Revoke Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize

[Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D.]

The Growing Campaign to Revoke Obama�s Nobel Peace Prize

By Norman Solomon

The Nobel Peace Prize that President Obama received 40 months ago
has emerged as the most appalling Orwellian award of this century.
No, war is not peace.

George Carlin used to riff about oxymorons like �jumbo shrimp,�
�genuine imitation,� �political science� and �military
intelligence.� But humor is of the gallows sort when we consider
the absurdity and tragedy of the world�s most important peace prize
honoring the world�s top war maker.

This week, a challenge has begun with the launch of a petition
urging the Norwegian Nobel Committee to revoke Obama�s Peace Prize.
By midnight of the first day, nearly 10,000 people had signed. The
online petition simply tells the Nobel committee: �I urge you to
rescind the Nobel Peace Prize that was awarded to Barack Obama.�

continued:
http://www.normansolomon.com/
-------------------------------------------------

posted as a free public service
;-)

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <luKdnVg78qMWX_nM...@supernews.com>,
"Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D." <dr...@coldine.edu> wrote:

> The Growing Campaign to Revoke Obama�s Nobel Peace Prize

>
> By Norman Solomon
>
> The Nobel Peace Prize that President Obama received 40 months ago
> has emerged as the most appalling Orwellian award of this century.
> No, war is not peace.
>

> George Carlin used to riff about oxymorons like �jumbo shrimp,�
> �genuine imitation,� �political science� and �military
> intelligence.� But humor is of the gallows sort when we consider
> the absurdity and tragedy of the world�s most important peace prize
> honoring the world�s top war maker.

>
> This week, a challenge has begun with the launch of a petition

> urging the Norwegian Nobel Committee to revoke Obama�s Peace Prize.

> By midnight of the first day, nearly 10,000 people had signed. The

> online petition simply tells the Nobel committee: �I urge you to
> rescind the Nobel Peace Prize that was awarded to Barack Obama.�

>
> continued:
> http://www.normansolomon.com/
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> posted as a free public service
> ;-)

Obama never deserved the NPP in the first place. He had no record of
accomplishments, other than peddling a slogan of "Change We Can Believe
in."

[Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D.]

yep...IMHO, he's proven himself to be a warmonger...not a peace maker.
;-)

[Malcom "Mal" Reynolds]

In article <JY2dnduhv_4sTPnM...@supernews.com>,

coming from someone with your bogus credentials that is high priase

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <JY2dnduhv_4sTPnM...@supernews.com>,

More like an empty suit, which a lot of people (myself included) thought
from the get-go.

His sole talent has been delivering flowery feel-good speeches with very
little content.

[Frank Galikanokus]

Orval Fairbairn wrote:
>
> In article <luKdnVg78qMWX_nM...@supernews.com>,
> "Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D." <dr...@coldine.edu> wrote:
>

> > The Growing Campaign to Revoke Obamaąs Nobel Peace Prize

> >
> > By Norman Solomon
> >
> > The Nobel Peace Prize that President Obama received 40 months ago
> > has emerged as the most appalling Orwellian award of this century.
> > No, war is not peace.
> >

> > George Carlin used to riff about oxymorons like łjumbo shrimp,˛
> > łgenuine imitation,˛ łpolitical science˛ and łmilitary

> > intelligence.˛ But humor is of the gallows sort when we consider

> > the absurdity and tragedy of the worldąs most important peace prize
> > honoring the worldąs top war maker.

> >
> > This week, a challenge has begun with the launch of a petition

> > urging the Norwegian Nobel Committee to revoke Obamaąs Peace Prize.

> > By midnight of the first day, nearly 10,000 people had signed. The

> > online petition simply tells the Nobel committee: łI urge you to

> > rescind the Nobel Peace Prize that was awarded to Barack Obama.˛
> >
> > continued:
> > http://www.normansolomon.com/
> > -------------------------------------------------
> >
> > posted as a free public service
> > ;-)
>
> Obama never deserved the NPP in the first place. He had no record of
> accomplishments, other than peddling a slogan of "Change We Can Believe
> in."

His accomplishment was not being a republican dolt that would unleash un-holy hell on the
world like Bush 43 did.

Here in the US people have no concept of the animosity towards the US Bush 43 created
around the world.

Thousands of our own dead, people tortured, and tens of thousands of innocent people
killed for no good reason. No one in the US cares even the slightest.

JAM

[Andrew Swallow]

On 10/04/2013 23:05, Frank Galikanokus wrote:
{snip}

> Here in the US people have no concept of the animosity towards the US Bush 43 created
> around the world.
>
> Thousands of our own dead, people tortured, and tens of thousands of innocent people
> killed for no good reason. No one in the US cares even the slightest.

The Americans do not have to care. They can just kill the people who
are rude to them.

Andrew Swallow

[peter skelton]

"Andrew Swallow" wrote in message
news:qZCdnXGYhrtSavjM...@bt.com...

That was one of the many things they believed under the
Shrub that they must abandon as false.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <5165E227...@nospam.net>,

... and whose dead is that? Taliban? Al-Quaida?

[Andrew Swallow]

No it is not. A lot of the USA's problems are that people are not
frightened of it. People do not insult Mafia Dons in public.

Being nice to your friends a different matter.

Andrew Swallow

[Joel Edge]

On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 21:38:41 -0400, Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D. wrote
(in article <luKdnVg78qMWX_nM...@supernews.com>):

>
> The Growing Campaign to Revoke Obamaï¿œs Nobel Peace Prize

>
> By Norman Solomon
>
> The Nobel Peace Prize that President Obama received 40 months ago
> has emerged as the most appalling Orwellian award of this century.
> No, war is not peace.
>

> George Carlin used to riff about oxymorons like ￜjumbo shrimp,ￜ
> ￜgenuine imitation,ￜ ￜpolitical scienceￜ and ￜmilitary
> intelligence.ￜ But humor is of the gallows sort when we consider
> the absurdity and tragedy of the worldï¿œs most important peace prize
> honoring the worldï¿œs top war maker.

>
> This week, a challenge has begun with the launch of a petition

> urging the Norwegian Nobel Committee to revoke Obamaï¿œs Peace Prize.

> By midnight of the first day, nearly 10,000 people had signed. The

> online petition simply tells the Nobel committee: ï¿œI urge you to
> rescind the Nobel Peace Prize that was awarded to Barack Obama.ￜ

>
> continued:
> http://www.normansolomon.com/
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> posted as a free public service
> ;-)

Noooo....not Ol'Barry's Nobel Peace Prize. I wonder how many were making
snarky comments back in the day when the rest of us were asking "what the
hell did he do to earn one?". Just give it to Joe Biden. He's been on
forefront of the gun-grabber movement, so I guess that makes him eligible.

[peter skelton]

"Andrew Swallow" wrote in message

news:JKGdnS7d46h8sPvM...@bt.com...

There are far too many of them to kill, killing them tends
to cause them to multiply faster than they are killed off.
Your comparison to mafia dons is very idiotic indeed.

[Frank Galikanokus]

Joel Edge wrote:
>
> On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 21:38:41 -0400, Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D. wrote
> (in article <luKdnVg78qMWX_nM...@supernews.com>):
>
> >

> > The Growing Campaign to Revoke Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize

> >
> > By Norman Solomon
> >
> > The Nobel Peace Prize that President Obama received 40 months ago
> > has emerged as the most appalling Orwellian award of this century.
> > No, war is not peace.
> >

> > George Carlin used to riff about oxymorons like “jumbo shrimp,”

> > “genuine imitation,” “political science” and “military

> > intelligence.” But humor is of the gallows sort when we consider
> > the absurdity and tragedy of the world’s most important peace prize
> > honoring the world’s top war maker.

> >
> > This week, a challenge has begun with the launch of a petition

> > urging the Norwegian Nobel Committee to revoke Obama’s Peace Prize.

> > By midnight of the first day, nearly 10,000 people had signed. The

> > online petition simply tells the Nobel committee: “I urge you to
> > rescind the Nobel Peace Prize that was awarded to Barack Obama.”

> >
> > continued:
> > http://www.normansolomon.com/
> > -------------------------------------------------
> >
> > posted as a free public service
> > ;-)
>
> Noooo....not Ol'Barry's Nobel Peace Prize. I wonder how many were making
> snarky comments back in the day when the rest of us were asking "what the
> hell did he do to earn one?". Just give it to Joe Biden. He's been on
> forefront of the gun-grabber movement, so I guess that makes him eligible.

"gun-grabber movement"?

Are yo one of those delusional bullet heads?

JAM

[DGVREIMAN]

"Andrew Swallow" <am.sw...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:qZCdnXGYhrtSavjM...@bt.com...

Doug Says: Hmmm. On 09/11/01 the goons attacked the USA and murdered
about 3000 people. You call that being "rude?" I call it a sneak
attack that deserved a reprisal.

The war against the goons has nothing to do with religion, or money,
or oil, it has everything to do with an unprovoked attack that
murdered 3000 Americans. BTW, the 3000 killed at the World Trade
center represents more Americans killed than were killed at Pearl
Harbor, or during the Normandy Invasion - and look how far the USA
went to respond against those that perpetrated those murders. Those
that backed, housed and helped train those that attacked us on 09/11
are getting off easy - so far - but we all know it is not over with
yet - is it?

I suspect that very soon we and our allies will be returning to the
Middle East. This time the kid gloves will be off.

Doug Grant (Tm)

[David E. Powell]

On Apr 11, 10:40 pm, "DGVREIMAN" <dgvrei...@comcast.net> wrote:
> "Andrew Swallow" <am.swal...@btinternet.com> wrote in message

Well, noticing the AF/Pak therad headlines, one sees stuff like
"Insurgency to continue after US withdraw" and high paid foreign
policy experts scratching their head as to why the Taliban doesn't
want to negotiate with the US before the US pulls out. Um...

We have a gov't/media structure that has developed in the past 10-12
years that seems to not want to go all out, and not want to deal with
the long term counterinsurgency type war that results when one does it
the other way. The other alternatives to either of those are all
worse, but maybe the leadership is so detached they don't see that.

> I suspect that very soon we and our allies will be returning to the
> Middle East.  This time the kid gloves will be off.

Well that depends if we have the sense to do stuff like that.

If not hitting back becomes seen as civilized it will be possible for
the west to civilize itself to death.

> Doug Grant (Tm)

[Bill]

On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 19:40:19 -0700, "DGVREIMAN"
<dgvr...@comcast.net> wrote:


>Doug Says: Hmmm. On 09/11/01 the goons attacked the USA and murdered
>about 3000 people. You call that being "rude?" I call it a sneak
>attack that deserved a reprisal.

They were rich young Saudis.

How many times has the USA attacked the Saudi sponsors of terror?

>The war against the goons has nothing to do with religion, or money,
>or oil, it has everything to do with an unprovoked attack that
>murdered 3000 Americans.

He's so sweet.

They weren't all Americans.

Of the less than 3,00 victims some 300 were not US Citizens.

BTW, the 3000 killed at the World Trade
>center represents more Americans killed than were killed at Pearl
>Harbor, or during the Normandy Invasion

And they're still not all Americans...

>I suspect that very soon we and our allies will be returning to the
>Middle East. This time the kid gloves will be off.

After Iraq?

Don't be silly.

[Daryl]

I still vote for attacking Cleveland.

daryl

[Bill]

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 04:51:25 -0600, Daryl
<dh...@nospamtvmoviesforfree.com> wrote:

>> BTW, the 3000 killed at the World Trade
>>> center represents more Americans killed than were killed at Pearl
>>> Harbor, or during the Normandy Invasion
>>
>> And they're still not all Americans...

Indeed, he's wrong about the numbers as well.

2606 people died in the WTC attacks, of which some 300 were not US
Citizens.

2499 US Soldiers were killed on D-Day.

2402 were killed in the attack on Pearl Harbor.

So he can't count either...

[Andrew Swallow]

On 12/04/2013 10:57, Bill wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 19:40:19 -0700, "DGVREIMAN"
> <dgvr...@comcast.net> wrote:

{snip}

>> I suspect that very soon we and our allies will be returning to the
>> Middle East. This time the kid gloves will be off.
>
> After Iraq?
>
> Don't be silly.
>

Learn from Iraq and Vietnam. The USA can win air and tank wars. She is
poor on foot, unless using Custer's killer tactics. Any problem in a
village and both disappear.

Andrew Swallow

[Joel Edge]

On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 18:09:33 -0400, Frank Galikanokus wrote
(in article <5167349D...@nospam.net>):

> Joel Edge wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 21:38:41 -0400, Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D. wrote
>> (in article <luKdnVg78qMWX_nM...@supernews.com>):
>>
>>>

>>> The Growing Campaign to Revoke Obamaï¿œs Nobel Peace Prize

>>>
>>> By Norman Solomon
>>>
>>> The Nobel Peace Prize that President Obama received 40 months ago
>>> has emerged as the most appalling Orwellian award of this century.
>>> No, war is not peace.
>>>

>>> George Carlin used to riff about oxymorons like ￜjumbo shrimp,ￜ
>>> ￜgenuine imitation,ￜ ￜpolitical scienceￜ and ￜmilitary

>>> intelligence.ￜ But humor is of the gallows sort when we consider
>>> the absurdity and tragedy of the worldï¿œs most important peace prize
>>> honoring the worldï¿œs top war maker.

>>>
>>> This week, a challenge has begun with the launch of a petition

>>> urging the Norwegian Nobel Committee to revoke Obamaï¿œs Peace Prize.

>>> By midnight of the first day, nearly 10,000 people had signed. The

>>> online petition simply tells the Nobel committee: ï¿œI urge you to
>>> rescind the Nobel Peace Prize that was awarded to Barack Obama.ￜ

>>>
>>> continued:
>>> http://www.normansolomon.com/
>>> -------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> posted as a free public service
>>> ;-)
>>
>> Noooo....not Ol'Barry's Nobel Peace Prize. I wonder how many were making
>> snarky comments back in the day when the rest of us were asking "what the
>> hell did he do to earn one?". Just give it to Joe Biden. He's been on
>> forefront of the gun-grabber movement, so I guess that makes him eligible.
>
> "gun-grabber movement"?
>
> Are yo one of those delusional bullet heads?
>
> JAM

You'll have to frame that question into....something that justifies an
answer. Can you do that?

[dott.Piergiorgio]

Il 11/04/2013 14:51, peter skelton ha scritto:

>> No it is not. A lot of the USA's problems are that people are not
> frightened of it. People do not insult Mafia Dons in public.
>
> There are far too many of them to kill, killing them tends to cause them
> to multiply faster than they are killed off. Your comparison to mafia
> dons is very idiotic indeed.

Indeed comparing USA to dons is hugely idiotic; for a starter, I don't
known about dons whose die peacefully of old age in their beds, either
shot up, behind bars or victim of some unusual "accidents".

Best regards from Italy,
dott. Piergiorgio.

[DGVREIMAN]

"David E. Powell" <David_Po...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:57a310f1-ac2c-4447...@b20g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...

Doug Says: They would need to be deaf, dumb and blind not to see it.
. . wait a minute! Perhaps they are???

> I suspect that very soon we and our allies will be returning to the
> Middle East. This time the kid gloves will be off.

Well that depends if we have the sense to do stuff like that.

If not hitting back becomes seen as civilized it will be possible for
the west to civilize itself to death.

Doug Says: Well said - we can be politically correct in all things
even if it destroys us - that seems to be the mantra of the press and
of our Government.

> Doug Grant (Tm)

[DGVREIMAN]

"Daryl" <dh...@nospamtvmoviesforfree.com> wrote in message
news:kk8oqa$7of$1...@dont-email.me...

> On 4/12/2013 3:57 AM, Bill wrote:
>> On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 19:40:19 -0700, "DGVREIMAN"
>> <dgvr...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Doug Says: Hmmm. On 09/11/01 the goons attacked the USA and
>>> murdered
>>> about 3000 people. You call that being "rude?" I call it a sneak
>>> attack that deserved a reprisal.
>>
>> They were rich young Saudis.

Doug Says: That were trained in Iran, rich or not, they were willing
to perpetrate a Jihad against America and give up their own lives in
the process - so being rich seems to have little or no impact. Iran
trained them, and Iran is boasting it has trained 50,000 more suicide
bombers to attack America as soon as it start producing nuclear
weapons (including dirty bombs) - so I suspect this war is not even
close to being over - and I am sure the Iranians can con other wide
eyed morons (rich or not) to die for the Ayatollahs and meet their 70
virgins.

>>
>> How many times has the USA attacked the Saudi sponsors of terror?

Doug Says: Nonsense - the Saudi government does not sponser radical
Islamic terrorism - quite the contrary, they are the arch enimies of
radical Islam, and Iran. If a person comes from outerslobovia, then
trains in Iran to murder Americans, and does so under the auspices of
Iran, then are you claiming we should attack outerslobovia?

You are missing the key issue - of course there are radical islamists
in many different nations, but that does not mean all of the nations
that produce radical Islamists are the enemies of the USA - it is a
religious issue, not a nation issue. Get it?

>>
>>> The war against the goons has nothing to do with religion, or
>>> money,
>>> or oil, it has everything to do with an unprovoked attack that
>>> murdered 3000 Americans.
>>
>> He's so sweet.
>>
>> They weren't all Americans.
>>
>> Of the less than 3,00 victims some 300 were not US Citizens.

Doug Says: They were working in the USA, and what does it matter?
Are you claiming that it was OK to murder all of the Americans on
09/11 because the goons only murdered 2700 instead of 3000? What does
the nationality of those murdered have to do with anything? They were
on American soil working in an American building located in an
American city - and they were wantonly and purposefully murdered.
Don't you think that act requires a reprisal against those that aided
or abetted the murderers?

>>
>> BTW, the 3000 killed at the World Trade
>>> center represents more Americans killed than were killed at Pearl
>>> Harbor, or during the Normandy Invasion
>>
>> And they're still not all Americans...

Doug Says: Regardless, my point stands.

>>
>>> I suspect that very soon we and our allies will be returning to
>>> the
>>> Middle East. This time the kid gloves will be off.
>>
>> After Iraq?
>>
>> Don't be silly.

Doug Says: The Clinton Administration approved the Iraqi Liberation
Act which called for the removal of Saddam. Ergo, that had to happen
as the Democrats had passed the leglislation that President Bush
inherited.

However, when Iran is attacked by Israel, and Iran releases its
claimed 50,000 suicide bombers on the USA and its interests, and
attempts to mine or otherwise close the straight of hormuz, if you
believe we Americans are just going to stand by and watch this unfold
without taking military action, you are living in a dream world.
Moreover, since a mid term election is coming President Obama is not
going to want to fight a politically correct war and drag it out -
this time the kid gloves will be off.

Doug Grant (Tm)

[DGVREIMAN]

"Andrew Swallow" <am.sw...@btinternet.com> wrote in message

news:hcGdnT_y7YMKZfrM...@bt.com...

Doug Says: Our Infantry Divisions are designed to roll over, crush,
destroy and annihilate the enemy. They were NOT designed to fight
politically correct wars. However, since Vietnam our US Army has
developed special operation units that can fight door to door and keep
the destruction of property and civilians to a minimum. There was not
a need to use these special op troops in Iraq as we were fighting
IED's and not enemy troops.

In Iran it will be different. The Infantry ID's will be loosed on
the Iranian Revolutionary Guard troops, if they hide in cities or
towns, those cities or towns will be crushed much like WWII. We have
learned our lessons well - no more IED wars.

Doug Grant (Tm)

[peter skelton]

"DGVREIMAN" wrote in message
news:19SdnYp2R6lAwvXM...@giganews.com...

How do you arrange that? The IED war comes after you smash
their regular forces when you find you've nether the
resources nor the will to police the population.

[Keith W]

DGVREIMAN wrote:
> "Daryl" <dh...@nospamtvmoviesforfree.com> wrote in message
> news:kk8oqa$7of$1...@dont-email.me...
>> On 4/12/2013 3:57 AM, Bill wrote:
>>> On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 19:40:19 -0700, "DGVREIMAN"
>>> <dgvr...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Doug Says: Hmmm. On 09/11/01 the goons attacked the USA and
>>>> murdered
>>>> about 3000 people. You call that being "rude?" I call it a sneak
>>>> attack that deserved a reprisal.
>>>
>>> They were rich young Saudis.
>
> Doug Says: That were trained in Iran, rich or not, they were willing
> to perpetrate a Jihad against America and give up their own lives in
> the process - so being rich seems to have little or no impact.

Well no, they received some training in Afghanistan but learned
how to fly the hijacked planes in the good old USA.

I guess that means America should attack itself.

Keith

[Frank Galikanokus]

Joel Edge wrote:
>
> On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 18:09:33 -0400, Frank Galikanokus wrote
> (in article <5167349D...@nospam.net>):
>
> > Joel Edge wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 21:38:41 -0400, Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D. wrote
> >> (in article <luKdnVg78qMWX_nM...@supernews.com>):
> >>
> >>>

> >>> The Growing Campaign to Revoke Obama�s Nobel Peace Prize

> >>>
> >>> By Norman Solomon
> >>>
> >>> The Nobel Peace Prize that President Obama received 40 months ago
> >>> has emerged as the most appalling Orwellian award of this century.
> >>> No, war is not peace.
> >>>

> >>> George Carlin used to riff about oxymorons like �jumbo shrimp,�

> >>> �genuine imitation,� �political science� and �military

> >>> intelligence.� But humor is of the gallows sort when we consider
> >>> the absurdity and tragedy of the world�s most important peace prize
> >>> honoring the world�s top war maker.

> >>>
> >>> This week, a challenge has begun with the launch of a petition

> >>> urging the Norwegian Nobel Committee to revoke Obama�s Peace Prize.

> >>> By midnight of the first day, nearly 10,000 people had signed. The

> >>> online petition simply tells the Nobel committee: �I urge you to
> >>> rescind the Nobel Peace Prize that was awarded to Barack Obama.�

> >>>
> >>> continued:
> >>> http://www.normansolomon.com/
> >>> -------------------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> posted as a free public service
> >>> ;-)
> >>
> >> Noooo....not Ol'Barry's Nobel Peace Prize. I wonder how many were making
> >> snarky comments back in the day when the rest of us were asking "what the
> >> hell did he do to earn one?". Just give it to Joe Biden. He's been on
> >> forefront of the gun-grabber movement, so I guess that makes him eligible.
> >
> > "gun-grabber movement"?
> >
> > Are yo one of those delusional bullet heads?
> >
> > JAM
>
> You'll have to frame that question into....something that justifies an
> answer. Can you do that?

First, what is the "gun-grabber movement"?

JAM

[Bill]

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 12:17:30 -0700, "DGVREIMAN"
<dgvr...@comcast.net> wrote:

>
>"Daryl" <dh...@nospamtvmoviesforfree.com> wrote in message
>news:kk8oqa$7of$1...@dont-email.me...
>> On 4/12/2013 3:57 AM, Bill wrote:
>>> On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 19:40:19 -0700, "DGVREIMAN"
>>> <dgvr...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Doug Says: Hmmm. On 09/11/01 the goons attacked the USA and
>>>> murdered
>>>> about 3000 people. You call that being "rude?" I call it a sneak
>>>> attack that deserved a reprisal.
>>>
>>> They were rich young Saudis.
>
>Doug Says: That were trained in Iran,

Everyone else says it was Florida.

The idea that Iran is training Wahabi and Salafist fanatics is so
unlikely as to be laughable.

>>> How many times has the USA attacked the Saudi sponsors of terror?
>
>Doug Says: Nonsense - the Saudi government does not sponser radical
>Islamic terrorism

Actually it seems it is, in Syria.

The USA says it is...

>>> He's so sweet.
>>>
>>> They weren't all Americans.
>>>
>>> Of the less than 3,00 victims some 300 were not US Citizens.
>
>Doug Says: They were working in the USA, and what does it matter?

You're just plain wrong son.

[Bill]

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 12:26:17 -0700, "DGVREIMAN"
<dgvr...@comcast.net> wrote:

>Doug Says: Our Infantry Divisions are designed to roll over, crush,
>destroy and annihilate the enemy. They were NOT designed to fight
>politically correct wars. However, since Vietnam our US Army has
>developed special operation units that can fight door to door and keep
>the destruction of property and civilians to a minimum. There was not
>a need to use these special op troops in Iraq as we were fighting
>IED's and not enemy troops.
>
> In Iran it will be different. The Infantry ID's will be loosed on
>the Iranian Revolutionary Guard troops, if they hide in cities or
>towns, those cities or towns will be crushed much like WWII. We have
>learned our lessons well - no more IED wars.

Hmmm...

The Force is strong in this one...

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <51687655...@nospam.net>,

It is the loose association of groups and individuals who believe that
private citizens should not own guns. This group includes (but is not
limited to):
1. Communists
2. Socialists
3. Left-wing Democrats
4. Self-styled "civil rights" organizations
5. Criminals
6. Chicken Littles
7. Henny Pennys


They do not want people to have the ability to defend themselves or
their property from the predations of the criminal class.

[dott.Piergiorgio]

depend on where is the front.... if you care to notice, W iran,
bordering Iraq, is an terrain uniquely favourable to the defender, when
elsewhere there are a large desertic plain perfect for the fast
roll-over & crush war. and the latter don't need to enter into the jaws
of Hormuz Strait...

[Keith W]

Did you mean The Farce ?

Keith

[Bill]

You know exactly what I mean...

[David E. Powell]

Harold Coyle wrote a book some years back which featured the Soviets
jumping out of Afghanistan and invading Iran (Back in the 80s, of the
Cold War days, when headbands and mullets were standard issue
according to every movie, and every security code was 867-5309.)

So the plot then featured the US jumping in to stop the Soviets by
invading from the Persona Gulf side, yet strangely the Iranians didn't
take too kindly to that either.

It's still worth a read, especially in the area of tactics. The stuff
about convoys being hit after main armored forces pass is an eye-
opener, written years before Desert Storm, not to mention Operation
Iraqi Freedom. If one considers the mechanics of a ground war with
Iran it is still a good thing to check out to see what some of the
climate might be like on the ground there.

[Keith W]

David E. Powell wrote:
> Harold Coyle wrote a book some years back which featured the Soviets
> jumping out of Afghanistan and invading Iran (Back in the 80s, of the
> Cold War days, when headbands and mullets were standard issue
> according to every movie, and every security code was 867-5309.)
>

They would be unlikely to invade via Aghhanistan given that the terrain
is terrible and infrastructure poor. If the Soviets invaded Iran in
that time period they would have come straight down the highway
from Baku and over the Caspian with naval infantry. This is of course
what they did in 1941 while the British forces came in from Iraq.

> So the plot then featured the US jumping in to stop the Soviets by
> invading from the Persona Gulf side, yet strangely the Iranians didn't
> take too kindly to that either.
>

Well given that the last time the Soviets invaded the British came in
from the Persian Gulf side at the same time its hardly surprising.

The Anglo Soviet Invasion of Iran in 1941 is not well known
outside Persia.

Keith

[Daryl]

Invade Iran? Are you just trying to cheer me up?

daryl

[Keith W]

Its all ancient history old boy. The British Army occupied
both Baghdad and Tehran in 1941

Keith

[Joel Edge]

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 17:02:13 -0400, Frank Galikanokus wrote
(in article <51687655...@nospam.net>):

> Joel Edge wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 18:09:33 -0400, Frank Galikanokus wrote
>> (in article <5167349D...@nospam.net>):
>>
>>> Joel Edge wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 21:38:41 -0400, Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D. wrote
>>>> (in article <luKdnVg78qMWX_nM...@supernews.com>):
>>>>
>>>>>

>>>>> The Growing Campaign to Revoke Obamaï¿œs Nobel Peace Prize

>>>>>
>>>>> By Norman Solomon
>>>>>
>>>>> The Nobel Peace Prize that President Obama received 40 months ago
>>>>> has emerged as the most appalling Orwellian award of this century.
>>>>> No, war is not peace.
>>>>>

>>>>> George Carlin used to riff about oxymorons like ￜjumbo shrimp,ￜ
>>>>> ￜgenuine imitation,ￜ ￜpolitical scienceￜ and ￜmilitary

>>>>> intelligence.ￜ But humor is of the gallows sort when we consider
>>>>> the absurdity and tragedy of the worldï¿œs most important peace prize
>>>>> honoring the worldï¿œs top war maker.

>>>>>
>>>>> This week, a challenge has begun with the launch of a petition

>>>>> urging the Norwegian Nobel Committee to revoke Obamaï¿œs Peace Prize.

>>>>> By midnight of the first day, nearly 10,000 people had signed. The

>>>>> online petition simply tells the Nobel committee: ï¿œI urge you to
>>>>> rescind the Nobel Peace Prize that was awarded to Barack Obama.ￜ

>>>>>
>>>>> continued:
>>>>> http://www.normansolomon.com/
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> posted as a free public service
>>>>> ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Noooo....not Ol'Barry's Nobel Peace Prize. I wonder how many were making
>>>> snarky comments back in the day when the rest of us were asking "what the
>>>> hell did he do to earn one?". Just give it to Joe Biden. He's been on
>>>> forefront of the gun-grabber movement, so I guess that makes him eligible.
>>>
>>> "gun-grabber movement"?
>>>
>>> Are yo one of those delusional bullet heads?
>>>
>>> JAM
>>
>> You'll have to frame that question into....something that justifies an
>> answer. Can you do that?
>
> First, what is the "gun-grabber movement"?
>
> JAM

Various and sundry individuals who would love nothing more than to disarm the
American public and are currently standing on the graves of twenty children
and six adults from Newtown. Feinstein, Biden, etc. At the same time saying
nothing about the butchery occurring in many inner cities. Why is that
liberals don't seem to care unless it advances an agenda?

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <0001HW.CD901DAB...@news.planttel.net>,

Joel Edge <joel...@planttel.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 17:02:13 -0400, Frank Galikanokus wrote
> (in article <51687655...@nospam.net>):
>
> > Joel Edge wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 18:09:33 -0400, Frank Galikanokus wrote
> >> (in article <5167349D...@nospam.net>):
> >>
> >>> Joel Edge wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 21:38:41 -0400, Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D. wrote
> >>>> (in article <luKdnVg78qMWX_nM...@supernews.com>):
> >>>>
> >>>>>

> >>>>> The Growing Campaign to Revoke Obama?s Nobel Peace Prize

> >>>>>
> >>>>> By Norman Solomon
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The Nobel Peace Prize that President Obama received 40 months ago
> >>>>> has emerged as the most appalling Orwellian award of this century.
> >>>>> No, war is not peace.
> >>>>>

> >>>>> George Carlin used to riff about oxymorons like ?jumbo shrimp,?
> >>>>> ?genuine imitation,? ?political science? and ?military
> >>>>> intelligence.? But humor is of the gallows sort when we consider
> >>>>> the absurdity and tragedy of the world?s most important peace prize
> >>>>> honoring the world?s top war maker.

> >>>>>
> >>>>> This week, a challenge has begun with the launch of a petition

> >>>>> urging the Norwegian Nobel Committee to revoke Obama?s Peace Prize.

> >>>>> By midnight of the first day, nearly 10,000 people had signed. The

> >>>>> online petition simply tells the Nobel committee: ?I urge you to
> >>>>> rescind the Nobel Peace Prize that was awarded to Barack Obama.?

> >>>>>
> >>>>> continued:
> >>>>> http://www.normansolomon.com/
> >>>>> -------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>
> >>>>> posted as a free public service
> >>>>> ;-)
> >>>>
> >>>> Noooo....not Ol'Barry's Nobel Peace Prize. I wonder how many were making
> >>>> snarky comments back in the day when the rest of us were asking "what
> >>>> the
> >>>> hell did he do to earn one?". Just give it to Joe Biden. He's been on
> >>>> forefront of the gun-grabber movement, so I guess that makes him
> >>>> eligible.
> >>>
> >>> "gun-grabber movement"?
> >>>
> >>> Are yo one of those delusional bullet heads?
> >>>
> >>> JAM
> >>
> >> You'll have to frame that question into....something that justifies an
> >> answer. Can you do that?
> >
> > First, what is the "gun-grabber movement"?
> >
> > JAM
>
> Various and sundry individuals who would love nothing more than to disarm the
> American public and are currently standing on the graves of twenty children
> and six adults from Newtown. Feinstein, Biden, etc. At the same time saying
> nothing about the butchery occurring in many inner cities. Why is that
> liberals don't seem to care unless it advances an agenda?

That is just the nature of the Oppressives. Remember the sage advice of
Rahm Emmanuel: "Never let a good crisis go to waste."

[Daryl]

On 4/14/2013 6:47 AM, Joel Edge wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 17:02:13 -0400, Frank Galikanokus wrote
> (in article <51687655...@nospam.net>):
>
>> Joel Edge wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 18:09:33 -0400, Frank Galikanokus wrote
>>> (in article <5167349D...@nospam.net>):
>>>
>>>> Joel Edge wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 21:38:41 -0400, Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D. wrote
>>>>> (in article <luKdnVg78qMWX_nM...@supernews.com>):
>>>>>
>>>>>>

>>>>>> The Growing Campaign to Revoke Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize

>>>>>>
>>>>>> By Norman Solomon
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Nobel Peace Prize that President Obama received 40 months ago
>>>>>> has emerged as the most appalling Orwellian award of this century.
>>>>>> No, war is not peace.
>>>>>>

>>>>>> George Carlin used to riff about oxymorons like “jumbo shrimp,”

>>>>>> “genuine imitation,” “political science” and “military

>>>>>> intelligence.” But humor is of the gallows sort when we consider
>>>>>> the absurdity and tragedy of the world’s most important peace prize
>>>>>> honoring the world’s top war maker.

>>>>>>
>>>>>> This week, a challenge has begun with the launch of a petition

>>>>>> urging the Norwegian Nobel Committee to revoke Obama’s Peace Prize.

>>>>>> By midnight of the first day, nearly 10,000 people had signed. The

>>>>>> online petition simply tells the Nobel committee: “I urge you to
>>>>>> rescind the Nobel Peace Prize that was awarded to Barack Obama.”

>>>>>>
>>>>>> continued:
>>>>>> http://www.normansolomon.com/
>>>>>> -------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> posted as a free public service
>>>>>> ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Noooo....not Ol'Barry's Nobel Peace Prize. I wonder how many were making
>>>>> snarky comments back in the day when the rest of us were asking "what the
>>>>> hell did he do to earn one?". Just give it to Joe Biden. He's been on
>>>>> forefront of the gun-grabber movement, so I guess that makes him eligible.
>>>>
>>>> "gun-grabber movement"?
>>>>
>>>> Are yo one of those delusional bullet heads?
>>>>
>>>> JAM
>>>
>>> You'll have to frame that question into....something that justifies an
>>> answer. Can you do that?
>>
>> First, what is the "gun-grabber movement"?
>>
>> JAM
>
> Various and sundry individuals who would love nothing more than to disarm the
> American public and are currently standing on the graves of twenty children
> and six adults from Newtown. Feinstein, Biden, etc. At the same time saying
> nothing about the butchery occurring in many inner cities. Why is that
> liberals don't seem to care unless it advances an agenda?
>

Ever hear about compromise? You want freedom? You want all your
rights? Well, when get all your rights so do the fruitcakes. Making a
Gun Owner resposible for his own weapon may have prevented the shooting
in denver in the theater. Making that type of weapon may have prevented
the fruitcake from obtaining it in the first place. He was shooting an
AR derivative with a high cyclic rate that he had "Borrowed". The Gun
owner gets off scot free but does lose the weapons. NO, it wasn't the
Gun Owner that did the shooting but that gun was loaned to the fruitcake
who did the shooting. Gun ownership does not include being responsible.
Therefore, you don't have to be a responsible gun owner to own a gun,
period.

Your bunch keeps harping about there never has been a crime by
Responsible Gun Owner. Loaning your gun to a fruitcake shows a total
lack of responsibility and removes your argument. Gun owners should be
held responsible for how their weapons (notice I am now saying weapon)
are used. That gun owner that loaned those weapons to the shooter in
denver is as guilty as the shooter and should be treated as such. You
want to be treated as a responsible gun owner, fine. We, the People,
will hold you responsible for your weapons.

daryl

[David E. Powell]

On Apr 14, 12:27 pm, Daryl <dh...@nospamtvmoviesforfree.com> wrote:
> On 4/14/2013 6:47 AM, Joel Edge wrote:

Snip

> Your bunch keeps harping about there never has been a crime by
> Responsible Gun Owner.  Loaning your gun to a fruitcake shows a total
> lack of responsibility and removes your argument.  Gun owners should be
> held responsible for how their weapons (notice I am now saying weapon)
> are used.  That gun owner that loaned those weapons to the shooter in
> denver is as guilty as the shooter and should be treated as such.  You
> want to be treated as a responsible gun owner, fine.  We, the People,
> will hold you responsible for your weapons.

Well, prosecuting Adam Lanza's mom will be rather difficult. He killed
her and stole her weapons....

I agree those who deliberately "Straw Purchase" should be prosecuted
as accessories plus for the supplying of the gun as a separate crime
in itself.

It is fascinating this does not happen very often, instead a constant
focus on the question of regulating everyone else. Find the crooks and
the accessories and hammer them, hard. Playing politics costs too much
blood and accomplishes nothing except driving it back into partisan
bickering.

Outside of Lanza, we are now finding the Aurora. Colorado shooting had
tons of warnings people had given, it seems to take a while for this
stuff to come out, but those warnings and psychological issues that
were reported should have been in the NICS database so they couldn't
buy a cap pistol. Ditto the Virginia Tech shooter who also had
documented issues before their rampage.

Lanza got past it by not legally buying a gun at all, murdering a
family member and stealing theirs. Very hard to guard against that
kind of freak with any background checks :(

> daryl

[Bill]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 10:35:56 -0700 (PDT), "David E. Powell"
<David_Po...@msn.com> wrote:


>Lanza got past it by not legally buying a gun at all, murdering a
>family member and stealing theirs. Very hard to guard against that
>kind of freak with any background checks :(

Not if you require secure storage for firearms.

[Andrew Swallow]

An accessory before the fact.

Andrew Swallow

[Andrew Swallow]

On 14/04/2013 18:35, David E. Powell wrote:
{snip}

> Lanza got past it by not legally buying a gun at all, murdering a
> family member and stealing theirs. Very hard to guard against that
> kind of freak with any background checks :(

Back ground checks can cover the whole household. This used to apply to
credit checks and security checks.

Andrew Swallow

[DGVREIMAN]

"Keith W" <keithnosp...@demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:0x_9t.11$F_...@fx07.fr7...

Doug Says: They were trained in Iran to accept their Jihad role.
When they were training to fly airplanes in the USA they did not
reveal to their instructors they wanted such training so as to murder
Americans.

We cannot blame a country that did not train the goons specifically
to murder. We can blame the government of a nation if it was involved
in absolving them from their conscience for murder via some religious
training, or to recruit them for that specific purpose. In both cases
that is Iran.

Doug Grant (Tm)
>
>

[DGVREIMAN]

"peter skelton" <skel...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:kk9pd7$uk4$1...@dont-email.me...

Doug Says: We have developed new optics, drones and robots that will
detect IEDs.

We can and will plant these new optics in camouflaged rocks and other
items to cover an entire roadside area.

We also have developed better IED detection devices and vehicle
mounted optics.

The IED wars are over. The goon that plants the IED will be spotted,
or the IED will be detected prior to it being command detonated. Not
in all cases, but the IED will no longer be an effective means of
combat in the future. American technology has caught up. There are
other was to detect IED's as well that are also coming through the
pipeline - entire units have been formed and trained for that specific
purpose, and drones and robots will be leading the detection.

The goons will of course try IED's but this time they will fail.

The most effective weapon the Iranians have is their religious
indoctration. During the Iraq/Iranian war they used children walking
arm in arm to detect and detonate Iraqi mine fields. Think about
that for a minute. That kind of tactic is so bizarre and alien to the
USA and its allies that we would be hard pressed to mow down legions
of suicide bomber children walking toward our troops.

The Iranian Ayatollahs are counting on a Christian philosophy to help
them defeat our superior military capabilities - I would hate to be
the American commander that would need to give the order to fire under
those conditions - who would want to mow down thousands of children
and other civilians that have been indoctrinated to a point they are
willing to give their lives for Jihad?

Iran claims to have available 50,000 suicide bombers ready to go to
paradise.

So war crimes will be leveled at our military commanders and the
leftist press will howl - but I bet the commander will still give the
order to fire.

Considering the Iranian religious indoctrination of its masses, it
will impossible to defeat Iran without total warfare - politically
correct wars will fail, as they usually do.

From what I understand our military leaders have made the above fact
very clear to the CIC - either we attack Iran with total war, or we
allow them to build their nuclear weapons, or we allow Israel to
commit total war against Iran by itself. Those are our three
options - there is not a fourth as diplomacy will always fail due to
the religious zealotry.


Doug Grant (Tm)


>
>

[DGVREIMAN]

"Andrew Swallow" <am.sw...@btinternet.com> wrote in message

news:3tKdnZC_CbnHb_fM...@bt.com...

Doug Says: Guns are dead things - they can do no harm or good by
themselves. Banning things that cannot function without a human
involvement is nuts. Banning human involvement makes sense provided
we do not throw out the baby with the bath water. If some fool has a
nervous episode, and his doctor gives him some valium, should that
person be banned from owning a gun?

These are the hard questions that are impossible to answer. How
deranged someone might be is a matter of opinion. However, it should
be mandatory that all Psychologist's that detect a patient that has
fantasized or envisions the murder of anyone to prescribe drugs that
will make that person passive, and then turn the entire issue over to
the local social services to determine, based upon an established
legal bench mark, whether that person will be forced to stay on the
passive inducing drug until the patient recovers.

Another way would be to place special combination locks on all guns
that must be set before the trigger is released. And of course an
optic camera in the gun that takes a picture of the person firing it,
and stores or sends the picture to a Government data base. Photos are
allowed without permission, so why not?

I know this makes too much sense and will never been enacted for that
reason - our government likes to do stupid things and ignore real
solutions - they do this to keep the controversy going, polarize their
electorate, and keep them writing checks.

Doug Grant (Tm)

[Daryl]

You picked on and that means all the others need to be overlooked. The
law here now reads that anyone buying the amount of ammo he did, the
clips he did and the weapon that did the most damage (an AR style) is
outlawed. He fired approx 60 rounds. Yes, in one minute he killed or
wounded that many people. He fired apprx 60 rounds in one minute. 30
were from the SW Rifle that was a copy of an AR-15 but it jammed at 30.
It had a 100 round clip full prior to the shooting. AFter that, he
turned to his shotgun and his 40cal semi auto hand gun. He ran out of
ammo fast from those two and elected to return to his car. The Cops
were there in under 90 seconds and spent their time getting people to
hospitals and arresting him at his car. I don't care if the cops had
been there in 30 seconds, most of the people would have been still
killed or injured. Fate, Karma, Higher being or just plain luck caused
his most lethal weapon to jam. The laws aren't against the shotgun or
the handgun, they are geared to the most lethal holding the most ammo.
Giving that the shotgun had 5 rounds and the Glock 40 at 15 rounds, if
the Rifle hadn't jammed, instead of 60 rounds he would have done 120 or
more rounds in that one minute going into the second minute. So they go
after the 15 round, the 100 round clips. While the crime may not have
been thwarted without these the number of people killed or injured would
be greatly reduced. And no, the law didn't include or ban the Rifle,
the shotgun or the handgun, just the 100 and the 15 round magazine.

under the federal law that ended in 2004, the 100 round magazine and the
Rifle would have not been able to legally be purchased. He bought his
equipment (including guns, clips, gas mask, flak vest) from two gun
shops LEGALLY. This included the basic background check and the
appropriate waiting period for the weapons. The Guns may not have been
a good indicator but the rest of the items certainly are. The Gun Shops
should have been alerted with the purchase of the other items including
the Gas Mask, Smoke Bombs, Flak Vest, etc. during such a short time
along with the Extended Mag and the amount of ammo.

You can say that he was mentally deranged but you should say that about
anyone that would do such a thing. Yes, there were warning signs. But
in order to figure out he was serious you would have to have all the
warning signs put together by a responsible person. It didn't happen
and he reacted to his illness.

What does the mass shootings have in common?
Sandy Hook School Shooting - Bushmaster 223 (AR style Rifle) larger clip
(multiplel 3 round clips). 26 victims with 6 dead and apprx 154 rounds
fired. He continued shooting until the police arrived on scene. There
was a classroom that was spared because his rifle jammed allowing 6
children to escape. unlike the threater shooting, he had to go room to
room and did exactly that.


Denver Theater Shooting - Smith and Wesson M&p 15 (ar15 style rifle)
large clip. 12 dead, 54 injured.
The others in recent times did not have the AR style and expanded mags
involved and the victims were kept to less than 10. While this is still
too high, it wasn't in the 20 to 30 range of the shooting with the AR
style Rifle and the expanded mags.

Now, how would You prevent this from happening? Think if they 100 round
clip or rifle had not jammed. How could this have been either prevented
or minimized?

By removing the "Easy Access" to the ammo needed and the extended mags
that means there is less ammo involved. Like the others that happened,
limiting the ammo doesn't prevent it but it minimizes the amount of ammo
that can be carried. These two nut jobs wouldn't have had the ammo and
the clips to carry the ammo had they been banned. And this isn't the
first times that this has happened with equal deadly results in the us.

Yah, Yah, I know, they couldn't legally buy the amount of ammo or the
clips and could purchase them illegally. Just how many illegal gun
sellers do you think they knew? Just finding one is not too bright.
You may also find a police sting operation while you are at it which
would have prevented this in the first place.

Now include the AR style Rifle and you now have handguns with 10 or less
bullets in the clips and, maybe, a shotgun holding 5 rounds. Instead of
30 to 70 people killed and injured it keeps it well below 10. It
doesn't prevent it it just minimizes the damage. And for every one you
minimize that makes the prevention worth it.

The ball is in your court. How do we either prevent or minimize such
shootings? And don't say we can't minimize them.

daryl

[Daryl]

The bans never banned the AR Style Rifles but they made it where you had
to qualify to buy them. And this includes an approved locking gun
cabinet of a certain size for the number or weapons you housed in them.
When the ban was lifted in 2004, that requirement was lifted.

daryl

[Bill]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:37:57 -0700, "DGVREIMAN"
<dgvr...@comcast.net> wrote:

>
>"Keith W" <keithnosp...@demon.co.uk> wrote in message

>> Well no, they received some training in Afghanistan but learned
>> how to fly the hijacked planes in the good old USA.
>>
>> I guess that means America should attack itself.
>>
>> Keith
>
>Doug Says: They were trained in Iran to accept their Jihad role.

Bollocks.

Wrong type of Muslims...

[Bill]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 14:08:09 -0700, "DGVREIMAN"
<dgvr...@comcast.net> wrote:

>
>"Andrew Swallow" <am.sw...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>news:3tKdnZC_CbnHb_fM...@bt.com...
>> On 14/04/2013 18:35, David E. Powell wrote:
>> {snip}
>>> Lanza got past it by not legally buying a gun at all, murdering a
>>> family member and stealing theirs. Very hard to guard against that
>>> kind of freak with any background checks :(
>>
>> Back ground checks can cover the whole household. This used to
>> apply to credit checks and security checks.
>>
>> Andrew Swallow
>
>Doug Says: Guns are dead things - they can do no harm or good by
>themselves. Banning things that cannot function without a human
>involvement is nuts.

Every civilised country in the world, and most of the uncivilised
ones, have restrictions on the availability of firearms.

Now seeing as you live in a country where you're not allowed to buy
chocolates with booze in them (in 42 states anyway), or Cuban cigars,
or even buy a house in a national park, what on earth makes you think
you're any freer than anyone else?

[Bill]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:56:14 -0700, "DGVREIMAN"
<dgvr...@comcast.net> wrote:

>
> The IED wars are over. The goon that plants the IED will be spotted,
>or the IED will be detected prior to it being command detonated. Not
>in all cases, but the IED will no longer be an effective means of
>combat in the future. American technology has caught up. There are
>other was to detect IED's as well that are also coming through the
>pipeline - entire units have been formed and trained for that specific
>purpose, and drones and robots will be leading the detection.

Let us know when it works in Afghanistan will you.

So far it isn't...

>From what I understand our military leaders have made the above fact
>very clear to the CIC - either we attack Iran with total war, or we
>allow them to build their nuclear weapons, or we allow Israel to
>commit total war against Iran by itself.

How does Israel launch total war against Iran?

[Ian B MacLure]

"DGVREIMAN" <dgvr...@comcast.net> wrote in
news:qeqdnf08UqduivbM...@giganews.com:

[snip]

> Considering the Iranian religious indoctrination of its masses, it
> will impossible to defeat Iran without total warfare - politically
> correct wars will fail, as they usually do.
>
> From what I understand our military leaders have made the above fact
> very clear to the CIC - either we attack Iran with total war, or we
> allow them to build their nuclear weapons, or we allow Israel to
> commit total war against Iran by itself. Those are our three
> options - there is not a fourth as diplomacy will always fail due to
> the religious zealotry.

Go after the infrastructure.
Iran only has one gasoline refinery AIUI.
Power plants.
Port facilities.
Bridges.
Pipelines.
And set the CIA on the trail of Ayatollahs who don't hew to the
concept of separation of church and state. Wet jobs or UAVs makes
no difference.

Arm Arab and Turkmen insurgencies and let them do the work.
That would more or less cripple Iran's oil industry.

Make the IRGC target #1 after the Ayatollahs.

Nuke their bomb building facilities and target their enabling
scientists. Go after their suppliers as well wherever they might
be found.

IBM

[Ian B MacLure]

Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:6ncmm8p5uahdftia5...@4ax.com:

[snip]

> How does Israel launch total war against Iran?

Israel has deliverable nukes.
Do the math.

IBM

[Andrew Swallow]

On 14/04/2013 21:56, DGVREIMAN wrote:
>
{snip}

> Considering the Iranian religious indoctrination of its masses, it will
> impossible to defeat Iran without total warfare - politically correct
> wars will fail, as they usually do.

Sexism is politically incorrect. Women with degrees in Woman's Studies
are unlikely to be in reserved occupations so they get sent to the front
line as well. Banning political correctness is the simplest way for
women to avoid serving. Next time the draft laws are reviewed set the trap.

Andrew Swallow

[Keith W]

DGVREIMAN wrote:
>>
>> Well no, they received some training in Afghanistan but learned
>> how to fly the hijacked planes in the good old USA.
>>
>> I guess that means America should attack itself.
>>
>> Keith
>
> Doug Says: They were trained in Iran to accept their Jihad role.
> When they were training to fly airplanes in the USA they did not
> reveal to their instructors they wanted such training so as to murder
> Americans.
>

Their movements are well known, Iran was not on their itinerary.

> We cannot blame a country that did not train the goons specifically
> to murder. We can blame the government of a nation if it was involved
> in absolving them from their conscience for murder via some religious
> training, or to recruit them for that specific purpose. In both cases
> that is Iran.
>
> Doug Grant (Tm)

Trouble is they had no connection with Iran, those of us who live in the
real world understand that.

Keith

[Joel Edge]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:27:54 -0400, Daryl wrote
(in article <kkel92$hqd$1...@dont-email.me>):

> On 4/14/2013 6:47 AM, Joel Edge wrote:
>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 17:02:13 -0400, Frank Galikanokus wrote
>> (in article <51687655...@nospam.net>):
>>
>>> Joel Edge wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 18:09:33 -0400, Frank Galikanokus wrote
>>>> (in article <5167349D...@nospam.net>):
>>>>
>>>>> Joel Edge wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 21:38:41 -0400, Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D. wrote
>>>>>> (in article <luKdnVg78qMWX_nM...@supernews.com>):
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> The Growing Campaign to Revoke Obama s Nobel Peace Prize

>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> By Norman Solomon
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Nobel Peace Prize that President Obama received 40 months ago
>>>>>>> has emerged as the most appalling Orwellian award of this century.
>>>>>>> No, war is not peace.
>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> George Carlin used to riff about oxymorons like  jumbo shrimp,Â
>>>>>>>  genuine imitation,  political science and  military
>>>>>>> intelligence. But humor is of the gallows sort when we consider
>>>>>>> the absurdity and tragedy of the world s most important peace prize
>>>>>>> honoring the world s top war maker.

>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This week, a challenge has begun with the launch of a petition

>>>>>>> urging the Norwegian Nobel Committee to revoke Obama s Peace Prize.

>>>>>>> By midnight of the first day, nearly 10,000 people had signed. The

>>>>>>> online petition simply tells the Nobel committee: Â I urge you to
>>>>>>> rescind the Nobel Peace Prize that was awarded to Barack Obama.Â

Actually, Adam Lanza stole it. From his mother. And he killed her. I notice
you keep using the term "fruitcake". Any suggestions how we keep the
"fruitcakes" from getting weapons? Cause none of the current wailing and
gnashing of teeth does that. Want to back up to the seventies and start
putting people back in institutions? Cause that's where this boy should have
been. I seem to remember back then all the talk was 'you can't keep these
people locked up, it's a crime against their freedom and dignity' or some
other lefty emotional pleading. Soon after that the homeless population went
up and you people were crying about that. You pass a law to fix something and
it breaks something else. Unintended consequences. You folks never seem to
learn that lesson.
BTW, if you'd like to come by and try and make me responsible for my weapons,
feel free. That little threat thing doesn't work.

[Joel Edge]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:57:45 -0400, Bill wrote
(in article <7frlm8tos1buarmhr...@4ax.com>):

So he would have to steal a key or combination first before he stole the gun?

[Joel Edge]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 18:50:10 -0400, Bill wrote
(in article <6gcmm85o9e15jaq66...@4ax.com>):

I agree. We need less restrictions on chocolates and cuban cigars. I tend to
err on more freedom than less.

[Joel Edge]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 18:42:48 -0400, Daryl wrote
(in article <kkfb80$j65$1...@dont-email.me>):

Sport, I have a 45 with two clips and a pump Savage shotgun (Joe Biden's
chosen weapon) and I could do as much or more damage that he did with an
AR-15.
Have we forgotten the weapons choices of Columbine? It's not the weapon, it's
the person behind it.

"Klebold, wearing cargo pants and a black T-shirt with "Wrath" on the front,
was armed with a 9-mm semi-automatic handgun and a 12-gauge double-barrel
sawed-off shotgun. Harris, wearing dark-colored pants and a white T-shirt
that said "Natural Selection," was armed with a 9-mm carbine rifle and a
12-gauge pump sawed-off shotgun. Both wore black trench coats to hide the
weapons they were carrying and utility belts filled with ammunition. Klebold
wore a black glove on his left hand; Harris wore a black glove on his right
hand. They also carried knives and had a backpack and a duffel bag full of
bombs."

[Bill]

On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 07:45:10 -0400, Joel Edge <joel...@planttel.net>
wrote:

It's another layer of security that might work. As far as we know the
mass shooters tend not to be that focused in the phase before they
start shooting due to them being barking mad. It may stops a couple
of them.

Why do you object to that?

[Bill]

On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 07:55:35 -0400, Joel Edge <joel...@planttel.net>
wrote:

>Sport, I have a 45 with two clips and a pump Savage shotgun (Joe Biden's
>chosen weapon) and I could do as much or more damage that he did with an
>AR-15.

Who are you frightened of?

[Bill]

On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 07:43:33 -0400, Joel Edge <joel...@planttel.net>
wrote:

>Actually, Adam Lanza stole it. From his mother. And he killed her. I notice
>you keep using the term "fruitcake". Any suggestions how we keep the
>"fruitcakes" from getting weapons?

From auto loading carbines with 30 round plus magazines?

Easy.

Ban 'em...

For the rest, a comprehensive national licensing system and
compulsory secure storage.

You'll still get the odd nutter 'going postal' but it'll stop the vast
majority of them.

[Bill]

On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 07:47:16 -0400, Joel Edge <joel...@planttel.net>
wrote:

>On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 18:50:10 -0400, Bill wrote
>(in article <6gcmm85o9e15jaq66...@4ax.com>):
>

>> Every civilised country in the world, and most of the uncivilised
>> ones, have restrictions on the availability of firearms.
>>
>> Now seeing as you live in a country where you're not allowed to buy
>> chocolates with booze in them (in 42 states anyway), or Cuban cigars,
>> or even buy a house in a national park, what on earth makes you think
>> you're any freer than anyone else?
>>
>
>I agree. We need less restrictions on chocolates and cuban cigars. I tend to
>err on more freedom than less.

Live free...

Come and live in England.

[Daryl]

Easy answer. Before 2005, it was illegal to openly sell an AR style
weapon without having to qualify for it first. part of that
qualification was the proper storage in a proper storage locker. That
was more a vault than a gun locker. And it was locked, usually by a
combination lock. That certainly would have slowed him down. They
didn't ban them, they just made you have to have a class d firearms
license to possess them. And the qualify for that license. See, this
is easy.

Want to back up to the seventies and start
> putting people back in institutions? Cause that's where this boy should have
> been. I seem to remember back then all the talk was 'you can't keep these
> people locked up, it's a crime against their freedom and dignity' or some
> other lefty emotional pleading.

There are Righty Fruitcakes that probably need to be locked up as well.
It's not a righty or a lefty problem. It's a fruitcake problem. Guess
if they hate Obama they don't need to be locked up, right?

>Soon after that the homeless population went
> up and you people were crying about that.

This is probably the wrong areas to be posting about homeless. There
are hundreds of thousand Veterans that are homeless for many difference
reasons. It's a huge problem. It needs to be addressed. Throw the
extreme right wing crap away, stop talking about the extreme left wing
and actually join in a dialogue to help with the problem. Most
Americans are about 1/2 paycheck from becoming homeless themselves.

You pass a law to fix something and
> it breaks something else. Unintended consequences. You folks never seem to
> learn that lesson.

You folks? Are you talking to me? Are you talking to me? (Robert
Deniro off now)

> BTW, if you'd like to come by and try and make me responsible for my weapons,
> feel free. That little threat thing doesn't work.

By that statement, alone, you are Not a responsible gun owner.

daryl

[Daryl]

It would certainly slow him down. Or he would have used a much less
lethal series of weapons. While we can't stop the carnage, we can help
to minimize the damage.

daryl

[Daryl]

Tell me how you can have a total of 60 rounds for a 45 when you can only
have 5 rounds in your shotgun? You have one minute to discharge 60
rounds. Good friggin luck. You have 60 seconds to kill or injure 53
people. Don't give me that crap you can do it with the weapons you are
bringing up. only in the movies.

> Have we forgotten the weapons choices of Columbine? It's not the weapon, it's
> the person behind it.

We won't completely stop it but we can slow it down. And you are
talking here about something that sounds as bad as the two most recent
but if you give credit to each person involved it's less than 10 per
shooter.

>
> "Klebold, wearing cargo pants and a black T-shirt with "Wrath" on the front,
> was armed with a 9-mm semi-automatic handgun and a 12-gauge double-barrel
> sawed-off shotgun.

That 9mm you are bring up was a Tech 9 9mm with 32 round clips.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TEC-9 Not a sporting gun, self defense gun
or anything else but a military assault weapon used by Law Enforcement
and Military Special Forces.

Those two shotguns were pump 5 round shotguns, not double barreled
anything. The only thing you got right here was the making them both
into short barreled guns.

Harris, wearing dark-colored pants and a white T-shirt
> that said "Natural Selection," was armed with a 9-mm carbine rifle and a
> 12-gauge pump sawed-off shotgun. Both wore black trench coats to hide the
> weapons they were carrying and utility belts filled with ammunition. Klebold
> wore a black glove on his left hand; Harris wore a black glove on his right
> hand. They also carried knives and had a backpack and a duffel bag full of
> bombs."

This rifle wouldn't be caught in any of the proposed gun bans. It only
has a 10 round clip. Using this probably offset the use of his buddies
tech 9 which did much more damage with it's speed, ease of use and
magazine capacity. Not having the high capacity mags may not stop it
but it will minimize the damage.

And you already proved you are not a responsible gun owner.

daryl

[Daryl]

oh, please, England won't take him.

daryl

[Andrew Swallow]

That may keep him out of his neighbours safe but he would probably know
his mother's combination.

Andrew Swallow

[Bill]

Why?

My gun safe is locked, with two five lever locks, and the terms of
my license requires me to keep the location of the keys secret from
people who do not hold the appropriate licenses.

Not too long ago someone in the UK lost their shotgun certificate
because when the cops came to call for his routine license renewal
check his wife went and got the keys for his gun cupboard.

[Daryl]

Not exactly a secure storage then, is it.

daryl

[Bert]

In news:burnm8pkpi61kdvfj...@4ax.com Bill

<black...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Come and live in England.

Sorry, no. The violent crime rate there is far too high for that to be
considered.

--
be...@iphouse.com St. Paul, MN

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <gornm8lkv2sj8teot...@4ax.com>,

I would think that his appropriate answer is: "Nobody."

[Bill]

Oh come on.

He's effective against a couple of housebreakers, after that he's
stuffed.

He'd do better to sell the pistol and buy a decent front door and some
window locks...

[Bill]

On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 16:56:05 +0000 (UTC), Bert <be...@iphouse.com>
wrote:

>In news:burnm8pkpi61kdvfj...@4ax.com Bill
><black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Come and live in England.
>
>Sorry, no. The violent crime rate there is far too high for that to be
>considered.

You're out of date.

Violent crime has fallen some 30% in the past decade.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jul/14/crime-statistics-england-wales

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-1

[Bert]

In news:fghom85bcdhhck4sc...@4ax.com Bill

<black...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Violent crime has fallen some 30% in the past decade.
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jul/14/crime-statistics-england-wales
>
> http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-1

While the FBI table shows the rate of "violent crime" as 386/100K for
2011, the UK data only shows something called "personal crime" at a rate
of 7800/100K.

I have no idea what "personal crime" might be, but the rate certainly
looks rather high.

[Andrew Swallow]

Bar fights. Probably on the street outside.

Andrew Swallow

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <lahom8p36i1muoi1d...@4ax.com>,

Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 13:07:25 -0400, Orval Fairbairn
> <orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >In article <gornm8lkv2sj8teot...@4ax.com>,
> > Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 07:55:35 -0400, Joel Edge <joel...@planttel.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> >Sport, I have a 45 with two clips and a pump Savage shotgun (Joe Biden's
> >> >chosen weapon) and I could do as much or more damage that he did with an
> >> >AR-15.
> >>
> >> Who are you frightened of?
> >
> >I would think that his appropriate answer is: "Nobody."
>
> Oh come on.
>
> He's effective against a couple of housebreakers, after that he's
> stuffed.
>
> He'd do better to sell the pistol and buy a decent front door and some
> window locks...

The first level of riff-raff is where most of the violent crime occurs.

Granted -- he is pretty well, as you say, "stuffed," if it is a
well-planned, organized, gang assault. In that case, so are the police.

[Bill]

On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 16:59:08 -0400, Orval Fairbairn

<orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote:

>In article <lahom8p36i1muoi1d...@4ax.com>,
> Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 13:07:25 -0400, Orval Fairbairn
>> <orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <gornm8lkv2sj8teot...@4ax.com>,
>> > Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 07:55:35 -0400, Joel Edge <joel...@planttel.net>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >Sport, I have a 45 with two clips and a pump Savage shotgun (Joe Biden's
>> >> >chosen weapon) and I could do as much or more damage that he did with an
>> >> >AR-15.
>> >>
>> >> Who are you frightened of?
>> >
>> >I would think that his appropriate answer is: "Nobody."
>>
>> Oh come on.
>>
>> He's effective against a couple of housebreakers, after that he's
>> stuffed.
>>
>> He'd do better to sell the pistol and buy a decent front door and some
>> window locks...
>
>The first level of riff-raff is where most of the violent crime occurs.

The first level of riff raf are opportunist burglars and are deterred
by a cheap alarm system and decent door locks.

They just go elsewhere.

>Granted -- he is pretty well, as you say, "stuffed," if it is a
>well-planned, organized, gang assault. In that case, so are the police.

The police have rifles and a supply of ammunition and a regular
training programme designed to teach them how to shoot at people.

They are what is known as 'a platoon sized problem'.

A guy with a pistol and a shotgun is an accident waiting to
happen...,

[Bill]

On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 18:46:04 +0000 (UTC), Bert <be...@iphouse.com>
wrote:

The vast bulk of those are low level bar fights on a Friday and
Saturday night that usually involve half a dozen drunken young men
between the ages of 16 and 30.

Just stay out of town centers between 9:00pm and midnight on Friday
and Saturday.

[Dave Kearton]

"Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a8rom8t6lgikpnhom...@4ax.com...

The very worst thing you need a gun for.



--



Cheers

Dave Kearton

[Bert]

In news:maOdnSYMYdQ0y_HM...@bt.com Andrew Swallow

Doing just a little resesearch, I find that the term "relate[s] to all crimes
against the individual," excluding "sexual offences," "except for 'wounding
with a sexual motive')."

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/116226/user-guide-crime-statistics.pdf

> Andrew Swallow

So, guess again.

[Bert]

In news:a8rom8t6lgikpnhom...@4ax.com Bill

<black...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Just stay out of town centers between 9:00pm and midnight on Friday
> and Saturday.

How nice; you've turned your cities over to the thugs.

[Bill]

On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 22:56:11 +0000 (UTC), Bert <be...@iphouse.com>
wrote:

>In news:a8rom8t6lgikpnhom...@4ax.com Bill
><black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Just stay out of town centers between 9:00pm and midnight on Friday
>> and Saturday.
>
>How nice; you've turned your cities over to the thugs.

More or less, yes.

We accept that kids get drunk and get into fights.

More mature people don't go into the bar/nightclub areas of our city
centers at weekends in the evenings.

As nobody involved at any level has a gun the death rate is considered
acceptable.


People don't just 'stay home'. There are suburban pubs. Theatres,
concert halls and restaurants tend to be away from the drinking dens
plus an awful lot of people drive out into the country to go to
country pubs for meals.

I'd hate to think of what would happen if carrying pistols was legal
and our fashion driven, celebrity obsessed culture started finding
guns fashionable...

They'd be stacking the bodies like chordwood...

We're a violent society, always have been, but we don't kill or maim
each other in anything like the numbers they do in the USA...

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <13rom8d8vn6ocumfg...@4ax.com>,

No -- at the very least, he has to be able to stand off the assault
until the police get there.

As the ad says: "Seconds count when the police are only minutes away."

[Daryl]

I find nothing wrong with your statements. With a Shotgun and a pistol
you certainly keep a criminal not only at bay but honest as well. The
shotgun is still the most formidable and most terrifying home defense
weapon ever made.

daryl

[DGVREIMAN]

"Andrew Swallow" <am.sw...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:ooidnWC7RtQMNvbM...@bt.com...
> On 14/04/2013 21:56, DGVREIMAN wrote:
>>
> {snip}
>
>> Considering the Iranian religious indoctrination of its masses, it
>> will
>> impossible to defeat Iran without total warfare - politically
>> correct
>> wars will fail, as they usually do.
>
> Sexism is politically incorrect. Women with degrees in Woman's
> Studies are unlikely to be in reserved occupations so they get sent
> to the front line as well. Banning political correctness is the
> simplest way for women to avoid serving. Next time the draft laws
> are reviewed set the trap.
>
> Andrew Swallow

Doug Says: Women will be forced to register IF needed. Right now the
Army does not want any more draftees.

Doug Grant (Tm)

[DGVREIMAN]

"Joel Edge" <joel...@planttel.net> wrote in message
news:0001HW.CD916104...@news.planttel.net...
> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 18:50:10 -0400, Bill wrote
> (in article <6gcmm85o9e15jaq66...@4ax.com>):

>
>> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 14:08:09 -0700, "DGVREIMAN"
>> <dgvr...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Andrew Swallow" <am.sw...@btinternet.com> wrote in message

>>> news:3tKdnZC_CbnHb_fM...@bt.com...
>>>> On 14/04/2013 18:35, David E. Powell wrote:
>>>> {snip}

>>>>> Lanza got past it by not legally buying a gun at all, murdering
>>>>> a
>>>>> family member and stealing theirs. Very hard to guard against
>>>>> that
>>>>> kind of freak with any background checks :(
>>>>

>>>> Back ground checks can cover the whole household. This used to
>>>> apply to credit checks and security checks.
>>>>
>>>> Andrew Swallow
>>>
>>> Doug Says: Guns are dead things - they can do no harm or good by
>>> themselves. Banning things that cannot function without a human
>>> involvement is nuts.

>>
>> Every civilised country in the world, and most of the uncivilised
>> ones, have restrictions on the availability of firearms.

Doug Says: The founding fathers wanted Americans to possess guns so
(1) they could defend themselves (2) they could defend against
invading armies (3) to hunt for food (4) to use them to force their
government to abide by the constitution and the bill of rights. None
of the people located in nations that have forced the guns away from
those they govern have a bill of rights. The FIRST thing a despot
does to the people it governs is to take away their guns.

>>
>> Now seeing as you live in a country where you're not allowed to buy
>> chocolates with booze in them (in 42 states anyway), or Cuban
>> cigars,
>> or even buy a house in a national park, what on earth makes you
>> think
>> you're any freer than anyone else?

Doug Says: The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United
States of America guarantees my right to own and bear arms - it does
not mention chocolate with booze in them, nor Cuban cigars, or houses
located in National parks.
>>
>
> Doug Grant (Tm)
>

[Andrew Swallow]

Try the real Bill of Rights. A law passed in England in 1689. The US
constitutional amendments are based on it.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_Rights_1689>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_Rights_1689

Andrew Swallow

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <kki8l0$ush$1...@dont-email.me>,

Agreed. Also, the shotgun usually doesn't send its rounds too far around
the neighborhood, as pellets shed velocity rather quickly.

The Brits, apparently, have turned their country over to the yeggs, as
they have made self-defense difficult.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <hICdnYJbWKnfXPHM...@bt.com>,

The English version was the beta; the US Constitution is the 2.0 version.

[Daryl]

Around here, I can apply and receive a CCW permit because I easily
qualify like Most Americans do. okay, the clip will be 10 rounds or
less but since when do I need more than 10 rounds to make you put your
head down? The 5 shot Shotgun does even a better job. While the
handgun makes you piss your pants, the shotgun makes you shit your pants
as well and close counts.

I taught my ex wife to use the shotgun, not the pistol or the rifle.
She would only get one shot and was terrified to use any of them. She
wasn't big enough to actually hold the shotgun. But I told her to hold
it by her side without supporting the stock. And announce she has a
shotgun if someone is messing with the front door. If the door was
forced open to just pull the trigger directly at the front door from the
bedroom. There is now a 2 foot hole in the door and anything behind it
has more than a few number 4 BBs in it and probably won't be doing an
accurate damage report to his buddies behind him or next to him. So the
shotgun does a second hole in the back of the bedroom but, trust me, the
threat is neutralized and the one in the door stays in the doorway for
the cops. Now, picture a terrified 105 lb 5 foot 2 woman holding that
shotgun behind a closed door. That's the most terrifying picture I can
come up with. And a criminal will be visualizing this as well.

daryl

[DGVREIMAN]

"Andrew Swallow" <am.sw...@btinternet.com> wrote in message

news:hICdnYJbWKnfXPHM...@bt.com...

Doug Says: We are talking about the Constitution of the United States
of America - which does not resemble in any way the English Bill of
Rights of 1689 and if our Bill of Rights includes some of the most
favorable articles of the 1689 English Bill of Rights that is very
interesting, but the USA created a representative Democracy long
before King George gave up his powers - and a representative Democracy
goes back to the teachings of Plato - so I would suspect that our Bill
of Rights has more to do with ancient Greece than it does England.

Regardless, with the exception of the discrimatory powers of
Protestants to bear arms but Catholics not to have the same rights,
and in Ireland the forbad of any Catholic first Son to inherent the
property of his Father, and other oppressions, dictates, and
subversions of the people the English dominated, I would say the USA
Constitution and its Bill of Rights has about the same connection to
English law as the Third Reich has to the Israeli Parliament.

The Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States allows
all citizens to own and bear arms for the reasons heretofore stated.
Find me that passage in any English law, or any European law.

Doug Grant (Tm)

[DGVREIMAN]

"Orval Fairbairn" <orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:orfairbairn-2187...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net...

Doug Says: I doubt if the English version could even qualify as the
Beta as the English King had not relinquished his powers regardless
of the 1689 pact when the American Constitution was proclaimed.

Of course today much can be said about the English version of
democracy. They exist not as "the best liar with the most money" as
the American version has become. . . so there are lessons to be
learned in some respects from the Europeans, but then they have
lessons to learn from us, such as our second amendment rights.

Doug Grant (Tm)

Doug Grant (Tm)

Doug Grant (Tm)

[Keith W]

Right now the Army doesnt want ANY draftees.

Keith

[Bill]

Assault by whom exactly?

They don't come over teatime in full daylight...

Indeed the most likely people to turn up with guns and a bad attitude
is cops who've made a mistake about an address...

[Bill]

We may have more burglaries, but that's falling like a stone at the
moment, however we don't slaughter as many innocents as you.

A burglar has done nothing worthy of death...

[Daryl]

The reason it doesn't exactly resemble it is that only part of the
influence came from the English. The rest was either thought out by our
Founding Fathers or borrowed from the 14th Colony, the Iriqious who
already had a similar government in place. But the Iriqious didn't have
it written down. Notice, I called it the 14th Colony as a couple of
historians have called it.

[Bill]

On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 18:45:47 -0700, "DGVREIMAN"
<dgvr...@comcast.net> wrote:

>Doug Says: The founding fathers wanted Americans to possess guns so
>(1) they could defend themselves (2) they could defend against
>invading armies (3) to hunt for food (4) to use them to force their
>government to abide by the constitution and the bill of rights. None
>of the people located in nations that have forced the guns away from
>those they govern have a bill of rights. The FIRST thing a despot
>does to the people it governs is to take away their guns.

Well (2) doesn't work, and didn't work in 1776 either...

(3) is reasonable.

(4) is utterly daft

>>>
>>> Now seeing as you live in a country where you're not allowed to buy
>>> chocolates with booze in them (in 42 states anyway), or Cuban
>>> cigars,
>>> or even buy a house in a national park, what on earth makes you
>>> think
>>> you're any freer than anyone else?
>
>Doug Says: The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United
>States of America guarantees my right to own and bear arms - it does
>not mention chocolate with booze in them, nor Cuban cigars, or houses
>located in National parks.

It's like this, things change.

Your president has roughly the same powers as an eighteenth century
king, and a pretty despotic one at that. Certainly more powers than
George III, who he displaced.

Everyone else has moved on from there...