401Ks that are in mutual funds ..... worth
far less now that what they put into them over the last decades.

what the hell do you libs have against private industry anyway? what the
hell do you think made this country the number one power in the world? it
sure as hell wasn't high taxes and govt interference..

You think that it was brain dead neocons?

you guys bitch and moan against the very things that have allowed you to
live in your nice home, with your nice car, with plenty of food, while other
socialist, tyranical empires are having mass starvation,

Stop bombing them.

explain to yourself why a small tiny country such as taiwan, with ..
relatlivly speaking very little in the way of natural resources, can do far
better.. oh say.. zimbabwe,, which has abundant natural resources..

http://www.zimbabwesituation.com/

They refused to let American firms buy & run everything?
Being in business as a people & a culture for over 4,000
years?

btw. my example has nothing to do with pensions,,

Oh?

you're grasping for
straws, personally i would never stick a lot of money in a pension fund

But setting up private ones was exactly your subject.

in
an industry that is so heavily unionized, GM is a wonderfull example of
what
happens with too much unionized labor.. too many "benefits" not enough
real
cash, and no way to reverse it.

Their major problem, much like everyone else's, seems to be the
cost of health care.
And trusting the government .... those private accounts that you
are advocating can be raided at any time by the government, just
as SS has been.

Clearly you also missed what has happened in every other nation
that has tried it ..... your trust in big & bigger government, stock
brokers (big shrubbie donors, like the medical firms), etc. is,
however, very touching indeed.

lol, what makes you think I trust in big govts?

Your desire to hand over money to them ......

BTW, Your spelling & suchlike seems to have improved.
On the wagon? LOL ...
sod off, ******.

It was of very limited duration anyway it seems.
Who REALLY wrote it?

********
shu

BTW, Have you considered getting an education? I've
heard that some of the more liberal schools will allow you
to wear your jackboots ...
--
Cliff

On Sun, 22 May 2005 06:10:09 GMT, BottleBob
wrote:

Cliff wrote:

On Sat, 21 May 2005 23:45:50 GMT, BottleBob
wrote:

Cliff:

Heh, sorry Cliff 'ol buddy, you'll have to find a different fish to
bite on your dogmatic political hyperbole.

Umm .... BB, ~100,000 + actually have been murdered and it was
all sold to you in packs of lies ...... and they claim that it was
done in your name & because you wanted it (recall "democracy"?)

Step up to the plate or cut bait.


Cliff:

Ssssniiiip! (That's the sound of the bait line being cut) g

Well, BB, as you like to whine & complain & do surveys in your
"line" ..... now you can have a real subject that may actually matter:
neocons, fundies, wingers & how to limit their damages.

From a biological perspective: How did their genes survive?
Why don't they think? Why are they so gullible? Is there a survival
advantage in being sheep or cattle (Yep, there is .... the farmer
takes care of you & breeds more ...)?
--
Cliff

Cliff wrote:

On Sun, 22 May 2005 06:10:09 GMT, BottleBob
wrote:

Cliff:

Ssssniiiip! (That's the sound of the bait line being cut) g

Well, BB, as you like to whine & complain & do surveys...

Cliff:

Sliiip Pop! (That's the sound of the hook slipping out again). LOL

Perhaps if you crossposted your parochial political polemic to 20 or 30
groups instead of two, you might have more luck catching some unwary
dupes that aren't familiar with your modus operandi.

--
BottleBob
http://home.earthlink.net/~bottlbob

In article , says...

On Sat, 21 May 2005 18:43:02 GMT, BottleBob
wrote:

sittingduck wrote:

Nutjobs like gunner, jb, and cliff belong in groups like that, but they would
be drowned out by the dozens more just like them. This is why they stay in
the groups they normally frequent, thre is very little competition for
attention.

SD:

"Nutjobs like gunner, jb, and cliff..." But, but, I thought you and
Cliff were buds? Left wing feathers flocking together, or something
like that. Did you become disillusioned for some reason?

BB,
You don't have to be "left" anything to pick apart the
favored sayings, lies & claims of nutjobs like Gunner, most of
the braindead wingers, gunnutz, fundies or jb.

I don't think Gunner's a nutjob. But I have no idea what's
wrong with him, these days.

FW

On 22 May 2005 15:16:58 GMT, (Frank White)
wrote:

In article , says...

On Sat, 21 May 2005 18:43:02 GMT, BottleBob
wrote:

sittingduck wrote:

Nutjobs like gunner, jb, and cliff belong in groups like that, but they would
be drowned out by the dozens more just like them. This is why they stay in
the groups they normally frequent, thre is very little competition for
attention.

SD:

"Nutjobs like gunner, jb, and cliff..." But, but, I thought you and
Cliff were buds? Left wing feathers flocking together, or something
like that. Did you become disillusioned for some reason?

BB,
You don't have to be "left" anything to pick apart the
favored sayings, lies & claims of nutjobs like Gunner, most of
the braindead wingers, gunnutz, fundies or jb.

I don't think Gunner's a nutjob. But I have no idea what's
wrong with him, these days.

FW

What are you referring to? That I dont share your view on the war in
Iraq? Or that I tend to not let bull**** remain unanswered? Or that
my capacity for being nice to buffoons has gotten smaller and smaller?

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 16:50:33 GMT, Gunner
wrote:

Or that I tend to not let bull**** remain unanswered?

snicker

Or that
my capacity for being nice to buffoons has gotten smaller and smaller?

snicker

Anyone have a killfile handy?
--
Cliff

In article , says...

On 22 May 2005 15:16:58 GMT, (Frank White)
wrote:

In article , says...

On Sat, 21 May 2005 18:43:02 GMT, BottleBob
wrote:

sittingduck wrote:

Nutjobs like gunner, jb, and cliff belong in groups like that, but they would
be drowned out by the dozens more just like them. This is why they stay in
the groups they normally frequent, thre is very little competition for
attention.

SD:

"Nutjobs like gunner, jb, and cliff..." But, but, I thought you and
Cliff were buds? Left wing feathers flocking together, or something
like that. Did you become disillusioned for some reason?

BB,
You don't have to be "left" anything to pick apart the
favored sayings, lies & claims of nutjobs like Gunner, most of
the braindead wingers, gunnutz, fundies or jb.

I don't think Gunner's a nutjob. But I have no idea what's
wrong with him, these days.

FW

What are you referring to? That I dont share your view on the war in
Iraq?

Well, that, in part. But it goes deeper. Up until recently I
would have said that the tenets of your life were "Work hard,
play fair, follow the rules no matter what the other guy does,
and don't trust government (aka if someone from the government
comes up and says "We're here to help you", run for your life)".
But now...

Bush says we need to invade other countries in the name of
national security, you not only jump on the bandwagon, you
attack - without discussion or an explaination of why you
support him - anyone who says this was a BAD idea.

Bush says we should privatize Social Security, you accept his
proposal as Gospel, ignoring even the Republican economists
who point out problems. Like that it may well cost TRILLIONS
(yes, the "T" word) to implement his plan at a time when the
government is already facing record deficets. And that there's
little popular support for such an idea.

Bush says we NEED the Patriot Act to fight terrorists; and
even though there's little evidence that the Patriot Act has
actually been effective against terrorist activities; and even
though your challenge to name one innocent person who's been
hurt by the law has been answered repeatedly and extensively
in the positive; and even though folks from all over the
spectrum worry about it endangering civil liberties, you
insist anyone who wants this act repealed is a leftist whack-
hole.

It's like you've chucked the fourth tenet and become, not
just a Bush supporter, but a Saturday Night Live parody of a
Bush supporter. Or the guy in "1984" who was reprogrammed to
love Big Brother...

I assume the first two tenets are still in place. But some
of your comments make me think you've also tossed "Follow the
rules" (or international law, the Golden Rule, basic humanity,
etc) for "kill them all and let God sort them out".

Wrath, I would point out, is one of the Seven Deadly Sins...

Or that I tend to not let bull**** remain unanswered?

You don't?

What do you classify your proposal that we nuke Mecca in
retaliation for further terrorist attacks as? Have you
actually THOUGHT of what the consequences of that would
be, international, economic, political, social, internal,
humanitarian? I have no wish to see the US go from the
world's policeman to Nazi Germany II overnight and the
world preparing to put us down like a rabid dog. If
your plan is not a bull**** idea, I don't know what is...

I don't know who's doing your thinking for you thse days, but
you should fire them. They're not doing a good job.

Or that
my capacity for being nice to buffoons has gotten smaller and smaller?

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

And THIS is another problem! I haven't been able to
Google it - I may be remembering it wrong - but I
recall the counter quote that "Nations are at their
most arrogant when they are in decline". Spain,
England, France, several of the Chinese dynasties
before they fall... I don't know if we're in decline
but I see worrisome signs: A crumbling infrastructure,
lack of focus on education, an increasing divide
between rich and poor, political/social/religious
divisiveness on a scale seldom seen before...

Decline CAN be reversed, but it takes people willing
to work together, identify the problems, and figure
out how to fix them.

Finding such people isn't easy...

FW

On 25 May 2005 02:58:19 GMT, (Frank White)
wrote:


Or that I tend to not let bull**** remain unanswered?

You don't?

Seldom


What do you classify your proposal that we nuke Mecca in
retaliation for further terrorist attacks as? Have you
actually THOUGHT of what the consequences of that would
be, international, economic, political, social, internal,
humanitarian? I have no wish to see the US go from the
world's policeman to Nazi Germany II overnight and the
world preparing to put us down like a rabid dog. If
your plan is not a bull**** idea, I don't know what is...

So which group of nations is big enough to take us down? Nukeing
Mecca was something of a personal fantasy..but the day may not be all
that far in the furture. Its called A Last Resort.

One I agree with btw.

I don't know who's doing your thinking for you thse days, but
you should fire them. They're not doing a good job.

I think for myself thank you veddyveddymuch. I still believe and
practice personal responsiblity and adherence to honor, truth and
justice.

You sound like you get your daily arguments via Fax from the DNC.

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

In article , Gunner says...

So which group of nations is big enough to take us down?

The last time we didn't even know the answer to that
question before it happened. Are you sure you want to
keep on asking it?

Nukeing
Mecca was something of a personal fantasy..but the day may not be all
that far in the furture. Its called A Last Resort.

They got pretty riled up when we flushed a koran. Just think
if the same thing happened to the Kaba.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

On Wed, 25 May 2005 04:53:27 GMT, Gunner
wrote:

What do you classify your proposal that we nuke Mecca in
retaliation for further terrorist attacks as? Have you
actually THOUGHT of what the consequences of that would
be, international, economic, political, social, internal,
humanitarian? I have no wish to see the US go from the
world's policeman to Nazi Germany II overnight and the
world preparing to put us down like a rabid dog. If
your plan is not a bull**** idea, I don't know what is...

So which group of nations is big enough to take us down? Nukeing
Mecca was something of a personal fantasy..but the day may not be all
that far in the furture. Its called A Last Resort.

Not YOUR religion, eh, gummer?

BTW, Do you have ANY clue what nation Mecca is in?
(He's often quite confused by maps & suchlike too.)
--
Cliff

In article , says...

On 25 May 2005 02:58:19 GMT, (Frank White)
wrote:


Or that I tend to not let bull**** remain unanswered?

You don't?

Seldom


What do you classify your proposal that we nuke Mecca in
retaliation for further terrorist attacks as? Have you
actually THOUGHT of what the consequences of that would
be, international, economic, political, social, internal,
humanitarian? I have no wish to see the US go from the
world's policeman to Nazi Germany II overnight and the
world preparing to put us down like a rabid dog. If
your plan is not a bull**** idea, I don't know what is...

So which group of nations is big enough to take us down? Nukeing
Mecca was something of a personal fantasy..but the day may not be all
that far in the furture. Its called A Last Resort.

One I agree with btw.

OK, let's run through the probable way such a move will
unfold...

We'll say this doesn't comes out of nowhere or is even
totally insane. We'll say that first there's a MAJOR
Islamic terrorist attack - maybe even nuclear - on a US city
and after days of newsclips showing dead US children, burned
and mangled bodies, and survivors with horrific injuries, the
whole country is crazed for vengence and the Pres announces
he'll engage in violent retribution for any further attacks.

Then the terrorists blow up ANOTHER US city.

The Pres, between a hard rock and a place and under massive
pressure (and probably pretty angry himself) but with no
clue as to where the terrorists tehmselves are, hits back at
Islam in general by nuking Mecca. Probably saying "THAT
will learn them!"

Mecca isn't just an incredibly holy place for Islams, though,
it's one of Saudi Arabia's major cities. Chuck full of
MILLIONS of innocent civilians. So after the nuking, on
Arab TV, we get newsclips of dead ARAB children, burned and
mangled ARAB bodies, and ARAB survivors with horrific injuries,
all played over and over minute by minute.

Combine that with that with the sacrilege of destroying the
Holiest of Moslem Holies - like desecrating Korans but a
million million times worse - AND an unprovoked attack on a
civilian target, and it's not hard to imagine every Arab and
Moslem throughout the world, regardless of nationality,
personal inclination, or economic status, joining as one to
scream "JIHAD!!"

And this time not just the ravings of lone terrorists, but
the start of an actual, Honest to God unholy war.

No American - heck, no Caucasian - would be safe outside of
their own borders, rage would be running so high Moslems
would shoot first and probably not even ask questions later.

Oil shipments to the US from any Arab country would stop.
Immediately. I suspect many tankers on route to the US would
either turn away or dump the oil at sea rather than be seen
delivering to the US. We've got about a 30 day supply and
NO way to crank domesitc production up enough to match the
loss in supply. The US economy would tank, WORSE than in the
Depression.

Anything US, and anyone and everything doing business with the
US would become a terrorist target. And not just for grandstand
moves like airliner kamikaze attacks: beatings, firebombings,
drive by shootings, attacks large and small would rain down
on everything, everywhere. There would be no safety.

US allies would desert us like we had cooties/AIDS/leperosy/
the Plague, all at once. I doubt anyone but Israel would
stay on our side, and THEY'D probably be so hard put to survive
in the rage wave sweeping the world they wouldn't be any help.
In fact I can see Putin decalring that he will not put up with
American nuclear terrorism and he is putting Russia's nuclear
aresenal on a "launch on warning" footing, and immediately being
hearalded as the world's savior, his image completely refurbished
and Russia restored to superpower status by a world frightened
of the US bully. And with other nuclear powers being forced by
public opinion to follow his lead and support him.

Even Britian.

And in the US, MASSIVE dislocation as folks realize we are now
responsible for a Holocaust, and those who regard this as a
major crime against humanity clashing - in the military, in
government, in the streets - with those who think of it as
getting our own back. The fighting would probably become
physical, and combined with the economic effects of an oil
boycott (gas expensive at $2.50 a gallon? Try gas as $250 a
gallon!) and in six months the country could be defeated by
a bunch of Girl Scouts, we'd be so smashed up.

Personal fantasy? Sounds like a nightmare, to me.

I don't know who's doing your thinking for you thse days, but
you should fire them. They're not doing a good job.

I think for myself thank you veddyveddymuch. I still believe and
practice personal responsiblity and adherence to honor, truth and
justice.

I refuse to believe this. You're an intelligent man and some of
the things you've said recently are definately NOT intelligent.

Somebody's influencing you. Somebody not too bright...

You sound like you get your daily arguments via Fax from the DNC.

(EXTREMELY heavy sigh)

You're DOING it again! Insisting that anyone who disagrees with
you is a leftist whack-hole! Or a Democrat, which you seem to
think is the same thing.

Listen.

Listen carefully.

I have something important to tell you.

There is NO damn difference between Republicians and Democrats,
these days! It's all cosmetic! They're both, at the core,
power hungry nutbars whose answer to everything is to spend and
spend YOUR money on THEIR pet projects, regardless of whether
the money is coming from record deficits, record taxes, or
both! If Kerry were in office he'd be doing EXACTLY the same
things as Bush, except that instead of wanting to spend trillions
privatizing Social Security, he'd probably want to spend trillions
on national health insurance. THEY ARE THE SAME JERKS!!!!!!!!!

You might want to take a red hot poker and burn 'No Difference'
into your forehead so you don't keep forgetting that...

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

AGAIN with the 'older brother engaging in behavior modification
through violence' motif! What are you trying to say here????

FW

On 25 May 2005 02:58:19 GMT, (Frank White)
wrote:


Bush says we NEED the Patriot Act to fight terrorists; and
even though there's little evidence that the Patriot Act has
actually been effective against terrorist activities

Looks like a large number of the military & "homeland
insecurtty" employees are known criminals or illegal
aliens or working on fake social security numbers in
any case.

Herr shrubbie's "port security" spending is less than
~5% of what everyone that knows about such things
says is needed.

Fake IDs seem easy to get & nobody checks much anyway ....

Nifty boondoggle.
--
Cliff

"...a terrorist would have to be really stupid to attack George's
office, because the odds of George being there are so slim. "

Ben Tripp

On 25 May 2005 02:58:19 GMT, (Frank White)
wrote:

I have no wish to see the US go from the
world's policeman to Nazi Germany II overnight and the
world preparing to put us down like a rabid dog.

The EU (among others) may already have long range
plans in motion, just in case.
They are not stupid.
--
Cliff

On 25 May 2005 02:58:19 GMT, (Frank White)
wrote:

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

And THIS is another problem! I haven't been able to
Google it - I may be remembering it wrong - but I
recall the counter quote that "Nations are at their
most arrogant when they are in decline". Spain,
England, France, several of the Chinese dynasties
before they fall... I don't know if we're in decline
but I see worrisome signs: A crumbling infrastructure,
lack of focus on education, an increasing divide
between rich and poor,

You probably are a little better off now in the US IF
you make over US$ 200,000 per year or inherited
your wealth.

political/social/religious
divisiveness on a scale seldom seen before...
--
Cliff

On 25 May 2005 02:58:19 GMT, the inscrutable
(Frank White) spake:

In article , says...

I don't think Gunner's a nutjob. But I have no idea what's
wrong with him, these days.

FW

Ditto, see below.


What are you referring to? That I dont share your view on the war in
Iraq?

Well, that, in part. But it goes deeper. Up until recently I
would have said that the tenets of your life were "Work hard,
play fair, follow the rules no matter what the other guy does,
and don't trust government (aka if someone from the government
comes up and says "We're here to help you", run for your life)".
But now...

Bush says we need to invade other countries in the name of
national security, you not only jump on the bandwagon, you
attack - without discussion or an explaination of why you
support him - anyone who says this was a BAD idea.

Bush says we should privatize Social Security, you accept his
proposal as Gospel, ignoring even the Republican economists
who point out problems. Like that it may well cost TRILLIONS
(yes, the "T" word) to implement his plan at a time when the
government is already facing record deficets. And that there's
little popular support for such an idea.

Bush says we NEED the Patriot Act to fight terrorists; and
even though there's little evidence that the Patriot Act has
actually been effective against terrorist activities; and even
though your challenge to name one innocent person who's been
hurt by the law has been answered repeatedly and extensively
in the positive; and even though folks from all over the
spectrum worry about it endangering civil liberties, you
insist anyone who wants this act repealed is a leftist whack-
hole.

It's like you've chucked the fourth tenet and become, not
just a Bush supporter, but a Saturday Night Live parody of a
Bush supporter. Or the guy in "1984" who was reprogrammed to
love Big Brother...

I assume the first two tenets are still in place. But some
of your comments make me think you've also tossed "Follow the
rules" (or international law, the Golden Rule, basic humanity,
etc) for "kill them all and let God sort them out".

Wrath, I would point out, is one of the Seven Deadly Sins...

Or that I tend to not let bull**** remain unanswered?

You don't?

What do you classify your proposal that we nuke Mecca in
retaliation for further terrorist attacks as? Have you
actually THOUGHT of what the consequences of that would
be, international, economic, political, social, internal,
humanitarian? I have no wish to see the US go from the
world's policeman to Nazi Germany II overnight and the
world preparing to put us down like a rabid dog. If
your plan is not a bull**** idea, I don't know what is...

I don't know who's doing your thinking for you thse days, but
you should fire them. They're not doing a good job.

Or that
my capacity for being nice to buffoons has gotten smaller and smaller?

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

And THIS is another problem! I haven't been able to
Google it - I may be remembering it wrong - but I
recall the counter quote that "Nations are at their
most arrogant when they are in decline". Spain,
England, France, several of the Chinese dynasties
before they fall... I don't know if we're in decline
but I see worrisome signs: A crumbling infrastructure,
lack of focus on education, an increasing divide
between rich and poor, political/social/religious
divisiveness on a scale seldom seen before...

Decline CAN be reversed, but it takes people willing
to work together, identify the problems, and figure
out how to fix them.

Finding such people isn't easy...

AMEN, Frank. I didn't snip any of it because it was so good.

The Shrub (or RNC) has somehow thoroughly brainwashed poor Gunner into
believing their every twisted thought, no matter how liberal or sick
it may be. It's downright scary! Maybe Big Brother is trying another
one of those "LSD-in-the-public-water" experiments in California.

Let's hope he recovers soon, before Shrub and followers push more than
a billion otherwise mellow Arabs (and/or the hundreds of millions of
sheeple here in the US) over the edge. Without the ****-stirring, the
few Arab terrorists don't have the societal backing they need to
continue their crap on nearly as large a front as they have now.


--
REMEMBER: First you pillage, then you burn.
---
http://diversify.com Full Service Website Development

On Wed, 25 May 2005 08:59:43 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:


Let's hope he recovers soon, before Shrub and followers push more than
a billion otherwise mellow Arabs (and/or the hundreds of millions of
sheeple here in the US) over the edge. Without the ****-stirring, the
few Arab terrorists don't have the societal backing they need to
continue their crap on nearly as large a front as they have now.


Bush has been president since 1979?

Your bias, your hate and your spew is noted. As is your apparent
attempt at revisionism



November 4, 1979 Teran, Iran

U.S. Embassy Taken Over

A group of Iranian students who were angry at the United States
attacked and seized its embassy in Tehran, Iran. They were supported
by the countries leader, Ayatollah Khomeini.

Details
1982 - 1991
Lebanon 18 Americans Kidnapped

David Dodge was the president of the American University in Beirut. He
was kidnapped the first time while he was on his way home from work.
He was released, but he was kidnapped again. This time he was killed.
His murder was called the most gruesome abduction, torture, and
killing of a United States citizen. The terrorists videotaped his
torture and murder. A group called the Organization of the Oppressed
on Earth claimed responsibility, but the real suspects are the
Hezbollah guerillas.

Details
April 18, 1983
Beirut, Lebanon
Truck Bombing of U.S. Embassy

A large vehicle packed with explosives is driven quickly into the U.S.
Embassy compound in Beirut. When it explodes it kills 63 people. A
group of terrorists called the Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility.

Details
October 23, 1983
Beirut, Lebanon Truck Bombing of U.S. Marine Barracks

A large truck bomb with 2,500 pounds of TNT smashed through the main
gate of the U.S. Marine headquarters in Beirut. 241 U.S. servicement
are killed when it expoldes. A French paratrooper base is blown up
just a few minutes later and 58 French soldiers are killed. A
terrorist group called the Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility.

Details
December 12, 1983
Kuwait City, Kuwait

U.S. Embassy Annex Attacked

A truck loaded with explosives crashed into the U.S. Embassy anex in
Kuwait. Four people were killed and at least 62 were injured. A
terrorist group called the Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility.

Details
September 20, 1984
Beirut, Lebanon

U.S. Embassy Compound Attacked

A van filled with explosives sped through several barriers and groups
of U.S. soldiers and stopped about 30 feet in front of the embassy
annex. The driver of the van and 12 soldiers and visitors to the annex
were killed. A terrorist group called the Islamic Jihad claimed
responsibility.

Details
April 12, 1985
Madrid, Spain

Restaurant Bombing

A bomb exploded in a restaurant where U.S. soldiers liked to eat. The
explosion killed 18 Spaniard citizens and injured 82 other people.
Only 15 of the Americans were injured, but none were killed.

Details
June 13, 1985
Beirut, Lebanon/
Algiers, Algeria

TWA Flight 847

This airliner took off in Rome, Italy, but was hijacked and forced to
fly to Beirut, Lebanon. Mohammed Hamadei from the terrorist group
Hezbollah, Hassan Izz-al-Din from Lebanon, and Ali Atwa another
terrorist hijacked the plane.

Details

August 8, 1985
Frankfurt, Germany



Rhein-Main Airbase Bombing

Two Americans and 20 others are injured when a Volkswagon car loaded
with explosives blew up at the U.S. Rhein-Main air base in Frankfurt,
Germany. Two terrorist groups, West German Red Army faction and the
French Direct Action, claimed responsibility for the bombing.

Details
October 7, 1985
Port Said, Egypt

The Ship Achille Lauro is Hijacked

Achille Lauro cruise ship hijacked by four Palistinian men who are
members of the Palestine Liberation Organization. They murder a
handicapped man from New York and throw his body overboard.

Details
November 23, 1985
Valeta, Malta Egyptair Flight 648 Hijacked

Three Arab men from the terrorist group Abu Nidal Organization
hijacked this plane and forced it to land in Valletta, Malta. There
was a 30 hour standoff between the hijackers and the Egyptian
comandos.

Details
December 27, 1985
Rome, Italy and Vienna, Austria

Grenades and Guns are used to Massacre Passengers at Rome and Vienna
Airport

At the same time two groups of terrorists, one in Rome and one in
Vienna, charge up to the counters of Israel's El Air airline. They
throw grenades at the tourists getting ready to fly on the airline.


Details
April 02, 1986
Athens, Greece

TWA Flight 840 Bombed

As the plane was beginning to land in Athens a plastic explosive bomb
exploded under the seat of the passenger sitting in seat 10F. Four
people were killed and nine others were wounded. The terrorist group
called Ezzedine Kassam Unit of the Arab Revolutionary Cells claimed
responsibility.Details




April 05, 1986
West Berlin


La Belle Disco in Berlin Bombed



The La Belle is a nightclub that was popular with the United States
servicemen. Two United States soldiers and one Turkish woman were
killed in the explosion

December 21, 1988
Lockerbie, Scotland


Pan Am Flight 103 Bombing

The bomb that blew up this flight was packed in a small radio case. It
was left on the plane by a terrorist that got off of the plane at an
earlier stop. The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine
terrorist group claimed responsibility. The bombing was carried out so
that they could take revenge on America when one of its warships
accidentally mistook a Palestinian passenger plane as a war plane and
shot it down.

Details
January 25, 1993
Langley, Virginia


CIA Employees in Langley, VA are Shot

A Pakisini man, Mir Aimal Kasi, who lived in Virginia drove up to the
CIA building in Langley, Virginia and shot two CIA agents. He was
angry because he believed that the United States were mistreating
Muslims who lived in the Middle East.

Details

February 26, 1993
New York, New York


1993 World Trade Center in New York Bombed

A group of Muslim terrorists are arrested after a rented van packed
with explosives and driven into the World Trade Center's underground
parking garage. Six people were killed and more than 1,000 are injured
in this terrorist attack

Details

November 13, 1995
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia


U.S. Military Complex in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia is Bombed

Seven people are killed when a powerful car bomb explodes in front of
a military center run by the United States military. Three terrorist
groups: Islamic Movement for Change, the Tigers of the Gulf, and the
Combatant Partisans of God claim responsibility for the bombing of
this military center.

Details

June 25, 1996
Dhahran, Saudi Arabia


Khobar Towers in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia are Bombed

A fuel truck was parked 35 yards away from a United States military
compound. When the truck blew up 19 American soldiers were killed and
500 more people were wounded. The Movement for Islamic Change claimed
responsibility for the bombing.

Details

August 07, 1998
Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

U.S. Embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania are
Bombed

These terrorist attacks happened almost at the same time. More than
5,000 people were injured and 224 were killed when the buildings that
they were working in collapsed during the explosions.

Details

October 12, 2000
Aden, Yemen


USS Cole Bombed

The USS Cole was docked in Aden Yemen for refueling. A small craft
pulled alongside the ship and two terrorists set off the bomb. The two
terrorists were killed and so were 17 U.S. Navy seamen when the
explosion blew a 20 by 40 foot hole in the side of the ship.

Details

September 11, 2001
New York City, Washington, D.C.

World Trade Center is Destroyed and the Pentagon is Attacked

Terrorists hijack 4 domestic flights from Boston airport. Two of the
planes slam in to the two World Trade Center towers, causing them to
collapse. A third flight crashes into the Pentagon, and a fourth
crashes in Pennsylvania.

Details
"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

On Sun, 22 May 2005 17:08:34 -0500, "shu" wrote:

Are you aware that many Social Security recipients receive more over their
lifetimes than their contributions would give them if invested in the
private market? Apparently not.

hahahahahahahahaha. apparently you live on a completey different planet if
you believe that
i'm sorry if you fell into that, you've been completely decieved, the people
that receive more then they put in are on disablities, and/or have had other
extraordinary circuminstances happen to them.

Which will never happen to you, anyone you know, anyone
that signs up for this new neocon swindle ....

for the rest of us, we aren't , and do not expect, to get diddly back.

Because you want to opt out.

i dont' really have a problem keeping disablity, it's a relativly small
portion of the total scam that is social security

So .... a new added tax on your "savings" & "investment account"
to pay for it all?

LMAO !!!
--
Cliff

On Thu, 26 May 2005 21:38:23 -0500, "shu" wrote:

Ed, do you seriously think you're going to get out, what you put in to
social security?
do you think social security is an issue to be ignored?

Don't you trip over the jackboots with your head screwed on
backwards?

Do you expect to make a profit on your health or term life
insurance?

If we, the taxpayers, do not pay a bit for all who will? The
neocons will just do it with their deficits, right?
And who, in the end, will pay for those?
--
Cliff