Bicylist shot and killed for thrill

[Mike Kruger]

"Roger Houston" <[email protected]> wrote
> "Jeff Starr" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 22:38:19 -0700, Mark Hickey <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>History will tell whether he's right or not. If the democracies in
>>>Afghanistan and Iraq "work", they're going to cause profound changes
>>>throughout the entire region. If so, like it or not, the man will go
>>>down as a visionary.
>>
>> Why stop at visionary, why not make him a saint? Your blind
>> allegiance is really something to behold.
>
> You have to wait until he's dead to make him a saint, see? All in good
> time.
>
We could follow the Roman practice and deify him right now.

 

[Mike Kruger]

> Brooks, you're so predictable!

I think if we all took a look at our own postings on this thread, we would
find that it's not just Brooks who's predictable. (I'm not leaving myself
out of this group.)

 

[Zoot Katz]

On Sat, 03 Dec 2005 04:29:06 GMT, "Mike Kruger"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>> Brooks, you're so predictable!
>
> I think if we all took a look at our own postings on this thread, we would
>find that it's not just Brooks who's predictable. (I'm not leaving myself
>out of this group.)
>
For all the back and forth exchanges, nobody's mind has been changed.

That I have long detested the foreign policies, trade practises and
mainstream culture of the USA is no secret. That I consider both its
political parties pawns of the military industrial complex is a fact.
I stand by my general condemnation of the entire country, its
leadershit and power elite. I refuse to ever again visit the place and
spit on its embassy whenever I pass. I reject any of our politicians
who accept its machinations. I will be among the last to lament the
eventual total demise of the USA.
--
zk

 

[Zoot Katz]

On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 08:40:26 GMT, through a puddle of drool, Freeper,
"Bill Sornson" pecked this devastating wedgie:

>Zoot Katz wrote:
>> On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 07:13:06 GMT, "Bill Sornson"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Snooty Putz wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 16:41:56 GMT, "Bill Sornson"
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Quit your sniveling, *****.
>>>
>>>>> Snoot! That's twice you've gone to the sexual orientation flame
>>>>> card before my first cup (manly mug) of coffee!
>>>
>>>> That's just plain old kennel talk, *****.
>>>>
>>>> I'd tell you to "suck my ass" but you'd probably also interpret that
>>>> to satisfy your fantasies.
>>>
>>> Ah, gotta love that Lefty Gentility. Class act today, Putzster.
>>>
>> Croak, toady.
>
>Break a leg, Clumso.
>
Gosh, I'm crushed. I hope you realise that you're now officially off
my xmas list.
--
zk

 

[Bill Sornson]

Zoot Katz wrote:
> On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 08:40:26 GMT, through a puddle of drool, Freeper,
> "Bill Sornson" pecked this devastating wedgie:
>
>> Zoot Katz wrote:
>>> On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 07:13:06 GMT, "Bill Sornson"
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Snooty Putz wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 16:41:56 GMT, "Bill Sornson"
>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Quit your sniveling, *****.
>>>>
>>>>>> Snoot! That's twice you've gone to the sexual orientation flame
>>>>>> card before my first cup (manly mug) of coffee!
>>>>
>>>>> That's just plain old kennel talk, *****.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd tell you to "suck my ass" but you'd probably also interpret
>>>>> that to satisfy your fantasies.
>>>>
>>>> Ah, gotta love that Lefty Gentility. Class act today, Putzster.
>>>>
>>> Croak, toady.
>>
>> Break a leg, Clumso.
>>
> Gosh, I'm crushed. I hope you realise that you're now officially off
> my xmas list.

Don't you mean your /holiday/ list?!? We must be PC, don't you know...

Bill "guess I'll return the 25-year-old cognac I bought you" S.

 

[Zoot Katz]

On Sat, 03 Dec 2005 07:21:17 GMT, "Bill Sornson"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Bill "guess I'll return the 25-year-old cognac I bought you" S.

Just shove it up your ass.
--
zk

 

[Jeff Starr]

On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 23:15:58 -0800, Zoot Katz <[email protected]>
wrote:

>On Sat, 03 Dec 2005 04:29:06 GMT, "Mike Kruger"
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> Brooks, you're so predictable!
>>
>> I think if we all took a look at our own postings on this thread, we would
>>find that it's not just Brooks who's predictable. (I'm not leaving myself
>>out of this group.)
>>
>For all the back and forth exchanges, nobody's mind has been changed.
>
>That I have long detested the foreign policies, trade practises and
>mainstream culture of the USA is no secret. That I consider both its
>political parties pawns of the military industrial complex is a fact.
>I stand by my general condemnation of the entire country, its
>leadershit and power elite. I refuse to ever again visit the place and
>spit on its embassy whenever I pass. I reject any of our politicians
>who accept its machinations. I will be among the last to lament the
>eventual total demise of the USA.


So your condemning us all because of the Bush Administration, his
followers, and your out of control love affair with Sornson?

Of course, all this depends on your definition of demise. If you mean
a 180 degree turn around in policy and attitude, then I'm with you. If
you mean total destruction of us all, I doubt that it will stop at
the border. If we go, you go.

We will elect good leaders sometime in the future, the problem is,
their job may be nearly impossible. Correcting the mistakes and the
damage that has been done, will take many years. Five short years to
tear it down, maybe fifty to repair the damage.

Just like the "war" on drugs has done nothing to solve the drug
problem. Some of our current methods for lessening or eliminating
terrorism are misguided and are creating terrorists. After 9-11 we had
the opportunity to improve our alliances, possibly to organize a world
wide united front against the terrorists. As we know, the Bush
administration squandered that opportunity, dstroyed much of that
goodwill, and has actually strengthened hatred towards the USA.

I often wonder how many of these suicide bombers, and their cohorts,
were just average people who, although most likely harbored some
dislike or mild hatred of the USA, inspired by our recent actions have
or are becoming the commited terrorists of the present and future.

Jeff

 

[TomP]

Chalo wrote:

> Well, you have people all over the country claiming that our goons in
> Iraq are "brave" and "honorable", in the face of all contravening
> evidence.
>
> Chalo Colina

So what's your solution?

--
Tp,

-------- __o
----- -\<. -------- __o
--- ( )/ ( ) ---- -\<.
-------------------- ( )/ ( )
-----------------------------------------

No Lawsuit Ever Fixed A Moron...

 

[Roger Houston]

"Chalo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> OK, then substitute "racial and cultural prejudice" instead, which is
> interchangeable with "racism" for most people's purposes.

Chalo = "most people".

Yeah. Right.

 

[George Karabotsos]

Peter Cole wrote:
> Bob wrote:
>
>> Peter Cole wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Re: parallels between Iraq and Viet Nam, in Viet Nam we underestimated
>>> the resolve of the enemy and misunderstood their motivation.
>>>
>>> We have misjudged the resolve and the motives of the enemy in Iraq. Like
>>> Viet Nam, even if there may be a path to "victory", it will almost
>>> certainly be more expensive (in all costs) than defeat.
>>
>>
>>
>> I know you aren't the first to try to compare Vietnam and Iraq but like
>> all that do make that comparison, you're mistaking the vastly different
>> motivations of our opponents. There is a fundamental difference between
>> the radical Islamists we are fighting in Iraq and the Vietnamese we
>> opposed in Vietnam.
>>
>> Our Vietnamese opponents were focused on reuniting *their* country. Had
>> we never interfered in the domestic politics of Vietnam, the end result
>> would have been the same. North and South Vietnam would have been
>> reunited as simply Vietnam.
>>
>> Iraq is not Vietnam. The war in Iraq is between two groups of
>> foreigners fighting on Iraqi soil. One (us) is motivated by a desire to
>> stabilize the region for selfish economic reasons and at the same time
>> defend a people's right to self-determination
>
>
> I guess I wasn't clear. The only similarity I was describing was the
> misjudgment of resolve and motivation of the enemy. I understand that
> the motives are different.
>
> The administration expected the citizens of Iraq to welcome liberation
> from SH. That didn't happen. Former administrations expected N Vietnam
> to yield to superior military force. That didn't happen. The FAA worried
> about hijackings or bombings, not suicide squads. Our commanders in Iraq
> didn't expect suicide squads or a protracted guerrilla war either.
>
> Setting aside moral and legal issues, and leaving out the partisan
> finger pointing (not that those aren't important issues), on a pragmatic
> level, it's not unreasonable to expect the military chain of command
> (including the commander in chief) to understand what they're committing
> us to. In both wars they called things wrong and were surprised by the
> turn of events. That's just incompetence, doesn't matter whether you're
> a hawk or dove to see that.
>
> McNamara was wrong, Rumsfeld was wrong. Both overestimated what you can
> do with an army. We're doomed to repeat history.

I have two questions. How much is the US debt now days? For how long
the US economy can sustain this war?

George

 

[Roger Houston]

"George Karabotsos" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> I have two questions. How much is the US debt now days? For how long the
> US economy can sustain this war?

Well, we could tell you, but then you'd have to kill us.

Or something like that.

 

[[email protected]]

[email protected] wrote:
> Mark Hickey wrote:
>
> >
> > Frank, I really can't imagine a world where we reward such horrendous
> > behavior by paying them off. Can you REALLY suggest that without
> > following that approach to its logical conclusion? We'd only have to
> > pay off every despot in the world, since they'd have a) no fear of
> > reprisal, and b) a profit motive for outrageous behavior.
>
> Mark, what are we doing with China? (In fact, what are _you_ doing
> with China?)
>
> What are we doing with Saudi Arabia?
>
> What are we doing with North Korea?
>
> What are we doing with Iran?
>
> The list goes on and on. There are many despots in the world, some
> worse than others. We don't invade them all. We use an entire range
> of tactics to try to influence behavior. Those tactics include things
> like those I listed, and more.
>
> Well, in _some_ cases we try to influence behavior, anyway. In other
> cases, we just shovel money at them for their oil, or for their cheap
> labor in welding titanium, and we pretend their citizens are treated
> well enough. We ignore their anti-western ideologies, we ignore their
> oppression of other countries (like Tibet). Basically, money trumps
> morality. If they have the titanium tubes we can make money off of, we
> ignore their terrible records. ...
>
> ...But to you, it's better to spend trillions to invade Iraq - while,
> simultaneously, it's somehow better to trade with China.
>
> It's actually a combination of "might makes right" and "money makes
> right."

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Speaking of doing business with China - This short article is from
today's paper:

"U. N. Inspector: Torture widespread in China"

"Beijing - He Depu, a Chinese democracy activist, was forced to lie
still on a bed in a cold room for 85 days. Others told of being beaten
with electric batons or sticks, and of sleepless interrogations that
went on for weeks. The U. N.'s first torture investigator to visit
China said Friday that torture, while on the decline, is still
widespread. During the landmark two-week visit, Manfred Nowak met 30
detainees held in Beijing, Tibet and the Muslim-majority region of
Xinjiang. Nowak also met with victims' families and held talks with
top Chinese prosecutors and justice officials."

That's it. Not a big article. Kind of buried, in fact.

Of course, if you ask Cheney, they misused the word "torture." Those
techniques probably don't involve massive organ failure, after all.

And besides, there's titanium to be welded.

So there's no need to invade _that_ despotic country.

- Frank Krygowski

 

[George Karabotsos]

Roger Houston wrote:
> "George Karabotsos" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>I have two questions. How much is the US debt now days? For how long the
>>US economy can sustain this war?
>
>
> Well, we could tell you, but then you'd have to kill us.
>
LOL I am Canadian, we do not kill people We just follow the US around
and setup field hospitals and water purification plants, ROFL.

I have to admit though I like the exchange rate of the CA$ vs the US$.
I can now buy most of my cycling equipment online without worrying too
much on the exchange. Especially in the winter were the LBS have almost
nothing in stock

George

 

[Zoot Katz]

On Sat, 03 Dec 2005 15:31:01 GMT, Jeff Starr <[email protected]>
wrote:

>So your condemning us all because of the Bush Administration, his
>followers,

And Clinton and Reagan and Nixon and Johnson. I think Carter was the
last decent human being to have held that position

By "eventual total demise", I meant that all empires in history have
fallen.

That the USA is an imperialist nation on the world scene and a police
state at home is too obvious to be denied. The only thing that can
bring it down will be a greater monster and I'm afraid that thing is
its citizens. Given their mindset, it ain't gonna be a "velvet
revolution".

>and your out of control love affair with Sornson?

Who?
--
zk

 

[Roger Houston]

"George Karabotsos" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>>
> LOL I am Canadian, we do not kill people We just follow the US around
> and setup field hospitals and water purification plants, ROFL.

You're our 51st State, and our 25th poorest State, in practice if not in
name.

But I like Canucks. Weird sense of humor. My "we could tell you but then
you'd have to kill us" reference was a parody of a line from a movie, "Top
Gun".

 

[Nuck 'n Futz]

Zoot Katz wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Dec 2005 15:31:01 GMT, Jeff Starr <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> So your condemning us all because of the Bush Administration, his
>> followers,
>
> And Clinton and Reagan and Nixon and Johnson. I think Carter was the
> last decent human being to have held that position.

Yeah, hostages and gas lines and rampant inflation and high unemployment --
"malaise" -- good times!

Not shocked, N&F

 

[Zoot Katz]

On Sat, 03 Dec 2005 18:04:49 GMT, "Nuck 'n Futz" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>>> So your condemning us all because of the Bush Administration, his
>>> followers,
>>
>> And Clinton and Reagan and Nixon and Johnson. I think Carter was the
>> last decent human being to have held that position.
>
>Yeah, hostages and gas lines and rampant inflation and high unemployment --
>"malaise" -- good times!
>
It just goes to show that conscience and humanitarian ideals aren't
high on the list of requirements for holding the job of president.
--
zk

 

[Cheto]

"TomP" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Chalo wrote:
>
>> Well, you have people all over the country claiming that our goons in
>> Iraq are "brave" and "honorable", in the face of all contravening
>> evidence.
>>
>> Chalo Colina
>
> So what's your solution?

They don't have a solution. They don't care what happens in Iraq as long as
it makes Bush look bad.

Cheto

 

[George Karabotsos]

Roger Houston wrote:
> "George Karabotsos" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>LOL I am Canadian, we do not kill people We just follow the US around
>>and setup field hospitals and water purification plants, ROFL.
>
>
> You're our 51st State, and our 25th poorest State, in practice if not in
> name.
Last time you tried, war of 1812, you guys failed.

>
> But I like Canucks. Weird sense of humor.
Not if you are a canuck

> My "we could tell you but then
> you'd have to kill us" reference was a parody of a line from a movie, "Top
> Gun".
I still do not get it :/ *points to "Weird sense of humor*

BTW anyone knows the latest figure on the US debt and maybe the current
yearly deficit?

George

 

[Neil Brooks]

George Karabotsos <[email protected]> wrote:

>BTW anyone knows the latest figure on the US debt and maybe the current
>yearly deficit?

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

$8 trillion. I'm rolling up my pennies right now....

Basic annual budget deficit info:

http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=1944&sequence=0#table1-1

Can we count on your support?
--
Live simply so that others may simply live