A lap around "The Ring"

"John Wallace" > wrote in message
...
>Nuclear missiles go nowhere without oil.

You make this assumption that we could not develop an alternative fuel
source and that once a particular resource is eliminated, that there would
be nothing to take its place. I believe otherwise and believe in the theory
of Necessity is the Mother of Invention.

Therefore, I believe that Nuclear Missles CAN go anywhere without oil.

Bill Bollinger
www.gsxn.com

John Wallace > wrote in
:

> Dave Henrie wrote:
>
>> The fact you seem to admire him Ziggy...is frightening.
>
> Dave, please can you explain to me how citing a very famous quote of
> Stalin's which fits a context, can be interpreted that the person is a
> raving commie?
>
> You should join the CIA - you may in fact be a touch overqualified.

John,
You should do a google groups search on ras to find out just how
paranoid I am. Xfiles should do the trick.
I barely breezed through his statement, I wasn't aware of the quote, I
think I was responding to his defense of using the quote in an earlier
post. Frankly, I can only think of one Stalin quote, it's not something
I would be dropping in everyday conversation. I never said Zig was a
commie..good chance that Socialist would fit tho.
It's the old Al Capone mentality. Viscious criminal, murderer,
extortionist etc etc...yet the local neighborhood adored and protected him
due to the charities and community projects he sponsored. Good works do
not absolve evil intent. Ergo..due to Aseg's continued attempt to defend
his man, I merely concluded that he is BONKERS. ABSOLUTELY START RAVING
MAD! Other than that...no worries...welcome member of the group and all
that.

seeya John,

dave henrie

> <laughter>
>
> Wow, the tin beanie is on mighty tight today, eh ? Pessimism isn't good
> for the health ya know.
>
> Suggest you do some research into history too. I don't buy the "when oil
> runs out, etc." moonbat theories you mention, but history has shown people
> don't "come together" when times are bad, as you suggest will happen when
> oil runs out.
> The opposite in fact.
>
> The kumbaya stuff is soooo unrealistic.


Did you really mean to say ""I don't buy the "when oil runs out, etc."
moonbat theories you mention""?

So, no need to worry I guess. There will always be plenty of oil to fuel
American's gas guzzlers.

Marty

Bill Bollinger wrote:
> Yah, because that SOCIALIST Society you live in is so great at expanding the
> quality of life </sarcasm>. Hmmm, wonder how many jobs have been created in
> that Socialist Leaning Western Europe over the past 20 years? Let's just
> say we have created more jobs in the past 5 years than all of Western Europe
> has in the past 20 years.
>
>
> The truth comes out: Socialist
>
> Bill Bollinger
> www.gsxn.com

Well, the facts seem to say otherwise.

"Overall, this level of creation represents the worst job performance
since the Bureau of Labor Statistics began collecting monthly jobs data
in 1939 (at the end of the Great Depression"

http://www.jobwatch.org/

Of course it's not all bad news. Corporate profits are souring.

Marty

....and seize his oil.

Marty

Mitch_A wrote:
> What you dont seem to comprehend is that WE do question our Government. I
> questioned why the hell it took 12 fn years to get rid of Saddam....
>
> Mitch
>
>
> "John Wallace" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>rmagruder wrote:
>>
>>>I also don't feel like getting into a debate about whether a cloudless
>>>sky is really blue. Some things just aren't worth investing the effort
>>>into.
>>
>>No-one is saying the sky has disappeared.
>>
>>If you dropped an egg on the floor and there was no shell as you cleaned
>>it up, I'm guess you'd be fine with that.
>>
>>Don't ever question your government, there's a good citizen.
>
>
>

Mitch_A wrote:
> The world is a difficult confusing place full of liars and con men that only
> have their own interest in mind. These people exist in EVERY government in
> every corner of the world not just the US gov as you insinuate.

True, but few corrupt morons have done the damage GW has done with the
blind acquiescence of barely enough American voters to put him in the
White House.

> You can tell yourself all you want that Saddam was a grreat guy but anyone
> with any common sense knows better.

Where do you get anyone saying "Saddam was a grreat guy"?

> Despite the doom and gloom of you and your party affiliates Iraq is a better
> place now and freedom is infectious throughout the ME. Its still to early
> to know how it will turn out but right now things look pretty good, which
> makes your argument seem even more marginal.

This might help. http://search.csmonitor.com/2005/0331/p01s04-wome.htm

Marty

True, but the truth is out there for those who have the guts to go after it.

Marty

Mitch_A wrote:
> Google does not a *FACT* make....
>
> Mitch
>
>
> "John Wallace" > wrote in > It takes two seconds on
> Google to find anything - you could have easily
>
>>found it yourself. Are people soooooo comfortable in their predjudice that
>>they won't even challenge their own ideas? I constantly challenge mine,
>>and despair for the human race if we ever give that up.
>
>
>

No, John is right on the money there. If people spent less time waving
the flag and more time concerned about their liberty we wouldn't have GW
in the White House.

Marty

Mitch_A wrote:
> Your interpretation of the Patriot Act is completely wrong.
>
> Mitch
>
>
> "John Wallace" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>rmagruder wrote:
>>
>>>>>Should it be any surprise that Dick Cheney stated the war on terror
>>>
>>>could last fifty years or more?>>
>>>
>>>I wasn't aware that Dick Cheney launched the attacks on 9/11 (or is
>>>that a conspiracy you also hold?)
>>
>>Sorry, Randy, straw man argument.
>>
>>Cheney said it - do you agree or disagree? I made no allegation about him
>>and 9/11, so why are you trying to put down an argument I never made?
>>
>>
>>>I realize you don't live in the USA, but I'm wondering just what civil
>>>liberties you claim we've lost? Can you name even a single case where
>>>some innocent American has lost any civil rights because of this
>>>administration?
>>
>>Well, far be it from me to comment on your laws, but Amendment IV says;
>>
>>"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers,
>>and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be
>>violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported
>>by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be
>>searched, and the persons or things to be seized"
>>
>>The Patriot Act (LOL, well named) allows the police to come into your
>>home, search, leave without telling you. The Federal Intelligence
>>Surveillance Act allows warrants from special courts, looking into such
>>ridiculous items as what library books were read, again without
>>notification.
>>
>>Just a couple of example of new laws trampling all over just one amendment
>>to your bill of rights. We're no better off over here unfortunately.
>>
>> >>>Our own corporations kill more every year in the name of profit,
>>
>>>peddling tobacco and fat/sugar laden crap for the populace to later die
>>>from.
>>>
>>>And undboutedly they are over here forcing our mouths open and making
>>>us eat every bite. They are just coming into our homes at dinner times
>>>and prying open our mouths and murdering us. Every seller needs a
>>>buyer. Not sure why you remove free choice from the equation. You're
>>>not one of those victim mentality types who think that we aren't
>>>responsible for anything we do, that we're all just victims of
>>>corporations? Sounds kinda like you are...
>>
>>I have no victim mentality - I make sure I'm not a victim. The point is
>>that "free choice" is a myth for the most part.
>>
>>Okay, let's take just an example. I show you succulent chicken, couple of
>>bucks, "special offer" tasty chicken breast. You might buy it. If I told
>>you the chicken came from Indonesia, was shipped via Holland where it was
>>injected with 50% water to make it bigger, injected with collagen to hold
>>the water, injected with pig DNA to retain the collagen, and processed in
>>filthy water to remove feathers etc, and had a high probability to be
>>infected with campylobacter....would you still buy it? How about if you
>>were moslem, and hadn't been given the information you were actually
>>eating pig?
>>
>>Fact is that it probably is (more than 80% of the world's chicken comes
>>from three companies, much of it processed in this way). You have the
>>"free choice" to buy this, but you are usually not furnished with the full
>>facts with which to properly exercise that free choice.
>>
>>
>>>What left wing web site did you get those figures from? And what did
>>>you do to ensure that the figures were indeed accurate?
>>
>>The "left wing" website of the United Nations. From your government. From
>>my government. From journalist reports. From news. It's almost 11 million
>>children per year, and a very widely known statistic. I suggest you
>>contact those organisations and let them know you dispute it.
>>
>>
>>>>>Iraqi children are dying from cancers caused by OUR depleted uranium
>>>
>>>shells
>>>
>>>I'll be looking for your objective citation backing this up as well.
>>
>>I know you can use Google....
>>
>>http://www.google.co.uk/search?compl...e+Search&meta=
>>
>>
>>>Hey Saddam managed to buy weaponry from the French and Russians during
>>>the embargo...why didn't he buy medicine if the 'evil' US and Britain
>>>were stopping him.
>>
>>You may say he bought weapons, but since we failed to find any I don't
>>think we can say this with any certainty. Or do you think he just let his
>>children die to teach us a lesson? Or to boost his popularity?
>>
>>
>>>I'm sure the French and Russians would have happily
>>>sold some to him for the proper oil-for-food profits to corrupt
>>>individuals (why is it that the left never acknowledges that the
>>>French, Russians and Germans were on the take from Saddam, and that
>>>Saddam's oil-for-food money was not getting to his own population - but
>>>I suppose you'll just deny that, too).
>>
>>The oil-for-food "profits" went first of all to Kuwait (one of the richest
>>countries in the world) as compensation for war damage. A third of the
>>money went to pay UN "expenses" (I thought we paid out of tax, but there
>>you go), further money goes to Kuwait as mentioned, further money goes as
>>compensation to oil and other companies. and with the remainder Iraq would
>>tender on the international markets for food, medical supplies etc - every
>>contract then had to be approved by the UN sanctions committee. From
>>August 1990, for eight months, ALL IMPORTS were banned, including food and
>>medicine, despite these being explicitly allowed under resolution 661.
>>
>>Have you heard of Denis Halliday? He was the Assistant Secretary-General
>>of the UN, and resigned over the sanctions. He said "I had been instructed
>>to implement a policy that satisfies the definition of genocide: a
>>deliberate policy that has deliberately killed over a million
>>individuals".
>>
>>His successor, Hans von Spooneck, calculated the oil-for-food money, and
>>after paying Kuwait, the UN, oil companies etc, Iraq was left with $100
>>for each citizen....per YEAR. That money has to pay also for
>>infrastructure including oil, water, electricity etc. After that he also
>>called the sanctions "genocide".
>>
>>But hey, it's a million Iraqis dying, so it doesn't matter...right?
>
>
>

"MartyU" > wrote in message
...
>
> > <laughter>
> >
> > Wow, the tin beanie is on mighty tight today, eh ? Pessimism isn't
good
> > for the health ya know.
> >
> > Suggest you do some research into history too. I don't buy the "when
oil
> > runs out, etc." moonbat theories you mention, but history has shown
people
> > don't "come together" when times are bad, as you suggest will happen
when
> > oil runs out.
> > The opposite in fact.
> >
> > The kumbaya stuff is soooo unrealistic.
>
>
> Did you really mean to say ""I don't buy the "when oil runs out, etc."
> moonbat theories you mention""?
>
> So, no need to worry I guess. There will always be plenty of oil to fuel
> American's gas guzzlers.
>
> Marty


Whoosh, right over the moobat's tin beenied head.

"MartyU" > wrote in message
...
> Bill Bollinger wrote:
> > Yah, because that SOCIALIST Society you live in is so great at expanding
the
> > quality of life </sarcasm>. Hmmm, wonder how many jobs have been
created in
> > that Socialist Leaning Western Europe over the past 20 years? Let's
just
> > say we have created more jobs in the past 5 years than all of Western
Europe
> > has in the past 20 years.
> >
> >
> > The truth comes out: Socialist
> >
> > Bill Bollinger
> > www.gsxn.com
>
> Well, the facts seem to say otherwise.
>
> "Overall, this level of creation represents the worst job performance
> since the Bureau of Labor Statistics began collecting monthly jobs data
> in 1939 (at the end of the Great Depression"
>
> http://www.jobwatch.org/
>
> Of course it's not all bad news. Corporate profits are souring.
>
> Marty


What's wrong with corporate profits ? Just curious is all.

Here's some info. you need to know. The numbers are from just after the
election, fwiw.

5.5% unemployment, wonderfully low interest rates, and GDP growing at just
under 4%.
Indeed, these numbers are either the same or better than the corresponding
figures during the 1996 election period.
Interestingly, the media decided to script the election as "Bush's Bad
Economy," versus their previous scripting *of the same numbers* in 1996 as
"Clinton's Economic Miracle."