RV 6 in Sydney Australia

[frank connaly]

Is anyone in the Sydney area building an RV 6 I have a friend over there who
is a senior aerospace engineer that is interested in doing a stress analysis
of this airplane(free of charge) to verify the strength of the design even
though Van did an excellent job.

[Jerry Springer]

frank connaly wrote:
> Is anyone in the Sydney area building an RV 6 I have a friend over there who
> is a senior aerospace engineer that is interested in doing a stress analysis
> of this airplane(free of charge) to verify the strength of the design even
> though Van did an excellent job.
>
>
How does he plan to do it? By actually destroying an airplane or just
using the drawings and materials lists? If Van did an excellent job
why redo it?

Jerry (flying my RV-6 for 15 years strong enough for me) Springer

[frank connaly]

From the drawings and material list. why? I dunno curiosity or as he says to
keep his brain active or it`s boring over in Australia and tired of " tie me
Kangaroos down sport" as the old song goes.
"Jerry Springer" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> frank connaly wrote:
> > Is anyone in the Sydney area building an RV 6 I have a friend over there
who
> > is a senior aerospace engineer that is interested in doing a stress
analysis
> > of this airplane(free of charge) to verify the strength of the design
even
> > though Van did an excellent job.
> >
> >
> How does he plan to do it? By actually destroying an airplane or just
> using the drawings and materials lists? If Van did an excellent job
> why redo it?
>
> Jerry (flying my RV-6 for 15 years strong enough for me) Springer
>

[John Duncan]

G'day mates, <strine off>

Yes it's definitely boring down here, the weather is terrible, no good
beaches, the fishing is awful, so all you nice Yanks just stay up there
with Dubya and his cowboy pals :->

I'm building an 8 at Wedderburn and I know of at least one 6 over at
Camden under construction (G'day Pete!)

Get your friend to email me for details.

Rgds

John

frank connaly wrote:
> From the drawings and material list. why? I dunno curiosity or as he says to
> keep his brain active or it`s boring over in Australia and tired of " tie me
> Kangaroos down sport" as the old song goes.
> "Jerry Springer" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>
>>frank connaly wrote:
>>
>>>Is anyone in the Sydney area building an RV 6 I have a friend over there
>>
> who
>
>>>is a senior aerospace engineer that is interested in doing a stress
>>
> analysis
>
>>>of this airplane(free of charge) to verify the strength of the design
>>
> even
>
>>>though Van did an excellent job.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>How does he plan to do it? By actually destroying an airplane or just
>>using the drawings and materials lists? If Van did an excellent job
>>why redo it?
>>
>>Jerry (flying my RV-6 for 15 years strong enough for me) Springer
>>
>
>
>

[Rich S.]

"John Duncan" > wrote in message
...
> G'day mates, <strine off>
>
> Yes it's definitely boring down here, the weather is terrible, no good
> beaches, the fishing is awful, so all you nice Yanks just stay up there
> with Dubya and his cowboy pals :->

John..........

It's not boring up here. We are at war with those who have invaded our
country and would destroy Western civilization. You just keep on fishing and
enjoying the fruits of a free society (your airplane kit) while we act the
cowboy, as the greatest generation did some sixty years ago. Didn't some of
yours (when things got close to your borders) share the foxholes - and the
bleeding - with us? Those were great times, eh?

Enjoy your leave.

Rich S.

[Blueskies]

The arrogance continues...comparing dubya and his actions to the actions of the greatest generation 60 years ago. Not
even close, baby...

--
Dan D.
http://www.ameritech.net/users/ddevillers/start.html


..
"Rich S." > wrote in message ...
> "John Duncan" > wrote in message
> ...
> > G'day mates, <strine off>
> >
> > Yes it's definitely boring down here, the weather is terrible, no good
> > beaches, the fishing is awful, so all you nice Yanks just stay up there
> > with Dubya and his cowboy pals :->
>
> John..........
>
> It's not boring up here. We are at war with those who have invaded our
> country and would destroy Western civilization. You just keep on fishing and
> enjoying the fruits of a free society (your airplane kit) while we act the
> cowboy, as the greatest generation did some sixty years ago. Didn't some of
> yours (when things got close to your borders) share the foxholes - and the
> bleeding - with us? Those were great times, eh?
>
> Enjoy your leave.
>
> Rich S.
>
>

[Mike Patterson]

On Mon, 03 May 2004 22:41:34 GMT, "Blueskies" > wrote:

>The arrogance continues...comparing dubya and his actions to the actions of the greatest generation 60 years ago. Not
>even close, baby...

Yeah, we all know that GWB is the root of all that is evil on earth,
and those poor chaps who keep strapping bombs on their bodies to blow
up buses loaded with children and housewives are heroes.

The USA should never involve itself in world affairs until and unless
directly attacked.

Oh wait...nevermind that part.

OK, make that "until attacked with nuclear, chemical, or biological
weapons by a nation-state".

If so attacked by organized religious zealots, we should hunt them
down with police agencies and serve them all with subpeonas. If our
staunch allies like, say, the Germans capture and convict them, I'm
sure they'll put them away in a safe place where they'll no longer
pose a threat to anyone.

I just hope they hit -your- town before they hit -mine-. That way I
can keep my eyes closed as long as possible before I head for the
hills.

By the way, how much information do -you- get from the daily CIA, NSA
and other intel briefings?


Mike Patterson
Please remove the spamtrap to email me.

[Jerry Springer]

Blueskies wrote:
> The arrogance continues...comparing dubya and his actions to the actions of the greatest generation 60 years ago. Not
> even close, baby...
>
And I say F**K you

[Blueskies]

Just a bunch of wanna-be's

..
"Jerry Springer" > wrote in message ink.net...
> Blueskies wrote:
> > The arrogance continues...comparing dubya and his actions to the actions of the greatest generation 60 years ago.
Not
> > even close, baby...
> >
> And I say F**K you
>

[Mike Patterson]

Ouch! Such a telling blow, the intellect is blinding!

Oy...what a schmuck.



On Tue, 04 May 2004 01:08:25 GMT, "Blueskies" > wrote:

>Just a bunch of wanna-be's
>
>.
>"Jerry Springer" > wrote in message ink.net...
>> Blueskies wrote:
>> > The arrogance continues...comparing dubya and his actions to the actions of the greatest generation 60 years ago.
>Not
>> > even close, baby...
>> >
>> And I say F**K you
>>
>

Mike Patterson
Please remove the spamtrap to email me.

[Regnirps]

"Blueskies" wrote:

>Just a bunch of wanna-be's

Yep. Wanna be lookin you in the eye right about now. Wanna smell the cheap gin
when you say that to my face. Wanna let you meet a couple Rangers with a, ah,
sense of humor. Really wanna see you talk your way out of a crowd in Falluja.

-- Charlie Springer

[Blueskies]

Intelligence is figuring out how not to kill someone. Too bad the US gov't is not so smart. Once upon a time we had
great options in Iraq; not anymore. Self serving attitudes are everywhere. Oh yea, that's right, killing people is fun.
The ones with the biggest guns wins. Why exactly did we pull out of Falluja after all the threats of reprisals?

The comparison to the greatest generation is a stretch at best. Where is the commitment and self sacrifice? Where is the
GI bill and other support for the troops? What happened to reconstruction? I fully support the folks in the field - too
bad they are operating under flawed orders...

--
..
"Mike Patterson" > wrote in message
...
> Ouch! Such a telling blow, the intellect is blinding!
>
> Oy...what a schmuck.
>
>
>
> On Tue, 04 May 2004 01:08:25 GMT, "Blueskies" > wrote:
>
> >Just a bunch of wanna-be's
> >
> >.
> >"Jerry Springer" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> >> Blueskies wrote:
> >> > The arrogance continues...comparing dubya and his actions to the actions of the greatest generation 60 years ago.
> >Not
> >> > even close, baby...
> >> >
> >> And I say F**K you
> >>
> >
>
> Mike Patterson
> Please remove the spamtrap to email me.

[Rich S.]

"Blueskies" > wrote in message
. ..

> Intelligence is figuring out how not to kill someone.

I started to reply by asking what your solution might be. I erased the
question.

My brothers and sisters in those two towers had to choose between the flames
and the long, slow, terrifying plunge to the concrete below. My fellow
workers (I am a retired firefighter) climbed those stairs in the knowledge
that they might - no - probably would die trying to save the innocent.

I am sick and tired of appeasement. "Not killing someone" is long past. The
enemies of civilization do not fit your definition of intelligence. They are
vicious animals. If we wish to survive, we must eliminate the threat.

Have you no compassion for those who were murdered?

I pity your ignorance.

Rich S.

[Blueskies]

I indeed have compassion for those who were murdered in the twin towers. The attack on Iraq is in no way associated with
that horrible attack. I totally supported dubya in the Afghanistan offensive and I still do, but then he went into some
sort of all powerful flip and diverted those resources into Iraq. We almost had full UN support to go into Iraq with the
full support of the world, but he jumped the gun so to speak and I don't think it was right. We are paying the
consequences of that decision with still more human lives.

Lincoln said it best; "You can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time, but you
cannot fool all of the people all of the time."

The horror of the attack on the twin towers will be with us for the rest of our lives. The civilized world needs to
teach the less 'enlightened' parts of the world what good looks like. The problem is the perception that we are
conquerors on a crusade. We need to change that perception...


--
Dan D.
http://www.ameritech.net/users/ddevillers/start.html


..
"Rich S." > wrote in message ...
> "Blueskies" > wrote in message
> . ..
>
> > Intelligence is figuring out how not to kill someone.
>
> I started to reply by asking what your solution might be. I erased the
> question.
>
> My brothers and sisters in those two towers had to choose between the flames
> and the long, slow, terrifying plunge to the concrete below. My fellow
> workers (I am a retired firefighter) climbed those stairs in the knowledge
> that they might - no - probably would die trying to save the innocent.
>
> I am sick and tired of appeasement. "Not killing someone" is long past. The
> enemies of civilization do not fit your definition of intelligence. They are
> vicious animals. If we wish to survive, we must eliminate the threat.
>
> Have you no compassion for those who were murdered?
>
> I pity your ignorance.
>
> Rich S.
>
>

[Rich S.]

"Blueskies" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> The horror of the attack on the twin towers will be with us for the rest
of our lives. The civilized world needs to
> teach the less 'enlightened' parts of the world what good looks like. The
problem is the perception that we are
> conquerors on a crusade. We need to change that perception...

If you could do that, you would be competing with the prophets of the
Islamic world. This difference of opinion has been ongoing since the last
crusades. If there had been a different outcome at the council of Nicea, the
Christian world and the Muslims may be sleeping tonight under the same tent.
But this is not reality.

In any case, this discussion arose when a citizen of another country
portrayed the United States government as "cowboys". I disagree with his
portrayal but, more importantly, disagree with his right to inject his
opinion on this newsgroup. If he wants to bring influence against the
actions of my government, this is not the appropriate forum. I struggled
with my response, but he ****ed me off so bad that I could not help lashing
back. For this I apologize. Trolls like him deserve shunning - no more.

You and I, as citizens of this blessed nation may disagree. It is our right.
This is not a U.S. newsgroup. We all know that. But no one has the right to
call us names without receiving a justifiable angry response. If he has a
bitch, take it somewhere else. I have a lot of disagreements with the
Socialist Australian government, but I don't air them here.

Rich S.

[Mark Hickey]

"Blueskies" > wrote:

>I indeed have compassion for those who were murdered in the twin towers. The attack on Iraq is in no way associated with
>that horrible attack.

There are always those who will prefer to wait and see what happens.
Hope for the best and all that nonsense. I for one am glad we took
out the regime in Iraq. Not doing so would have been a tragic
mistake. Imagine for just a moment the uproar the Bush bashers would
make had we not gone into Iraq and had then been attacked with WMD
that were determined to have come from Iraq!

>I totally supported dubya in the Afghanistan offensive and I still do, but then he went into some
>sort of all powerful flip and diverted those resources into Iraq. We almost had full UN support to go into Iraq with the
>full support of the world, but he jumped the gun so to speak and I don't think it was right.

Did you happen to forget that the French proclaimed that they would
use their UN Security Council veto against ANY use of force in Iraq?
They weren't going to come off that position (nor were Germany and
Russia) until Saddam quit lining their pockets (and he had plenty of
money at his disposal thanks to the UN). Sad that you still believe
in such a corrupt system.

>We are paying the
>consequences of that decision with still more human lives.

We liberatied 25 million Iraqis , Iraq is well on the way to a
democratic government, and the region is now receiving newscasts from
sources other than the propaganda of Al Jezeera and the like. A
despotic dictator and his thugs are out of power, and a hospitable
haven for terrorists is gone forever.

But you didn't mention any of that. If the democracy in Iraq holds
the payback will be huge. At the very least, the US is respected by
her enemies again (and I'd rather the US was respected than "liked").

>Lincoln said it best; "You can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time, but you
>cannot fool all of the people all of the time."

Guess you're in the "some of the people all of the time" camp.

>The horror of the attack on the twin towers will be with us for the rest of our lives. The civilized world needs to
>teach the less 'enlightened' parts of the world what good looks like. The problem is the perception that we are
>conquerors on a crusade. We need to change that perception...

When in the history of warfare has the civilian casualty rate ever
been so low (considerably lower than during Saddam's reign)? And when
has "being good" paid off when dealing with terrorists? We took
almost no action against the previous half dozen attacks on US
interests without doing squat. Look how we got "rewarded" on 9/11.

For a history lesson, read up on Neville Chamberlain and Winston
Churchill. I'll take a Churchill every time.

Mark Hickey

[Stealth Pilot]

On Tue, 4 May 2004 18:56:03 -0700, "Rich S."
> wrote:

>. I have a lot of disagreements with the
>Socialist Australian government, but I don't air them here.
>
>Rich S.
>
Rich there are enough errors in your post to make it silly.
your protanonist's are even sillier.
Australia hasnt has a socialist government since we voted out the
labor twits.

The Special Air Services Regiment, the guys working deep behind enemy
lines, the guys who deeply impressed your military with their
competence, they were australians.
Baghdad Airport, thats run by australians.
the guys who picked your sailors out of the drink after the terrorist
attack over there, they were australians.

silly stupid arguments.
go fly aeroplanes or go and build. do something useful.

for the guy wanting contacts in sydney email me at
just before you leave and I will give you some
phone numbers.

Stealth Pilot

[Brian Sponcil]

"Mark Hickey" > wrote in message
...
> "Blueskies" > wrote:
>
> >I indeed have compassion for those who were murdered in the twin towers.
The attack on Iraq is in no way associated with
> >that horrible attack.
>
> There are always those who will prefer to wait and see what happens.
> Hope for the best and all that nonsense. I for one am glad we took
> out the regime in Iraq. Not doing so would have been a tragic
> mistake.

Really? In the absence of WMDs, it seems to me that the only way this works
out to our favor is if Democracy sprouts in Iraq and frankly I think that's
a long shot. None of the countries surrounding Iraq want that and none of
the people in power positions inside of Iraq want that (or so it seems to
me. I am not briefed by the CIA). Obviously time will tell but at this
point we've spent nearly 100 billion dollars, 700+ lives (not including
those injured) and I don't see how things are much different in regards to
the world being a safer place.

And before you blast me for being a pinko liberal be advised that I'd love
it if I were to be proven wrong.


-Brian

[Del Rawlins]

In > Stealth Pilot wrote:

> Australia hasnt has a socialist government since we voted out the
> labor twits.

Did they give back all the guns they stole?

----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins-
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/

[Mark Hickey]

"Brian Sponcil" > wrote:

>
>"Mark Hickey" > wrote in message
...
>> "Blueskies" > wrote:
>>
>> >I indeed have compassion for those who were murdered in the twin towers.
>The attack on Iraq is in no way associated with
>> >that horrible attack.
>>
>> There are always those who will prefer to wait and see what happens.
>> Hope for the best and all that nonsense. I for one am glad we took
>> out the regime in Iraq. Not doing so would have been a tragic
>> mistake.
>
>Really? In the absence of WMDs,
<snip>

I'd really, really like to think there weren't any WMDs in Iraq, but
it's hard to figure out why Saddam would rather get removed than to
simply tell the UN where and how he got rid of the the ones he admits
having. I hope we don't find out where they went "the hard way"...

> it seems to me that the only way this works
>out to our favor is if Democracy sprouts in Iraq and frankly I think that's
>a long shot. None of the countries surrounding Iraq want that and none of
>the people in power positions inside of Iraq want that (or so it seems to
>me. I am not briefed by the CIA).

The important thing is that 90%+ of the Iraqis want a democratic
government, and they'll never have a better chance than they have
right now. Imagine how many of them would have lost their lives
overthrowing Saddam's Baathist regime "the old fashioned way"...

> Obviously time will tell but at this
>point we've spent nearly 100 billion dollars, 700+ lives (not including
>those injured) and I don't see how things are much different in regards to
>the world being a safer place.

Libya opened up to inspections and agreed to shut down their nuke
program, other more "friendly" countries are suddenly actually
cracking down on terrorists instead of coddling them (note the attacks
in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere in response to the change). And best of
all it appears the mind-boggling corruption in the UN might finally be
brought into the light of day. All very good things, IMHO.

>And before you blast me for being a pinko liberal be advised that I'd love
>it if I were to be proven wrong.

I know you're no pinko liberal - you never said "GWB is dumb" even
once. ;-)

Mark Hickey

[[email protected]]

On Wed, 05 May 2004 21:10:38 -0700, Mark Hickey >
wrote:

>I'd really, really like to think there weren't any WMDs in Iraq, but
>it's hard to figure out why Saddam would rather get removed than to
>simply tell the UN where and how he got rid of the the ones he admits
>having. I hope we don't find out where they went "the hard way"...

There is a possible explanation: Hussein actually thought he **DID**
have weapons of mass destruction because that's what his underlings
were telling him. A number of them were telling him that for several
reasons, 1. Their lives depended on their ability to produce WMD's so
they told him they were being made. It wasn't healthy to say no, or
they couldn't do it to Saddam Hussein. 2. His experts didn't really
have the expertise to produce WMD. 3. His experts were being paid a
lot of money to produce WMD and they for SURE did not want to tell
Saddam that they were getting all this money and nothing was
happening, so they told him they were making progress.

This is the angle (the human foibles factor) that the President's
cabinet, the ones who decided they did not like the intelligence they
were getting so they set up their own ad hoc intelligence group,
ignored: The possibility that there really were no WMDs.

The professional intelligence groups were saying that they could not
verify that WMD actually existed and Cheney and company just could not
believe it, given Hussein's retoric. They didn't think it was
possible that he was nothing more than a sadistic blowhard. But it
appears that is in fact what he was.

Corky Scott

[John Duncan]

Mike Patterson wrote:
> On Mon, 03 May 2004 22:41:34 GMT, "Blueskies" > wrote:
>
>
>>The arrogance continues...comparing dubya and his actions to the actions of the greatest generation 60 years ago. Not
>>even close, baby...
>
>
> Yeah, we all know that GWB is the root of all that is evil on earth,
> and those poor chaps who keep strapping bombs on their bodies to blow
> up buses loaded with children and housewives are heroes.
>
> The USA should never involve itself in world affairs until and unless
> directly attacked.
>
> Oh wait...nevermind that part.
>
> OK, make that "until attacked with nuclear, chemical, or biological
> weapons by a nation-state".
>
> If so attacked by organized religious zealots, we should hunt them
> down with police agencies and serve them all with subpeonas. If our
> staunch allies like, say, the Germans capture and convict them, I'm
> sure they'll put them away in a safe place where they'll no longer
> pose a threat to anyone.
>
> I just hope they hit -your- town before they hit -mine-. That way I
> can keep my eyes closed as long as possible before I head for the
> hills.
>
> By the way, how much information do -you- get from the daily CIA, NSA
> and other intel briefings?
>
>
> Mike Patterson
> Please remove the spamtrap to email me.

Geesh, you make tongue in cheek comment to a joke and you get all the
cowboys coming out of the woodwork!

Fellas.....GET A LIFE....

and definitely stay up there until the Prozac kicks in!


Rgds

John

[Mark Hickey]

wrote:

>The professional intelligence groups were saying that they could not
>verify that WMD actually existed and Cheney and company just could not
>believe it, given Hussein's retoric. They didn't think it was
>possible that he was nothing more than a sadistic blowhard. But it
>appears that is in fact what he was.

The "professional intelligence groups" were pretty much unanimous in
stating that it was almost certain that Iraq had massive stores of
WMD, and certainly had the ability to produce lots more in short
order. The UN weapons inspection report just before the war concluded
that it was nearly certain they were sitting on 10,000 liters of
viable anthrax, for example (not that the 10 second snippets from Hans
Blix would have led the average news viewer to understand that).

I really, really hope you're right and that somehow his WMDs had gone
inert - though that wouldn't make a lot of sense given the known Iraqi
abilities in production of WMDs.

Mark Hickey

[Kevin Horton]

On Thu, 06 May 2004 23:38:39 -0700, Mark Hickey wrote:

> wrote:
>
>>The professional intelligence groups were saying that they could not
>>verify that WMD actually existed and Cheney and company just could not
>>believe it, given Hussein's retoric. They didn't think it was possible
>>that he was nothing more than a sadistic blowhard. But it appears that
>>is in fact what he was.
>
> The "professional intelligence groups" were pretty much unanimous in
> stating that it was almost certain that Iraq had massive stores of WMD,
> and certainly had the ability to produce lots more in short order. The UN
> weapons inspection report just before the war concluded that it was nearly
> certain they were sitting on 10,000 liters of viable anthrax, for example
> (not that the 10 second snippets from Hans Blix would have led the average
> news viewer to understand that).
>
> I really, really hope you're right and that somehow his WMDs had gone
> inert - though that wouldn't make a lot of sense given the known Iraqi
> abilities in production of WMDs.
>
> Mark Hickey

This WMD stuff really baffles me. If Saddam had WMD, and he knew the US
was coming to get them, did we really think he would just leave them to be
found? Shouldn't we have expected him to get them out of the country,
into unknown hands? Would we be safer with the WMD in Iraq, where we
could try to keep an eye on them, or in unknown hands? Is GWB
stupid enough to prefer having WMD in unknown hands to having them
contained in Irag? I doubt it.

And if the US really believed he had WMD, and then they weren't found,
shouldn't they have concluded that they had to have been spirited out of
the country, and shouldn't there have been a massive panic to find them?

Something doesn't add up somewhere.

--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
e-mail: khorton02(_at_)rogers(_dot_)com

[Mark Hickey]

Kevin Horton > wrote:

>This WMD stuff really baffles me. If Saddam had WMD, and he knew the US
>was coming to get them, did we really think he would just leave them to be
>found? Shouldn't we have expected him to get them out of the country,
>into unknown hands?

They wouldn't do him much good in the hands of his neighbors (most of
whom he couldn't trust anyway).

> Would we be safer with the WMD in Iraq, where we
>could try to keep an eye on them, or in unknown hands? Is GWB
>stupid enough to prefer having WMD in unknown hands to having them
>contained in Irag? I doubt it.

Unless I missed something, the whole point is we could NOT "keep an
eye on them". No one knew where they were. I know that it's "common
knowledge" that the WMD were "contained". I've just never had anyone
explain to me how that keeps WMD from getting out of the country.
When you consider how many bad guys and equipment are flowing into and
out of Iraq across the very pourous borders AFTER the country is full
of US troops, it's pretty unrealistic to think we could have kept a
few thousand liters of anthrax from filtering through.

>And if the US really believed he had WMD, and then they weren't found,
>shouldn't they have concluded that they had to have been spirited out of
>the country, and shouldn't there have been a massive panic to find them?

I suspect there was... I'll wager there is a lot of searching going on
now that "won't make the news" for obvious reasons. And heck, if
they're finding jet fighters buried in the desert, there are obviously
some places we haven't looked IN Iraq yet.

Mark Hickey

[Boo]

Oh, get off your sanctimonious high horse will you. This ain't world war II.
We've been invading THEIR country since the very beginning. We "discovered"
an already occupied country then proceeded to slaughter the original
occupants for the next 3 centuries. US covert operations and our installed
proxies are responsible for the deaths of 100s of thousands in the middle
east, southeast Asia and south America. Iraq is nothing but a welfare
program for Halliburton and the other Bush cronies. America is the biggest
terrorist nation in the world. But of course if your only source of
information is the mind altering BS of Limbaugh and the other right wing
media corporate whores you wouldn't know that would you.

"Rich S." > wrote in message
news:8ISdnXwpsZpGWQvdRVn-> It's not boring up here. We are at war with those
who have invaded our
> country and would destroy Western civilization. You just keep on fishing
and
> enjoying the fruits of a free society (your airplane kit) while we act the
> cowboy, as the greatest generation did some sixty years ago. Didn't some
of
> yours (when things got close to your borders) share the foxholes - and the
> bleeding - with us? Those were great times, eh?

[Boo]

"John Duncan" > wrote in message
...
>
> Fellas.....GET A LIFE....
>
> and definitely stay up there until the Prozac kicks in!
>

Americans are nothing if not sanctimonious. YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO CRITICIZE
AMERICA EVER! We are the GREATEST NATION IN THE WORLD! Whether it's true or
not it's been drilled into our heads since day one. I just hope my Aus PR
comes thru so I can finally leave this land of vulture capitalism (where
making a killing on killing is just good business sense) and live in a
civilized country.

[Rich S.]

"Boo" > wrote in message
s.com...
> (snipped rant) . . . I just hope my Aus PR
> comes thru so I can finally leave this land of vulture capitalism (where
> making a killing on killing is just good business sense) and live in a
> civilized country.

Godspeed.

Rich S.