Re: Can Yoorghis Tell Us Why He Hates The TEA Party -- Anyone?

[Joe Cooper]

AlleyCat <al...@aohell.com> wrote in news:MPG.2c04419b99ae37d5989ff8
@news.eternal-september.org:

> TEA Party speech is akin to Klan speech, huh.
> Please provide ANY speech
> such as you describe.
> What the fuck is wrong with you?

Yoorghikins is a proggie. THAT'S what's wrong with him.

> You're against an organization that is trying to lower taxes?

No. He is against a group of people that believe in smaller government
and adherence to the Constitution. That last part scares the shit out of
him. People who understand the law are difficult for bullies like yoorghi
to deal with - they fight back.


--
Enjoy Internet Privacy And Anonymity: http://hidemyass.com/vpn/r6995:5/

Leftists think and act like protofascists. Control is the key. And
control through fear, threat of force, and rhetorical intimidation
is the modus operandi. (Ben Shapro, "Bullies")

[Help Me, Rhonda]

On Mon, 20 May 2013 15:20:48 -0500, AlleyCat wrote:


> You are a fucking loon.

Yoorghis, actually Gary Roselles, is a 70-year-old ex-hippie dirtball who
never forgave his parents for being conservative democrats, and, more
importantly, for being white.

He brags about his relationship with blacks when in fact Rapid City SD is
only 1% black. The only minority of any quantitative consequence there is
the American Indian, 12% of the town's population. If Roselles wants to be
with people who share his socialist and anti-white views, you'd think he'd
leave his lily-white environs and migrate to Philly, Baltimore, East St
Lou, or any one of a hundred cities we could name.

He never got over the facts that Bush got a whopping 67% of the vote in
Pennington County in 2004 even though much of America was in hate Bush
mode. To add insult to injury, the very weak RINO McCain got a healthy 60%
against Odumbo in 2008 and Romney racked 64% in 2012.

[Ookin' 'n' Eekin']

On Mon, 20 May 2013 15:24:10 -0700, Siri Cruise wrote:

> In article <13q40h7ewg572$.qvl4xbuy...@40tude.net>,
> "Help Me, Rhonda" <inv...@invalid.org> wrote:
>
> Trolling for lawsuits is so New Jersey.

The truth does not result in successful lawsuits, twinky.

The politically-incorrect truth may be uncomfortable, but it ain't libel.

[Tracey12]

On May 20, 3:20 pm, AlleyCat <al...@aohell.com> wrote:

the Democrats that want to take more money so
> they can spend it on their pets, like Blacks and Latinos, to get more
> votes so they can stay in power.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

ARE THEY BUYING THEM FLEA COLLARS ?

[Ookin' 'n' Eekin']

On Mon, 20 May 2013 21:13:59 -0600, Yoor...@Jurgis.net wrote:

> On Mon, 20 May 2013 18:02:00 -0400, "Help Me, Rhonda"
> <inv...@invalid.org> wrote:
>
>>He never got over the facts that Bush got a whopping 67% of the vote in
>>Pennington County
>

> We never forget that Bush lied us into war---and that those who love
> him exemplify the ignorance and stupidity of conservatism
>
> That would be you

That would be the citizens of SDak who voted for McCain and Romney.

Eats ya heart out, don't it, punk.
>
> Just like this guy------
>
>>=================================================================================
>
>
> Newsgroups: alt.personals.black
>
>
> From: "Dana Raffaniello" <r...@home.com> - Find messages by this
> author
> Date: 1999/10/18
> Subject: White guy seeking black female
>
> hi
> visit my page, my picture is on pics page 3.
> http://members.home.net/raff1
> I live in Phoenix AZ so if any local black ladies are interested email
> me at
> r...@home.com

.

[Ookin' 'n' Eekin']

On Mon, 20 May 2013 21:39:27 -0700, Siri Cruise wrote:

> In article <1rck2zyejkyvg.b7phari0xlv1$.d...@40tude.net>,

> Your hate is your downfall.

Your girly-man liberalism is the downfall of America, Welfare Child.

[opel]

On 5/20/2013 10:39 PM, Siri Cruise wrote:
> In article <1rck2zyejkyvg.b7phari0xlv1$.d...@40tude.net>,
> Ookin' 'n' Eekin' <po...@poop.com> wrote:
>

> Your hate is your downfall.
>

Speaking from personal experience again?

[opel]

On 5/21/2013 1:22 AM, Siri Cruise wrote:
> In article <MPG.2c04b014b...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> AlleyCat <al...@aohell.com> wrote:
>
>> How about you nerds just try once to not forget about 9/11 and the
>> nearly 3000 Americans that died on that ONE day.
>
> Which had zero to do with Iraq.

Try again:


http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/033jgqyi.asp

The CIA has confirmed, in interviews with detainees and informants it
finds highly credible, that al Qaeda's Number 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri, met
with Iraqi intelligence in Baghdad in 1992 and 1998. More disturbing,
according to an administration official familiar with briefings the CIA
has given President Bush, the Agency has "irrefutable evidence" that the
Iraqi regime paid Zawahiri $300,000 in 1998, around the time his Islamic
Jihad was merging with al Qaeda. "It's a lock," says this source. Other
administration officials are a bit more circumspect, noting that the
intelligence may have come from a single source. Still, four sources
spread across the national security hierarchy have confirmed the payment.

>> If Bush is relaying info from several credible sources, well, it's just
>> not a lie, now is it?
>
> He wasn't.
>

Others were:
* On February 13, 2003, the government of the Philippines asked Hisham
al Hussein, the second secretary of the Iraqi embassy in Manila, to
leave the country. According to telephone records obtained by Philippine
intelligence, Hussein had been in frequent contact with two leaders of
Abu Sayyaf, an al Qaeda affiliate in South Asia, immediately before and
immediately after they detonated a bomb in Zamboanga City. That attack
killed two Filipinos and an American Special Forces soldier and injured
several others. Hussein left the Philippines for Iraq after he was
"PNG'd"--declared persona non grata--by the Philippine government and
has not been heard from since.

According to a report in the Christian Science Monitor, an Abu Sayyaf
leader who planned the attack bragged on television a month after the
bombing that Iraq had contacted him about conducting joint operations.
Philippine intelligence officials were initially skeptical of his
boasting, but after finding the telephone records they believed him.

* No fewer than five high-ranking Czech officials have publicly
confirmed that Mohammed Atta, the lead September 11 hijacker, met with
Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim al-Ani, an Iraqi intelligence officer working at
the Iraqi embassy, in Prague five months before the hijacking. Media
leaks here and in the Czech Republic have called into question whether
Atta was in Prague on the key dates--between April 4 and April 11, 2001.
And several high-ranking administration officials are "agnostic" as to
whether the meeting took place. Still, the public position of the Czech
government to this day is that it did.

That assertion should be seen in the context of Atta's curious stop-off
in Prague the previous spring, as he traveled to the United States. Atta
flew to Prague from Germany on May 30, 2000, but did not have a valid
visa and was denied entry. He returned to Germany, obtained the proper
paperwork, and took a bus back to Prague. One day later, he left for the
United States.

Despite the Czech government's confirmation of the Atta-al Ani meeting,
the Bush administration dropped it as evidence of an al Qaeda-Iraq
connection in September 2002. Far from hyping this episode,
administration officials refrained from citing it as the debate over the
Iraq war heated up in Congress, in the country, and at the U.N.

[opel]

On 5/21/2013 2:46 AM, Siri Cruise wrote:

> Everybody but you know has already read the admission by Bush, Powell, etc that
> their sources were not credible.

Does that include:

“[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the
U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if
appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond
effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of
mass destruction programs.” — From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman,
Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among
others on October 9, 1998

“This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors
last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam
Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that
biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back
to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery
systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to
develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and
our allies.” — From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe
Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

“Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between
Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to
dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to
permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections;
Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including
chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress
toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities” — From a joint
resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

“Saddam’s goal … is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while
retaining and enhancing Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs. We
cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed.” — Madeline
Albright, 1998

“(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and
some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he
has 10 times since 1983″ — National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb
18, 1998

“Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all
weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to
its agreement.” — Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

“The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are
confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to
build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence
reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not
yet achieved nuclear capability.” — Robert Byrd, October 2002

“There’s no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat… Yes, he has
chemical and biological weapons. He’s had those for a long time. But the
United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture
than we were before September 11th of 2001… He is, as far as we know,
actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn’t have nuclear
warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends
in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we.” — Wesley
Clark on September 26, 2002

“What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents
with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad’s regime did use such
weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think
that, over the past four years, in the absence of international
inspectors, this country has continued armament programs.” — Jacques
Chirac, October 16, 2002

“The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of
threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction,
ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond
today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be
emboldened tomorrow.” — Bill Clinton in 1998

“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show
that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological
weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program.
He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including
Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his
involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear,
however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to
increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will
keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that
endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the
Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.” —
Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

“I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons…I saw evidence back in
1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry
into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving
those trucks out.” — Clinton’s Secretary of Defense William Cohen in
April of 2003

“Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass
destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them
against his own people.” — Tom Daschle in 1998

“Saddam Hussein’s regime represents a grave threat to America and our
allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades,
Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every
available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He
has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is
trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to
build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to
achieving that goal.” — John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

“The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national
security. It should be clear that our national security requires
Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is
united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq’s
weapons of mass destruction.” — John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

“I share the administration’s goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons
of mass destruction.” — Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

“Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf
and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his
access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq’s search for weapons of mass
destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should
assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.” — Al
Gore, 2002

“We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that
Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing
capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.”
— Bob Graham, December 2002

“Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to
deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction.” —
Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002

“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and
developing weapons of mass destruction.” — Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

“There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein’s regime is a serious danger,
that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass
destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed.” — Ted Kennedy,
Sept 27, 2002

“I will be voting to give the president of the United States the
authority to use force – if necessary – to disarm Saddam Hussein because
I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his
hands is a real and grave threat to our security.” — John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

“The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real,
but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that
war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert
Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build
those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these
weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we
had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation.” —
John Kerry, October 9, 2002

“(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator,
leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He
presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently
prone to miscalculation. …And now he is miscalculating America�s
response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of
mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations
Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq
disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam
Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It
has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War.” — John Kerry,
Jan 23, 2003

“We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass
destruction and the means of delivering them.” — Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

“Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological
weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for
the United States.” — Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

“Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and
biological weapons. During 1991 – 1994, despite Iraq’s denials, U.N.
inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear
facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various
reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons
capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear
weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N.
inspectors have said that Iraq’s claims about biological weapons is
neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons
against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While
weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no
inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has
continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction.”
— Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

“As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that
the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of
grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the
development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat
to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons
inspection process.” — Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

“Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible
intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq
still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and
clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen
bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue
manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of
the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard
gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic
missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial
infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale
chemical weapons production.” — Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998

“There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working
aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear
weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can
obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources — something that
is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we
have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development
of weapons of mass destruction.” — John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

“Saddam�s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a
very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons
before, both against Iraq�s enemies and against his own people. He is
working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial
vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and
U.S. facilities in the Middle East.” — John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

“Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration�s policy
towards Iraq, I don�t think there can be any question about Saddam�s
conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11
years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm
and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear
capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the
mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games
the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and
legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the
United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts.” — Henry
Waxman, Oct 10, 2002

[opel]

On 5/21/2013 7:17 AM, Siri Cruise wrote:
> In article <qwqf52e75dl3$.ms9pqq75...@40tude.net>,

> Ookin' 'n' Eekin' <po...@poop.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 20 May 2013 21:39:27 -0700, Siri Cruise wrote:
>>
>>> In article <1rck2zyejkyvg.b7phari0xlv1$.d...@40tude.net>,
>>> Ookin' 'n' Eekin' <po...@poop.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 20 May 2013 15:24:10 -0700, Siri Cruise wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <13q40h7ewg572$.qvl4xbuy...@40tude.net>,
>>>>> "Help Me, Rhonda" <inv...@invalid.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Trolling for lawsuits is so New Jersey.
>>>>
>>>> The truth does not result in successful lawsuits, twinky.
>>>>
>>>> The politically-incorrect truth may be uncomfortable, but it ain't libel.
>>>
>>> Your hate is your downfall.
>>
>> Your girly-man liberalism is the downfall of America, Welfare Child.
>

> Why do you think a legal secretary is on welfare?
>

Stupidity or laziness?

[Trayvon Obamason]

Good one.

[MattB .]

On Mon, 20 May 2013 21:13:59 -0600, Yoor...@Jurgis.net wrote:

>On Mon, 20 May 2013 18:02:00 -0400, "Help Me, Rhonda"
><inv...@invalid.org> wrote:
>
>>He never got over the facts that Bush got a whopping 67% of the vote in
>>Pennington County
>

>We never forget that Bush lied us into war---and that those who love
>him exemplify the ignorance and stupidity of conservatism
>
>That would be you
>

>Just like this guy------

Democrats here aren't happy with Obama and his liberal agenda.
Hopefully you will lose the Senate soon.

>
>>=================================================================================
>
>
>Newsgroups: alt.personals.black
>
>
>From: "Dana Raffaniello" <r...@home.com> - Find messages by this
>author
>Date: 1999/10/18
>Subject: White guy seeking black female
>
>hi
>visit my page, my picture is on pics page 3.
>http://members.home.net/raff1
>I live in Phoenix AZ so if any local black ladies are interested email
>me at
>r...@home.com

A white guy that likes Black women. What is wrong with that? One of
my Black friends has a white wife. I'd think if you weren't a racist
Gary you'd approve.

BTW you have several times shown your racist views of Native
Americans.

Remember this

Here is what you say will happen to those of different opinions.

****

On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 17:42:40 -0700, Yoor...@Jurgis.net wrote:

>On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 15:54:25 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>Obama and me are both Zebras

You actually are nothing, MattLoon

You don't even make a good native american.

You come live at PineRidge on the Rosebud and spout your loony
shit---and I guaranfuckingtee you they won't find enough of you to
feed to the prairie dogs.

*****

Well you do support murder although you live at Cedar Ridge Townhouses
Rapid City, SD. not Pine Ridge Indian Reservation.

********

Yes I am a Zebra of native American heritage and yes I have relatives
on both Pine Ridge Indian Reservation and Cheyenne River. They are
good people.

[MattB .]

On Tue, 21 May 2013 15:45:05 -0600, Yoor...@Jurgis.net wrote:

>On Tue, 21 May 2013 11:45:27 -0700, MattB .
><trdel...@spamnogmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>We never forget that Bush lied us into war---and that those who love
>>>him exemplify the ignorance and stupidity of conservatism
>>>
>>>That would be you
>>>
>>>Just like this guy------
>>
>>Democrats here aren't happy with Obama and his liberal agenda.
>>Hopefully you will lose the Senate soon.
>

>Wrong.
>
>But not surprising you can't even get that right
>
>For SOME Democrats, Obama is not liberal enough---he compromises (as
>he should) ....or at least tries.
>
>Compromising progressive principles is worse for us than conservatives
>compromising conservative "princples"----because conservatives use the
>word "conservative principles" to convey a "message" that they do not
>practice in reality


Well lets see. Liberals are turning Democrats against them and the
Media.

You are going to lose.

[opel]

On 5/21/2013 5:56 PM, Siri Cruise wrote:
> In article <MPG.2c059b27...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> AlleyCat <al...@aohell.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 21 May 2013 01:46:11 -0700,Siri Cruise says...

>>
>>> Everybody but you know has already read the admission by Bush, Powell, etc
>>> that
>>> their sources were not credible.
>>>

>>> Curveball?
>>
>> AFTER the fact, moron.
>
> Nope, Germans and Brits warned Bush before the fact.

Putin, Mubarak and others said the opposite.