I believe Obama is lying again about the capture & death of bin Laden.
A. Nony Moose
Why dispose of the body so quickly?
Why dispose the body where a civilian review panel can't get at it?
Why all this rush?
Oh no, my friends, Obama and the government are involved in a conspiracy to
delude the public into thinking Osama is dead, when in fact, he was neither
captured or killed but rather still alive and planning more terror attacks in
the name of his terrorist religion...
Clearly Obama took note of his sinking approval ratings and desperately flailed
about looking for something, anything to distract the public from his
disgraceful ineptitude that has ruined the US economy and will shortly lead to a
hyper-inflation never before witnessed by the American public.
What better way to garner "good press" than announce that the Islamic bogeyman
is dead and gone?
Ding, dong the witch is dead.
Obama has sunk to an all-time low and should be impeached for this conspiracy!
Jim_Higgins
Nothing of importance as he lay on the Grassy Knoll.
A. Nony Moose
"Jim_Higgins" <gordi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ipmfqt$f9h$2...@dont-email.me...
> On 5/2/11 10:24 AM, A. Nony Moose wrote:
> Nothing of importance as he lay on the Grassy Knoll.
Such a rapier wit, Higgins!
Reid Goldsborough
can no doubt see that it's a troll post. You'd be hard pressed to
construct a lamer and more transparent troll post if you were entering a
contest to see who could formulate such a post. But let me offer two
other statements in response ... widely circulating online:
Obama's opponents will believe bin Laden is dead only when they see his
long-form death certificate.
This headline was flashed on Fox News: "Obama Administration kills
homeless religious man with kidney disease."
On 5/2/2011 10:24 AM, A. Nony Moose wrote:
> I believe Obama is lying again about the capture& death of bin Laden.
--
Consumer: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Connoisseur: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Counterfeit: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos
A. Nony Moose
"Reid Goldsborough" <reidgol...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4lj6l8....@news.alt.net...
> Anybody reading this whose online experience is greater that 6 seconds can no
> doubt see that it's a troll post. You'd be hard pressed to construct a lamer
> and more transparent troll post if you were entering a contest to see who
> could formulate such a post. But let me offer two other statements in response
> ... widely circulating online:
Sometimes I wonder why every take you off my kill-file, given your propensity
for supercilious blather and general all-around inanity.
Back you go.
PLONK
Frank Galikanokus
>
> I believe Obama is lying again about the capture & death of bin Laden.
When was the last time he lied about the capture & death of bin Laden?
>
> Why dispose of the body so quickly?
>
> Why dispose the body where a civilian review panel can't get at it?
>
> Why all this rush?
Please tell us how the body was disposed.
>
> Oh no, my friends, Obama and the government are involved in a conspiracy to
> delude the public into thinking Osama is dead, when in fact, he was neither
> captured or killed but rather still alive and planning more terror attacks in
> the name of his terrorist religion...
>
> Clearly Obama took note of his sinking approval ratings and desperately flailed
> about looking for something, anything to distract the public from his
> disgraceful ineptitude that has ruined the US economy and will shortly lead to a
> hyper-inflation never before witnessed by the American public.
>
> What better way to garner "good press" than announce that the Islamic bogeyman
> is dead and gone?
>
> Ding, dong the witch is dead.
>
> Obama has sunk to an all-time low and should be impeached for this conspiracy!
Your a loony and you know it. And now we all know you are a loony.
JAM
A. Nony Moose
"Frank Galikanokus" <FrankGal...@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:4DBECF59...@nospam.net...
> "A. Nony Moose" wrote:
>>
>> I believe Obama is lying again about the capture & death of bin Laden.
>
> When was the last time he lied about the capture & death of bin Laden?
It's not surprising that you fail to be able to deconstruct a simple English
sentence.
>> Why dispose of the body so quickly?
>>
>> Why dispose the body where a civilian review panel can't get at it?
>>
>> Why all this rush?
>
> Please tell us how the body was disposed.
The government announced that bin Laden was allegedly "buried at sea", which you
would know if you weren't a semi-literate, mouth-breathing troglodyte.
Bremick
"A. Nony Moose" <a...@nony.moose> wrote in message
news:98zvp.2564$OZ2....@newsfe07.iad...
>I believe Obama is lying again about the capture & death of bin Laden.
>
> Why dispose of the body so quickly?
Why not?
>
> Why dispose the body where a civilian review panel can't get at it?
Civilian review panels typically take six months to make decisions-- when
they can make them at all. Thank God civilian panels don't get to "review"
all our special ops actions.
>
> Why all this rush?
He was beginning to smell.
>
> Oh no, my friends, Obama and the government are involved in a conspiracy
> to delude the public into thinking Osama is dead, when in fact, he was
> neither captured or killed but rather still alive and planning more terror
> attacks in the name of his terrorist religion...
So you were there? Or did Glen or Rush tell you this, based on their inside
connections to the CIA and ST6?
>
> Clearly Obama took note of his sinking approval ratings and desperately
> flailed about looking for something, anything to distract the public from
> his disgraceful ineptitude that has ruined the US economy and will shortly
> lead to a hyper-inflation never before witnessed by the American public.
Do you always carry your talking points with you?
>
> What better way to garner "good press" than announce that the Islamic
> bogeyman is dead and gone?
It seems to be working, doesn't it? Too bad he couldn't have been able to
make the announcement earlier. Too bad Bush couldn't.
>
> Ding, dong the witch is dead.
>
> Obama has sunk to an all-time low and should be impeached for this
> conspiracy!
No more TV for you for a week.
Robert Hairgrove
> "A. Nony Moose"<a...@nony.moose> wrote in message
> news:98zvp.2564$OZ2....@newsfe07.iad...
>>
>> Why dispose of the body so quickly?
>
> Why not?
>
>>
>> Why dispose the body where a civilian review panel can't get at it?
>
> Civilian review panels typically take six months to make decisions-- when
> they can make them at all. Thank God civilian panels don't get to "review"
> all our special ops actions.
>
>>
>> Why all this rush?
>
> He was beginning to smell.
There will always be people who think that Hitler is still alive and
living in Argentina or Chile or Paraguay or (... pick your favorite
conspircay-theoretist South American hideaway for ex-Nazis). There are
certainly enough people who think that the Holocaust never happened in
spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. What can we do except to
educate the next generation and to preserve the historical evidence?
As obnoxious as AnonyMoose's theory might be, I have to agree that, for
the moment, there is certainly a lack of convincing and *publicly
available* evidence that they indeed got the guy (i.e. the right guy).
They do have some after-the-fact pictures (presumably NOT suitable for
PG-rated public viewing), and they do have DNA tests. And I assume that
with the build-up time from March this year (or even 5 years earlier
when they pretty much knew where OBL was), the current administration
would have taken adequate steps to retain enough evidence to silence
discussions such as the current one. But it will probably take more time
until a "public viewing" of such things is possible.
(JUST TO STAY ON-TOPIC with COINS:)
If they come out with a commemorative silver round showing OBL with a
bullet hole in his head, I'll buy one!
A. Nony Moose
"Robert Hairgrove" <nob...@hogwash.com> wrote in message
news:530f9$4dc03ef6$d9a2879e$30...@news.hispeed.ch...
> As obnoxious as AnonyMoose's theory might be, I have to agree that, for the
> moment, there is certainly a lack of convincing and *publicly available*
> evidence that they indeed got the guy (i.e. the right guy).
>
> They do have some after-the-fact pictures (presumably NOT suitable for
> PG-rated public viewing), and they do have DNA tests. And I assume that with
> the build-up time from March this year (or even 5 years earlier when they
> pretty much knew where OBL was), the current administration would have taken
> adequate steps to retain enough evidence to silence discussions such as the
> current one. But it will probably take more time until a "public viewing" of
> such things is possible.
>
"Obnoxious theory"?
There has been no reliable evidence that OBL was killed, other than the word of
a congenital liar and hypocrite (Obama).
They are busy now dummying up fake photos and video to further dupe the masses.
The DNA evidence can easily be faked.
Jason Burke
Bob, you ought to wander over to alt.conspiracy.jfk. You'll meet lots of
nice folks there.
Bremick
"A. Nony Moose" <a...@nony.moose> wrote in message
While you continue to fester over this issue, the rest of the country will
go on with business. You sure seem to have lots of inside access. I'm
surprised the authorities haven't contacted you personally yet to invite you
to inspect all their evidence and then cross their fingers in hope you will
accept it. If Rush or Glen were to accept it, I'm sure you will too
without further question.
A. Nony Moose
"Bremick" <rem...@cox.net> wrote in message news:ipq3bp$vpq$1...@dont-email.me...
Contrary to your belief, I am not a fan of Rush or Glenn, nor have I ever made
any claim of "inside access" (don't know where you came up with that!)
I'm just disgusted by the feckless Obama administration and its bungling of the
economy.
Obama's credibility around this household is ZERO.
He lies constantly, even when their is no logical reason for doing so. I believe
it's impossible for him to utter a truth.
I'm duly suspicious of the gubmint, esp. when they ask me to believe them
without a shred of evidence.
Again I ask: why the rush to dispose of the (alleged) body?
Why don't they release the videos and photographs? Is it so they have time to
dummy up fakes?
The whole affair stinks to high heaven and screams out CONSPIRACY!
Bremick
"A. Nony Moose" <a...@nony.moose> wrote in message
You constantly make wild claims as if you know more than the rest of us.
You don't "wonder". You accuse.
> I'm just disgusted by the feckless Obama administration and its bungling
> of the economy.
> Obama's credibility around this household is ZERO.
Good for you. Big deal. Lots of people feel that way.
> He lies constantly, even when their is no logical reason for doing so. I
> believe it's impossible for him to utter a truth.
> I'm duly suspicious of the gubmint, esp. when they ask me to believe them
> without a shred of evidence.
Then maybe you should find a country to live in with a government you can
always trust. Maybe they'll be sure to gather special evidence just for
you.
> Again I ask: why the rush to dispose of the (alleged) body?
I have no problem with their various rationales so far. Why do you care so
much?
> Why don't they release the videos and photographs? Is it so they have
> time to dummy up fakes?
Who really *needs* photos? The Enquirer? People magazine? Certainly not
those who accept and rejoice over the demise of bin Laden and don't need to
know all the details. You don't sound like you would accept a photo whether
some were released or not.
> The whole affair stinks to high heaven and screams out CONSPIRACY!
Use some cotton and a clothes pin if it bothers you so much.
Jerry Dennis
part:
<snipped for brevity>
> There will always be people who think that Hitler is still alive and
> living in Argentina or Chile or Paraguay or (... pick your favorite
> conspircay-theoretist South American hideaway for ex-Nazis).
Just a point of note. If Hitler did survive WW2, "escaped" to South
America, and was still alive, he'd be 122 as of this past April 20.
<more snippage>
> (JUST TO STAY ON-TOPIC with COINS:)
>
> If they come out with a commemorative silver round showing OBL
> with a bullet hole in his head, I'll buy one!
ME, TOO!
Jerry
Go Seal Team 6!
A. Nony Moose
>> Why don't they release the videos and photographs? Is it so they have time
>> to dummy up fakes?
>
> Who really *needs* photos? The Enquirer? People magazine? Certainly not
> those who accept and rejoice over the demise of bin Laden and don't need to
> know all the details. You don't sound like you would accept a photo whether
> some were released or not.
It never ceases to amaze my how readily the American public will drink the
Kool-Aid and believe anything the gubmint tells them.
Bremick
"A. Nony Moose" <a...@nony.moose> wrote in message
.......and by the same token.......
A. Nony Moose
"Bremick" <rem...@cox.net> wrote in message news:ipri5o$std$1...@dont-email.me...
Nice way to get this back on topic! ;-)
Bremick
"A. Nony Moose" <a...@nony.moose> wrote in message
I expect we'll see the inevitable "authorized" OBL token or two soon. Maybe
it will be sealed in a capsule filled with sea water.
oly
> "A. Nony Moose" <a...@nony.moose> wrote in messagenews:_%bwp.48577$sS4...@newsfe11.iad...
>
> - Show quoted text -
I tend to agree with RF that I can't understand why the American
people can't be shown real photographs, even videos, immediately.
"Transparency" is very very important. After all, they killed the
S.O.B. in the name of the American people and we will have to live
with any backlash.
Why would somebody hide an innocuous birth certificate for four years
if there wasn't something irregular??? Why not show us the photograph
of a high-profile dead enemy??? There is worse stuff on television
and the internet anytime you or anybody cares to look.
It's not an original thought to me, but lots and lots of you oldsters
used to protest at the drop of a hat when it was LBJ, Nixon and the
Vietnam War.
Now that you have a comfortable government teat to suck on, they've
got most of you totally 100% pacified.
oly
Bremick
"oly" <oly...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:fd2133aa-5bfc-42ef...@w36g2000vbi.googlegroups.com...
[Was this same transparency important when photos of burned hung
Americans were available, a beheaded American, the remains of a soldier
dragged through the streets? We accepted what had happened without the need
to demand photographic proof. You claim here to accept that we killed bin
Laden. But you still demand a photo of the results?]
Why would somebody hide an innocuous birth certificate for four years
if there wasn't something irregular??? Why not show us the photograph
of a high-profile dead enemy??? There is worse stuff on television
and the internet anytime you or anybody cares to look.
[Perhaps a photo should be loaded on a special website where the curious
could register and select a password and then gaze at it like Dillinger
fans. There would of course be a link to a discussion group where the
Photoshop skeptics could chat with one another.]
It's not an original thought to me, but lots and lots of you oldsters
used to protest at the drop of a hat when it was LBJ, Nixon and the
Vietnam War.
[Many of the "oldsters" fought in the war. You "youngsters" were doing
the protesting. And what does protesting the Vietnam War have to do with
bin Laden's photo?]
Now that you have a comfortable government teat to suck on, they've
got most of you totally 100% pacified.
[What would you do without the notion that "They" or "Them" are
conspiring against us all? Osama bin Laden's death pacifies me 100% and
makes me proud. No need here to be personally convinced every detail
occurred as claimed. I don't look upon every conflicting account as a govt
conspiracy or coverup. In the long run, who really cares whether he was
respectfully disposed of or in fact mutilated like an animal? He's dead.
And perish the thought that you might encounter things you "don't
understand". And I notice your apparent jealousy of govt retirees keeps
growing, since you keep weaving it into your posts.]
oly
> "oly" <oly2...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
My suspicion is that you were just a bit too old to be a hippy, Mr.
Remick. Probably grew up someplace damn conservative too, like the
bootheel of Missouri or somesuch.
Actually, on the age spectrum, I suspect that Mr. Mazor was the
correct age to pop-up and run-off to the demonstration at the drop of
a hat. Probably Frank too.
As for myself, I was 14 years old in 1974, so Vietnam didn't much
register with me (and the Civil Rights movement even less). But I did
grow up under late Nixon, Ford and Carter and in the big inflation
years, so I do have a great contempt for financial frauds and monetary
liars in high places. We have those in spades today.
But what about principles??? Fundamental priciples (if that's not a
redundant use of an adjective)???
This is the 40th Anniversary of Kent State, this very day. Nobody in
America 2011 has principles like those kids, not anymore. Even if
misguided, they had principles, real beliefs.
I do think that all the government bread and circuses are part of the
reason that the sheeple are such sheep in 2011. And you government
retirees are just the tip of the iceberg, don't overrate your
importance (or impotence). For instance, 44 million people are on
Food Stamps nowadays. Can't demonstrate when you can't feed yourself
first.
Why the hell can't we (the American People) be shown a real photograph
of a dead top-level terrorist who killed 3,000+ of our people in a
single attrocity??? Why the cover-up (to use a Watergate era word)???
oly
Bremick
[I was born, let's say, before Pearl Harbor. In New England, too, of
all conservative places. Funny you would mention "hippy" because I was
probably among the original bearded "beatniks" while attending an art
school.]
Actually, on the age spectrum, I suspect that Mr. Mazor was the
correct age to pop-up and run-off to the demonstration at the drop of
a hat. Probably Frank too.
As for myself, I was 14 years old in 1974, so Vietnam didn't much
register with me (and the Civil Rights movement even less). But I did
grow up under late Nixon, Ford and Carter and in the big inflation
years, so I do have a great contempt for financial frauds and monetary
liars in high places. We have those in spades today.
[When I was in college, the popular demonstration topic du jour was
"Fair Play For Cuba!". Just shows kids of that era could be the same
assholes as 2011 kids, as long as the cameras kept rolling.]
But what about principles??? Fundamental priciples (if that's not a
redundant use of an adjective)???
This is the 40th Anniversary of Kent State, this very day. Nobody in
America 2011 has principles like those kids, not anymore. Even if
misguided, they had principles, real beliefs.
[Now you're sounding like an "oldster."]
I do think that all the government bread and circuses are part of the
reason that the sheeple are such sheep in 2011. And you government
retirees are just the tip of the iceberg, don't overrate your
importance (or impotence). For instance, 44 million people are on
Food Stamps nowadays. Can't demonstrate when you can't feed yourself
first.
[There's a certain amount of truth in what you say. When I chose govt
service, we "servants" were considered UN-important even though govt jobs
were valued for their security. We're pretty much vilified as a group
today, along with those who receive SS, food stamps, unemployment benefits
for two years, or pretty much anybody who gets entitlement money from the
govt. I greee that things will have to change. We received a govt pension
the same as most of the corporate folks did. The cost of our pensions and
theirs was buried in by our taxes and within prices we paid for those
corporate goods and services respectively. We all end up paying in some
way. And we've all become spoiled.]
Why the hell can't we (the American People) be shown a real photograph
of a dead top-level terrorist who killed 3,000+ of our people in a
single attrocity??? Why the cover-up (to use a Watergate era word)???
[Maybe because less enthusiastic people in certain other countries would
be able see the photograph, too. I'd bet that's what's being considered
now, not whether or not Americans can handle it. Be patient.]
Jim_Higgins
Along with a crab?
Bremick
Maybe a big full one.
oly
>
> - Show quoted text -
We've never met in person, of course, but it's kinda hard to imagine
you as Maynard G. Krebs!!!
oly
Bremick
[ Like most fair-skinned teenagers today, I could never grow a decent
looking beard, even into my 20's. Which makes me skeptical of Maynard G.
Krebs' beard. A cover-up?]
mazorj
On May 4, 8:12 am, "Bremick" <rem...@cox.net> wrote:
<snip>
< I tend to agree with RF that I can't understand why the American
people can't be shown real photographs, even videos, immediately.
"Transparency" is very very important. After all, they killed the
S.O.B. in the name of the American people and we will have to live
with any backlash.
<
< Why would somebody hide an innocuous birth certificate for four years
if there wasn't something irregular??? Why not show us the photograph
of a high-profile dead enemy??? There is worse stuff on television
and the internet anytime you or anybody cares to look.
C'mon, oly. You know damn well that any photos and videos would become
iconic rallying devices to further inflame hatred of America. Think not?
An editor lost his life over publication of those "profane" cartoons in the
Dutch press; and that "offense" against Islam still is being used to whip up
anti-West anger.
This is an extreme "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation. While
transparency always is the preferable course, you have to weigh the costs
and benefits. In this case very little would be gained by releasing the
photos and videos - can there be any realistic doubt that Osama is dead?
(Notwithstanding Bobsey "Nanny Moose" Boy's trolling. Life in Sea Cliff does
get boring until the weather warms and the beaches open up.)
OTOH the cost would be giving aid and a beneficial source of discomfort to
the enemy. It's not beyond the realm of possibility that releasing this
material would tip the balance of anger to the point of provoking a
terrorist attack on U.S.soil. At the least, it would provoke attacks and
riots elsewhere, and generally increase hatred of America. Given that we
know beyond a reasonable doubt that we hunted down and killed the bastard,
is this cost worth the marginal benefit of getting to see a "death shot" and
a video of his burial at sea? This is one rare case where I'm willing to
forego the satisfaction of photographic proof for the greater good.
< It's not an original thought to me, but lots and lots of you oldsters
used to protest at the drop of a hat when it was LBJ, Nixon and the
Vietnam War.
That's hardly a good analogy. In order to parallel the Vietnam War here,
we'd have to be talking about the government covering up attacks into
neighboring nations, hiding the true casualty figures, and refusing to admit
that some of its previous statements about why we got involved were untrue
(for example, clinging to the bogus Gulf of Tonkin "attack" story vs. the
government's frank acknowledgement that Iraq was found not to have weapons
of mass destruction). The issue at hand doesn't even come close in either
the nature or the severity of the withheld information.
< Now that you have a comfortable government teat to suck on, they've
got most of you totally 100% pacified.
Get real, oly. You're saying that "If you ain't 100% with us, you're 100%
pacified and 100% against us." That's so far over the top that you need
binoculars to see it pass overhead.
mazorj
Only if his sign was Cancer.
A better prominent device would be to surround him in the water with 6
seals. (I hope I don't have to explain that one.)
mazorj
On May 4, 11:21 am, "Bremick" <rem...@cox.net> wrote:
,snip>
> [Maybe because less enthusiastic people in certain other countries would
> be able see the photograph, too. I'd bet that's what's being considered
> now, not whether or not Americans can handle it. Be patient.]- Hide quoted
> text -
<
< We've never met in person, of course, but it's kinda hard to imagine
< you as Maynard G. Krebs!!!
<
< oly
WORK!?!?!?
A. Nony Moose
news:ipuc19$qoe$1...@dont-email.me...
> This is an extreme "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation. While
> transparency always is the preferable course, you have to weigh the costs and
> benefits. In this case very little would be gained by releasing the photos
> and videos - can there be any realistic doubt that Osama is dead?
Of course there is "realistic doubt" that OBL is dead, you ninny.
Why the cover-up?
Why didn't they let a civilian pathologist do an autopsy?
Why the rush to dispose of the body?
And if by chance they really did kill OBL, it was a monumental act of stupidity.
Capturing him and interrogating him could have provided a wealth of information.
The American public is expected to believe "We are the government, trust us."
Well, I don't trust the government in general and I never believe anything Obama
says.
YMMV
oly
One "released" photo that I was very impressed with was the group
photo of people in the OBL raid "situation room" and their positions
around the table, their positions in front of portable computers.
IMHO, the photos from the "situation room" are very telling.
oly
mazorj
"A. Nony Moose" <a...@nony.moose> wrote in message
> "mazorj" <maz...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:ipuc19$qoe$1...@dont-email.me...
>> This is an extreme "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation.
>> While transparency always is the preferable course, you have to weigh the
>> costs and benefits. In this case very little would be gained by
>> releasing the photos and videos - can there be any realistic doubt that
>> Osama is dead?
>
> Of course there is "realistic doubt" that OBL is dead, you ninny.
Only in the minds of paranoids and trollers.
> Why the cover-up?
There is no cover-up. Just a decision not to release a photo.
> Why didn't they let a civilian pathologist do an autopsy?
Why should they? First, this was a military operation, and second, Cause of
Death: Obvious gunshot wound to head inflicted during armed assault on
deceased's lair.
> Why the rush to dispose of the body?
To not give America-haters a rallying point and icon (the body). Better a
quick fait accompli than to get entangled in a useless argument after the
fact over what to do with the body, which in itself would further inflame
anti-American sentiment. The quick burial at sea also conformed to Islamic
law, violation of which would be a further propaganda sore point.
> And if by chance they really did kill OBL, it was a monumental act of
> stupidity.
> Capturing him and interrogating him could have provided a wealth of
> information.
Given that we would have to stick to the current, fairly benign rules for
interrogating terrorists, you think that the Prime Mover of terrorism is
going to tell us squat, let alone spill his guts? As if.
As with the photographs and the body, an alive Bin Ladn prisoner would
become a rallying point for America-haters. Even from sympathetic nations,
their issues of what to do with him would become a major distraction for the
government. Furthermore, we'll get a ton of useful information from the
computers and documents they brought back - far, far more thas Osama would
ever let on.
> The American public is expected to believe "We are the government, trust
> us."
No, the reasonable expectation is one of trust with a *healthy* amount of
skepticism. Automatically distrusting everything from government -
especially in a situation like this where the action was so monumental that
disbelief of it is in the same league with claiming that the moon landings
were faked - is *unhealthy* distrust.
> Well, I don't trust the government in general and I never believe anything
> Obama says.
> YMMV
Therein lies your problem. You are the 180-degree polar opposite of what
you insultingly say about the American "sheeple".
If you want to troll, Bobsey Boy, get a boat, some fishing tackle, and go
1-2 miles north-northwest until you reach the Sound. Fishing with the gulls
may not be as much fun as phishing for gullibles, but if you skip the life
jacket, it will give one or two posters here (present company excepted) the
happy prospect of praying for a leak or sudden major squall. Then you'd
have the honor of a burial at sea just like your fellow paranoid Bin Ladn.
mazorj
Aw shucks, oly, don't be a sheeple. That was a doctored, repurposed shot of
a White House gathering to watch the royal wedding. Anyone frowning was
realizing that their bet that the bride and groom would drop the rings
wasn't going to pay off. :-)
A. Nony Moose
Back in the killfile you go, you curmdugeonly old bastard, until you learn to
mind your manners.
Frank Galikanokus
We are the government is what our representative democracy is all about.
You are a loony.
JAM
A. Nony Moose
"Frank Galikanokus" <FrankGal...@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:4DC2CCEF...@nospam.net...
Sticks and stones...
You appear to be extremely naive or just plain stupid.
Sine you have never posted anything of value, into the killfile you go.
mazorj
"A. Nony Moose" <a...@nony.moose> wrote in message
Pot, kettle, troll-boy.
Yes, I'm a curmudgeonly old bastard at times when it's warranted, but for
you it's SOP most of the time.
It's also SOP for you to killfile the messenger so you don't have to address
any aspect of my refutations of your moronic musings. If it weren't for the
distinct honor of it, I'd say "Please don't throw me into the briar patch!"
mazorj
"A. Nony Moose" <a...@nony.moose> wrote in message
Hiya, Frank, welcome to the Bobsey Boy killfile clubhouse. Beer is in the
fridge, pizza is over there, and the wide-screen is tuned to sports. Relax
and enjoy our honorable shunning by the Loon of Long Island. Make the most
of it, it won't last long.
oly
> "Frank Galikanokus" <FrankGalikano...@nospam.net> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
One shouldn't killfile Mr. Mazor. He is a fair proxy for what the
sheeple are "thinking", as well as a decent proxy for what "they" are
"thinking" in "The Beltway". If you disagree with Mr. Mazor, you have
to be (uncomfortably) closer to the truth than whatever he is.
oly
A. Nony Moose
================================================================
Mazor is a silly old fool with no life other than his curmudgeonly rants on
Usenet.
Occasionally he says something non-inflamatory but probably only by accident!
He rants, he raves, he insults, he whines - ultimately he's just a bore best
ignored.
oly
> "oly" <oly2...@aol.com> wrote in message
> Usenet.
> Occasionally he says something non-inflamatory but probably only by accident!
> He rants, he raves, he insults, he whines - ultimately he's just a bore best
>
> - Show quoted text -
Mr. Mazor is still at least a nominal believer in a country where
nobody should take any official or main-stream media information at
face value anymore. We now have a culture of institutionalized lying
(and lots of people who know better will lie and say that we don't).
oly
Frank Galikanokus
Tanks yinz guys!
JAM
mazorj
If by "sheeple" you mean anyone who articulates the carefully reasoned and
common sense responses to issues that the majority of reasonable citizens
would pose in response to the nonsense "thinking" of extremist
right-wingers, I plead guilty as charged.
Or are we to believe that geography determines the ability to learn, think,
and reason? Since you're given to such stereotypes: If that's the case,
oly's "thinking" is stuck at the level of those parochially minded Illinois
farmland rustics and yokels whose idea of "keeping informed" is shouting
"Mega-dittoes!" to Limbaugh, Fox, et al., forwarding scurrilous Obama-hating
e-mails, and "confirming" their narrow-minded "thoughts" by chattering with
like-minded pals over a tail-gate case of beer or doing shooters at the Dew
Drop Inn. Heaven forefend that any one of these ignorant paranoids should
refrain from shooting from the hip, and actually delve into all the facts of
an issue to get an intelligent comprehension of both sides of the coin
<on-topic reference noted for the record>.
Too bad for you, oly, but except for certain partisan politicians and
political appointees, for most of us who lived and worked a career "inside
the Beltway" our jobs absolutely required us to examine and be able to
articulate all the aspects of an issue before deciding or recommending a
course of action. Even if what we had to say was not always welcomed by the
powers that be, we were paid to inform them of *all* aspects and
consequences of a particular policy or action. They don't pay the good
money that I earned merely to be surrounded by Yes Men. Anyone at the staff
level who consistently relied on the lazy "What would a PC liberal say?" or
"What do they want to hear?" approach to analysis and response would soon
find him or herself on the street or shunted to a menial position for gross
incompetence.
Also note that daily exposure to all sides of issues leads to forming
personal opinions on certain issues that are distinctly not
"liberal-minded". (Contrast this with the "Nanner, nanner! I can't hear
you!" attitude of parochially minded paranoids, whose views are frozen at a
sophomoric level of ignorance and denial.) So because my views are the
product of exposure to additional facts and thinking, they are not uniformly
anti-conservative - on average I'm middle-of-the-road - and when they are,
it is solely for a good reason.
Read 'em and weep, oly. Your slurs on people who were trained to take the
neutral, intellectual approach to issues by you characterizing them as elite
egg-heads speaks more of envy than truth.
OTOH, you and Bobsey Boy wouldn't last a day in a demanding job like that.
Not because of your politics - I've worked with many competent people who
are genuine mainstream conservatives - but because you are profoundly
deficient in the willingness/ability to seek out and weigh all facts and
views and only then produce a fully formed analysis and recommendation for
your yourself or your superiors.
- mazorj, Middle Name: Call me "OTOH & OTOH"
Jason Burke
Big words coming from a boy who constantly nymshifts in a pathetic
attempt to avoid killfiles.
How's that next suicide try going?
mazorj
<>snip>
< Mr. Mazor is still at least a nominal believer in a country where
nobody should take any official or main-stream media information at
face value anymore. We now have a culture of institutionalized lying
(and lots of people who know better will lie and say that we don't).
<
< oly
You are correct only if by "nobody should take any official or main-stream
media information at face value" you accept my previously stated position
that we should give *healthy* credence to such information, but also
maintain a certain amount of "healthy skepticism". By that I mean that we
should not automatically assume that all such information is accurate to the
point of never being questioned. Whenever possible, confirmation should be
sought. But it does *not* mean automatically assuming that whatever was
said is inaccurate or a lie.
I would delete, or at least amplify on, the word "now" from your second
sentence. "Institutionalized government lying" was not invented by Obama or
Bush or even LBJ or Nixon. It goes back at least as far as WW2 and IMO
probably to a lesser extent even before that.
The WW2 "lying" usually was justifiable to deceive the enemy and protect the
security of military operations. However, there were plain old political
cover-ups too. One notorious example was the government's attempt to delay
news of the loss of the U.S.S. Indianapolis late in the war, and then to
justify an incompetently foolish decision by Naval higher-ups that led to
its otherwise avoidable sinking by a Japanese submarine, and then to the
avoidable loss of hundreds of sailors who perished in the water because of
the Navy's inexcusably slow learning of its sinking and the dispatching of
rescue forces. In that case, any claim of "secrecy for military necessity"
was a transparent fig leaf (if you can visualize that metaphor). The
sinking would already have been reported by the Japanese sub, so nothing of
important military value was gained by the cover-up. Furthermore, the
ship's captain was scapegoated as the cause of the loss when in fact he had
been deliberately been kept in the dark about the nearby presence of an
enemy sub. The whole pack of lies was concocted and clung to out of
political motives of the military, plain and simple.
The claim of the Gulf of Tonkin "attacks" against U.S. ships was another
deliberate government lie. So was Reagan's claim that he knew absolutely
nothing about the Iran-Contra operation, which he would have us believe was
carried out right there in the White House without the President having the
slightest inkling of its existence. This is much like the Pakistani
government claiming that for six years no one had the slightest inkling that
Osama was living half a mile from a major military facility. Okay, maybe
its president's awareness was limited to knowing that "he's somewhere
in-country" without him having the specific location or details; but you'd
have to be a Pakistani-loving sheeple to believe that no one in a position
of importance in the government and the Pakistani security forces knew the
particulars. Just as only an unquestioning Reagan adorer would believe that
"mistakes were made" totally without the president ever having the slightest
scrap of knowledge about the Iran-Contra operation. Neither passes the
smell test.
Granted, if you want to claim that Reagan slept through all of those
briefings, well, as unlikely as it may be, it does possess a teeny, tiny
grain of possible plausibility based on known facts about his tendency to
nod off at meetings. ;-)
Certain claims about Iraq, such as its alleged possession of weapons of mass
destruction, were so egregiously doubtful that the amount of blinkered
wishful thinking required to state them with a straight face as "fact" falls
into a gray zone that some might view as a form of lying through deliberate
avoidance of undeniable evidence to the contrary. Colin Powell's confession
of his strong doubts and his regret over being pressured to serve as a shill
for the White House on WMDs lends credence to that interpretation of Bush's
claims as being a marginal form of lying.
Clinton plain out lied about Monica, although that involved a personal
peccadillo that had nothing to do with public policy or action. Regarding
Obama, I'm not aware of any proven allegation of him lying. Not that I can
categorically rule out him ever lying - no one can prove the negative - but
disagreeing with him or doubting his word is not even close to proof of a
lie, it merely states a difference of opinion.
Having said all that, I've categorically proven the need for *healthy*
skepticism in government pronouncements. But that's a far cry from its
polar opposite, an unhealthy automatic disbelieving of everything the
government says. As I said, that's so far over the top that you'd need
mazorj
"Jason Burke" <jason...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ipv9ca$vna$1...@dont-email.me...
The truly pathetic thing is that he apparently really believes that he is
fooling any of the regulars here.
> How's that next suicide try going?
I figured that the current turn of this thread eventually would cause you to
weigh in.
Got any new dirt on Chameleon Boy? (Most of us already have seen the
previous monograph outlining his shockingly psychotic on-line behavior.)
Frank Provasek
forces.
oly
> The Taliban acknowledged that Osama bin Laden had been killed by US
> forces.
Well now, they would say that, wouldn't they???
oly