Riis says Ulrich can still join team!

[Jay Tegeder]

Like I said, I'm not going to change any opinions. I'm guessing you didn't vote for Bush and I'm
guessing you never will. The whole anti war protest is nothing but anti Bush as I mentioned. If you
were such a good international affairs analyst, I'm sure Carter could have used you when he screwed
up Iran. Or, Clinton could have used you when he devised his Sunshine Policy for North Korea. You
know, the policy that gave them economic aid while letting them build up their nuclear program. In
essence, Bush is the only President with the fortitude to take on thses problems instead of passing
them on the future Presidents like Carter and Clinton did. Both of them are squaking now in order to
put their failed foreign policy blunders in a better light. History will not be kind to them. Carter
will be remembered as one of the worst Presidents of all time with double digit inflation and
interest rates plus a very weak military filled with failures such as the failed rescue attempt of
the hostages in Iran. Clinton will be remembered for Somalia and "Blackhawk Down". Plus the slashing
of the defense, CIA and FBI. Oh yeah, he'll go down as the second President to be Impeached...

No matter how they try to make themselves look better, history will prove them to be inept in
Carter's case and criminal in Clinton's case.

BTW, CBS wanted Rsuh Limbaugh to do the point-counter point with Clinton on CBS. Old Bill knew Rush
would eat his lunch so he vetoed that idea and begged for Dole.

"Kurgan Gringioni" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> "Jay Tegeder" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > So, you're saying NK will have a megaton bomb in four days? Patience man, patience... You will
> > find that things will progress rapidly...
>
>
>
> It is stupid.
>
> Why not wait until the forces tied up in the Middle East are freed up before stopping heavy fuel
> oil shipments (provoking N. Korea to start up the reactor)?
>
>
>
>
> > Stick to bike racing and let the professionals worry about international affairs.
>
>
> Professionals such as yourself?
>
> That type of sentiment would be more at home in the type of totalitarian regime we seek to depose
> (Saddam Hussein).
>
>
> >You wouldn't be free to state your opinion in Iraq. Plus, if you were a member of the Iraqi
> >Olympic bike team and you didn't win a medal, Uday might have a few things for you...
>
>
>
> Not even Bush Sr. is comfortable with the way his son is handling things.
>
> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-605441,00.html

 

[Alan Atwood]

Yup. Don't expect to see any info until about May or so; but it's on for '03!

Alan

Ronde Chimp <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> Anybody heard any word about Green Mtn Stage Race? Is it a go?
>
> Thanks, Ronde Chimp

 

[Kurgan Gringion]

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

> Clinton will be remembered for Somalia and "Blackhawk Down".

Bush Sr. 'invaded' Somalia 2 weeks before Clinton took office.

 

[Jay Tegeder]

You don't seem to get it do you... The rogue nations hate us because we are a free country. Our
freedom is a direct threat to their totalitarian regimes. Whether you want to believe it or not, we
are the shining light in the World along with Western Europe. We have freedom and the ability to
express our different views. The rest of the World isn't against us in this matter. Only the vocal
minority, just like in the USA. You've got to realize that Carter created the mess in Iran when he
invited Rezza Pahlavi over for a hospital visit. One of the biggest foreign policy blunders of all
time... Yeah, we are going to take out threats to U.S. security. Any rogue nation that starts making
nuclear bombs will be taken out. Do you really want a brief case nuke bomb showing up in your
neighborhood someday? The threats are only going to get worse unless something is done to stop
terrorism. Clinton didn't have the guts to take on the problem. He was to busy trying to figure out
a way to ressurect his tarnished image. Be thankful we finally have a President who takes his job
seriously.

le gopheur <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> On 11 Mar 2003 04:45:46 -0800, [email protected] (Jay Tegeder) wrote:
>
> thanks jay, you have confirmed everything that i said in my last post....
>
> >W's job is to protect the U.S.
> funny that the UN Security Council (i.e. the REST of the world) doesn't agree with his methods for
> doing so. just the rah-rah crowd actually thinks what he is doing is helping us in the long run.
>
> >No one wants to go to war.
> then why the military build up in the mid east and now another small "token" one near NK? we just
> doing that to "scare" them into backing down? smells like war preparations to me. ( granted the
> build up near NK, isn't that big yet)
>
> > Do you want your kids to live in a World of constant threat levels? Orange one day, yellow the
> > next? The fact is, W is talking about rogue nations like Iraq, North Korea and Iran.
>
> the USA's "might-makes-right-we-are-the-world's-bully" policies are THE reason for those orange
> and yellow alerts you mentioned. why in the hell do you think those "rogue" nations hate us so
> much and want to cause us harm? because our olympic basketball team beats them?
>
> >Interesting how Iran is fast approaching nuke bomb capability.
>
> yep, as covered in my last post and snipped by you in this one. i'll repost it again for you to
> ponder ---
>
> "...so anytime someone else would like to acquire equal military fire power, or at least have SOME
> weapons in their arsenal to make it a fair fight, it's our job to crush and stop them immediately,
> right? after all, we are the defenders of freedom, and only use military force when we have
> exhausted all other peaceful means first, right?"
>
> >Keep living in your little dreamland...
> not so sure who's living in a dreamland here. the majority of the world seems to think this war is
> not needed, except for the rah-rahs.
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - the problem is that the
> "rah-rah" USA crowd is much too busy worrying about the symptoms
> (current situation) to step back and see the cause of why those
> countries hate the USA in the first place, and "the cause" was
> the point of my original post. (re-read it if you missed
> it)
>
> simple cause and effect. USA bullies. rouge nations hate. USA bullies some more to keep them in
> line. rogue nations hate us some more. it's a never ending spiral.
>
> and the only way to end such a spiral is when the bully swallows his pride, and attempts to
> compromise with the little guy. I can assure you that the little guy getting his ass kicked sure
> as hell isn't EVER going initiate this process.
>
> to sum it up. It's time for the USA to stop the bullying and posturing and military build up B.S.,
> and start finding a mature way, that the rest of the world agrees with, to solve these problems.
>
> gopher

 

[Kurgan Gringion]

"Jay Tegeder" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> You don't seem to get it do you... The rogue nations hate us because we are a free country. Our
> freedom is a direct threat to their totalitarian regimes. Whether you want to believe it or not,
> we are the shining light in the World along with Western Europe.

Mmmm hmmm.

That is why we 'rescued' Kuwait from one totalitarian regime (Saddam) so that it could be restored
to its former totalitarian regime (emir of Kuwait)?

Or why Saudi Arabia is ignored in the war vs. terrorism despite the fact that:

1) 15 of the 19 9/11 terrorists were Saudi
2) Al Qaeda is primarily funded by wealthy Saudis
3) Osama bin Laden was left alone by SA as long as he promised to leave the House of Saud alone
4) OBL is from Saudi Arabia and made his fortune there
5) the culture and government is based on the fundamentalist Waahabi sect. Schoolgirls burned to
death in a dormitory a few months ago because the religious police refused to let them outside of
the burning building (they were not dressed appropriately).

?

Freedom indeed. Our government protects Saudi Arabia because their government will keep the
oil flowing if we do. It's not about freedom, or terrorism. It's about keeping the Western
Economy going.

Saddam Hussein has been targeted not because he is a terrorist. There are 1000 times more links from
9/11 to Saudi Arabia than there is to Iraq (none). Saddam Hussein is targeted because he desires to
control the Middle Eastern oil flow to the West.

 

[Tomas Bystrom]

In article <[email protected]>, Jay Tegeder wrote:
> The rogue nations hate us because we are a free country. Our freedom is a direct threat to their
> totalitarian regimes.

...and therefore the converse must be true. Sorry, but logic does not work that way. We should not
forget that the free countries of now has through the history repeatedly tried to impose their
beliefs on others, with more or even more violence. We simply don't have a universal 'right' and a
'wrong' way of life. I fail to see that the rogue nations will overthrow our system and impose their
totalitarian regimes on US and/or Western Europe. When the Soviet union still were going for
expansion I would've seen it otherwise. I will not deny that US have a justification for being
catious regarding terrorist threats. However, I don't agree that attacking Iraq is the way to go to
lessen this threat. There are many other countries with bigger arsenals that don't like US much. I
will not say that the Iraqi regime is good for its people, there are many tidbits that will refute
that. However, the attack does not seem to have the liberation of the people as a goal - but I may
well be wrong.

/Tomas

--
Caps and foobar are normally not parts of my address.

 

[Stewart Fleming]

Jay Tegeder wrote:
> the shining light in the World along with Western Europe. We have

If you represent a shining light, then son, I have to tell you that the light is shining out of
your ****.

 

[Jay Tegeder]

Your effort to bolster your position with some facts about the terrorists being Saudis doesn't hold
up. Those Saudis hate the royal family. I'll admit that U.S. policy toward Saudi Arabia and Kuwait
is about oil. It always has been. Under Carter and Clinton, our close ties to the Saudis and Kuwait
were all about oil. Don't get the idea though that their forms of government will last either. If
democratic forces take on the royal families in both Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, don't expect Bush to
give aid and comfort to the royals. Once freedom in Iraq spreads, other nations will follow. Iran is
close to that move now. BTW, OBL isn't a Saudi, but his family did make their fortune there.

"Kurgan Gringioni" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> "Jay Tegeder" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > You don't seem to get it do you... The rogue nations hate us because we are a free country. Our
> > freedom is a direct threat to their totalitarian regimes. Whether you want to believe it or not,
> > we are the shining light in the World along with Western Europe.
>
>
>
> Mmmm hmmm.
>
> That is why we 'rescued' Kuwait from one totalitarian regime (Saddam) so that it could be restored
> to its former totalitarian regime (emir of Kuwait)?
>
> Or why Saudi Arabia is ignored in the war vs. terrorism despite the fact that:
>
> 1) 15 of the 19 9/11 terrorists were Saudi
> 2) Al Qaeda is primarily funded by wealthy Saudis
> 3) Osama bin Laden was left alone by SA as long as he promised to leave the House of Saud alone
> 4) OBL is from Saudi Arabia and made his fortune there
> 5) the culture and government is based on the fundamentalist Waahabi sect. Schoolgirls burned to
> death in a dormitory a few months ago because the religious police refused to let them outside
> of the burning building (they were not dressed appropriately).
>
> ?
>
> Freedom indeed. Our government protects Saudi Arabia because their government will keep the
> oil flowing if we do. It's not about freedom, or terrorism. It's about keeping the Western
> Economy going.
>
> Saddam Hussein has been targeted not because he is a terrorist. There are 1000 times more links
> from 9/11 to Saudi Arabia than there is to Iraq (none). Saddam Hussein is targeted because he
> desires to control the Middle Eastern oil flow to the West.

 

[Kurgan Gringion]

"Jay Tegeder" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Your effort to bolster your position with some facts about the terrorists being Saudis doesn't
> hold up. Those Saudis hate the royal family.

And therein lies the rub.

We prop up the governments of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, non-democratic regimes both.

Our military bases in those countries are meant to preserve the status quo. Al Qaeda attacked us
because of those bases on "Holy Land".

>Don't get the idea though that their forms of government will last either. If democratic forces
>take on the royal families in both Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, don't expect Bush to give aid and
>comfort to the royals.

LOL

What do you think we've been doing?

If we were to act in accordance with our own democratic principles, we would not prop up the
governments of Saudi Arabia or Kuwait. Then the aggreived tribes of the Middle East would be left to
fight amongst themselves.

The United States is now a target because we have chosen sides. We will prop up the oppressive Saudi
government. They will turn up the oil flow by 4million bbl/day when the hostilities start. In 1991
(Gulf War 1), they did the same.

 

[Jay Tegeder]

Well son... I'm 45 so you might be using that term incorrectly. Why don't you go live in Iraq,
Libya, the Congo, Columbia, Bangladesh or some other third World country then. Let me tell you
Stewie, you'll have some things shoved up your ****. But then, you would probably enjoy it...

Stewart Fleming <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Jay Tegeder wrote:
> > the shining light in the World along with Western Europe. We have
>
> If you represent a shining light, then son, I have to tell you that the light is shining out of
> your ****.

 

[Jay Tegeder]

Give Bush some time and the benefit of the doubt. He's not like Carter, Clinton, Reagan or Bush 41.
When democratic clouds are on the horizon in countries like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, etc, he's not
going to step in and prtect the royals. As I said before, patience. As for the terrorist attacks,
the Islamic Fundamentalists hate us becasue we are infidels for believing in Christianity. That fact
will alwyas remain. We can let Khalid Sheik Mohammed go along with the other terrorists locked up at
Guantanamo. We can send money to OBL to appease him. We can leave the Middle East and drill in
ANWAR. (Actually, we don't get that much oil for the Mideast). It won't matter, OBL and his
followers hate our freedom, our wealth and our religion.

"Kurgan Gringioni" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> "Jay Tegeder" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Your effort to bolster your position with some facts about the terrorists being Saudis doesn't
> > hold up. Those Saudis hate the royal family.
>
>
> And therein lies the rub.
>
> We prop up the governments of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, non-democratic regimes both.
>
> Our military bases in those countries are meant to preserve the status quo. Al Qaeda attacked us
> because of those bases on "Holy Land".
>
> >Don't get the idea though that their forms of government will last either. If democratic forces
> >take on the royal families in both Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, don't expect Bush to give aid and
> >comfort to the royals.
>
>
> LOL
>
> What do you think we've been doing?
>
> If we were to act in accordance with our own democratic principles, we would not prop up the
> governments of Saudi Arabia or Kuwait. Then the aggreived tribes of the Middle East would be left
> to fight amongst themselves.
>
> The United States is now a target because we have chosen sides. We will prop up the oppressive
> Saudi government. They will turn up the oil flow by 4million bbl/day when the hostilities start.
> In 1991 (Gulf War 1), they did the same.

 

[Kyle Legate]

"Jay Tegeder" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> Well son... I'm 45 so you might be using that term incorrectly. Why don't you go live in Iraq,
> Libya, the Congo, Columbia, Bangladesh or some other third World country then. Let me tell you
> Stewie, you'll have some things shoved up your ****. But then, you would probably enjoy it...
>
You sure don't write like you're 45.

 

[Kurgan Gringion]

"Jay Tegeder" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Give Bush some time and the benefit of the doubt. He's not like Carter, Clinton, Reagan or Bush
> 41. When democratic clouds are on the horizon in countries like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, etc, he's
> not going to step in and prtect the royals.

That is a laugh. After Saddam is gone, the military bases will remain. To protect the royals.

>As I said before, patience. As for the terrorist attacks, the Islamic Fundamentalists hate us
>becasue we are infidels for believing in Christianity.

Perhaps, but that's not why we were attacked.

We are a target because we maintain military bases on "Holy Land" (Saudi Arabia and Kuwait).

 

[Nick Burns]

And why do you suppose that is?

The objective is stability in the region, and all of the benefits that implies, including
economic factors.

>"Kurgan Gringioni" <[email protected]> wrote in
message:

<snip>

>After Saddam is gone, the military bases will remain. To protect the
royals.

<snip

 

[Kurgan Gringion]

"Nick Burns" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> And why do you suppose that is?
>
> The objective is stability in the region, and all of the benefits that implies, including economic
> factors.

Sure.

The propoganda is that we're going in there to promote democracy (freedom).

BTW, the unemployment rate in Saudi Arabia is more than 30%. The royals really know how to run an
economy with all that oil cash. It ends up being a fertile ground for terrorist recruitment -
totalitarian government, unemployed young men with no prospects, a foreign entity which props the
whole thing up.

 

[Tom Kunich]

"Kurgan Gringioni" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
>
> That is a laugh. After Saddam is gone, the military bases will
remain. To protect the royals.

I think what we ought to do is to let anarchy rein in an area of the world that supplies 60% of the
world's energy supply. That would make a lot of sense.

 

[Jay Tegeder]

Ouch... That one hurt real bad... Stewart took a couple of cheap shots at me... I have a right to
defend myself the same way he attacked me. Anyway, F U D!ckhe@d!!! How's that for a 45 year old?

"Kyle Legate" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> "Jay Tegeder" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > Well son... I'm 45 so you might be using that term incorrectly. Why don't you go live in Iraq,
> > Libya, the Congo, Columbia, Bangladesh or some other third World country then. Let me tell you
> > Stewie, you'll have some things shoved up your ****. But then, you would probably enjoy it...
> >
> You sure don't write like you're 45.

 

[Garry Allen]

[email protected] (Jay Tegeder) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> Well son... I'm 45 so you might be using that term incorrectly. Why don't you go live in Iraq,
> Libya, the Congo, Columbia, Bangladesh or some other third World country then. Let me tell you
> Stewie, you'll have some things shoved up your ****. But then, you would probably enjoy it...
>
Why would he want to? He is a citizen of a country where the average IQ is raised whenever one of
its citizens emigrates across the Tasman and at least doesnt do the yessir, nossir, three bags full
sir whenever George W makes a phone call for the benefit of the TV cameras. And NZ reporters have
got John Howard to sort of tell the truth about the Australian goverrment's intentions in any war on
Iraq instead of having John Howard squirm on about hypothetical situations and the threat to
Australians from Iraq, a nation which is on almost the opposite side of the world to us. Garry Allen
ps A senior intelligence officer in the Office of National Assessment, an Australian government
department responsible for assessing all the intelligence gathered by Australian intelligence and
that which is shared with the Australian Government by the US and great Britain, resigned this
week. He was a member of the unit responsible for assessing the threat to Australia by Iraq. He
said that he seen no evidence to support a link between the Iraqi Government and Al Qaeda, that
there was no justification for Australia to go to war with Iraq (being as we are, one of only 3
countries to actually commit troops to the Coalition of the Willing) and that by committing
troops, the Australian government was actually increasing the threat to Australians from
extremists in our region http://www.smh.com.au/text/articles/2003/03/12/1047431099821.htm

> Stewart Fleming <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> > Jay Tegeder wrote:
> > > the shining light in the World along with Western Europe. We have
> >
> > If you represent a shining light, then son, I have to tell you that the light is shining out of
> > your ****.

 

[Kyle Legate]

"Jay Tegeder" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Ouch... That one hurt real bad... Stewart took a couple of cheap shots at me... I have a right to
> defend myself the same way he attacked me. Anyway, F U D!ckhe@d!!! How's that for a 45 year old?
>
You also have the right to show some class, take the high road, whatever you want to call it. At
least now we know which road you like to travel most frequently.

 

[Jay Tegeder]

You call "yanking someone's chain" as taking the "high road?" I think that's called; "The pot
calling the kettle black." You are a "low road" punk...

"Kyle Legate" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> "Jay Tegeder" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Ouch... That one hurt real bad... Stewart took a couple of cheap shots at me... I have a
> > right to defend myself the same way he attacked me. Anyway, F U D!ckhe@d!!! How's that for a
> > 45 year old?
> >
> You also have the right to show some class, take the high road, whatever you want to call it. At
> least now we know which road you like to travel most frequently.