"CaveLamb" wrote in message
m...
Ed Huntress wrote:
"Edward A. Falk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Tom Gardner w@w wrote:
Am I the only one that remembers that the left thinks Bush and Chaney
did 9/11? Why is the left celebrating? Isn't OBL innocent like the
left says?
Only a small portion of the left believes this. They're as
crazy as the birthers, IMHO.

--
-Ed Falk

Right. Wingers are wingers, right or left. The ones on the right seem a
lot dumber, though. d8-)


You must lean left these days.

They both sound like extremist to me.

Oh, you're right about them being extremist on both sides. But just listen
here on RCM. Do you honestly think that the wingers on both sides are
equally intelligent -- or unintelligent?

I'm no fan of lefties but I have to admit they're a hell of a lot smarter.

--
Ed Huntress

"Josepi" wrote in message
...
Sitting on the ground right next to the cell antenna, sure...well maybe.

You conveniently left out the part that takes time for the cell system to
switch cells when you move. It takes time and the plane would be moving if
it wanted to stay in the air.

Right. But it works. I've been there. So have most people who were flying
and had cell phones in the early '90s. My use of them dates back to the
Motorola Lunch Boxes, and I've had them ever since.


The US had two plane attacks from terrorist hijacks and a third one, off
course, and not answering their call. They scrambled fighters too late to
intercept the first two but they were in the air freaking out.

You tell me what they did. Escort them to safety? Admit they shot their
own people down? They made up a story about heroics and blamed it on the
terrorists.

What they did is look down at the smoking wreckage of Flight 93. I had a
friend on that plane -- Joe DeLuca.

--
Ed Huntress



-------------------
"Ed Huntress" wrote in message ...
Uh, if you've never used a cell phone on a plane, before they changed the
system, it worked very well. You locked onto one cell for a very long
time,
and there were a lot of choices. It really tied up the cells around an
airport when half the people on all of the planes coming in for a landing
got on their phones at once, calling home to tell someone they were
arriving.

I did it all the time until they outlawed it.


Are you saying you don't believe it happened on Flight 93?

On Mon, 2 May 2011 18:22:43 -0400, "Tom Gardner" w@w wrote:


"Jon Danniken" wrote in message
...
Wes wrote:
(Doug Miller) wrote:

Tactful, quick, anonymous. What, you wanted us to prove that he
still mattered to us by desecrating the body or something? Give
him something to laugh at before he finds out that those 99
virgins
are all wrinkled-up retired librarians who have no patience for
trouble-makers?

Naahhh, not librarians.

Nuns.

Old Nuns

With brand new yardsticks.

No, it's the rubber-tipped wood pointers! They are as thick as broom
handles.

Freshly honed Katanas?


--
Science may have found a cure for most evils; but it has found
no remedy for the worst of them all--the apathy of human beings.
-- Helen Keller

On May 2, 6:07*pm, Stuart Wheaton wrote:
On 5/2/2011 6:28 PM, Wes wrote:





*wrote:

One news report I heard (and I don't remember what channel) said that
the quick disposal was out of respect for Muslim burial law. The body
was bathed and enshrouded. Prayers were said and the body was gently
slid off a board into the ocean. Why a burial at sea? The person
speaking (who I think was a military offical, but I'm not sure) said
that they were unable to find a country that would accept the body for
burial - either out of distaste for the man or out of security
concerns.

I'd need to do the research to see how often the Muslim radicals attacked Jews and
Christians on their holidays or what customs and conventions were violated, I don't
believe I'd have to look long or hard to find them.

For a country, ours, that wants to separate church and state to honor the religious
beliefs of someone that wanted to destroy us seems discordant at best.

I'll have to fall back on how we are a better people and wonder if those we don't want to
offend don't rejoice because our observance of their customs make them believe we fear
them and their God.

Nope, we honored the Islamic customs because we want to convince the
moderate Muslims that we have no beef with their faith. *We will never
convince the extremists, so it doesn't matter what they think of it.
What Obama knows, and Bush never figured out, is that one good way to
put the brakes on terrorism is to stop creating more people who hate us.
* We killed his sorry ass because we wanted all people to know that you
cannot do what he did to us and get away with it.

When we kill a Christian criminal or terrorist scumbag, either in a
gunfight or a death cell, we do not desecrate the body, we bury them
with the appropriate rites and trust God to handle the reprisals.

He was positively ID'd by people at the scene, photos the SEAL team
carried, and by DNA match. *I'm sure a tissue sample is still available..

A great team effort by Intelligence agents and spec.ops.
Another win for Mr. Obama.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well said.

And Four More Years for Mr. Obama.

TMT

On 5/3/2011 11:20 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

(I think that was an editorial decision to shift the sound sync, Paul.g
Otherwise, probably 98% of the population wouldn't understand what was going
on.)

I remember an event with my sister when we were teens. We were at a
friends watching someone play basketball well down the hillside. She
asked why the sound of the ball hitting the ground came after she saw it
hit the ground. I explained the difference between the speed of light vs
the speed of sound. Well, sis was nothing if not opinionated and willing
to defend that opinion to her last breath. She soundly rejected my
explanation and we got into quite an argument over it until Mom showed up.

I see this sort of manipulation all the time on TV. Kinda scary when you
think about it...


Jon

On May 2, 8:33*pm, " wrote:
On May 2, 9:20*pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:

Hmm. Sound travels at approx. 1100 feet per second .....

(I think that was an editorial decision to shift the sound sync, Paul. g
Otherwise, probably 98% of the population wouldn't understand what was going
on.)

--
Ed Huntress

You and the editors evidently believe that 98% of the population have
never seen lightning.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dan

Most people DO NOT understand that thunder happens after the
lightning.

Red State schooling has alot to do with that ignorance.

TMT

Ed Huntress wrote:
"CaveLamb" wrote in message
m...
Ed Huntress wrote:
"Edward A. Falk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Tom Gardner w@w wrote:
Am I the only one that remembers that the left thinks Bush and Chaney
did 9/11? Why is the left celebrating? Isn't OBL innocent like the
left says?
Only a small portion of the left believes this. They're as
crazy as the birthers, IMHO.

--
-Ed Falk
Right. Wingers are wingers, right or left. The ones on the right seem a
lot dumber, though. d8-)

You must lean left these days.

They both sound like extremist to me.

Oh, you're right about them being extremist on both sides. But just listen
here on RCM. Do you honestly think that the wingers on both sides are
equally intelligent -- or unintelligent?

I'm no fan of lefties but I have to admit they're a hell of a lot smarter.



Naw, it's just that you have become a closet liberal!

--

Richard Lamb
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~cavelamb
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~sv_temptress

On Mon, 02 May 2011 17:44:01 -0700, "Paul Hovnanian P.E."
wrote:

Ignoramus896 wrote:

On 2011-05-02, Jim Wilkins wrote:
On May 2, 5:32?am, Gunner Asch wrote:
WASHINGTON: The body of Al-Qaeda mastermind Osama bin Laden has been
buried at sea ...
Gunner

Thus denying his followers another Kaaba.


I would assume that they took plenty of pictures.

Probably. But they don't want to inflame the emotions of Muslims in general.
So, unlike the video of Saddam's capture, they won't be making it public.
US, Pakistani, Afghan, Saudi and other officials will probably be given a
look if they ask. So they can give their public a sanitized report on the
solemnity of the proceedings.

The birthers can just go ahead and stomp their little feet. Its not going up
on YouTube.

AFAIC, bin Laden was dead to me for years, ever since Bush stated that
he was irrelevant. This dog and pony show was for Obama's libtard
supporters who were unable to just move on like the rest of us were.

1. Religious law says 24 hours. There are Chaplains aboard ship
that are qualified.
2. What country in the world can knee jerk fast enough to grant
a second Mecca ? Oh - yea - monuments and all that.
3. If not a drove of people, they can be bought with his billions...

4. They have the brain of a direct relative. Matching with him was
trivial.
5. The process removes the a rally point.

I guess you get your input from the news group. This was widely reported.

Martin

On 5/1/2011 1:15 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 5/2/2011 6:33 AM, Christopher Tidy wrote:
Gunner Asch wrote:
WASHINGTON: The body of Al-Qaeda mastermind Osama bin Laden has been
buried at sea after he was killed by US covert forces in Pakistan , US
media reported Monday.

Cable television networks CNN, MSNBC and Fox said a senior US official
had confirmed to them that bin Laden's body had been buried in the sea,
without giving further details.

US officials did not respond when contacted by AFP for confirmation of
the reports.


I hope to hell they documented the **** out of the body.

Yes, seems odd. I mean, they have no qualms about going into a foreign
country to kill a guy, but then they're worried about burying him
according to local traditions?

Chris



My first thought was similar. We go to all the lengths in the world for
a decade to find and kill this guy. Then when we finally do kill him we
dump his body in the ocean the same day. It doesn't sound right to me.
It should be more like, U.S. captures Bin Laden, takes him to a secret
undisclosed location, and tells the world he's dead and buried at sea.
Why we would dispose of his remains so fast just seems fishy.

You would think we would want to keep and preserve his body for
posterity. I understand they have his DNA, photos, and all. But I would
have preferred for us to have kept his body, and done an autopsy on it.
If he's gone you can never go back and get the answers to any more
questions. It's just like with McVeigh. Dead men tell no tales. Maybe
Osama is in a cell right now somewhere getting ready for waterboarding.
I wouldn't put it past our government to do that.

Hawke

On Mon, 2 May 2011 18:33:43 -0700 (PDT), the renowned
" wrote:

On May 2, 9:20*pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:

Hmm. Sound travels at approx. 1100 feet per second .....

(I think that was an editorial decision to shift the sound sync, Paul. g
Otherwise, probably 98% of the population wouldn't understand what was going
on.)

--
Ed Huntress

You and the editors evidently believe that 98% of the population have
never seen lightning.

Dan

Mostly they see hollywood movies where that doesn't happen.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

On Mon, 2 May 2011 18:25:23 -0400, "Tom Gardner" w@w wrote:


"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
.. .

WASHINGTON: The body of Al-Qaeda mastermind Osama bin Laden has been
buried at sea after he was killed by US covert forces in Pakistan ,
US
media reported Monday.

Cable television networks CNN, MSNBC and Fox said a senior US
official
had confirmed to them that bin Laden's body had been buried in the
sea,
without giving further details.

US officials did not respond when contacted by AFP for confirmation
of
the reports.


I hope to hell they documented the **** out of the body.

It would be nasty..if it were just another birth certificate
thingy.....

Gunner

--
"If I say two plus two is four and a Democrat says two plus two is
eight,
it's not a partial victory for me when we agree that two plus two is
six. " Jonah Goldberg (modified)

Am I the only one that remembers that the left thinks Bush and Chaney
did 9/11? Why is the left celebrating? Isn't OBL innocent like the
left says?


Ooooh...very good question indeed! Bravo!

Thats certainly open for some exploration on both usenet and in the real
world archives.

Thanks!!!


Gunner

--
"If I say two plus two is four and a Democrat says two plus two is eight,
it's not a partial victory for me when we agree that two plus two is
six. " Jonah Goldberg (modified)

Spehro Pefhany wrote:
On Mon, 2 May 2011 18:33:43 -0700 (PDT), the renowned
wrote:

On May 2, 9:20 pm, "Ed wrote:

Hmm. Sound travels at approx. 1100 feet per second .....

(I think that was an editorial decision to shift the sound sync, Paul.g
Otherwise, probably 98% of the population wouldn't understand what was going
on.)

--
Ed Huntress

You and the editors evidently believe that 98% of the population have
never seen lightning.

Dan

Mostly they see hollywood movies where that doesn't happen.

Except for the Death Star of course.
Everything about that was real.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7hn3XImO0U

--Winston

On 05/02/2011 03:33 PM, Artemus wrote:


If they really did bury his carcass at sea, and not just say they did
to placate the religion of peace, then I hope they embalmed him with
lard and sewed him into a pigskin shroud with coprolite weights.
Art


I wonder how many swabs were willing to volunteer a coprolite or two?


technomaNge
--

On Mon, 02 May 2011 20:06:57 -0500, Ignoramus896
wrote:

On 2011-05-02, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Mon, 02 May 2011 08:18:27 -0500, Ignoramus896
wrote:

On 2011-05-02, Jim Wilkins wrote:
On May 2, 5:32?am, Gunner Asch wrote:
WASHINGTON: The body of Al-Qaeda mastermind Osama bin Laden has been
buried at sea ...
Gunner

Thus denying his followers another Kaaba.


I would assume that they took plenty of pictures.

i

If he got tagged in the head...there wont be much above the neck to ID.

If he was shot in the face, most of the face should stil be there.

You havent been around a lot of gunshot wounds have you?


Seriously.

Which, along with that birth cert fraud...makes a fellow wonder..really.

It sucks to have a president you simply cannot trust anything that comes
out of his mouth. Makes one long for Bubba Clinton again..cringe

Gunner, you mentioned that you had a number of fake ID, and false
identities, etc, but not everyone lives this way -- and it did not
get you very far either. It is better to have one good identity than
many crappy ones.

Get me very far? Where was it supposed to get me? They are for the
future...and havent been used yet.

Crappy ones? 3 Legitimate drivers licenses from 3 differnt states are
"crappy " id?????

Blink blink blink....blink...

As far as I am concerned, and I may not have followed everything super
closely, Barack Obama is unusually honest and upstanding for a
politician.

i
Blink....you live in a cave...right? Or..someplace where radio/tv and
the internet do not exist..right?

You going to Kmart to post here...right?

Gunner

--
"If I say two plus two is four and a Democrat says two plus two is eight,
it's not a partial victory for me when we agree that two plus two is
six. " Jonah Goldberg (modified)

"Stormin Mormon" wrote in message
...
Aparently, our Muslim in Chief didn't want to
offend anyone?

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

*Give it a rest*.

He claims to be a Christian. Damned shame you can't make the same claim.

Harold








"Christopher Tidy" wrote in
message ...

Yes, seems odd. I mean, they have no qualms about
going into a foreign country to kill a guy, but then
they're worried about burying him according to local
traditions?

Chris

"Tim Wescott" wrote in message
...
On 05/02/2011 02:32 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
snip--
If he were buried anywhere on land it'd just be an instant shrine --
this should significantly hold down on the hero-worship thingie, without
giving anyone an excuse to get bent out of shape about the way he was
buried.


Finally---some wisdom surfaces.

Harold

On Mon, 02 May 2011 18:47:10 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Mon, 02 May 2011 11:23:46 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Mon, 02 May 2011 08:18:27 -0500, Ignoramus896
wrote:

On 2011-05-02, Jim Wilkins wrote:
On May 2, 5:32?am, Gunner Asch wrote:
WASHINGTON: The body of Al-Qaeda mastermind Osama bin Laden has been
buried at sea ...
Gunner

Thus denying his followers another Kaaba.


I would assume that they took plenty of pictures.

i

If he got tagged in the head...there wont be much above the neck to ID.

Seriously.

Which, along with that birth cert fraud...makes a fellow wonder..really.

It sucks to have a president you simply cannot trust anything that comes
out of his mouth. Makes one long for Bubba Clinton again..cringe

Bwahahahaha! cringe Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

Questions: Was it really binLaden? Why now, after 9.5 years? Why the
burial at sea prior to confirmation?

It's awfully convenient after bogus birth cert #2, isn't it?

When I was the paper tonight, I was delighted that they'd finally
nabbed Obama bin Biden. Then I read more closely and was sad again.


The questions...are there..arnt they?

And the timing...the timing after the birth cert thing...is absolutely
fascinating.

Figure the odds of such things happening so close together.

Astronomical.

We do live...in interesting times.

Gunner

--
"If I say two plus two is four and a Democrat says two plus two is eight,
it's not a partial victory for me when we agree that two plus two is
six. " Jonah Goldberg (modified)

On Mon, 02 May 2011 17:44:01 -0700, "Paul Hovnanian P.E."
wrote:

Ignoramus896 wrote:

On 2011-05-02, Jim Wilkins wrote:
On May 2, 5:32?am, Gunner Asch wrote:
WASHINGTON: The body of Al-Qaeda mastermind Osama bin Laden has been
buried at sea ...
Gunner

Thus denying his followers another Kaaba.


I would assume that they took plenty of pictures.

Probably. But they don't want to inflame the emotions of Muslims in general.
So, unlike the video of Saddam's capture, they won't be making it public.
US, Pakistani, Afghan, Saudi and other officials will probably be given a
look if they ask. So they can give their public a sanitized report on the
solemnity of the proceedings.

The birthers can just go ahead and stomp their little feet. Its not going up
on YouTube.


So how long will it be before the public resumes the birth cert
questioning?

It wont be long.....VBG

Gunner

--
"If I say two plus two is four and a Democrat says two plus two is eight,
it's not a partial victory for me when we agree that two plus two is
six. " Jonah Goldberg (modified)

On May 3, 1:14*am, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Mon, 02 May 2011 20:06:57 -0500, Ignoramus896





wrote:
On 2011-05-02, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Mon, 02 May 2011 08:18:27 -0500, Ignoramus896
wrote:

On 2011-05-02, Jim Wilkins wrote:
On May 2, 5:32?am, Gunner Asch wrote:
WASHINGTON: The body of Al-Qaeda mastermind Osama bin Laden has been
buried at sea ...
Gunner

Thus denying his followers another Kaaba.

I would assume that they took plenty of pictures.

i

If he got tagged in the head...there wont be much above the neck to ID..

If he was shot in the face, most of the face should stil be there.

You havent been around a lot of gunshot wounds have you?



Seriously.

Which, along with that birth cert fraud...makes a fellow wonder..really.

It sucks to have a president you simply cannot trust anything that comes
out of his mouth. *Makes one long for Bubba Clinton again..cringe

Gunner, you mentioned that you had a number of fake ID, and false
identities, etc, but not everyone lives this way -- and it did not
get you very far either. It is better to have one good identity than
many crappy ones.

Get me very far? *Where was it supposed to get me? *They are for the
future...and havent been used yet.

Crappy ones? *3 Legitimate drivers licenses from 3 differnt states are
"crappy " id?????

Blink blink blink....blink...

As far as I am concerned, and I may not have followed everything super
closely, Barack Obama is unusually honest and upstanding for a
politician.

i

Blink....you live in a cave...right? Or..someplace where radio/tv and
the internet do not exist..right?

You going to Kmart to post here...right?

Gunner

--
"If I say two plus two is four and a Democrat says two plus two is eight,
it's not a partial victory for me when we agree that two plus two is
six. " *Jonah Goldberg (modified)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Gummer is so funny when he is caught in a lie.

TMT

On May 3, 1:15*am, "Harold & Susan Vordos" wrote:
"Stormin Mormon" wrote in message

...

Aparently, our Muslim in Chief didn't want to
offend anyone?

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.

*Give it a rest*.

He claims to be a Christian. *Damned shame you can't make the same claim.

Harold





"Christopher Tidy" wrote in
...

Yes, seems odd. I mean, they have no qualms about
going into a foreign country to kill a guy, but then
they're worried about burying him according to local
traditions?

Chris- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I was thinking that too.

For someone who "claims" to be a Christian, Storming will have some
explaining to do when he is at the Pearly Gates.

TMT

On May 3, 1:17*am, "Harold & Susan Vordos" wrote:
"Tim Wescott" wrote in message

...

On 05/02/2011 02:32 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
snip--
If he were buried anywhere on land it'd just be an instant shrine --
this should significantly hold down on the hero-worship thingie, without
giving anyone an excuse to get bent out of shape about the way he was
buried.

Finally---some wisdom surfaces.

Harold

I agree...that is why I think the burial at sea was a really good
idea.

TMT

On May 3, 1:17*am, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Mon, 02 May 2011 18:47:10 -0700, Larry Jaques





wrote:
On Mon, 02 May 2011 11:23:46 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Mon, 02 May 2011 08:18:27 -0500, Ignoramus896
wrote:

On 2011-05-02, Jim Wilkins wrote:
On May 2, 5:32?am, Gunner Asch wrote:
WASHINGTON: The body of Al-Qaeda mastermind Osama bin Laden has been
buried at sea ...
Gunner

Thus denying his followers another Kaaba.

I would assume that they took plenty of pictures.

i

If he got tagged in the head...there wont be much above the neck to ID.

Seriously.

Which, along with that birth cert fraud...makes a fellow wonder..really..

It sucks to have a president you simply cannot trust anything that comes
out of his mouth. *Makes one long for Bubba Clinton again..cringe

Bwahahahaha! *cringe Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

Questions: Was it really binLaden? Why now, after 9.5 years? Why the
burial at sea prior to confirmation?

It's awfully convenient after bogus birth cert #2, isn't it?

When I was the paper tonight, I was delighted that they'd finally
nabbed Obama bin Biden. Then I read more closely and was sad again.

The questions...are there..arnt they?

And the timing...the timing after the birth cert thing...is absolutely
fascinating.

Figure the odds of such things happening so close together.

Astronomical.

We do live...in interesting times.

Gunner

--
"If I say two plus two is four and a Democrat says two plus two is eight,
it's not a partial victory for me when we agree that two plus two is
six. " *Jonah Goldberg (modified)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yes Gummer..the questions are there.

We have yet to see any proof that you actually own any of the stuff
you are hawking here on Usenet.

Not one document.

Perhaps you should look for your proof of ownership of equipment that
is likely owned by your creditors before you worry about the
President's birth certificate.

TMT

"Josepi" wrote:

Bin Laden may be upstanding right now, also.

Nah, Bin Laden is firmly strapped to a waterboard while we pump him for intel. Then the
headshot followed by burial at sea with photo's. Note to navy, change time on digicam to
match story.

*Note*
I'm just speculating, there has not been a security leak.

Wes

On 5/2/2011 8:22 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
"Edward A. wrote in message
...
In ,
Tom Gardnerw@w wrote:

Am I the only one that remembers that the left thinks Bush and Chaney
did 9/11? Why is the left celebrating? Isn't OBL innocent like the
left says?

Only a small portion of the left believes this. They're as
crazy as the birthers, IMHO.

--
-Ed Falk

Right. Wingers are wingers, right or left. The ones on the right seem a lot
dumber, though. d8-)

Yet there seem to be a lot more gun controllers on the left than
creationists on the right.

David

"CaveLamb" wrote in message
m...
Ed Huntress wrote:
"CaveLamb" wrote in message
m...
Ed Huntress wrote:
"Edward A. Falk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Tom Gardner w@w wrote:
Am I the only one that remembers that the left thinks Bush and Chaney
did 9/11? Why is the left celebrating? Isn't OBL innocent like the
left says?
Only a small portion of the left believes this. They're as
crazy as the birthers, IMHO.

--
-Ed Falk
Right. Wingers are wingers, right or left. The ones on the right seem a
lot dumber, though. d8-)

You must lean left these days.

They both sound like extremist to me.

Oh, you're right about them being extremist on both sides. But just
listen here on RCM. Do you honestly think that the wingers on both sides
are equally intelligent -- or unintelligent?

I'm no fan of lefties but I have to admit they're a hell of a lot
smarter.



Naw, it's just that you have become a closet liberal!

g They don't take NRA members who were once delegates to local Republican
conventions.

I think what's happened is that the sheer volume of Gunner's spew has
lowered the curve lately. It could just be a matter of perception based on
the new average.

--
Ed Huntress

On 9/11/2001, several people did actually use cell phones
while in flight. I'm not sure what altitude, descending
towards the Pentagon, obviously.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"Josepi" wrote in message
...

Cell frequencies only travel line of site and cannot
penetrate the hull of a
commercial jet. They can shoot out through the windows or
other non-metallic
surfaces. Frequencies over 600 MHz doe not bounce off clouds
and atmospheric
surfaces. The ground antennas do not transmit much energy
vertically where a
plane would be.

Communications experts will tell you it doesn't happen.

http://911lies.org/cell_calls_911_fa..._morphing.html
"Here is the statement of an experienced airline pilot: "The
idea of being
able to use a cellphone while flying is completely
impractical. Once through
about 10,000 feet, the thing is useless, since you are too
high and moving
too fast (and thus changing cells too rapidly) for the phone
to provide a
signal." (AVWeb, 1999)."

Here is another video describing further describing and
testing the cell
phone conspiracy in actual tests and it's results agree.
Cell phones in the
air are just not functional.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJk8qdrv6AM

And, now you'll tell me that his body was at Area 51 with
the alien space ships they keep finding?

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"Tall King" wrote in message
...

AFAIC, bin Laden was dead to me for years, ever since Bush
stated that
he was irrelevant. This dog and pony show was for Obama's
libtard
supporters who were unable to just move on like the rest of
us were.

On Mon, 02 May 2011 23:14:59 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Mon, 02 May 2011 20:06:57 -0500, Ignoramus896
wrote:

On 2011-05-02, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Mon, 02 May 2011 08:18:27 -0500, Ignoramus896
wrote:

On 2011-05-02, Jim Wilkins wrote:
On May 2, 5:32?am, Gunner Asch wrote:
WASHINGTON: The body of Al-Qaeda mastermind Osama bin Laden has been
buried at sea ...
Gunner

Thus denying his followers another Kaaba.


I would assume that they took plenty of pictures.

i

If he got tagged in the head...there wont be much above the neck to ID.

If he was shot in the face, most of the face should stil be there.

You havent been around a lot of gunshot wounds have you?

Especially not if it were from a .50BMG. This video ought to help:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyEnkQSA7s4&NR=1


Seriously.

Which, along with that birth cert fraud...makes a fellow wonder..really.

It sucks to have a president you simply cannot trust anything that comes
out of his mouth. Makes one long for Bubba Clinton again..cringe
--snip--

As far as I am concerned, and I may not have followed everything super
closely, Barack Obama is unusually honest and upstanding for a
politician.

i
Blink....you live in a cave...right? Or..someplace where radio/tv and
the internet do not exist..right?

The rest of my family is absolutely blind in this manner, too. They
refuse to read or listen to anything negative about the man, evidently
getting their info only from DNC spin sources/liberal TV. They will do
no research whatsoever on the matter of politics. It's both scary and
extremely maddening.

--
Science may have found a cure for most evils; but it has found
no remedy for the worst of them all--the apathy of human beings.
-- Helen Keller

On 2011-05-03, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Mon, 02 May 2011 23:14:59 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Mon, 02 May 2011 20:06:57 -0500, Ignoramus896
wrote:

On 2011-05-02, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Mon, 02 May 2011 08:18:27 -0500, Ignoramus896
wrote:

On 2011-05-02, Jim Wilkins wrote:
On May 2, 5:32?am, Gunner Asch wrote:
WASHINGTON: The body of Al-Qaeda mastermind Osama bin Laden has been
buried at sea ...
Gunner

Thus denying his followers another Kaaba.


I would assume that they took plenty of pictures.

i

If he got tagged in the head...there wont be much above the neck to ID.

If he was shot in the face, most of the face should stil be there.

You havent been around a lot of gunshot wounds have you?

Especially not if it were from a .50BMG. This video ought to help:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyEnkQSA7s4&NR=1

That's a video of shooting at rocks.

And they did not use a .50 BMG shooting at Osama.

Thia is how a face shot looks like.

http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=49952


Seriously.

Which, along with that birth cert fraud...makes a fellow wonder..really.

It sucks to have a president you simply cannot trust anything that comes
out of his mouth. Makes one long for Bubba Clinton again..cringe
--snip--

As far as I am concerned, and I may not have followed everything super
closely, Barack Obama is unusually honest and upstanding for a
politician.

i
Blink....you live in a cave...right? Or..someplace where radio/tv and
the internet do not exist..right?

The rest of my family is absolutely blind in this manner, too. They
refuse to read or listen to anything negative about the man, evidently
getting their info only from DNC spin sources/liberal TV. They will do
no research whatsoever on the matter of politics. It's both scary and
extremely maddening.


I never watch TV, I read news online, including Drudge Report etc.

I stand by my comment. I find President Obama to be above board
honest. I do try to find evidence to the contrary.

So far, all that "birthers" and other bull**** mongers accomplished,
is that they undermined my trust in the Republican party even
further. Now Newt Gingrich is going to teach me "morality"?

i

"David R. Birch" wrote in message
...
On 5/2/2011 8:22 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
"Edward A. wrote in message
...
In ,
Tom Gardnerw@w wrote:

Am I the only one that remembers that the left thinks Bush and Chaney
did 9/11? Why is the left celebrating? Isn't OBL innocent like the
left says?

Only a small portion of the left believes this. They're as
crazy as the birthers, IMHO.

--
-Ed Falk

Right. Wingers are wingers, right or left. The ones on the right seem a
lot
dumber, though. d8-)

Yet there seem to be a lot more gun controllers on the left than
creationists on the right.

David

No doubt. But they've heard about Gunner, other RCM posts have leaked out,
and they have good reason to support gun control. d8-)

But creationists, while the Bull Goose loonies of the crop, are not the only
dumb ones on the right. The cheers for Donald Trump a few nights ago, when
he said he'd make the Chinese "mother****ers" pay a 25% import duty, and
tell the Middle Eastern countries to sell us the oil we want at the price we
demand, at gunpoint, by implication, reminds us that there are loons and
ignoramuses out there of various right-wing plumage.

There are some similar freakshows on the left, but not as many, from what
I've seen.

--
Ed Huntress

It would still depend on him being a little light-headed, wouldn't it?

-----------

Nah, Bin Laden is firmly strapped to a waterboard while we pump him for
intel. Then the
headshot followed by burial at sea with photo's. Note to navy, change time
on digicam to
match story.

*Note*
I'm just speculating, there has not been a security leak.

Wes


"Wes" wrote in message
...

"Josepi" wrote:

Bin Laden may be upstanding right now, also.

On Tue, 3 May 2011 10:39:27 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

The cheers for Donald Trump a few nights ago, when
he said he'd make the Chinese "mother****ers" pay a 25% import duty

He'd bluster loudly, posture and publicly threaten to tax Americans if
the Chinese holders of American debt don't act against their own
national interests. Gee, I wonder how that would play out. ;-)

"Spehro Pefhany" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 3 May 2011 10:39:27 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

The cheers for Donald Trump a few nights ago, when
he said he'd make the Chinese "mother****ers" pay a 25% import duty

He'd bluster loudly, posture and publicly threaten to tax Americans if
the Chinese holders of American debt don't act against their own
national interests. Gee, I wonder how that would play out. ;-)


Those of us in the NYC area should thank the rest of the country for helping
to humiliate The Donald. Maybe he'll lay low in the public eye after this
farce is over.

--
Ed Huntress

I read your attached but I see no validation of cell phones working in a
fuselage. The article is full of "could", "possibly" and "if" but no actual
validation to indicate it will function. Some reports indicate cell signals
work very intermittently in a fuselage. Many factors would be involved but
never for more than a few seconds at a time.

As the quote stated it was from a pilot. That should have not been confused
with another statement.

I believe that cells would work near the ground. The airspeed would be
slower, the windows (RF portholes) would align with the antennae better and
the antennae signals would be channeled more at the mobile cell handset.

OTOH: These hijacked flights would have been closer to the ground than a
regular flight so despite the logic and multiple persons telling us it can't
work the jury is still out for transmission capabilities. The cell switching
speed is still an unknown and I doubt the switching logic could handle cells
changing that fast. There are parameters in the switching logic that take
time to be sure, it is time, for the cell to switch frequencies and relock
with the next cell. I haven't found satisfactory evidence of this online,
yet, other than a 400ms blank out time. I believe I have experienced this
myself when switching cells.

I still maintain (as well as many others) the plane was shot down and the
cell phone conversations are lies to make the heroic story possible . No
other scenario would be possible.

-------------------
"Ed Huntress" wrote in message ...
Uh, Ok. So it doesn't happen. But it did happen. g Ask anyone who has used
one in a plane in the early days. Keep in mind that most of the use was, as
I said, soon before landing (and soon after takeoff). We aren't talking
about 30,000 feet.

I'm going to post a lengthy quote from Wikipedia at the bottom of this. If
you're interested, read it, and you'll see that cell phones did indeed work
on planes, when they were legal, and in the early days the systems were
analog, which is briefly mentioned. I have no idea how or if they work
today, because they haven't been allowed on flights I've taken for years.


Is this guy a communications engineer?


(From Wikipedia)

Cell tower channel re-use

The U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) currently prohibits the use
of mobile telephones aboard any aircraft in flight. The reason given is that
mobile phone systems depend on channel reuse and operating a phone at
altitude may violate the fundamental assumptions that allow channel reuse to
work.

The FCC is also concerned that the use, or even non-use, of a powered cell
phone could cause disruption to the cell systems' towers and has banned
their use.[19]

Mobile telephones are intentionally designed with a low power output. A
tower is the center of a "cell" and due to attenuation with distance
(inverse square law) cell phone transmissions can usually be received only
weakly by towers in adjacent cells and not at all in cells farther away
(non-adjacent cells). This allows the channel used by any given phone to be
reused by other phones in non-adjacent cells. This principle allows tens or
hundreds of thousands of people to use their phones at the same time in a
given metropolitan area while using only a limited number of channels.

Channel reuse works because a mobile phone on the ground will only have one
"closest" tower that can possibly use a particular group of frequencies,
CDMA codes, or time slots. The software that manages the system assumes that
the signal from a phone on a particular tower can, on other towers, only be
"heard" at greatly reduced signal strength. The frequency, code, or time
slot used by the phone can therefore be reused by other phones on other
towers.

In the old analog cell system a channel was simply a frequency pair: There
were seven groups of 35 channels each and no two adjacent cells used the
same channel groups. Modern CDMA and TDMA systems are more complex: A
channel in TDMA is a frequency pair, and a time slot, and a channel in CDMA
is a spread spectrum key but the principle of channel reuse still applies.

If a mobile phone is operated from an aircraft in flight above a city these
assumptions ares no longer valid because the towers of numerous different
cells may be about equidistant from the phone. Multiple towers might assume
that the phone is under their control and the phone could be assigned a free
channel by one tower but could also be heard on other towers using the same
channel group. The channel might already be in use on those other towers and
could cause interference with existing calls. It is also possible that the
software controlling the towers could crash.[citation needed] Even if the
software can cope with hearing the same phone on multiple non-adjacent
towers the result at best is an overall decrease in system capacity.

An additional concern is the output power of the mobile handset. Because the
towers might be miles below the aircraft the phone might have to transmit at
its maximum power to be received. This will increase the risk of
interference with electronic equipment on the aircraft.

On May 2, 10:02*am, Tim Wescott wrote:


If he were buried anywhere on land it'd just be an instant shrine --
this should significantly hold down on the hero-worship thingie, without
giving anyone an excuse to get bent out of shape about the way he was
buried.

Should have berried him on a Kansas hog farm, one of those really big
opperations that have the giant cess-pits that the barns drain into.

Then sell tickets to the pilgrims that want to come and let them set
their little rugs down and hope the crust does not give out when they
kneel down.

Roger Shoaf

"Josepi" wrote in message
...
I read your attached but I see no validation of cell phones working in a
fuselage. The article is full of "could", "possibly" and "if" but no
actual validation to indicate it will function. Some reports indicate cell
signals work very intermittently in a fuselage. Many factors would be
involved but never for more than a few seconds at a time.

Ok, try Googling "do cellphones work in airplanes". You'll find many sources
saying that they do, including this:

"The FCC rule, 47 CFR 22.925, prohibits the use of cell phones after the
aircraft leaves the ground. This rule applies to all aircraft whether
commercial or private or whether powered or simply a balloon. The FCC rule
applies only to cell phones..."

If they work on the ground, so much for 600 MHz+ signals not getting in and
out of an airplane.

A little Googling makes it clear that many, many people have used them. I
didn't spend any time on it, but there is this"

"...the Federal Aviation Administration has conducted studies indicating
that despite the warnings from flight attendants, an average of one to four
cell phone calls are made from commercial flights in the United States."

I remember people talking on cell phones from planes when I was flying a
lot, around 1990. I did it. We all did it, until it was outlawed.


As the quote stated it was from a pilot. That should have not been
confused with another statement.

I believe that cells would work near the ground. The airspeed would be
slower, the windows (RF portholes) would align with the antennae better
and the antennae signals would be channeled more at the mobile cell
handset.

OTOH: These hijacked flights would have been closer to the ground than a
regular flight so despite the logic and multiple persons telling us it
can't work the jury is still out for transmission capabilities. The cell
switching speed is still an unknown and I doubt the switching logic could
handle cells changing that fast. There are parameters in the switching
logic that take time to be sure, it is time, for the cell to switch
frequencies and relock with the next cell. I haven't found satisfactory
evidence of this online, yet, other than a 400ms blank out time. I believe
I have experienced this myself when switching cells.

I still maintain (as well as many others) the plane was shot down and the
cell phone conversations are lies to make the heroic story possible . No
other scenario would be possible.

Oh. If you had said that up front, I wouldn't have bothered responding.

Carry on. Don't forget your tinfoil hat. 8-)

--
Ed Huntress

"Ignoramus18758" wrote in message
...
On 2011-05-03, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Mon, 02 May 2011 23:14:59 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Mon, 02 May 2011 20:06:57 -0500, Ignoramus896
wrote:

On 2011-05-02, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Mon, 02 May 2011 08:18:27 -0500, Ignoramus896
wrote:

On 2011-05-02, Jim Wilkins wrote:
On May 2, 5:32?am, Gunner Asch wrote:
WASHINGTON: The body of Al-Qaeda mastermind Osama bin Laden has
been
buried at sea ...
Gunner

Thus denying his followers another Kaaba.


I would assume that they took plenty of pictures.

i

If he got tagged in the head...there wont be much above the neck to
ID.

If he was shot in the face, most of the face should stil be there.

You havent been around a lot of gunshot wounds have you?

Especially not if it were from a .50BMG. This video ought to help:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyEnkQSA7s4&NR=1

That's a video of shooting at rocks.

And they did not use a .50 BMG shooting at Osama.

Thia is how a face shot looks like.

http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=49952


Seriously.

Which, along with that birth cert fraud...makes a fellow
wonder..really.

It sucks to have a president you simply cannot trust anything that
comes
out of his mouth. Makes one long for Bubba Clinton again..cringe
--snip--

As far as I am concerned, and I may not have followed everything super
closely, Barack Obama is unusually honest and upstanding for a
politician.

i
Blink....you live in a cave...right? Or..someplace where radio/tv and
the internet do not exist..right?

The rest of my family is absolutely blind in this manner, too. They
refuse to read or listen to anything negative about the man, evidently
getting their info only from DNC spin sources/liberal TV. They will do
no research whatsoever on the matter of politics. It's both scary and
extremely maddening.


I never watch TV, I read news online, including Drudge Report etc.

I stand by my comment. I find President Obama to be above board
honest. I do try to find evidence to the contrary.

So far, all that "birthers" and other bull**** mongers accomplished,
is that they undermined my trust in the Republican party even
further. Now Newt Gingrich is going to teach me "morality"?

i

Why not, if Gunner can lecture us on fiscal responsibility?

"Josepi" wrote in message ...

I read your attached but I see no validation of cell phones working in a
fuselage. The article is full of "could", "possibly" and "if" but no actual
validation to indicate it will function. Some reports indicate cell signals
work very intermittently in a fuselage. Many factors would be involved but
never for more than a few seconds at a time.

As the quote stated it was from a pilot. That should have not been confused
with another statement.

I believe that cells would work near the ground. The airspeed would be
slower, the windows (RF portholes) would align with the antennae better and
the antennae signals would be channeled more at the mobile cell handset.

OTOH: These hijacked flights would have been closer to the ground than a
regular flight so despite the logic and multiple persons telling us it can't
work the jury is still out for transmission capabilities. The cell switching
speed is still an unknown and I doubt the switching logic could handle cells
changing that fast. There are parameters in the switching logic that take
time to be sure, it is time, for the cell to switch frequencies and relock
with the next cell. I haven't found satisfactory evidence of this online,
yet, other than a 400ms blank out time. I believe I have experienced this
myself when switching cells.

I still maintain (as well as many others) the plane was shot down and the
cell phone conversations are lies to make the heroic story possible . No
other scenario would be possible.

-------------------
"Ed Huntress" wrote in message ...
Uh, Ok. So it doesn't happen. But it did happen. g Ask anyone who has used
one in a plane in the early days. Keep in mind that most of the use was, as
I said, soon before landing (and soon after takeoff). We aren't talking
about 30,000 feet.

I'm going to post a lengthy quote from Wikipedia at the bottom of this. If
you're interested, read it, and you'll see that cell phones did indeed work
on planes, when they were legal, and in the early days the systems were
analog, which is briefly mentioned. I have no idea how or if they work
today, because they haven't been allowed on flights I've taken for years.


Is this guy a communications engineer?


(From Wikipedia)

Cell tower channel re-use

The U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) currently prohibits the use
of mobile telephones aboard any aircraft in flight. The reason given is that
mobile phone systems depend on channel reuse and operating a phone at
altitude may violate the fundamental assumptions that allow channel reuse to
work.

The FCC is also concerned that the use, or even non-use, of a powered cell
phone could cause disruption to the cell systems' towers and has banned
their use.[19]

Mobile telephones are intentionally designed with a low power output. A
tower is the center of a "cell" and due to attenuation with distance
(inverse square law) cell phone transmissions can usually be received only
weakly by towers in adjacent cells and not at all in cells farther away
(non-adjacent cells). This allows the channel used by any given phone to be
reused by other phones in non-adjacent cells. This principle allows tens or
hundreds of thousands of people to use their phones at the same time in a
given metropolitan area while using only a limited number of channels.

Channel reuse works because a mobile phone on the ground will only have one
"closest" tower that can possibly use a particular group of frequencies,
CDMA codes, or time slots. The software that manages the system assumes that
the signal from a phone on a particular tower can, on other towers, only be
"heard" at greatly reduced signal strength. The frequency, code, or time
slot used by the phone can therefore be reused by other phones on other
towers.

In the old analog cell system a channel was simply a frequency pair: There
were seven groups of 35 channels each and no two adjacent cells used the
same channel groups. Modern CDMA and TDMA systems are more complex: A
channel in TDMA is a frequency pair, and a time slot, and a channel in CDMA
is a spread spectrum key but the principle of channel reuse still applies.

If a mobile phone is operated from an aircraft in flight above a city these
assumptions ares no longer valid because the towers of numerous different
cells may be about equidistant from the phone. Multiple towers might assume
that the phone is under their control and the phone could be assigned a free
channel by one tower but could also be heard on other towers using the same
channel group. The channel might already be in use on those other towers and
could cause interference with existing calls. It is also possible that the
software controlling the towers could crash.[citation needed] Even if the
software can cope with hearing the same phone on multiple non-adjacent
towers the result at best is an overall decrease in system capacity.

An additional concern is the output power of the mobile handset. Because the
towers might be miles below the aircraft the phone might have to transmit at
its maximum power to be received. This will increase the risk of
interference with electronic equipment on the aircraft.


Reply:
A cell phone will work inside the plane. Just look at how many calls are
made before push back from the gate. On board the planes, there are pay by
the minute phones. Do not know if they are a cell phone or a radio system
by themselves. I think the passengers were using the phones in the seat
back when they learned of the crashes. Cell phone towers are not designed
to handle 500 mph speeds. I understand in Japan the cell phone system
everyone uses in town are only capable at less than 25 mph.

On May 3, 5:19*am, "David R. Birch" wrote:
On 5/2/2011 8:22 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:





"Edward A. *wrote in message
...
In ,
Tom Gardnerw@w *wrote:

Am I the only one that remembers that the left thinks Bush and Chaney
did 9/11? *Why is the left celebrating? *Isn't OBL innocent like the
left says?

Only a small portion of the left believes this. *They're as
crazy as the birthers, IMHO.

--
-Ed Falk

Right. Wingers are wingers, right or left. The ones on the right seem a lot
dumber, though. d8-)

Yet there seem to be a lot more gun controllers on the left than
creationists on the right.

David- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

There seems to be many more dead people at the hands of crazy ass
conservative gun owners than there are at the hand of responsible
liberal AND conservative gun owners.

And it is the crazy ass conservatives who deny that they are the
problem.

TMT

On Tue, 03 May 2011 08:07:41 -0500, Ignoramus18758
wrote:


Especially not if it were from a .50BMG. This video ought to help:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyEnkQSA7s4&NR=1

That's a video of shooting at rocks.

Actually...ground squirrels

And they did not use a .50 BMG shooting at Osama.

Thia is how a face shot looks like.

http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=49952

So you can tell who this guy is?

And it looks like the round went in from the side, probably under the
left eye. in a very shallow glancing path. FMJ

The cheekbones took out the front of the face as they exited.

Must have been a moderately slow round, probably 7.62x39

Here is something closer

http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_li...tk6do1_500.jpg

He (Osama) was afterall..hit with a .223 or 5.56 from a M4..more than
likely.
And given that there is no Geneva Convention standards to be met
here..probably a soft point or hollow point. Such are often carried by
Spec Ops guys

Gunner, who has shot far far too many people in the head over the years.



--
"If I say two plus two is four and a Democrat says two plus two is eight,
it's not a partial victory for me when we agree that two plus two is
six. " Jonah Goldberg (modified)