Re: Bush/Hitler creates another phony "terrorist" incident to suppress us...

[John Ousterhout]

On 27 Dec 2003 17:09:52 -0800, wrote:

>Well, it looks like President Bush (Or Hitler, as he's known among certain
>circles) has staged another Hollywood style "Terrorist Plot" that he can use to
>destroy our civil rights.

Godwin's law is invoked.
http://info.astrian.net/jargon/terms/g/Godwin_s_Law.html

- John Ousterhout-

[C J Campbell]

"John Ousterhout" >
wrote in message ...
| On 27 Dec 2003 17:09:52 -0800, wrote:
|
| >Well, it looks like President Bush (Or Hitler, as he's known among
certain
| >circles) has staged another Hollywood style "Terrorist Plot" that he can
use to
| >destroy our civil rights.
|
| Godwin's law is invoked.
| http://info.astrian.net/jargon/terms/g/Godwin_s_Law.html

Can you invoke Godwin's law for ridiculing conspiracy theorists?

[Larry Smith]

"John Ousterhout" >
wrote in message ...
> On 27 Dec 2003 17:09:52 -0800, wrote:
>
> >Well, it looks like President Bush (Or Hitler, as he's known among
certain
> >circles) has staged another Hollywood style "Terrorist Plot" that he can
use to
> >destroy our civil rights.
>
> Godwin's law is invoked.
> http://info.astrian.net/jargon/terms/g/Godwin_s_Law.html
>
> - John Ousterhout-

Aw, come on. Let him have his cause. He's still scorched by the fires
and angry. Besides, other than painting a goofy little mustache on Bush,
he's got a point.

[Larry Smith]

> wrote in message ...
I think that, despite some missteps, President Bush has done an
> excellent job in combating terrorism since Sept 11, 2001.

Like the exec branch taking over the legislative and judicial. Like
seizing private citizens and imprisoning them without trial, without formal
charges?

[Jay Honeck]

> <sarcsasm off>

Too subtle, obviously.

Must be cuz it's misspelled? ;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[RobertR237]

In article >, writes:

>
>Did I somehow get the syntax incorrect with the <sarcasm off> flag? Was
>there
>supposed to be an underline instead of a space or something?
>
>For everyone who didn't get it:
>
>The story is true. However, my introduction of it was "tongue in cheek," a
>satirical response to those who believe that there is no threat from
>terrorists,
>and that the Bush administration is using the specter of that threat to
>deprive
>US citizens of the rights and privileges enumerated in the Constitution.
>
>I believe that there is a real terrorist threat. I believe that the
>comparatively few restrictions on our civil liberties are justified by those
>threats. I think that, despite some missteps, President Bush has done an
>excellent job in combating terrorism since Sept 11, 2001.
>
>

Bush is really caught in the "NO WIN" situation no matter what happens. If a
plot is foiled and nothing happens (the French Airline grounding) then he is
called for over-reacting and crying wolf. On the other hand, if he does
nothing and the plane had been used as a weapon yet again, he would be slammed
for not having done something to prevent the attack. Who would have believed
and supported the President if he had recommended invasion of Afganistan prior
to 9/11 because he believed the Al Quida was planning an attack? And how many
now are critical because he saw the same threat from Iraq and opted to prevent
it?


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[AlwaysLearning]

You know, kind of like Abraham Lincoln or that other villain, Franklin
Roosevelt. I agree with you, Bush just made up that whole World Trade
Center attack/3000 civilians killed, thing.

(note the mild sarcasm)

Next subject, is Larry Smith a worse A&P or political scientist?

[clare @ snyder.on .ca]

On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 06:44:56 -0500, "Larry Smith"
> wrote:

>
> wrote in message ...
> I think that, despite some missteps, President Bush has done an
>> excellent job in combating terrorism since Sept 11, 2001.
>
>Like the exec branch taking over the legislative and judicial. Like
>seizing private citizens and imprisoning them without trial, without formal
>charges?
>
And deporting CANADIAN citizens to Iraq or wherever, instead of back
to Canada???

[Stan's News]

All,

Bush is a bum, a skull and bones moron...., Cheney's stooge, and by the way
Cheney is a bum too. Democrats, Republicans are all bums. Politics is the
biggest bunch of bull**** and the boys are running the show.

Stan K.


"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:aICHb.672733$HS4.4769839@attbi_s01...
> > <sarcsasm off>
>
> Too subtle, obviously.
>
> Must be cuz it's misspelled? ;-)
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

[Top Sirloin]

On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 06:44:56 -0500, "Larry Smith" > wrote:

> Like
>seizing private citizens and imprisoning them without trial, without formal
>charges?

If this is true you should have no problem finding us lots of references for
this statement Larry.


--
Scott Johnson
"Here's an idea of how you can change global events: quit smoking
pot long enough to register to vote!" -ddt

[Ron Wanttaja]

On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 11:49:25 -0500, "Stan's News" >
wrote:

>All,
>
>Bush is a bum, a skull and bones moron...., Cheney's stooge, and by the way
>Cheney is a bum too. Democrats, Republicans are all bums. Politics is the
>biggest bunch of bull**** and the boys are running the show.

I like the saying, "I never vote, it only encourages them...." :-)

Ron Wanttaja

[Rich S.]

"Ron Wanttaja" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 11:49:25 -0500, "Stan's News" >
> wrote:
>
> >All,
> >
> >Bush is a bum, a skull and bones moron...., Cheney's stooge, and by the
way
> >Cheney is a bum too. Democrats, Republicans are all bums. Politics is
the
> >biggest bunch of bull**** and the boys are running the show.
>
> I like the saying, "I never vote, it only encourages them...." :-)
>
> Ron Wanttaja

You guys could start a new political party - United Anarchists of the World
(UAW).

Rich S.

[Ron Wanttaja]

On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 10:15:27 -0800, "Rich S." >
wrote:

>"Ron Wanttaja" > wrote in message

>>>
>>>Bush is a bum, a skull and bones moron...., Cheney's stooge, and by the
>>>way Cheney is a bum too. Democrats, Republicans are all bums. Politics is
>>>the biggest bunch of bull**** and the boys are running the show.
>>
>> I like the saying, "I never vote, it only encourages them...." :-)
>
>You guys could start a new political party - United Anarchists of the World
>(UAW).

Well, anarchy is better than no government at all... :-)

Ron Wanttaja

[Rich S.]

"Ron Wanttaja" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 10:15:27 -0800, "Rich S."
>
> wrote:
>
> >You guys could start a new political party - United Anarchists of the
World
> >(UAW).
>
> Well, anarchy is better than no government at all... :-)
>
> Ron Wanttaja

Choosing the lesser of two weevils, I'd say that it may be a bit difficult
for anarchist to agree on a candidate.

Rich "subtlety ain't my forté" S.

[Unusual Attitude]

wrote:

>Did I somehow get the syntax incorrect with the <sarcasm off> flag? Was there
>supposed to be an underline instead of a space or something?

Funny, this sarcasm thing. One man's sarcasm is another's "Right on!"

-- UA --

[Wingsnaprop]

Did Hitler or IS Bush ( Who in my Honest Opinion is the GREATEST
PRESIDENT WE'VE HAD SINCE TEDDY ROOSEVELT) Building an Airplane? I
Didn't think so... Now what implications does that have for this
thread's appropriateness...... hmmmm can we figure it out together?

[Larry Smith]

"Top Sirloin" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 06:44:56 -0500, "Larry Smith" >
wrote:
>
> > Like
> >seizing private citizens and imprisoning them without trial, without
formal
> >charges?
>
> If this is true you should have no problem finding us lots of references
for
> this statement Larry.

Now I want you to read this, Scott, especially the last paragraph with the
words of Founding Father, James Madison. It is entitled "No Charges and No
Trial; Just Jail": http://www.cato.org/dailys/08-21-03.html

[pacplyer]

Larry, Larry, Larry,

While I hate to agree with a guy who claims to have hardware in lunar
and martian orbit, for example, who always posts in invisible
ink,)

And while a lot of the Patriot Act alarms me… It seems to me Larry,
there was plenty of precedence for locking up "the usual suspects"
into Japanese internment camps during WWII. These were US citizens
not charged with anything or afforded legal counsel. We won that war,
remember?

When 100% of your terrorists are mid-eastern males it's just dumb to
be deep cavity-searching little old ladies from Pasadena that don't
have the physical strength to take over a flight in the name of fair
play. This kind of PC where everybody gets a lawyer prior to lengthy
interrogation is going to result in another intelligence shortfall.
And that is going to result in a dirty bomb going off in one of our
harbors.

But you, predictably, would prefer an explosion to some lawyer being
out of work.

pacplyer


"Larry Smith" >
> wrote:
> >
> > > Like
> > >seizing private citizens and imprisoning them without trial, without
> >> formal
> > >charges?

> >
> > If this is true you should have no problem finding us lots of references
> > for
> > this statement Larry.
>
> Now I want you to read this, Scott, especially the last paragraph with the
> words of Founding Father, James Madison. It is entitled "No Charges and No
> Trial; Just Jail": http://www.cato.org/dailys/08-21-03.html

[Larry Smith]

"pacplyer" > wrote in message
om...
> Larry, Larry, Larry,
>
> While I hate to agree with a guy who claims to have hardware in lunar
> and martian orbit, for example, who always posts in invisible
> ink,)
>
> And while a lot of the Patriot Act alarms me. It seems to me Larry,
> there was plenty of precedence

Are you talking about "precedents"? No the Japanese internment was not
precedent and every legal scholar in the country, including the courts,
agrees that THAT was illegal and violated core mandates of the United States
Constitution.

It was really a hate reaction after Pearl Harbor.

for locking up "the usual suspects"
> into Japanese internment camps during WWII. These were US citizens
> not charged with anything or afforded legal counsel. We won that war,
> remember?
>
> When 100% of your terrorists are mid-eastern males

Jose Padilla is a black man from Chicago. And a federal court has already
said that Bush and that goofy attorney general whatshisname can't hold
Padilla without charging him and providing him due process. We won the war
against British who did that to us, remember?

Now you git, boy, unless you're building an aeroplane.

[BllFs6]

my main question is....

DID LARRY EVERY GET HIS LATCHES?

or is he still filling them outa a solid block of stainless steel?

lmao

BLLL

[Frank Stutzman]

pacplyer > wrote:

> When 100% of your terrorists are mid-eastern males it's just dumb to
> be deep cavity-searching little old ladies from Pasadena that don't
> have the physical strength to take over a flight in the name of fair
> play. This kind of PC where everybody gets a lawyer prior to lengthy
> interrogation is going to result in another intelligence shortfall.

Patrice Ford of the Portland Seven is, obviously, female.

Richard Reid (aka the "shoe bomber") is apparently Sri Lankan or British.
I don't consider Sri Lanka as a part of the Middle-East, but I am a bit
geographically challenged. If you think Britain is in the Middle-East
then you are more challenged than I am.

Jose Padilla, as already mentioned is American.

If the only people being searched were middle-eastern males, how long do
you think it would take for Al-Qaeda to recruit, say, some blond,
blue-eyed, Finnish female?

How much strength does it take for the "little old lady from Pasadena"
to attempt to smuggle aboard a bomb the size Richard Reid attempted to
use?

Frank Stutzman

[Richard Riley]

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 16:52:21 +0000 (UTC), Frank Stutzman
> wrote:

:pacplyer > wrote:
:
:> When 100% of your terrorists are mid-eastern males it's just dumb to
:> be deep cavity-searching little old ladies from Pasadena that don't
:> have the physical strength to take over a flight in the name of fair
:> play. This kind of PC where everybody gets a lawyer prior to lengthy
:> interrogation is going to result in another intelligence shortfall.
:
:Patrice Ford of the Portland Seven is, obviously, female.
:
:Richard Reid (aka the "shoe bomber") is apparently Sri Lankan or British.
:I don't consider Sri Lanka as a part of the Middle-East, but I am a bit
:geographically challenged. If you think Britain is in the Middle-East
:then you are more challenged than I am.

Richard Colvin Reid a/k/a/ Abdul-Raheem a/k/a Abdul Raheem, Abu
Ibrahim, is half British and half Jamaican.

And don't forget Anne-Marie Murphy, a pregnant Irish girl, who tried
to get on board an El Al flight in '86. Her boyfriend, Nezar Hindawi,
packed her bags, and included 7 lbs of explosives without telling her.

[pacplyer]

Richard Riley > wrote in message >...
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 16:52:21 +0000 (UTC), Frank Stutzman
> > wrote:
>
> :pacplyer > wrote:
> :
> :> When 100% of your terrorists are mid-eastern males it's just dumb to
> :> be deep cavity-searching little old ladies from Pasadena that don't
> :> have the physical strength to take over a flight in the name of fair
> :> play. This kind of PC where everybody gets a lawyer prior to lengthy
> :> interrogation is going to result in another intelligence shortfall.
> :
> :Patrice Ford of the Portland Seven is, obviously, female.
> :
> :Richard Reid (aka the "shoe bomber") is apparently Sri Lankan or British.
> :I don't consider Sri Lanka as a part of the Middle-East, but I am a bit
> :geographically challenged. If you think Britain is in the Middle-East
> :then you are more challenged than I am.
>
> Richard Colvin Reid a/k/a/ Abdul-Raheem a/k/a Abdul Raheem, Abu
> Ibrahim, is half British and half Jamaican.
>
> And don't forget Anne-Marie Murphy, a pregnant Irish girl, who tried
> to get on board an El Al flight in '86. Her boyfriend, Nezar Hindawi,
> packed her bags, and included 7 lbs of explosives without telling her.

Actually everybody, I was refering to the post 911 quagmire week where
all the terrorists involved were mid-eastern males and the concern was
that other sleepers were going to strike within days. The irony was
that FAA security refused to profile anybody. It made sense to a lot
of us that the Delta Captain threw off the SS passenger later because
both: he was a mid-eastern male, and possessed improper paperwork.
But that's a good point, race/immigrant background is not determinant.
Now it appears to be more along the lines of converts of extreme
religion. We need to be bugging mosques, not setting up more TFR's.
(let me just get under this manhole cover here....)


I should have said:
When 100% of your [WTC] terrorists are mid-eastern males it's just
dumb to
> :> be deep cavity-searching little old ladies from Pasadena that don't
> :> have the physical strength to take over a flight in the name of fair
> :> play. This kind of PC where everybody gets a lawyer prior to lengthy
> :> interrogation is going to result in another intelligence shortfall


pacplyer

[B2431]

>From:


>Did I somehow get the syntax incorrect with the <sarcasm off> flag? Was
>there
>supposed to be an underline instead of a space or something?
>

Actually there was a programming error on your part. You omitted the sarcasm on
flag. If you omit either the sacrasm on flag or sarcasm off flag the result is
a perpetual loop.

See? I did pass COBOL in 1976.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

[B2431]

>From: (BllFs6)
>Date: 12/31/2003 9:33 AM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>my main question is....
>
>DID LARRY EVERY GET HIS LATCHES?
>
>or is he still filling them outa a solid block of stainless steel?
>
>lmao
>
>BLLL
>

Occupational Therapy?

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

[B2431]

>From: "Stan's News"
>Date: 12/29/2003 10:49 AM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: <gVYHb.17$jR1.9@fe01>
>
>All,
>
>Bush is a bum, a skull and bones moron...., Cheney's stooge, and by the way
>Cheney is a bum too. Democrats, Republicans are all bums. Politics is the
>biggest bunch of bull**** and the boys are running the show.
>
>Stan K.
>
>

OK, you have made your criticism. Now what is your solution?

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

[B2431]

>From: "Rich S."
>Date: 12/29/2003 12:15 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>"Ron Wanttaja" > wrote in message
...
>> On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 11:49:25 -0500, "Stan's News" >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >All,
>> >
>> >Bush is a bum, a skull and bones moron...., Cheney's stooge, and by the
>way
>> >Cheney is a bum too. Democrats, Republicans are all bums. Politics is
>the
>> >biggest bunch of bull**** and the boys are running the show.
>>
>> I like the saying, "I never vote, it only encourages them...." :-)
>>
>> Ron Wanttaja
>
>You guys could start a new political party - United Anarchists of the World
>(UAW).
>
>Rich S.
>
How about UFO - United Fruitcakes Organization?

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

[Larry Smith]

> wrote in message ...
> In article >, Larry Smith says...
> >
> >
> >"pacplyer" > wrote in message
> om...
> >> Larry, Larry, Larry,
> >>
> >> While I hate to agree with a guy who claims to have hardware in lunar
> >> and martian orbit, for example, who always posts in invisible
> >> ink,)
>
> It's Acme's Disappearing Reappearing ink, thank you. And the lunar stuff
I
> designed isn't in orbit, it's on the surface. At least it's intact,
unlike
> Larry's brain.
>
> BTW, did you and BWB go on vacation together? He stopped posting on Sept
28,
> you disappeared on Sept 29th. Then you started posting again with the new
> return address on Dec 19th, he came back on Dec 21. Your IP shows you're
in the
> Direcway Southwest spot beam that covers Las Vegas. And you two are the
only
> ones here that don't like Sydney. Are you two neighbors or something?
>
> >>
> >> And while a lot of the Patriot Act alarms me. It seems to me Larry,
> >> there was plenty of precedence
> >
> >Are you talking about "precedents"? No the Japanese internment was not
> >precedent and every legal scholar in the country, including the courts,
> >agrees that THAT was illegal and violated core mandates of the United
States
> >Constitution.
> >
> >It was really a hate reaction after Pearl Harbor.
> >
>
> And what do the legal scholars say about Peter Burger and Herbert Haupt?
> American citizens, arrested on American soil, not having committed any
crime on
> American soil, one executed and the other (who cooperated, and turned
himself
> and his companions in) given 30 years by a military tribunal without
independent
> legal representation?
>
> The Supreme Court upheld it in Ex parte Quirin. Or don't you like "that"
SC?
> And the SC upheld Japanese internment in Korematsu v. Mott. Every legal
scholar
> may not like it, it may be ugly law, but neither one was ever overturned.
>
> The law is what the SC says it is. That's our system. If the SC says
that
> absolutely every aspect of our lives can be regulated by the Federal
Government
> under the commerce clause, it is, as it has been for the last 70 years
(though
> it looks like the 9th Circus is trying to put some limits on that. Now I
can
> smoke weed and build a machine gun in the privacy of my own beadroom!).
>
> If the SC says there's a constitutional right to sodomy, or to unequal
treatment
> by the government on the basis of race, there is. If the SC says you have
to
> put underwear on your head, shove pencils up your nose and say "wabbel" -
well,
> then you're all set, Larry.

Your law, like your tech, is junk, nameless. I'll do us up a little memo of
law showing how In re Quirin is not apt, although Bush is trying to rely on
it. I have already reported that the federal courts are closing in on Bush
and Ashcroft.

You must have slept through the last 20 years, triple-ass. Kinda like a
20th century Rip Van Winkle.

[pacplyer]

(B2431) wrote

> How about UFO - United Fruitcakes Organization?
>
> Dan, U. S. Air Farce, retarded



HO HO, HA HA. God you're witty. Did you retire as an E-2 by any chance?

pacplyer

[Richard Riley]

On 29 Dec 2003 17:08:41 -0800, (Wingsnaprop)
wrote:

:Did Hitler or IS Bush ( Who in my Honest Opinion is the GREATEST
:PRESIDENT WE'VE HAD SINCE TEDDY ROOSEVELT) Building an Airplane? I
:Didn't think so... Now what implications does that have for this
:thread's appropriateness...... hmmmm can we figure it out together?

If you go all the way back to the original post, it was about a report
that in Saudi Arabia they'd stopped a plot to use small planes filled
with explosives to crash into big planes taxiing for takeoff.

Granted, they weren't small HOMEBUILT planes, but the implication was
that it could lead to restrictions on all small planes, and that could
affect those of us that are building and flying small planes.

And Bush is a pilot. And so is his father.

[B2431]

>From: (pacplyer)
>Date: 1/1/2004 1:54 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
(B2431) wrote
>
>> How about UFO - United Fruitcakes Organization?
>>
>> Dan, U. S. Air Farce, retarded
>
>
>
>HO HO, HA HA. God you're witty. Did you retire as an E-2 by any chance?
>
>pacplyer
>
What would make you say that?
By the way I have met a retired E-1. He was medically retired due to service
related injuries.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

[pacplyer]

(B2431) wrote in message >...
> >From: (pacplyer)
> >Date: 1/1/2004 1:54 PM Central Standard Time
> >Message-id: >
> >
> (B2431) wrote
> >
> >> How about UFO - United Fruitcakes Organization?
> >>
> >> Dan, U. S. Air Farce, retarded
> >
> >
> >
> >HO HO, HA HA. God you're witty. Did you retire as an E-2 by any chance?
> >
> >pacplyer
> >
> What would make you say that?
> By the way I have met a retired E-1. He was medically retired due to service
> related injuries.
>
> Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

Well... you like to call people fruitcakes and loons or regulate their
free-speech right to use profanity, but then I see no postings from
you that would lead me to believe that you've ever done anything but
scrub the aeroclub latrine. Typing in "U. S. Air Force" in spread out
letters hoping someone will mistake you for a pilot ....is my guess of
what an E2 would do. ;-)

Am I right?

pacplyer

[Regnirps]

(pacplyer) wrote:

>> How about UFO - United Fruitcakes Organization?
>>
>> Dan, U. S. Air Farce, retarded

First time I have EVER seen anyone change quoted material to ridicule someone.
Very bad form.

-- Charlie Springer

[pacplyer]

Note: since "Dr. No" (name) "a" doesn't show up on google for me,
I'll have to tack this on to Larry's post. (responding to )

> > >"pacplyer" > wrote in message
> > om...
> > >> Larry, Larry, Larry,
> > >>
> > >> While I hate to agree with a guy who claims to have hardware in lunar
> > >> and martian orbit, for example, who always posts in invisible
> > >> ink,)
> >
> > It's Acme's Disappearing Reappearing ink, thank you. And the lunar stuff I
> > designed isn't in orbit, it's on the surface. At least it's intact, unlike
> > Larry's brain.

Ah ha, but... Just like Larry's brain, it doesn't work right? You
know, now I'm starting to believe you, Dr No (name)(secret scientist
"a.") Most of those Surveyors and Rangers crashed out of control or
shorted out on the surface right after contact. Then, let me guess...
your Martian project was the Deep Space 2 and the Mars Polar Lander.
Man, what big red dust clouds you've created, professor!

Why do I get the feeling your space "hardware" was a standard issue
ice-box rivet or something? And you forgot to plug the freezer in...
poor NASA! Did those go into the main external tank on the last STS
mission too? LOL!

> >
> > BTW, did you and BWB go on vacation together? He stopped posting on Sept 28,
> > you disappeared on Sept 29th. Then you started posting again with the new
> > return address on Dec 19th, he came back on Dec 21. Your IP shows you're in the
> > Direcway Southwest spot beam that covers Las Vegas. And you two are the
> only> > ones here that don't like Sydney. Are you two neighbors or something?
> >

As Howard Hughes said when asked if he really meant to fly the Spruce
Goose off the water: "You'll never know"

badplyer, er... pacwater...er

pacplyer!

(You mean with all your Cripto clearances, you can't figure this out?)

[[email protected]]

In article >, pacplyer says...
>
>Note: since "Dr. No" (name) "a" doesn't show up on google for me,
>I'll have to tack this on to Larry's post. (responding to )

Shazzam! Now it will appear for you.

>
>> > >"pacplyer" > wrote in message
>> > om...
>> > >> Larry, Larry, Larry,
>> > >>
>> > >> While I hate to agree with a guy who claims to have hardware in lunar
>> > >> and martian orbit, for example, who always posts in invisible
>> > >> ink,)
>> >
>> > It's Acme's Disappearing Reappearing ink, thank you. And the lunar stuff I
>> > designed isn't in orbit, it's on the surface. At least it's intact, unlike
>> > Larry's brain.
>
>Ah ha, but... Just like Larry's brain, it doesn't work right?

Not anymore, not for 20+ years or so. But it worked nicely for about 3 times
it's design life.

>You
>know, now I'm starting to believe you, Dr No (name)(secret scientist
>"a.") Most of those Surveyors and Rangers crashed out of control or
>shorted out on the surface right after contact. Then, let me guess...
>your Martian project was the Deep Space 2 and the Mars Polar Lander.
>Man, what big red dust clouds you've created, professor!

Ah, the Polar Impacter. No, go back a generation. I designed hardware that
worked, not this better faster cheaper crap that DT started.

>
>Why do I get the feeling your space "hardware" was a standard issue
>ice-box rivet or something? And you forgot to plug the freezer in...
>poor NASA! Did those go into the main external tank on the last STS
>mission too? LOL!

I never worked on Rockwell's shuttle. I worked on a couple of competing
proposals, though. Falling foam has been a problem since the first flight. I
never understood why they didn't just spray the foam on the INSIDE of the tank.
It wouldn't be subject to all those forces, and if any did fall off the turbo
pumps would chew it up easily.

>
>> >
>>> BTW, did you and BWB go on vacation together? He stopped posting on Sept 28,
>> > you disappeared on Sept 29th. Then you started posting again with the new
>>> return address on Dec 19th, he came back on Dec 21. Your IP shows you're in
>>the
>> > Direcway Southwest spot beam that covers Las Vegas. And you two are the
>>only> > ones here that don't like Sydney. Are you two neighbors or something?
>> >
>
>As Howard Hughes said when asked if he really meant to fly the Spruce
>Goose off the water: "You'll never know"

Wasn't that impressive. He got an airplane as close as it could be to it's
empty weight to fly a mile in ground effect. It did shut Congress up, though.

>
>badplyer, er... pacwater...er
>
>pacplyer!

>(You mean with all your Cripto clearances, you can't figure this out?)

I let my clearances expire after I left my last consulting job. No use for them
anymore. It's my work that's classified, not me; I don't even have a secret
anymore.

I'm just letting you know you're leaving too many breadcrumbs behind. If you
meant pacplyer to be your socially acceptable persona, you blew it when you went
after Sydney. If you meant to build up a credible persona and THEN go after
Sydney, to give support to Badwater's vendetta, you did it too quickly, Pac
hasn't been around long enough.

[pacplyer]

(Regnirps) wrote in message >...
> (pacplyer) wrote:
>
> >> How about UFO - United Fruitcakes Organization?
> >>
> >> Dan, U. S. Air Farce, retarded
>
> First time I have EVER seen anyone change quoted material to ridicule someone.
> Very bad form.
>
> -- Charlie Springer

The content wasn't changed Charlie, if you look at the rest of the
thread it's clear he doesn't sign his name as "Air Farce, retarded"...
But I'll un-roast it for you:

(B2431) wrote

> >> How about UFO - United Fruitcakes Organization?
> >>
> >> Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

<Well... you like to call people fruitcakes and loons or regulate
their
<free-speech right to use profanity, but then I see no postings from
<you that would lead me to believe that you've ever done anything but
<scrub the aeroclub latrine. Typing in "U. S. Air Force" in spread
out
<letters hoping someone will mistake you for a pilot ....is my guess
of
<what an E2 would do. ;-)

<Am I right?

<pacplyer



You win Charlie, my bad...

pacplyer

[B2431]

>From: (pacplyer)
>Date: 1/1/2004 9:20 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
(B2431) wrote in message
>...
>> >From: (pacplyer)
>> >Date: 1/1/2004 1:54 PM Central Standard Time
>> >Message-id: >
>> >
>> (B2431) wrote
>> >
>> >> How about UFO - United Fruitcakes Organization?
>> >>
>> >> Dan, U. S. Air Farce, retarded
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >HO HO, HA HA. God you're witty. Did you retire as an E-2 by any chance?
>> >
>> >pacplyer
>> >
>> What would make you say that?
>> By the way I have met a retired E-1. He was medically retired due to
>service
>> related injuries.
>>
>> Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired
>
>Well... you like to call people fruitcakes and loons or regulate their
>free-speech right to use profanity, but then I see no postings from
>you that would lead me to believe that you've ever done anything but
>scrub the aeroclub latrine. Typing in "U. S. Air Force" in spread out
>letters hoping someone will mistake you for a pilot ....is my guess of
>what an E2 would do. ;-)
>
>Am I right?
>
>pacplyer
>
I called no one a loon, the word was used by me in a thread involving bird
puns. Please pay attention.

I also never called anyone a fruitcake. Calling people names or using personal
insults is no way to debate or make a point.

How is suggesting people not using vulgar language an infringement on anyone's
"free speech?" I feel over use of vulgarity is an indication of a person's
inability to communicate in a civil manner.

Yes, I was enlisted, no I never implied or said I was a pilot. The "aeroclub"
on any military base is not a military function. Use of military personel as
you describe would be illegal.

In case you are wondering I was in aircraft maintenance, never faced
disciplinary actions and retired honourably.

Now, back to you. I seriously doubt you have any military experience. The fact
you have resorted to personal insult tells me you really are not worth talking
to.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired (and damned proud of it)

[B2431]

>From: (Regnirps)

>
(pacplyer) wrote:
>
>>> How about UFO - United Fruitcakes Organization?
>>>
>>> Dan, U. S. Air Farce, retarded
>
>First time I have EVER seen anyone change quoted material to ridicule
>someone.
>Very bad form.
>
>-- Charlie Springer
>
Please note he also omitted the part to which I used the UFO comment as a
reply.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[pacplyer]

wrote in message >...
> In article >, pacplyer says...
> >
> >Note: since "Dr. No" (name) "a" doesn't show up on google for me,
> >I'll have to tack this on to Larry's post. (responding to )
>
> Shazzam! Now it will appear for you.
>
> >
> >> > >"pacplyer" > wrote in message
> >> > om...
> >> > >> Larry, Larry, Larry,
> >> > >>
> >> > >> While I hate to agree with a guy who claims to have hardware in lunar
> >> > >> and martian orbit, for example, who always posts in invisible
> >> > >> ink,)
> >> >
> >> > It's Acme's Disappearing Reappearing ink, thank you. And the lunar stuff I
> >> > designed isn't in orbit, it's on the surface. At least it's intact, unlike
> >> > Larry's brain.
> >
> >Ah ha, but... Just like Larry's brain, it doesn't work right?
>
> Not anymore, not for 20+ years or so. But it worked nicely for about 3 times
> it's design life.
>
> >You
> >know, now I'm starting to believe you, Dr No (name)(secret scientist
> >"a.") Most of those Surveyors and Rangers crashed out of control or
> >shorted out on the surface right after contact. Then, let me guess...
> >your Martian project was the Deep Space 2 and the Mars Polar Lander.
> >Man, what big red dust clouds you've created, professor!
>
> Ah, the Polar Impacter. No, go back a generation. I designed hardware that
> worked, not this better faster cheaper crap that DT started.
>
> >
> >Why do I get the feeling your space "hardware" was a standard issue
> >ice-box rivet or something? And you forgot to plug the freezer in...
> >poor NASA! Did those go into the main external tank on the last STS
> >mission too? LOL!
>
> I never worked on Rockwell's shuttle. I worked on a couple of competing
> proposals, though. Falling foam has been a problem since the first flight. I
> never understood why they didn't just spray the foam on the INSIDE of the tank.
> It wouldn't be subject to all those forces, and if any did fall off the turbo
> pumps would chew it up easily.
>
> >
> >> >
> >>> BTW, did you and BWB go on vacation together? He stopped posting on Sept 28,
> >> > you disappeared on Sept 29th. Then you started posting again with the new
> >>> return address on Dec 19th, he came back on Dec 21. Your IP shows you're in
> the
> >> > Direcway Southwest spot beam that covers Las Vegas. And you two are the
> only> > ones here that don't like Sydney. Are you two neighbors or something?
> >> >
> >
> >As Howard Hughes said when asked if he really meant to fly the Spruce
> >Goose off the water: "You'll never know"
>
> Wasn't that impressive. He got an airplane as close as it could be to it's
> empty weight to fly a mile in ground effect. It did shut Congress up, though.
>
> >
> >badplyer, er... pacwater...er
> >
> >pacplyer!
>
> >(You mean with all your Cripto clearances, you can't figure this out?)
>
> I let my clearances expire after I left my last consulting job. No use for them
> anymore. It's my work that's classified, not me; I don't even have a secret
> anymore.
>
> I'm just letting you know you're leaving too many breadcrumbs behind. <snip>

Great Scott! It sounds like Dr. No (names)'s (a.k.a. )'s lunar
tracking beams are zeroing in on the position of me and my secret Las
Vegas laboratory! He may have the technology already to launch a
lunar dirty lie... I mean a lunar dirty bomb at me.

Drat! I shouldn't have dropped all those breadcrumbs out of the back
of the lunar rover prototype! Better fire up the Viking lander
vehicle testbed and hover on over to Burt Rutan's Space Ship One
facility. If Burt has the bugs worked out of the rockship, I believe
I just have time enough to blast into Lunar geostationary orbit and
latch on to the good Dr. No's lunar hardware...

There's only two problems. One: since 's 1960's vacuum-tube
Byzantine junk-pile is still highly classified (gotta protect that 16K
calculator and delco-remey"iron-ball" INS technology,) I can't call up
any design drawings, so I won't know what it looks like. Two: If
it's on the surface like he says, there may be Lunar Law
jurisdictional problems that we should consider first. It will be
difficult to hire a spaced-out lawyer this time of night and have a
trial to see if it's legal to stop something like a dirty bomb...

This looks like a job for...

Latchless Larry!

Stay tuned for the exciting conclusion!

pacplyer – out .. LOL! :^D

(both you guys are way out there! But it's highly entertaining!)

[pacplyer]

(B2431) wrote in message >...
> >From: (Regnirps)
>
> >
> (pacplyer) wrote:
> >
> >>> How about UFO - United Fruitcakes Organization?
> >>>
> >>> Dan, U. S. Air Farce, retarded
> >
> >First time I have EVER seen anyone change quoted material to ridicule
> >someone.
> >Very bad form.
> >
> >-- Charlie Springer
> >
> Please note he also omitted the part to which I used the UFO comment as a
> reply.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

What are you talking about? Isn't this called trimming the post? Did
I do it wrong? Did I cut off your B2431? Is that what your crying
about? Go ahead lecture me. I'm all ears. I've only been posting for
a year so I'll admit I don't know everything. As usual, your message
was a one line insult. If it had had any content at all, I would have
been more careful.

Readers please note:
I have improperly cut off and altered the signature on Dan's one-line
insult to the rest of us in this thread. He has stated we should
start an organization of fruitcakes. Now he explains this is a not an
insult. I also omitted something else that he's upset about. If I
knew what the f#$k it was I would correct that too.

See, here's your big chance to win this Dan.

Also note, I retracted the bad form in another part of this thread.
GGGGGrrrrrrrrrrrr

paplyer - out

[B2431]

>From: (pacplyer)
>
(B2431) wrote in message
>...
>> >From: (Regnirps)
>> >
>> (pacplyer) wrote:
>> >
>> >>> How about UFO - United Fruitcakes Organization?
>> >>>
>> >>> Dan, U. S. Air Farce, retarded
>> >
>> >First time I have EVER seen anyone change quoted material to ridicule
>> >someone.
>> >Very bad form.
>> >
>> >-- Charlie Springer
>> >
>> Please note he also omitted the part to which I used the UFO comment as a
>> reply.
>>
>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>
>What are you talking about? Isn't this called trimming the post? Did
>I do it wrong? Did I cut off your B2431? Is that what your crying
>about? Go ahead lecture me. I'm all ears. I've only been posting for
>a year so I'll admit I don't know everything. As usual, your message
>was a one line insult. If it had had any content at all, I would have
>been more careful.
>
>Readers please note:
>I have improperly cut off and altered the signature on Dan's one-line
>insult to the rest of us in this thread. He has stated we should
>start an organization of fruitcakes. Now he explains this is a not an
>insult. I also omitted something else that he's upset about. If I
>knew what the f#$k it was I would correct that too.
>
>See, here's your big chance to win this Dan.
>
>Also note, I retracted the bad form in another part of this thread.
>GGGGGrrrrrrrrrrrr
>
>paplyer - out
>
As I said: you cut out the part I was replying to with the UFO comment. See:]

<begin quote>

>From: "Rich S."
>Date: 12/29/2003 12:15 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>"Ron Wanttaja" > wrote in message
...
>> On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 11:49:25 -0500, "Stan's News" >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >All,
>> >
>> >Bush is a bum, a skull and bones moron...., Cheney's stooge, and by the
>way
>> >Cheney is a bum too. Democrats, Republicans are all bums. Politics is
>the
>> >biggest bunch of bull**** and the boys are running the show.
>>
>> I like the saying, "I never vote, it only encourages them...." :-)
>>
>> Ron Wanttaja
>
>You guys could start a new political party - United Anarchists of the World
>(UAW).
>
>Rich S.
>
How about UFO - United Fruitcakes Organization?

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

<end quote>

As you can see I insulted no one. The comment was in the same tenor as the
message to which I replied.

None of this justified your calling me retarded, saying I was impersonating an
Air Force pilot etc.

<begin quote>

Well... you like to call people fruitcakes and loons or regulate their
free-speech right to use profanity, but then I see no postings from
you that would lead me to believe that you've ever done anything but
scrub the aeroclub latrine. Typing in "U. S. Air Force" in spread out
letters hoping someone will mistake you for a pilot ....is my guess of
what an E2 would do. ;-)

Am I right?

<end quote>

If you feel the need to accuse me of things or to insult me get your facts
straight and do it as an adult.

Now, back to you. I seriously doubt you have any military experience. The fact
you have resorted to personal insult tells me you really are not worth talking
to. Am I correct?

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired (and damned proud of it)

[pacplyer]

(B2431) wrote in message >...
> >From: (pacplyer)
> >Date: 1/1/2004 9:20 PM Central Standard Time
> >Message-id: >
> >
> (B2431) wrote in message
> >...
> >> >From: (pacplyer)
> >> >Date: 1/1/2004 1:54 PM Central Standard Time
> >> >Message-id: >
> >> >
> >> (B2431) wrote
> >> >
> >> >> How about UFO - United Fruitcakes Organization?
> >> >>
> >> >> Dan, U. S. Air Farce, retarded
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >HO HO, HA HA. God you're witty. Did you retire as an E-2 by any chance?
> >> >
> >> >pacplyer
> >> >
> >> What would make you say that?
> >> By the way I have met a retired E-1. He was medically retired due to
> service
> >> related injuries.
> >>
> >> Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired
> >

Pac Puzzles:
[Note: now that you have printed more than a one line slam, I'm being
careful to keep in relevant material. Is that what your objection is?
Did I take your one-liner out of context?]

Pac said:
> >Well... you like to call people fruitcakes and loons or regulate their
> >free-speech right to use profanity, but then I see no postings from
> >you that would lead me to believe that you've ever done anything but
> >scrub the aeroclub latrine. Typing in "U. S. Air Force" in spread out
> >letters hoping someone will mistake you for a pilot ....is my guess of
> >what an E2 would do. ;-)
> >
> >Am I right?
> >
> >pacplyer
> >

> I called no one a loon, the word was used by me in a thread involving bird
> puns. Please pay attention.

Gee, then I went to the wrong college. Maybe I should try to get my
money back. You posted the loon insult right after I made an
off-color joke which you probably find "[un]civil". Do I have to
include it in the body here, or do you think anyone's capable of
checking that claim by going back in the thread? What… are we
submitting formal essays here? (just for you I won't even snip
anything here.)

>
> I also never called anyone a fruitcake. Calling people names or using personal
> insults is no way to debate or make a point.
>
> How is suggesting people not using vulgar language an infringement on anyone's
> "free speech?" I feel over use of vulgarity is an indication of a person's
> inability to communicate in a civil manner.

Profanity, (which is something I'm sure you've never heard in the
service) is an indicator of emotion, and an important Usenet clue in
the absence of voice inflection and body language ... that's how I
use it. It can be an indicator of personality I agree.
>
> Yes, I was enlisted, no I never implied or said I was a pilot. The "aeroclub"
> on any military base is not a military function. Use of military personel as
> you describe would be illegal.

I was born at Reese. My old man was asked by his boss to run the aero
club. He was an U. S. Air force officer. So this argument is bull.
That's not how the real world works.
>
> In case you are wondering I was in aircraft maintenance, never faced
> disciplinary actions and retired honourably.
>
> Now, back to you. I seriously doubt you have any military experience.

While not enlisted or commissioned, I flew DOD MAC charters for four
years. I was in Desert Shield and Desert Storm as a Civilian
accompanying the armed forces. I was issued the "Civilian Desert
Shield and Desert Storm medal" by Ronald R. Fogleman, General, USAF,
Commander, Air Mobility Command on April 15, 1993. (big deal:
everyone got that who made at least one trip into the area of
hostilities.)

The fact
> you have resorted to personal insult tells me you really are not worth talking
> to.
>
> Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired (and damned proud of it)


Refering to me as a loon is an insult. That's why I responded in
kind.

Pacplyer - out

[pacplyer]

[snipped numerous headers, see above thread for Dan's other comments]

> >"Ron Wanttaja" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 11:49:25 -0500, "Stan's News" >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >All,
> >> >
> >> >Bush is a bum, a skull and bones moron...., Cheney's stooge, and by the
> way
> >> >Cheney is a bum too. Democrats, Republicans are all bums. Politics is
> the
> >> >biggest bunch of bull**** and the boys are running the show.
> >>
> >> I like the saying, "I never vote, it only encourages them...." :-)
> >>
> >> Ron Wanttaja
> >
> >You guys could start a new political party - United Anarchists of the World
> >(UAW).
> >
> >Rich S.

Dan said: [i]
> >
> How about UFO - United Fruitcakes Organization?
>
> Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired
>
> <end quote>
>
> As you can see I insulted no one. The comment was in the same tenor as the
> message to which I replied.

Pac sez:
Maybe I'm the one who's retarded here. Doesn't: "You guys could start
a new political party - United Anarchists of the World (UAW)" by Rich
S. refer to "You guys" as Ron Wanttaja and Stans News? Isn't that the
message you replied to? Do you think Ron and Stan starting a "UFO -
United Fruitcakes Organization" as you put it, is a compliment? Or
would it be an insult? It wouldn't be worth mentioning except that
you refered to me as a loon in the other thread. Rich's comment was
funny and respectful. Yours didn't strike me that way.

>
> None of this justified your calling me retarded, saying I was impersonating an
> Air Force pilot etc.

So you can dish it out but you can't take it. Again, we can't agree
on what was printed. I intentionally followed my probe with: "am I
right?" This infers uncertainty on my part. That's not the same
thing as stating: "you ARE impersonating an Air Force pilot."

I did taunt you with a wink, to find out if it's true. But you never
answered the question: did you retire as an E-2? (and you don't have
answer if it bothers you.)


>
> <begin quote>
>
> Well... you like to call people fruitcakes and loons or regulate their
> free-speech right to use profanity, but then I see no postings from
> you that would lead me to believe that you've ever done anything but
> scrub the aeroclub latrine. Typing in "U. S. Air Force" in spread out
> letters hoping someone will mistake you for a pilot ....is my guess of
> what an E2 would do. ;-)
>
> Am I right?
>
> <end quote>
>
> If you feel the need to accuse me of things or to insult me get your facts
> straight and do it as an adult.
>
> Now, back to you. I seriously doubt you have any military experience. The fact
> you have resorted to personal insult tells me you really are not worth talking
> to. Am I correct?
>
> Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired (and damned proud of it)

Not worth talking to? O.K. I retract the insults. Military Experience?
No, you are not correct. Civilian Reserve Air Fleet (CRAFT) deployed
Sept 1990. (not enlisted or commissioned; see other post this
thread.)

[B2431]

>From: (pacplyer)

>
>
>Refering to me as a loon is an insult. That's why I responded in
>kind.
>
>Pacplyer - out
>
As I told you before the loon comment was in a bird pun in response to a bird
joke. You DO know a loon is a bird, don't you? If not look it up.

<begin quote>

From: (B2431)
Date: 1/1/2004 3:06 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id: >

>From: (pacplyer)
>Date: 12/30/2003 10:39 AM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>"Tim Ward" > wrote in message
>...
>> "Ron Wanttaja" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 13:49:21 -0800, "Rich S."
>> >
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > >"B2431" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> > >>
>> > >> In the old days pilots would often fly with a cat and a goose.
>> > >
>> > >This is an Urban Legend. Geese were never used, as they *love* to fly in
>> the
>> > >fog. Ducks were required.
>> >
>> > Yep. For one thing, geese will fly upside down, while a duck will avoid
>> > inverted flight. If ducks fly upside down, they quack up.
>> >
>> > Ron Wanttaja
>>
>> Yep, and they return from the vet with a big bill.
>>
>> Still, with a duck or a goose in the cockpit, you can always get down.
>>
>> Tim Ward
>
>Good point Tim. Lot's of "down" floating around. That's why it's
>important to check your air conditioning ducts before you take off.
>
>Q: How do you know you've blown a duct?
>
>A: You look in the mirror and see feathers around your mouth....
>
>pacplyer
>
Cheese and quackers, this thread brings out the loons.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired


<end quote>

In any event, your accusations and attacks on me far out weigh any offense you
perceived.

Since you insist on blaming me for your misunderstanding I hereby dismiss you
and send you to Tarverland since you have so much in common with him.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired (and still damned proud of it)

[pacplyer]

(B2431) wrote <snip snip>
>
> Since you insist on blaming me for your misunderstanding I hereby dismiss you
> and send you to Tarverland since you have so much in common with him.
>
> Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired (and still damned proud of it)
note the uncivilized profanity ^ There's hope for you
yet.

There's no misunderstanding, I expect you to retract the insult (I was
man enough to.)
Now I know why Tarver went crazy. He was surrounded all the time by
uneducated cheap-shot artists. If you read his posts, most are
well-thought out, intricate dissertations on aviation. I tried to ask
him some questions about his 747 mods but several smart-ass one-liner
trolls (I'm sure you know the type) jumped on his back so bad, I had
to leave.

pacplyer

[Snowbird]

wrote in message >...

(referring to Bill Phillips and 'pacplyer')
> And you two are the only ones here that don't like Sydney.
> Are you two neighbors or something?

I appreciate the compliment, but my first reaction reading
this was:

"Zounds! Where have I gone Wrong?" *g*

I'm sure there are plenty of other people who don't like
me on these newsgroups, past and present. I'm not
everybody's Teacup, and I wouldn't want to be.

However, it's generally true that those who don't
like me, do respect me. Else just ignore me.

Which brings me to this request: while I appreciate your
concern for me, I wish you'd join them and leave my name
out of your exchange with "pac" whoever he may be. I
know for myself, it's much harder to sit quietly while
someone I like or respect gets abused than it is to sit
quietly while it's headed my way, but nevertheless, I ask.

Personally if I were voting, I'd vote for "pac" as a
compendium of several people including a sometime
sock puppet for BP (a la Hef/Wingie). IIRC I think he
actually sort of acknowledged something of the sort at
one point. He's had his unintentionally amusing moments.
Accusing me of "harassing" my long-time net.friend Chip
was almost as good as "Hef's" Boxter -- true ROTFL.
Now I gather he thinks I'm you, which is also funny.

But overall he just sort of seems worth ignoring to me.
Sort of like "Selway Kid" aka 'ol shy and bashful' (whose
identity is another 'hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm')

For a supposed aviation enthusiast and professional pilot,
pacplyer doesn't seem to spend much time saying anything
a) entertaining
b) worthwhile about flying.

Even Unka Bob, that noted net.curmudgeon has, in his crotchety
way, much more worthwhile to say if you read between the lines.

JMO of course and "do as thou wilt".

Cheers,
Sydney (with time to fly, temp 37/dewpoint 37, thunder and
rain, forecast ice pellets. *grumble*)

[RU ok]

On 4 Jan 2004 08:43:53 -0800, (Snowbird)
wrote:

>
>Even Unka Bob, that noted net.curmudgeon has, in his crotchety
>way, much more worthwhile to say if you read between the lines.
>
>
>Cheers,
>Sydney



Please read:

--------------------------------------------------------------
between
--------------------------------------------------------------
between
--------------------------------------------------------------
between
--------------------------------------------------------------
between
--------------------------------------------------------------



Barnyard BOb --

[John Stricker]

I don't like you.

John Stricker

"Snowbird" > wrote in message
om...
> wrote in message >...
>
>
> However, it's generally true that those who don't
> like me, do respect me. Else just ignore me.
>
>
> Cheers,
> Sydney (with time to fly, temp 37/dewpoint 37, thunder and
> rain, forecast ice pellets. *grumble*)

[John Stricker]

Yes you do.

John Stricker

"Snowbird" > wrote in message
om...
> wrote in message >...
>
> (referring to Bill Phillips and 'pacplyer')
> > And you two are the only ones here that don't like Sydney.
> > Are you two neighbors or something?
>
> I appreciate the compliment, but my first reaction reading
> this was:
>
> "Zounds! Where have I gone Wrong?" *g*
>
> I'm sure there are plenty of other people who don't like
> me on these newsgroups, past and present. I'm not
> everybody's Teacup, and I wouldn't want to be.
>
> However, it's generally true that those who don't
> like me, do respect me. Else just ignore me.
>
> Which brings me to this request: while I appreciate your
> concern for me, I wish you'd join them and leave my name
> out of your exchange with "pac" whoever he may be. I
> know for myself, it's much harder to sit quietly while
> someone I like or respect gets abused than it is to sit
> quietly while it's headed my way, but nevertheless, I ask.
>
> Personally if I were voting, I'd vote for "pac" as a
> compendium of several people including a sometime
> sock puppet for BP (a la Hef/Wingie). IIRC I think he
> actually sort of acknowledged something of the sort at
> one point. He's had his unintentionally amusing moments.
> Accusing me of "harassing" my long-time net.friend Chip
> was almost as good as "Hef's" Boxter -- true ROTFL.
> Now I gather he thinks I'm you, which is also funny.
>
> But overall he just sort of seems worth ignoring to me.
> Sort of like "Selway Kid" aka 'ol shy and bashful' (whose
> identity is another 'hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm')
>
> For a supposed aviation enthusiast and professional pilot,
> pacplyer doesn't seem to spend much time saying anything
> a) entertaining
> b) worthwhile about flying.
>
> Even Unka Bob, that noted net.curmudgeon has, in his crotchety
> way, much more worthwhile to say if you read between the lines.
>
> JMO of course and "do as thou wilt".
>
> Cheers,
> Sydney (with time to fly, temp 37/dewpoint 37, thunder and
> rain, forecast ice pellets. *grumble*)

[John Stricker]

No I don't, don't tell me what to do.

John Stricker

"Snowbird" > wrote in message
om...
> wrote in message >...
>
> (referring to Bill Phillips and 'pacplyer')
> > And you two are the only ones here that don't like Sydney.
> > Are you two neighbors or something?
>
> I appreciate the compliment, but my first reaction reading
> this was:
>
> "Zounds! Where have I gone Wrong?" *g*
>
> I'm sure there are plenty of other people who don't like
> me on these newsgroups, past and present. I'm not
> everybody's Teacup, and I wouldn't want to be.
>
> However, it's generally true that those who don't
> like me, do respect me. Else just ignore me.
>
> Which brings me to this request: while I appreciate your
> concern for me, I wish you'd join them and leave my name
> out of your exchange with "pac" whoever he may be. I
> know for myself, it's much harder to sit quietly while
> someone I like or respect gets abused than it is to sit
> quietly while it's headed my way, but nevertheless, I ask.
>
> Personally if I were voting, I'd vote for "pac" as a
> compendium of several people including a sometime
> sock puppet for BP (a la Hef/Wingie). IIRC I think he
> actually sort of acknowledged something of the sort at
> one point. He's had his unintentionally amusing moments.
> Accusing me of "harassing" my long-time net.friend Chip
> was almost as good as "Hef's" Boxter -- true ROTFL.
> Now I gather he thinks I'm you, which is also funny.
>
> But overall he just sort of seems worth ignoring to me.
> Sort of like "Selway Kid" aka 'ol shy and bashful' (whose
> identity is another 'hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm')
>
> For a supposed aviation enthusiast and professional pilot,
> pacplyer doesn't seem to spend much time saying anything
> a) entertaining
> b) worthwhile about flying.
>
> Even Unka Bob, that noted net.curmudgeon has, in his crotchety
> way, much more worthwhile to say if you read between the lines.
>
> JMO of course and "do as thou wilt".
>
> Cheers,
> Sydney (with time to fly, temp 37/dewpoint 37, thunder and
> rain, forecast ice pellets. *grumble*)

[John Stricker]

Yes you do and you know it.

John Stricker

"Snowbird" > wrote in message
om...
> wrote in message >...
>
> (referring to Bill Phillips and 'pacplyer')
> > And you two are the only ones here that don't like Sydney.
> > Are you two neighbors or something?
>
> I appreciate the compliment, but my first reaction reading
> this was:
>
> "Zounds! Where have I gone Wrong?" *g*
>
> I'm sure there are plenty of other people who don't like
> me on these newsgroups, past and present. I'm not
> everybody's Teacup, and I wouldn't want to be.
>
> However, it's generally true that those who don't
> like me, do respect me. Else just ignore me.
>
> Which brings me to this request: while I appreciate your
> concern for me, I wish you'd join them and leave my name
> out of your exchange with "pac" whoever he may be. I
> know for myself, it's much harder to sit quietly while
> someone I like or respect gets abused than it is to sit
> quietly while it's headed my way, but nevertheless, I ask.
>
> Personally if I were voting, I'd vote for "pac" as a
> compendium of several people including a sometime
> sock puppet for BP (a la Hef/Wingie). IIRC I think he
> actually sort of acknowledged something of the sort at
> one point. He's had his unintentionally amusing moments.
> Accusing me of "harassing" my long-time net.friend Chip
> was almost as good as "Hef's" Boxter -- true ROTFL.
> Now I gather he thinks I'm you, which is also funny.
>
> But overall he just sort of seems worth ignoring to me.
> Sort of like "Selway Kid" aka 'ol shy and bashful' (whose
> identity is another 'hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm')
>
> For a supposed aviation enthusiast and professional pilot,
> pacplyer doesn't seem to spend much time saying anything
> a) entertaining
> b) worthwhile about flying.
>
> Even Unka Bob, that noted net.curmudgeon has, in his crotchety
> way, much more worthwhile to say if you read between the lines.
>
> JMO of course and "do as thou wilt".
>
> Cheers,
> Sydney (with time to fly, temp 37/dewpoint 37, thunder and
> rain, forecast ice pellets. *grumble*)

[John Stricker]

No I don't, she's a girl who thinks she can fly. She should stay in the
kitchen. Or at least the lab. Don't tell me what I like.

John Stricker

"Snowbird" > wrote in message
om...
> wrote in message >...
>
> (referring to Bill Phillips and 'pacplyer')
> > And you two are the only ones here that don't like Sydney.
> > Are you two neighbors or something?
>
> I appreciate the compliment, but my first reaction reading
> this was:
>
> "Zounds! Where have I gone Wrong?" *g*
>
> I'm sure there are plenty of other people who don't like
> me on these newsgroups, past and present. I'm not
> everybody's Teacup, and I wouldn't want to be.
>
> However, it's generally true that those who don't
> like me, do respect me. Else just ignore me.
>
> Which brings me to this request: while I appreciate your
> concern for me, I wish you'd join them and leave my name
> out of your exchange with "pac" whoever he may be. I
> know for myself, it's much harder to sit quietly while
> someone I like or respect gets abused than it is to sit
> quietly while it's headed my way, but nevertheless, I ask.
>
> Personally if I were voting, I'd vote for "pac" as a
> compendium of several people including a sometime
> sock puppet for BP (a la Hef/Wingie). IIRC I think he
> actually sort of acknowledged something of the sort at
> one point. He's had his unintentionally amusing moments.
> Accusing me of "harassing" my long-time net.friend Chip
> was almost as good as "Hef's" Boxter -- true ROTFL.
> Now I gather he thinks I'm you, which is also funny.
>
> But overall he just sort of seems worth ignoring to me.
> Sort of like "Selway Kid" aka 'ol shy and bashful' (whose
> identity is another 'hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm')
>
> For a supposed aviation enthusiast and professional pilot,
> pacplyer doesn't seem to spend much time saying anything
> a) entertaining
> b) worthwhile about flying.
>
> Even Unka Bob, that noted net.curmudgeon has, in his crotchety
> way, much more worthwhile to say if you read between the lines.
>
> JMO of course and "do as thou wilt".
>
> Cheers,
> Sydney (with time to fly, temp 37/dewpoint 37, thunder and
> rain, forecast ice pellets. *grumble*)

[John Stricker]

Quit being such a chauvinist, next thing you know, you'll be goose-stepping
like the Hitler youth.

John Stricker

"Snowbird" > wrote in message
om...
> wrote in message >...
>
> (referring to Bill Phillips and 'pacplyer')
> > And you two are the only ones here that don't like Sydney.
> > Are you two neighbors or something?
>
> I appreciate the compliment, but my first reaction reading
> this was:
>
> "Zounds! Where have I gone Wrong?" *g*
>
> I'm sure there are plenty of other people who don't like
> me on these newsgroups, past and present. I'm not
> everybody's Teacup, and I wouldn't want to be.
>
> However, it's generally true that those who don't
> like me, do respect me. Else just ignore me.
>
> Which brings me to this request: while I appreciate your
> concern for me, I wish you'd join them and leave my name
> out of your exchange with "pac" whoever he may be. I
> know for myself, it's much harder to sit quietly while
> someone I like or respect gets abused than it is to sit
> quietly while it's headed my way, but nevertheless, I ask.
>
> Personally if I were voting, I'd vote for "pac" as a
> compendium of several people including a sometime
> sock puppet for BP (a la Hef/Wingie). IIRC I think he
> actually sort of acknowledged something of the sort at
> one point. He's had his unintentionally amusing moments.
> Accusing me of "harassing" my long-time net.friend Chip
> was almost as good as "Hef's" Boxter -- true ROTFL.
> Now I gather he thinks I'm you, which is also funny.
>
> But overall he just sort of seems worth ignoring to me.
> Sort of like "Selway Kid" aka 'ol shy and bashful' (whose
> identity is another 'hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm')
>
> For a supposed aviation enthusiast and professional pilot,
> pacplyer doesn't seem to spend much time saying anything
> a) entertaining
> b) worthwhile about flying.
>
> Even Unka Bob, that noted net.curmudgeon has, in his crotchety
> way, much more worthwhile to say if you read between the lines.
>
> JMO of course and "do as thou wilt".
>
> Cheers,
> Sydney (with time to fly, temp 37/dewpoint 37, thunder and
> rain, forecast ice pellets. *grumble*)

[John Stricker]

Hitler Youth?? I invoke Usenet rules. Thread closed.

John Stricker

"Snowbird" > wrote in message
om...
> wrote in message >...
>
> (referring to Bill Phillips and 'pacplyer')
> > And you two are the only ones here that don't like Sydney.
> > Are you two neighbors or something?
>
> I appreciate the compliment, but my first reaction reading
> this was:
>
> "Zounds! Where have I gone Wrong?" *g*
>
> I'm sure there are plenty of other people who don't like
> me on these newsgroups, past and present. I'm not
> everybody's Teacup, and I wouldn't want to be.
>
> However, it's generally true that those who don't
> like me, do respect me. Else just ignore me.
>
> Which brings me to this request: while I appreciate your
> concern for me, I wish you'd join them and leave my name
> out of your exchange with "pac" whoever he may be. I
> know for myself, it's much harder to sit quietly while
> someone I like or respect gets abused than it is to sit
> quietly while it's headed my way, but nevertheless, I ask.
>
> Personally if I were voting, I'd vote for "pac" as a
> compendium of several people including a sometime
> sock puppet for BP (a la Hef/Wingie). IIRC I think he
> actually sort of acknowledged something of the sort at
> one point. He's had his unintentionally amusing moments.
> Accusing me of "harassing" my long-time net.friend Chip
> was almost as good as "Hef's" Boxter -- true ROTFL.
> Now I gather he thinks I'm you, which is also funny.
>
> But overall he just sort of seems worth ignoring to me.
> Sort of like "Selway Kid" aka 'ol shy and bashful' (whose
> identity is another 'hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm')
>
> For a supposed aviation enthusiast and professional pilot,
> pacplyer doesn't seem to spend much time saying anything
> a) entertaining
> b) worthwhile about flying.
>
> Even Unka Bob, that noted net.curmudgeon has, in his crotchety
> way, much more worthwhile to say if you read between the lines.
>
> JMO of course and "do as thou wilt".
>
> Cheers,
> Sydney (with time to fly, temp 37/dewpoint 37, thunder and
> rain, forecast ice pellets. *grumble*)

[Snowbird]

"John Stricker" > wrote in message >...
> No I don't, she's a girl who thinks she can fly. She should stay in the
> kitchen. Or at least the lab. Don't tell me what I like.

Great Heavens Steakbreath, SEVEN (7) top-posted one-liners (and
counting for all I know)???

Has your ISP imposed a one-line-per-post limit, or is
it a personal limitation? Are you trying to justify
Pasture Dave's Christmas Ode to you?

I won't tell you what you like. I'll leave that for the
Warrior Princess.

She'll tell you you like me :)

*smooch*
Sydney

[John Stricker]

I refuse to bow to the whims of the bottom post Nazis. I like top posting
when I read them so that's what I'm going to do.

So there.

John Stricker

"Snowbird" > wrote in message
om...
> "John Stricker" > wrote in message
>...
> > No I don't, she's a girl who thinks she can fly. She should stay in the
> > kitchen. Or at least the lab. Don't tell me what I like.
>
> Great Heavens Steakbreath, SEVEN (7) top-posted one-liners (and
> counting for all I know)???
>
> Has your ISP imposed a one-line-per-post limit, or is
> it a personal limitation? Are you trying to justify
> Pasture Dave's Christmas Ode to you?
>
> I won't tell you what you like. I'll leave that for the
> Warrior Princess.
>
> She'll tell you you like me :)
>
> *smooch*
> Sydney

[Richard Riley]

Fine, then I'll read your posts from the bottom up!!

Ha!
--
Richard Riley
Cthulu for President, '04!
Why settle for the lesser evil!!

On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 18:23:25 -0600, "John Stricker"
> wrote:

:I refuse to bow to the whims of the bottom post Nazis. I like top posting
:when I read them so that's what I'm going to do.
:
:So there.
:
:John Stricker
:
:"Snowbird" > wrote in message
. com...
:> "John Stricker" > wrote in message
>...
:> > No I don't, she's a girl who thinks she can fly. She should stay in the
:> > kitchen. Or at least the lab. Don't tell me what I like.
:>
:> Great Heavens Steakbreath, SEVEN (7) top-posted one-liners (and
:> counting for all I know)???
:>
:> Has your ISP imposed a one-line-per-post limit, or is
:> it a personal limitation? Are you trying to justify
:> Pasture Dave's Christmas Ode to you?
:>
:> I won't tell you what you like. I'll leave that for the
:> Warrior Princess.
:>
:> She'll tell you you like me :)
:>
:> *smooch*
:> Sydney
:

[Snowbird]

Richard Riley > wrote in message >...
> Fine, then I'll read your posts from the bottom up!!

> Ha!

At least he's up to three sentences and only one response.

But does he invoke Godwin's Law on himself for referring to
"bottom post Nazis"?

> Richard Riley
> Cthulu for President, '04!
> Why settle for the lesser evil!!

I need a bumper sticker!

Sydney

[Larry Smith]

"Snowbird" > wrote in message
om...
> Richard Riley > wrote in message
>...
> > Fine, then I'll read your posts from the bottom up!!
>
> > Ha!
>
> At least he's up to three sentences and only one response.
>
> But does he invoke Godwin's Law on himself for referring to
> "bottom post Nazis"?
>
> > Richard Riley
> > Cthulu for President, '04!
> > Why settle for the lesser evil!!
>
> I need a bumper sticker!
>
> Sydney

OK http://www.cthulhu.org/cthulhu/stickers.html

The "Campus Crusade for Cthulu" is an especially touching one.

[Top Sirloin]

On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 22:37:45 -0500, "Larry Smith" > wrote:

>
>"Top Sirloin" > wrote in message
...
>> On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 06:44:56 -0500, "Larry Smith" >
>wrote:
>>
>> > Like
>> >seizing private citizens and imprisoning them without trial, without
>formal
>> >charges?
>>
>> If this is true you should have no problem finding us lots of references
>for
>> this statement Larry.
>
>Now I want you to read this, Scott, especially the last paragraph with the
>words of Founding Father, James Madison. It is entitled "No Charges and No
>Trial; Just Jail": http://www.cato.org/dailys/08-21-03.html

I'm sorry Larry, but Jose Padilla ceded his American Citizenship when he trained
with a foreign military to fight against the United States.

Do you also think the Rosenbergs deserved a traditional jury trial for selling
atomic bomb secrets to the Soviets and that the goverment was heavy-handed in
trying them under the Espionage Act of 1917?

I'm not surprised that's the best you can do, considering you show an amazing
lack of comprehension by comparing a sitting US President with a mass murderer.

Here's something for you, especially the last paragraph:

------

Nazis murdered millions of unarmed people. They put them in ovens. They made
soap out of them. They carted off children in boxcars to die and used some of
the kids for medical experiments, including injecting dyes into their eyes to
see if they could improve their looks. Lower on the list of charges, the Nazis
enslaved millions and launched wars for territorial and egotistical gain (and
sent many of the conquered populations to death camps as well). Lower still,
they banned books and burned them too. They expropriated homes and businesses,
banned religions, etc.

An intelligent person wouldn't normally assume these are the sorts of facts
people forget. It's not quite the same thing as saying that the Mork and Mindy
was a spin-off from Happy Days, is it?

I could, of course, get more graphic about what the Nazis did, but I don't much
like writing about the Holocaust. It's not merely a depressing subject, its
enormity is so depressing, so compacted down with evil and barbarity and cruelty
that it folds in upon itself like a black hole. The gravitational pull of its
tragedy has permanently bent the trajectory of mankind. Suffice it to say that
the Nazis weren't simply generically bad, they were uniquely and monumentally
evil, not just in their hearts but also in literally billions of intentional,
well-planned, and bureaucratized decisions they made every day.

And yet, in polite and supposedly sophisticated circles in America today it is
acceptable to say George Bush is akin to a Nazi and that America is becoming
Nazi-like. Indeed, in certain corners of the globe to disagree with this
assertion is the more outlandish position than to agree with it.

In the September 1, 2003, issue of National Review, Byron York chronicles (read
the piece here) some of the Bushphobia. He writes,

A staple of Bush-hating is the portrayal of the president as a Nazi. That has,
of course, been a prominent part of other attacks against other presidents, but
today it seems to be deployed with particular aggressiveness against Bush. There
are thousands of references, across the vastness of the Internet, linking Bush
to Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich. Do you want to buy a T-shirt with a
swastika replacing the "s" in Bush? No problem. Do you want to collect images of
Bush in a German army uniform, with a Hitler mustache Photoshopped onto his
face? That's easy. Do you want to find pictures of Dick Cheney and Tom Ridge and
Ari Fleischer dressed as Bush's Nazi henchmen? That's easy, too.

As York observes, It's not just the intellectual poltroons of the Internet who
feign bravery by loudly saying what is patently stupid so that people a fraction
dumber than them might mistake it for boldness and conviction. It's not just the
masses of undifferentiated cattle who sport their Hitlerfied George Bush
T-shirts and who chant slogans with a verve more truly reminiscent of Nuremberg
than anything ever uttered by George Bush.

Indeed, "smart" people mouth this nonsense too. Scholars at Berkeley insist that
George Bush shares a psychological profile with Hitler. An editorial writer for
the Kansas City Star invokes Martin Niemoller's "First they came for the Jews…"
mantra to decry the alleged excesses of the Patriot Act. Various Muslim
activists are constantly suggesting that they are the Jews of the Nazified
America. Almost everyday I get dozens of e-mails from seemingly intelligent
liberals -- and a few conservatives -- who insist that I "can't deny it" anymore
-- it's 1933 Germany in America. Retired Princeton University professor Sheldon
Wolin writes of the "inverted totalitarianism" of the Republican party -- "a
fervently doctrinal party, zealous, ruthless, antidemocratic, and boasting a
near majority" -- as a stand-in for a Nazi party which doesn't need to use
"totalitarian thugs" to attain power. He writes:

No doubt these remarks will be dismissed by some as alarmist, but I want to go
further and name the emergent political system "inverted totalitarianism." By
inverted I mean that while the current system and its operatives share with
Nazism the aspiration toward unlimited power and aggressive expansionism, their
methods and actions seem upside down. For example, in Weimar Germany, before the
Nazis took power, the "streets" were dominated by totalitarian-oriented gangs of
toughs, and whatever there was of democracy was confined to the government. In
the United States, however, it is the streets where democracy is most alive --
while the real danger lies with an increasingly unbridled government.

You may think that's brilliant stuff and that Wolin is a savant. As for me, I'm
simply reminded of Walter Bagehot's observation that "In the faculty of writing
nonsense, stupidity is no match for genius."

"It's going a bit far to compare the Bush of 2003 to the Hitler of 1933," writes
Dave Lindorff in "Bush and Hitler: The Strategy of Fear," which according to
York's article appeared in February on the site Counterpunch.org. "Bush simply
is not the orator that Hitler was. But comparisons of the Bush administration's
fear-mongering tactics to those practiced so successfully and with such terrible
results by Hitler and Goebbels . . . are not at all out of line."

In the September issue of Vanity Fair a photo of Richard Perle is placed
alongside Joseph Goebbels and the caption asks: "Separated at Birth?" The
editors of Vanity Fair ran the pictures because a letter-writer noted a
similarity between the two. "Perle isn't the first government official to use
deceit and fear mongering to force an extremist, irrational, and ultimately
violent view on an entire nation, or globe." In the face of this idiocy the
editors of The New Republic were forced to ask: "Does someone really need to
explain to Vanity Fair that nothing Perle or President Bush will ever do can
invite a comparison to Nazi Germany?"

But The New Republic misses the point. They believe Vanity Fair mistakenly took
a "crank" correspondent too seriously. Unfortunately, The New Republic isn't
taking Vanity Fair seriously enough. For while it's by no means an
extraordinarily serious magazine, Vanity Fair is a near-perfect barometer for
what is fashionable and what passes for intelligent conversation among the
chattering classes.

Show me the camps. Show me the millions of people being gassed. Show me the
tattoos on people's arms. Show me elderly Muslim men being beaten in the
streets, their stores smashed, and books burned. Show me huge piles of emaciated
bodies stocked high like cords of wood.

Instead, on the web we find juxtaposed pictures of Bush with a dog and Hitler
with a dog; Bush posing with children and Hitler posing with children; Bush
appearing before large crowds and Hitler appearing before large crowds. By such
"standards" every president -- every politician -- since at least the day
photography was invented is a Nazi. To assume the mantle of "reasonableness" --
as Lindorff does -- by conceding that Bush isn't as good an orator as Hitler
was, is to claim soundness of mind by conceding that a clock doesn't melt
because vests have no sleeves.

The likes of Wolin and Abbot Gleason are more clever. They, too, say that Nazism
is coming, but they don't refer to the Holocaust. They simply mean an illiberal
regime with imperial ambitions is in the offing. I think this is ludicrous, too.
But it's a different argument. Nevertheless, the intellectuals insist on using
Nazism as a way of decrying what they see as American militarism. But comparing
America to Nazi Germany in this way is like saying Jonah Goldberg is just like
the "Son of Sam" serial killer because they both get lots of parking tickets. To
leave out all the genocide and murder is to leave out a pretty important part of
the story.

So if you can't show me the death camps and the horror, find another example.
Compare Bush to Bismarck or Franco or Mikey from the Life cereal commercials for
all I care -- because any of those would make more sense.

By the way, I don't say this because I feel a passionate need to defend George
Bush. I would make the exact same points if Al Gore were president. I would make
the exact same points if anybody running for the Democratic nomination were
president. This has nothing to do with partisanship. It has to do with the fact
that such comparisons are slanderous to the United States and historical truth
and amount to Holocaust denial. When you say that anything George Bush has done
is akin to what Hitler did, you make the Holocaust into nothing more than an
example of partisan excess. Tax cuts are not genocide, as so many Democrats have
suggested over the years. (For example,. during the Contract with America
debate, Charles Rangel complained that "Hitler wasn't even talking about doing
these things" that were in the Contract with America. In other words, the
Contract with America was in some way worse than what Hitler did. At the end of
the day, that is Holocaust denial.)

"Darn those Republicans" does not equal "Darn those Nazis." The Patriot Act is
not the final solution. The handful of men in Guantanamo may not all be guilty
of terrorism, but it's more than reasonable to assume they are. And no matter
how you try to contort it, Gitmo is not the same thing as Auschwitz or Dachau.
There are no children there. You don't get carted off to Cuba and gassed if you
criticize the president or if you are one-quarter Muslim. And, inversely, there
was no reasonable justification for throwing the Jews and the Gypsies and all
the others into the death camps. The Jews weren't terrorists or members of a
terrorist organization. To say that the men in Guantanamo -- or any of the
Muslims being politely interviewed by appointment -- are akin to the Jews of
Germany is to trivialize the experiences of the millions who were slaughtered.
Even if you think Muslims are being unfairly inconvenienced, when you say they
are the Jews of Nazified America you are in essence saying the worst crime of
the Holocaust was to unfairly inconvenience the Jews.

But let's stop talking about Nazis.

I hate blue cheese. I mean I hate it. To me, it tastes like death or Al
Sharpton's socks after they've been under the fridge for a year. But no matter
how much I hate it, no matter how much I loathe its texture and smell and taste,
it's still only blue or, if you must, "bleu" cheese. Even if you tripled my
hatred for it, it would still just be a musky fromage from the land of cheese,
long speeches, and short-lived loyalties. It would not, through the mysterious
alchemy of hatred and bile, become poison. Sure, I could call it Sarin or
Anthrax but that would not make it so. Because, you see, hating an object
doesn't change an object. Only the most arrogant and solipsistic fool would
argue or convince himself that his hatred of something increases the importance
of that thing.

And that's how I think of all these people who e-mail me insistent that George
Bush is a Nazi. They believe they are so important, so noble, their hatred and
fear must be rooted things of Great Consequence. It's just so prosaic to hate
Republicans. I am better than that. So, Republicans must be Nazis. They must be
a threat to the whole world and to the sanctity of everything I hold dear
because anything less would not be worth my time. George Bush can't simply be
someone I disagree with. No, his popularity must be an indication of mass
hysteria, of Nuremberg-style devotion to evil.

So desperate are these people to live in interesting times and play the hero,
that they are willing and eager to topple every significant moral and historical
category so they can role play as the Heroes who Would Not Stay Silent. That
would be fine if these losers were playing some multisided dice game in their
basements. But they're not. There's a war going on and these guys are acting
like we're the real enemy. That's not just shameful and stupid, it's unhelpful.

[Larry Smith]

"Top Sirloin" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 22:37:45 -0500, "Larry Smith" >
wrote:
>
> >
> >"Top Sirloin" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 06:44:56 -0500, "Larry Smith"
>
> >wrote:
> >>
> >> > Like
> >> >seizing private citizens and imprisoning them without trial, without
> >formal
> >> >charges?
> >>
> >> If this is true you should have no problem finding us lots of
references
> >for
> >> this statement Larry.
> >
> >Now I want you to read this, Scott, especially the last paragraph with
the
> >words of Founding Father, James Madison. It is entitled "No Charges and
No
> >Trial; Just Jail": http://www.cato.org/dailys/08-21-03.html
>
> I'm sorry Larry, but Jose Padilla ceded his American Citizenship when he
trained
> with a foreign military to fight against the United States.

Where's your authority for that? You won't produce it, of course, because
you have none. Federal courts have already interceded for Padilla and
ordered the "Justice" Department to try him under constitutional guidelines
or release him.

>
> Do you also think the Rosenbergs deserved a traditional jury trial for
selling
> atomic bomb secrets to the Soviets and that the goverment was heavy-handed
in
> trying them under the Espionage Act of 1917?
>
> I'm not surprised that's the best you can do, considering you show an
amazing
> lack of comprehension by comparing a sitting US President with a mass
murderer.
>
Cite? You been smoking too much crack, fella.

<disingenuous soapbox slobber flushed>