Unlikely rumor says SSN needed to board plane
Anonymous
>This showed up in, of all places, comp.dcom.telecom. The moderator
>credited it to a state legislator in the midwest.
>
>> But the best it seems, is yet to come. Starting October 2, 2000 you
>> will need to present your SSN to *board any airplane or purchase any
>> airplane ticket*, use *any government services* -- regardless if it
>> is a welfare program or you just want to call the police and report
>> some incident, although Medicare and welfare programs will definitly
>> require the number -- or to conduct any bank transactions.
>
>I find it extremely implausible and I've seen no confirmation of it
>anywhere else, but I'm wondering if anyone can figure out what he's
>actually referring to.
Extremely unlikely. The right wing nuts would start a revolution.
I can already see it, gun nuts rushing to form militia groups in preparation for battle
with 'the coming dictatorship'.
Juan Liberale
The right wing fear of the social security number dates all
the way back to its beginning. Many of the bible thumping morons
consider it to be the biblical mark of the beast.
Some of the uneducated red necks also consider it to be just
another method for the big bad gubmint to eventually take
over their trailer.
--
Why does the GOP want criminals to have guns?
Why does the GOP want hate crimes to go unpunished?
Why does the GOP want poor children to go hungry?
Why does the GOP want your children to smoke?
Why does the GOP want religious bigots to decide the laws?
Why does the GOP want you to pay taxes for the rich?
Why does the GOP want women to be subservient?
Why does the GOP want you to pay for segregated schools?
Why does the GOP want children to have guns?
Why does the GOP want our water to be poisoned?
Why does the GOP want our air to be polluted?
Why does the GOP want your wages to be less?
Why does the GOP want guns to be unlocked?
----
The person most likely to kill you with a gun
is living in your house!
----
http://www.gwbush.com
"There ought to be limits to freedom".
- G.W. "Chicken George II" Bush
----
Chicken George the 1st was asleep as CIA director, bought off as
China Ambassador, out-of-the-loop as Vice President and
a complete failure as President! What a record! Sure, let's
give his coke snorting son a try now!
OrnageViking
cleary labled as not for use for ID.
Deborah Stevenson
In <374E7399...@bellsouth.net> OrnageViking <oran...@bellsouth.net> writes:
>> jo...@iecc.com (John R Levine) wrote:
>>
>> >This showed up in, of all places, comp.dcom.telecom. The moderator
>> >credited it to a state legislator in the midwest.
>> >
>> >> But the best it seems, is yet to come. Starting October 2, 2000 you
>> >> will need to present your SSN to *board any airplane or purchase any
>> >> airplane ticket*, use *any government services* -- regardless if it
>> >> is a welfare program or you just want to call the police and report
>> >> some incident, although Medicare and welfare programs will definitly
>> >> require the number -- or to conduct any bank transactions.
>> >
>> >I find it extremely implausible and I've seen no confirmation of it
>> >anywhere else, but I'm wondering if anyone can figure out what he's
>> >actually referring to.
>I t woulf require a change in Federal law. if you loook at your SS card, you'll find it is
>cleary labled as not for use for ID.
1) that means the *card*, not the *number*
2) they've changed the rule anyway
3) since it's not true, it doesn't really matter
Deborah Stevenson
(stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
Mr. Horrible
Believe half of what you read, nothing of what you hear -- and the
opposite of what you read on the internet.
Mr. H
betweentheeyes
Juan Liberale, not being fearfull of the gubnernment, posted his SSN on
usenet.
Jim Alder
Juan Liberale <JLib...@hotmail.com> wrote in message:
> The right wing fear of the social security number dates all
> the way back to its beginning. Many of the bible thumping morons
> consider it to be the biblical mark of the beast.
That would be way back when the only way the government could get the
Social security number instituted was by promising that said number would
never become a 'citizen ID number' and in fact was guaranteed to never be
used for anything but social security purposes and NOT for identification?
The only 'morons' back then were the ones who believed the constant
stream of lies that comes from the government. The same people that believed
that 'withholding taxes' were voluntary and temporary.
> --
> Why does the GOP ....?
Why does Juan here waste so much of his time coming up with questions about
lies he made up to begin with?
> Chicken George the 1st was asleep as CIA director, bought off as
> China Ambassador, out-of-the-loop as Vice President and
> a complete failure as President! What a record! Sure, let's
> give his coke snorting son a try now!
Since Reno said she didn't have enough evidence to issue a warrant or launch
an investigation three years ago, I (tho not you, it would seem) would be
hard pressed to condemn Bush for not doing so eight years ago. And thanks,
but one coke snorting president is one too many for me. Amazing how that
doesn't bother you, but Bush's does! You have absolutely NO moral standard,
do you? No wonder you stick to the democrats.
Scout
Deborah Stevenson <stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu> wrote in article
<7im3vt$1i4$1...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>...
> Followups trimmed.
>
> In <374E7399...@bellsouth.net> OrnageViking
<oran...@bellsouth.net> writes:
>
> >> jo...@iecc.com (John R Levine) wrote:
> >>
> >> >This showed up in, of all places, comp.dcom.telecom. The moderator
> >> >credited it to a state legislator in the midwest.
> >> >
> >> >> But the best it seems, is yet to come. Starting October 2, 2000 you
> >> >> will need to present your SSN to *board any airplane or purchase
any
> >> >> airplane ticket*, use *any government services* -- regardless if it
> >> >> is a welfare program or you just want to call the police and report
> >> >> some incident, although Medicare and welfare programs will
definitly
> >> >> require the number -- or to conduct any bank transactions.
> >> >
> >> >I find it extremely implausible and I've seen no confirmation of it
> >> >anywhere else, but I'm wondering if anyone can figure out what he's
> >> >actually referring to.
>
> >I t woulf require a change in Federal law. if you loook at your SS
card, you'll find it is
> >cleary labled as not for use for ID.
>
> 1) that means the *card*, not the *number*
> 2) they've changed the rule anyway
> 3) since it's not true, it doesn't really matter
Nope sorry, even the NUMBER is not for use as an D.
In fact no government agency can deny a person any legal rights for
refusing to provide their social security number. Further while no law
prohibits private organizations, neither can they require it for service.
Further the combining of names and social security numbers opens up any
private individual or business to EXTREME liability. Since anyone who
obtains so much as a single such combination who was not authorized can
result in civil suits for thousands of dollars per violation. See such
information is protected under the Privacy Act of 1974, and criminal and
civil suits can follow any release of that information. A college I once
attended threw away a computer list of students with their SSNs, I found it
and returned it to the campus Admin, noting that such a violation could
cost the college millions, and that such papers should be shredded before
throwing it into the recycle pile. The amount began clear when several
years later a student sued the college when an instructor posted a list of
names and SSN for the students taking the course. That student won to the
tune of $10,000 and the judge commented that the rest of the students could
have similarly sued the college. So before you decide to use SSNs for your
store database, be aware of the liability you are leaving yourself open to.
Even an employee misusing that data could be grounds for criminal and/or
civil action.
> Deborah Stevenson
> (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
>
Juan Liberale
>
>
>Juan Liberale <JLib...@hotmail.com> wrote in message:
>
>> The right wing fear of the social security number dates all
>> the way back to its beginning. Many of the bible thumping morons
>> consider it to be the biblical mark of the beast.
>
> That would be way back when the only way the government could get the
>Social security number instituted was by promising that said number would
>never become a 'citizen ID number' and in fact was guaranteed to never be
>used for anything but social security purposes and NOT for identification?
Exactly. They had to placate the moron crowd.
>
> The only 'morons' back then were the ones who believed the constant
>stream of lies that comes from the government. The same people that believed
>that 'withholding taxes' were voluntary and temporary.
Oooooooooooh. Another gubmint hater. Note: You are not a loser
because of the government. You are a loser because your
ancestors fucked close family members.
>
>> --
>> Why does the GOP ....?
>
>Why does Juan here waste so much of his time coming up with questions about
>lies he made up to begin with?
>
>> Chicken George the 1st was asleep as CIA director, bought off as
>> China Ambassador, out-of-the-loop as Vice President and
>> a complete failure as President! What a record! Sure, let's
>> give his coke snorting son a try now!
>
>Since Reno said she didn't have enough evidence to issue a warrant or launch
>an investigation three years ago, I (tho not you, it would seem) would be
>hard pressed to condemn Bush for not doing so eight years ago. And thanks,
>but one coke snorting president is one too many for me. Amazing how that
>doesn't bother you, but Bush's does! You have absolutely NO moral standard,
>do you? No wonder you stick to the democrats.
>
>
>
--
Why does the GOP want criminals to have guns?
Why does the GOP want hate crimes to go unpunished?
Why does the GOP want poor children to go hungry?
Why does the GOP want your children to smoke?
Why does the GOP want religious bigots to decide the laws?
Why does the GOP want you to pay taxes for the rich?
Why does the GOP want women to be subservient?
Why does the GOP want you to pay for segregated schools?
Why does the GOP want children to have guns?
Why does the GOP want our water to be poisoned?
Why does the GOP want our air to be polluted?
Why does the GOP want your wages to be less?
Why does the GOP want guns to be unlocked?
----
The person most likely to kill you with a gun
is living in your house!
----
http://www.gwbush.com
"There ought to be limits to freedom".
- G.W. "Chicken George II" Bush
----
M. W. Eglestone
you for your Social Security Number. The Military uses a persons SSN
in place of the old Serial Number which was in use for many, many
years. Now, when you're captured, you provide the ENEMY with your
Social Security Number. If it's safe to give it to sworn enemies of
your country, it should be safe enough to give it to anyone!
--
Mike Eglestone
Senior Master Sergeant (E-8)
United States Air Force (26 years)
Retired?
Tag Lines:
Those who would give up Essential Liberty, to purchase a little
Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty or Safety. Nor, are they
likely to end up with either!
fatsin...@got.net
<nob...@replay.com> wrote:
>Extremely unlikely. The right wing nuts would start a revolution.
And finish one.
Nullifier
betweentheeyes wrote in message <5EA33.228$oc....@news.flash.net>...
>Could I see your SSN Mr. Valdez?
>
>Juan Liberale, not being fearfull of the gubnernment, posted his SSN on
>usenet.
Really? ha ha ha ha where?
Michael Cidras
OrnageViking wrote in message <374E7399...@bellsouth.net>...
>I t woulf require a change in Federal law. if you loook at your SS card,
you'll find it is
That's cool. Now talk to anyone in the military. Your SSN is used for
identification in every document you sign from enlistment to requesting a
copy of your pay stub. It's most definitely used for ID, and by the Fed no
less.
>Anonymous wrote:
>
>> jo...@iecc.com (John R Levine) wrote:
>>
>> >This showed up in, of all places, comp.dcom.telecom. The moderator
>> >credited it to a state legislator in the midwest.
>> >
>> >> But the best it seems, is yet to come. Starting October 2, 2000 you
>> >> will need to present your SSN to *board any airplane or purchase any
>> >> airplane ticket*, use *any government services* -- regardless if it
>> >> is a welfare program or you just want to call the police and report
>> >> some incident, although Medicare and welfare programs will definitly
>> >> require the number -- or to conduct any bank transactions.
>> >
>> >I find it extremely implausible and I've seen no confirmation of it
>> >anywhere else, but I'm wondering if anyone can figure out what he's
>> >actually referring to.
>>
>> Extremely unlikely. The right wing nuts would start a revolution.
>>
el...@spam.free.at.last
Scout <sc...@monumental.com> wrote:
<snip>
> See such
>information is protected under the Privacy Act of 1974, and criminal and
>civil suits can follow any release of that information. A college I once
>attended threw away a computer list of students with their SSNs, I found it
>and returned it to the campus Admin, noting that such a violation could
>cost the college millions, and that such papers should be shredded before
>throwing it into the recycle pile. The amount began clear when several
>years later a student sued the college when an instructor posted a list of
>names and SSN for the students taking the course. That student won to the
>tune of $10,000 and the judge commented that the rest of the students could
>have similarly sued the college.
Are you really sure it was the posting of the SS# that was the cause
for the suit? AFAIK, it is against the Privacy Act to post the *grade*
with any readily identifiable marker, i.e. the *name* of the student.
At my university and at others I know about, one posts the grade
with only the SS#, no name. And, for things that don't involve
grades, e.g. section assignments, one often posts the name and
SS#, no problem.
Juan Liberale
I glued it to the end of my dick and posted it into Mr. Between's
mouth.
later
Does some or all of the following qualify as hate speech?
Juan Liberale wrote in message
<3603688C3B3377E0.64530F42...@library-proxy.airnews.ne
t>...
Juan Liberale
says...
>
>Hey folks -
>
>Does some or all of the following qualify as hate speech?
No, you stupid little fuck.
Nullifier
Juan Liberale wrote in message
>In article <7in079$n...@chronicle.concentric.net>, Nu...@Void.com says...
>>
>>
>>betweentheeyes wrote in message <5EA33.228$oc....@news.flash.net>...
>>>Could I see your SSN Mr. Valdez?
>>>
>>>Juan Liberale, not being fearfull of the gubnernment, posted his SSN on
>>>usenet.
>>
>>
>>Really? ha ha ha ha where?
>
>I glued it to the end of my dick and posted it into Mr. Between's
>mouth.
But you said you were half way through your sex-change and had that
unsightly little pimple you refer to as a dick, removed. Did you change your
mind and cancel your breast enhancement Shawn?
later
Juan Liberale wrote in message
t>...
>In article <7io9l1$23v$1...@nntp3.atl.mindspring.net>, la...@anonymous.com
>says...
>>
>>Hey folks -
>>
>>Does some or all of the following qualify as hate speech?
>
>No, you stupid little fuck.
Let's ask the jury...........
>
>>
>>
>>Juan Liberale wrote in message
>><3603688C3B3377E0.64530F42...@library-proxy.airnews.
ne
>>t>...
>>>In article <7in079$n...@chronicle.concentric.net>, Nu...@Void.com says...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>betweentheeyes wrote in message <5EA33.228$oc....@news.flash.net>...
>>>>>Could I see your SSN Mr. Valdez?
>>>>>
>>>>>Juan Liberale, not being fearfull of the gubnernment, posted his SSN on
>>>>>usenet.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Really? ha ha ha ha where?
>>>
>>>I glued it to the end of my dick and posted it into Mr. Between's
>>>mouth.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
later
What does the jury say?
What do you say?
Juan Liberale wrote in message
<9362BC497EB9298F.1632B93C...@library-proxy.airnews.ne
t>...
>In article <7io9l1$23v$1...@nntp3.atl.mindspring.net>, la...@anonymous.com
>says...
>>
>>Hey folks -
>>
>>Does some or all of the following qualify as hate speech?
>
>No, you stupid little fuck.
>
>>
>>
Juan Liberale
says...
>
>Juan Liberale was accused of hate speech. He denies it.
>
>What does the jury say?
>
>What do you say?
They say that you are a pathetic little whiney pussy.
----
I was astounded to read these courageous remarks by Charlton
Heston. I am thankful to hear a man with such high esteem say
essentially the same things for which I have been reviled by
the liberal media. His words should be reproduced and put into
the hands of every American. - David Duke, Republican
M. W. Eglestone
> They say that you are a pathetic little whiney pussy.
=========================================================
Just in case you forgot, Juan, you have a bit of answering to do
before you hang up your guns for the day!
---------------------------------------------------------
"Juan" I challenge you to come up with a few things:
1. At least two (2) court decisions PRIOR to 1968, one (1) prior to
1934, and if you can, one (1) SCOTUS decision (four total) that
clearly state that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.
2. At least two quotes from any of the Founding Fathers with sources
that clearly state that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.
Juan Liberale
>
>Juan Liberale wrote:
>
>> They say that you are a pathetic little whiney pussy.
>=========================================================
>
> Just in case you forgot, Juan, you have a bit of answering to do
>before you hang up your guns for the day!
>---------------------------------------------------------
>
> "Juan" I challenge you to come up with a few things:
>
When is the NRA going to file a suit over all of the violations
of your big bad 2nd amendment rights?
>
> Mike Eglestone
> Senior Master Sergeant (E-8)
> United States Air Force (26 years)
> Retired?
--
Zepp
<sms...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>Juan Liberale wrote:
>
>> They say that you are a pathetic little whiney pussy.
>=========================================================
>
> Just in case you forgot, Juan, you have a bit of answering to do
>before you hang up your guns for the day!
>---------------------------------------------------------
>
> "Juan" I challenge you to come up with a few things:
>
>1. At least two (2) court decisions PRIOR to 1968, one (1) prior to
>1934, and if you can, one (1) SCOTUS decision (four total) that
>clearly state that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.
>
>2. At least two quotes from any of the Founding Fathers with sources
>that clearly state that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.
Amazing. You tried the same silly challenge against Milt, and he beat
you like a cheap drum.
>
>--
>
> Mike Eglestone
> Senior Master Sergeant (E-8)
> United States Air Force (26 years)
> Retired?
>
The Mad Hatter
I know of several things Milt beats like a drum.
--
I choose to live and to
Lie, kill and give and to
Die, learn and love and to
Do what it takes to step through.
"Forty Six & 2"
TOOL
HomePage: http://www.mv.com/ipusers/craig/mypage.htm
Shooting Page: http://www.mv.com/ipusers/craig/rifle.htm
Michael Cidras
Zepp wrote in message <3751cee7....@news.snowcrest.net>...
>On Sun, 30 May 1999 17:14:04 -0700, "M. W. Eglestone"
><sms...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>>Juan Liberale wrote:
>>
>>> They say that you are a pathetic little whiney pussy.
>>=========================================================
>>
>> Just in case you forgot, Juan, you have a bit of answering to do
>>before you hang up your guns for the day!
>>---------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> "Juan" I challenge you to come up with a few things:
>>
>>1. At least two (2) court decisions PRIOR to 1968, one (1) prior to
>>1934, and if you can, one (1) SCOTUS decision (four total) that
>>clearly state that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.
>>
>>2. At least two quotes from any of the Founding Fathers with sources
>>that clearly state that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.
>
>Amazing. You tried the same silly challenge against Milt, and he beat
>you like a cheap drum.
Actually, he didn't. Read the thread as it stands at this point.
Jim Alder
later <la...@anonymous.com> wrote in message
news:7iqqao$oel$1...@nntp3.atl.mindspring.net...
> Juan Liberale was accused of hate speech. He denies it.
>
> What does the jury say?
>
> What do you say?
I doubt Juan believes in juries anymore than he believes in any other
civilized tenet. The rest of the world is only an annoyance to his
superiority delusion. They keep proving him wrong.
> Juan Liberale wrote in message
>
<9362BC497EB9298F.1632B93C...@library-proxy.airnews.ne
> t>...
> >In article <7io9l1$23v$1...@nntp3.atl.mindspring.net>, la...@anonymous.com
> >says...
> >>
> >>Hey folks -
> >>
> >>Does some or all of the following qualify as hate speech?
> >
> >No, you stupid little fuck.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>Juan Liberale wrote in message
>
>><3603688C3B3377E0.64530F42...@library-proxy.airnews.
> ne
> >>t>...
> >>>In article <7in079$n...@chronicle.concentric.net>, Nu...@Void.com says...
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>betweentheeyes wrote in message <5EA33.228$oc....@news.flash.net>...
> >>>>>Could I see your SSN Mr. Valdez?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Juan Liberale, not being fearfull of the gubnernment, posted his SSN
on
> >>>>>usenet.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Really? ha ha ha ha where?
> >>>
> >>>I glued it to the end of my dick and posted it into Mr. Between's
> >>>mouth.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
Zepp
He's been running from thread to thread like a five year old with a
new toy, tugging sleeves and demanding attention. Milt hammered him
flat.
>
>
>
Juan Liberale
>
>Zepp wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 30 May 1999 17:14:04 -0700, "M. W. Eglestone"
>> <sms...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>
>> >Juan Liberale wrote:
>> >
>> >> They say that you are a pathetic little whiney pussy.
>> >=========================================================
>> >
>> > Just in case you forgot, Juan, you have a bit of answering to do
>> >before you hang up your guns for the day!
>> >---------------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> > "Juan" I challenge you to come up with a few things:
>> >
>> >1. At least two (2) court decisions PRIOR to 1968, one (1) prior to
>> >1934, and if you can, one (1) SCOTUS decision (four total) that
>> >clearly state that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.
>> >
>> >2. At least two quotes from any of the Founding Fathers with sources
>> >that clearly state that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.
>>
>> Amazing. You tried the same silly challenge against Milt, and he beat
>> you like a cheap drum.
>> >
>> >
>> > Mike Eglestone
>> > Senior Master Sergeant (E-8)
>> > United States Air Force (26 years)
>> > Retired?
>> >
>> > Tag Lines:
>> >
>> > Those who would give up Essential Liberty, to purchase a little
>> >Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty or Safety. Nor, are they
>> >likely to end up with either!
>
>I know of several things Milt beats like a drum.
I understand the biggest and loudest drum in Milt's band is
made from the skin he kicked off your huge ass!
Michael Cidras
Zepp wrote in message <37520147....@news.snowcrest.net>...
>On Sun, 30 May 1999 20:00:30 -0600, "Michael Cidras"
><cidr...@pcisys.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>Zepp wrote in message <3751cee7....@news.snowcrest.net>...
>>><sms...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Juan Liberale wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> They say that you are a pathetic little whiney pussy.
>>>>=========================================================
>>>>
>>>> Just in case you forgot, Juan, you have a bit of answering to do
>>>>before you hang up your guns for the day!
>>>>---------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> "Juan" I challenge you to come up with a few things:
>>>>
>>>>1. At least two (2) court decisions PRIOR to 1968, one (1) prior to
>>>>1934, and if you can, one (1) SCOTUS decision (four total) that
>>>>clearly state that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.
>>>>
>>>>2. At least two quotes from any of the Founding Fathers with sources
>>>>that clearly state that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.
>>>
>>>Amazing. You tried the same silly challenge against Milt, and he beat
>>>you like a cheap drum.
>>
>>
>
>He's been running from thread to thread like a five year old with a
>new toy, tugging sleeves and demanding attention. Milt hammered him
>flat.
Strange, I didn't see that. I read all of Milt's cites, most of them didn't
even come close to even applying. Every single one was refuted, at least
once, some many times.
You were saying?
The Mad Hatter
> made from the skin he kicked off your huge ass!
My huge ass. HA! I'm only 19 and weigh 160lbs, at a height of 5'11''
that makes my ass slightly underweight by definition. Juan my invitation
still stands to you and milt. Come up to NH sometime and I can show you
a good time. No ok...
Thanks for the laugh though.
Zepp
<cidr...@pcisys.net> wrote:
You gotta stop living in such deep denial. It's not good for you.
>
>
>
Juan Liberale
>
>
>later <la...@anonymous.com> wrote in message
>news:7iqqao$oel$1...@nntp3.atl.mindspring.net...
>> Juan Liberale was accused of hate speech. He denies it.
>>
>> What does the jury say?
>>
>> What do you say?
>
>I doubt Juan believes in juries anymore than he believes in any other
>civilized tenet. The rest of the world is only an annoyance to his
>superiority delusion. They keep proving him wrong.
It seems to me that you little right wing cocksuckers
are the ones who have accepted the doctrine of guilty
until proven innocnet lately. Just like the worlds
most famous conservative, Adolf.
M. W. Eglestone
> I understand the biggest and loudest drum in Milt's band is
> made from the skin he kicked off your huge ass!
=============================================================
Still waiting for your reply, Juan. Here is the challenge again
(just in case you forgot)! These are NOT going to to away, Juan.
Address them now, or read them forever; your choice!
------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok "Juan". I see you snipped all of the historical quotes (with
sources) Dan posted. Milt posted a few lower court decisions that
were ALL in the 1990s.
This shows that there is no historical evidence that the 2nd
Amendment is not an individual right, and that the "collective right"
nonsense is a modern fabrication.
"Juan" I challenge you to come up with a few things:
1. At least two (2) court decisions PRIOR to 1968, one (1) prior to
1934, and if you can, one (1) SCOTUS decision (four total) that
clearly state that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.
2. At least two quotes from any of the Founding Fathers with sources
that clearly state that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.
Jim Alder
Juan Liberale <JLib...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5CD5840D5DFEC7A1.EBBD9E8B...@library-proxy.airnew
s.net...
> In article <9281189...@news.remarQ.com>, jima...@sssnet.com says...
> >
> >
> >later <la...@anonymous.com> wrote in message
> >news:7iqqao$oel$1...@nntp3.atl.mindspring.net...
> >> Juan Liberale was accused of hate speech. He denies it.
> >>
> >> What does the jury say?
> >>
> >> What do you say?
> >
> >I doubt Juan believes in juries anymore than he believes in any other
> >civilized tenet. The rest of the world is only an annoyance to his
> >superiority delusion. They keep proving him wrong.
>
> It seems to me that you little right wing cocksuckers
> are the ones who have accepted the doctrine of guilty
> until proven innocnet lately. Just like the worlds
> most famous conservative, Adolf.
About what I expect from you 'Juan.' Nothing thought out, no basis for
anything, just another insult or two. And of course a reason to add your
idiotic addendum to still one more bullshit message.
Juan Liberale
>
>On Sun, 30 May 1999 20:00:30 -0600, "Michael Cidras"
><cidr...@pcisys.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>Zepp wrote in message <3751cee7....@news.snowcrest.net>...
>>>On Sun, 30 May 1999 17:14:04 -0700, "M. W. Eglestone"
>>><sms...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Juan Liberale wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> They say that you are a pathetic little whiney pussy.
>>>>=========================================================
>>>>
>>>> Just in case you forgot, Juan, you have a bit of answering to do
>>>>before you hang up your guns for the day!
>>>>---------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>1. At least two (2) court decisions PRIOR to 1968, one (1) prior to
>>>>1934, and if you can, one (1) SCOTUS decision (four total) that
>>>>clearly state that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.
>>>>
>>>>2. At least two quotes from any of the Founding Fathers with sources
>>>>that clearly state that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.
>>>
>>>you like a cheap drum.
>>
>>
>>Actually, he didn't. Read the thread as it stands at this point.
>
>He's been running from thread to thread like a five year old with a
>new toy, tugging sleeves and demanding attention. Milt hammered him
>flat.
Cidras is a joke! He has decided that anyone attemting to
purchase a gun under Brady is interfering with commerce.
The little pussies are soooo desparate to prove the
most effective gun legislation ever enacted is
actually a failure. They have made some good points
about how it needs to be strengthened.
Juan Liberale
>
>> I understand the biggest and loudest drum in Milt's band is
>> made from the skin he kicked off your huge ass!
>
>that makes my ass slightly underweight by definition. Juan my invitation
>still stands to you and milt. Come up to NH sometime and I can show you
>a good time. No ok...
>
>Thanks for the laugh though.
Sorry, we only fuck adult conservatives. It sounds like
you fit THE profile though:
If you look at the psychological profile of those who are
the so called rabid gun owners. Almost to a man (it is a
male phenomenon) they were physically and/or sexually
abused as children. At home, meekness meant survival. This
meekness carries over into the day at school and is picked
up on by fellow students. So we have the poor guy being
abused at home and bullied at school. To him, a gun is the
great equalizer. His manhood. He no longer has to be afraid
of being pushed around or abused, his fears are abated by
his gun.
Unfortunately, most are not content with being equal, they
in turn become the bully. Their gun did not make them equal,
but superior. This is where the cycle begins. They have a
strong tendancy to raise their children n exactly the same
manner they so despised. And the beat goes on.
Recent data shows those who worship their guns suffer from
bipolar disorder (manic depressive disorder) at a rate five
times the national average and are three times more likely
to suffer the effect of obsessive compulsive disorder. They
also, as a group, are second only to police officers in their
suicide rate. Clearly, guns are attractive to troubled
individuals.
A college education seems to be the one thing that may break
the cycle, however the segment of the population where this
is prominent is also the segment least likey to achieve higher
education.
>
>--
>I choose to live and to
>Lie, kill and give and to
>Die, learn and love and to
>Do what it takes to step through.
> "Forty Six & 2"
> TOOL
>
>HomePage: http://www.mv.com/ipusers/craig/mypage.htm
>Shooting Page: http://www.mv.com/ipusers/craig/rifle.htm
--
Juan Liberale
>
>On Mon, 31 May 1999 00:15:14 -0600, "Michael Cidras"
><cidr...@pcisys.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>Zepp wrote in message <37520147....@news.snowcrest.net>...
>>>On Sun, 30 May 1999 20:00:30 -0600, "Michael Cidras"
>>><cidr...@pcisys.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Zepp wrote in message <3751cee7....@news.snowcrest.net>...
>>>>>On Sun, 30 May 1999 17:14:04 -0700, "M. W. Eglestone"
>>>>><sms...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Juan Liberale wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They say that you are a pathetic little whiney pussy.
>>>>>>=========================================================
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just in case you forgot, Juan, you have a bit of answering to do
>>>>>>before you hang up your guns for the day!
>>>>>>---------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Juan" I challenge you to come up with a few things:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>1. At least two (2) court decisions PRIOR to 1968, one (1) prior to
>>>>>>1934, and if you can, one (1) SCOTUS decision (four total) that
>>>>>>clearly state that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>2. At least two quotes from any of the Founding Fathers with sources
>>>>>>that clearly state that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.
>>>>>
>>>>>Amazing. You tried the same silly challenge against Milt, and he beat
>>>>>you like a cheap drum.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Actually, he didn't. Read the thread as it stands at this point.
>>>
>>>He's been running from thread to thread like a five year old with a
>>>new toy, tugging sleeves and demanding attention. Milt hammered him
>>>flat.
>>
>>
>>even come close to even applying. Every single one was refuted, at least
>>once, some many times.
>>
>>You were saying?
>
>You gotta stop living in such deep denial. It's not good for you.
The only way you can get anything past Cidras' thick skull
is if you tape it to the end of Heston's dick!
Walter E. Kurtz
Not only is what you request not possible ( therein lies the beauty )
but even if it were, the abrasive little street urchin you pose the
challenge to is not at all up to the task. You might, however, expect to
view some of the more rabid examples of liberal "thought" crafted in the
gutter. Everyone is good at something. It seems "Mr" Liberale's forte is
the expletitive riddled, pointless, rant. I suspect that the volume and
vulgarity are meant to distract from the fact that this individual has
little to say of any substance.
regards,
Kurtz
M. W. Eglestone <sms...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:3752DB5B...@bellsouth.net...
> Juan Liberale wrote:
>
> > I understand the biggest and loudest drum in Milt's band is
> > made from the skin he kicked off your huge ass!
> =============================================================
>
> Still waiting for your reply, Juan. Here is the challenge again
> (just in case you forgot)! These are NOT going to to away, Juan.
> Address them now, or read them forever; your choice!
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Ok "Juan". I see you snipped all of the historical quotes (with
> sources) Dan posted. Milt posted a few lower court decisions that
> were ALL in the 1990s.
>
> This shows that there is no historical evidence that the 2nd
> Amendment is not an individual right, and that the "collective right"
> nonsense is a modern fabrication.
>
> "Juan" I challenge you to come up with a few things:
>
> 1. At least two (2) court decisions PRIOR to 1968, one (1) prior to
> 1934, and if you can, one (1) SCOTUS decision (four total) that
> clearly state that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.
>
> 2. At least two quotes from any of the Founding Fathers with sources
> that clearly state that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.
Juan Liberale
>
>Sgt Eglestone,
>
> Not only is what you request not possible ( therein lies the beauty )
>but even if it were, the abrasive little street urchin you pose the
>challenge to is not at all up to the task. You might, however, expect to
>view some of the more rabid examples of liberal "thought" crafted in the
>gutter. Everyone is good at something. It seems "Mr" Liberale's forte is
>the expletitive riddled, pointless, rant. I suspect that the volume and
>vulgarity are meant to distract from the fact that this individual has
>little to say of any substance.
>
>regards,
>
>Kurtz
Oh, how sweet, Eggy has a boyfriend!
--
Why does the GOP want criminals to have guns?
Why does the GOP want hate crimes to go unpunished?
Why does the GOP want poor children to go hungry?
Why does the GOP want your children to smoke?
Why does the GOP want religious bigots to decide the laws?
Why does the GOP want you to pay taxes for the rich?
Why does the GOP want women to be subservient?
Why does the GOP want you to pay for segregated schools?
Why does the GOP want children to have guns?
Why does the GOP want our water to be poisoned?
Why does the GOP want our air to be polluted?
Why does the GOP want your wages to be less?
Why does the GOP want guns to be unlocked?
----
The person most likely to kill you with a gun
is living in your house!
----
Chicken George the 1st was asleep as CIA director, bought off as
China Ambassador, out-of-the-loop as Vice President and
a complete failure as President! What a record! Sure, let's
give his coke snorting son a try now!
----
I was astounded to read these courageous remarks by Charlton
Heston. I am thankful to hear a man with such high esteem say
essentially the same things for which I have been reviled by
the liberal media. His words should be reproduced and put into
the hands of every American. - David Duke, Republican
----
IMPORTANT SITES
http://www.vpc.org/
http://www.gwbush.com
http://www.handguncontrol.org/default2.htm
http://www.ceasefire.org/welcome.html
http://www.american-politics.com/
Michael Cidras
Zepp wrote in message <37529b07....@news.snowcrest.net>...
>On Mon, 31 May 1999 00:15:14 -0600, "Michael Cidras"
><cidr...@pcisys.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>Zepp wrote in message <37520147....@news.snowcrest.net>...
>>>On Sun, 30 May 1999 20:00:30 -0600, "Michael Cidras"
>>><cidr...@pcisys.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Zepp wrote in message <3751cee7....@news.snowcrest.net>...
>>>>>On Sun, 30 May 1999 17:14:04 -0700, "M. W. Eglestone"
>>>>><sms...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Juan Liberale wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They say that you are a pathetic little whiney pussy.
>>>>>>=========================================================
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just in case you forgot, Juan, you have a bit of answering to do
>>>>>>before you hang up your guns for the day!
>>>>>>---------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>1. At least two (2) court decisions PRIOR to 1968, one (1) prior to
>>>>>>1934, and if you can, one (1) SCOTUS decision (four total) that
>>>>>>clearly state that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>2. At least two quotes from any of the Founding Fathers with sources
>>>>>>that clearly state that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.
>>>>>
>>>>>you like a cheap drum.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Actually, he didn't. Read the thread as it stands at this point.
>>>
>>>He's been running from thread to thread like a five year old with a
>>>new toy, tugging sleeves and demanding attention. Milt hammered him
>>>flat.
>>
>>
>>Strange, I didn't see that. I read all of Milt's cites, most of them
didn't
>>even come close to even applying. Every single one was refuted, at least
>>once, some many times.
>>
>>You were saying?
>
>You gotta stop living in such deep denial. It's not good for you.
So, IOW, you know I'm right.
Michael Cidras
Juan Liberale wrote in message
t>...
>><cidr...@pcisys.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Zepp wrote in message <3751cee7....@news.snowcrest.net>...
>>>>On Sun, 30 May 1999 17:14:04 -0700, "M. W. Eglestone"
>>>><sms...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Juan Liberale wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> They say that you are a pathetic little whiney pussy.
>>>>>=========================================================
>>>>>
>>>>> Just in case you forgot, Juan, you have a bit of answering to do
>>>>>before you hang up your guns for the day!
>>>>>---------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> "Juan" I challenge you to come up with a few things:
>>>>>
>>>>>1. At least two (2) court decisions PRIOR to 1968, one (1) prior to
>>>>>1934, and if you can, one (1) SCOTUS decision (four total) that
>>>>>clearly state that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.
>>>>>
>>>>>2. At least two quotes from any of the Founding Fathers with sources
>>>>>that clearly state that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.
>>>>
>>>>Amazing. You tried the same silly challenge against Milt, and he beat
>>>>you like a cheap drum.
>>>
>>>
>>>Actually, he didn't. Read the thread as it stands at this point.
>>
>>He's been running from thread to thread like a five year old with a
>>new toy, tugging sleeves and demanding attention. Milt hammered him
>>flat.
>
>purchase a gun under Brady is interfering with commerce.
Geez Juan, you can't even read. That's affecting commerce, not interfering
bozo.
>The little pussies are soooo desparate to prove the
>most effective gun legislation ever enacted is
>actually a failure. They have made some good points
>about how it needs to be strengthened.
So, you admit it's a failure then, if it was a blazing success, it wouldn't
need to be strengthened, now would it.
Juan Liberale
>>Cidras is a joke! He has decided that anyone attemting to
>>purchase a gun under Brady is interfering with commerce.
>
>
>Geez Juan, you can't even read. That's affecting commerce, not interfering
>bozo.
>
>>The little pussies are soooo desparate to prove the
>>most effective gun legislation ever enacted is
>>actually a failure. They have made some good points
>>about how it needs to be strengthened.
>
>
>So, you admit it's a failure then, if it was a blazing success, it wouldn't
>need to be strengthened, now would it.
Sorry pussyboy. It is the single most effective gun legislation
passed in the last 20 years. 250,000 criminals without gun and that
really really psses of the NRA maggots!
Steven Payne
Juan Liberale wrote:
> In article <3752...@news.inil.com>, Apocolypse@theend says...
> >
> >Sgt Eglestone,
> >
> > Not only is what you request not possible ( therein lies the beauty )
> >but even if it were, the abrasive little street urchin you pose the
> >challenge to is not at all up to the task. You might, however, expect to
> >view some of the more rabid examples of liberal "thought" crafted in the
> >gutter. Everyone is good at something. It seems "Mr" Liberale's forte is
> >the expletitive riddled, pointless, rant. I suspect that the volume and
> >vulgarity are meant to distract from the fact that this individual has
> >little to say of any substance.
> >
> >regards,
> >
> >Kurtz
>
> Oh, how sweet, Eggy has a boyfriend!
What? Still no facts.. It must be a Liberal !! Still doing the kiddies with glee
but as usual Clue less.
Steve
>
>
> >
> >M. W. Eglestone <sms...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> >news:3752DB5B...@bellsouth.net...
> >> Juan Liberale wrote:
> >>
> >> > I understand the biggest and loudest drum in Milt's band is
> >> > made from the skin he kicked off your huge ass!
> >> =============================================================
> >>
> >> Still waiting for your reply, Juan. Here is the challenge again
> >> (just in case you forgot)! These are NOT going to to away, Juan.
> >> Address them now, or read them forever; your choice!
> >>
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> Ok "Juan". I see you snipped all of the historical quotes (with
> >> sources) Dan posted. Milt posted a few lower court decisions that
> >> were ALL in the 1990s.
> >>
> >> This shows that there is no historical evidence that the 2nd
> >> Amendment is not an individual right, and that the "collective right"
> >> nonsense is a modern fabrication.
> >>
> >> "Juan" I challenge you to come up with a few things:
> >>
> >> 1. At least two (2) court decisions PRIOR to 1968, one (1) prior to
> >> 1934, and if you can, one (1) SCOTUS decision (four total) that
> >> clearly state that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.
> >>
> >> 2. At least two quotes from any of the Founding Fathers with sources
> >> that clearly state that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.
> >> --
> >>
> >> Mike Eglestone
> >> Senior Master Sergeant (E-8)
> >> United States Air Force (26 years)
> >> Retired?
> >>
> >> Tag Lines:
> >>
> >> Those who would give up Essential Liberty, to purchase a little
> >> Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty or Safety. Nor, are they
> >> likely to end up with either!
> >
> >
>
Steven Payne
Juan Liberale wrote:
>
>
> Sorry, we only fuck adult conservatives. It sounds like
> you fit THE profile though:
Ahh the Standard "Juan" (I gotta get laid somehow) Liberal has a wet dream..
Was it good for you??
Alas the reposts begin again, hit a brain skip, skip skip.. Take your meds.
steve
> If you look at the psychological profile of those who are
Snip the repost..
Steven Payne
Juan Liberale wrote:
> In article <92818073...@news.remarQ.com>, cidr...@pcisys.net says...
> >
> >
> >Juan Liberale wrote in message
> ><17C7A6B9492CA7A6.2E5C0DC3...@library-proxy.airnews.ne
>
> >>Cidras is a joke! He has decided that anyone attemting to
> >>purchase a gun under Brady is interfering with commerce.
> >
> >
> >Geez Juan, you can't even read. That's affecting commerce, not interfering
> >bozo.
> >
> >>The little pussies are soooo desparate to prove the
> >>most effective gun legislation ever enacted is
> >>actually a failure. They have made some good points
> >>about how it needs to be strengthened.
> >
> >
> >So, you admit it's a failure then, if it was a blazing success, it wouldn't
> >need to be strengthened, now would it.
>
> Sorry pussyboy. It is the single most effective gun legislation
> passed in the last 20 years. 250,000 criminals without gun and that
> really really psses of the NRA maggots!
Where and HOW many prosecutions are you raving about "Juan", Show us?? The last
figure I saw said under 10,000 in all these years?? Now that is the Justice
system at work, but I am curious...
You wouldn't happen to have a site for this would you? Oh it's Juan, Sorry
forgot..
Steve
James W Brown
s.net...
> In article <92818073...@news.remarQ.com>, cidr...@pcisys.net says...
> >
> >
> >Juan Liberale wrote in message
>
><17C7A6B9492CA7A6.2E5C0DC3...@library-proxy.airnews.n
e
>
wouldn't
> >need to be strengthened, now would it.
>
> Sorry pussyboy. It is the single most effective gun legislation
> passed in the last 20 years. 250,000 criminals without gun and that
> really really psses of the NRA maggots!
>
>
nabbed?
> --
Why does the Juan Liberale want only criminals to have guns?
Why does the Juan Liberale want gun crimes to go unpunished?
Why does the Juan Liberale beat his children?
Why does the Juan Liberale want gunowners to die?
Why does the Juan Liberale want athiestic bigots to decide the laws?
The person most likely to kill Juan Liberale with a gun
is Juan Liberale!
-------------------------------
"If you don't understand weapons you don't understand fighting.
If you don't understand fighting you don't understand war.
If you don't understand war you don't understand history.
And if you don't understand history you might as well live with your head in
a sack."
-----Jeff Cooper
Michael Cidras
Juan Liberale wrote in message ...
>In article <92818073...@news.remarQ.com>, cidr...@pcisys.net says...
>>
>>
>>Juan Liberale wrote in message
>><17C7A6B9492CA7A6.2E5C0DC3...@library-proxy.airnews.
ne
>
>>>purchase a gun under Brady is interfering with commerce.
>>
>>
>>Geez Juan, you can't even read. That's affecting commerce, not
interfering
>>bozo.
>>
>>>The little pussies are soooo desparate to prove the
>>>most effective gun legislation ever enacted is
>>>actually a failure. They have made some good points
>>>about how it needs to be strengthened.
>>
>>
wouldn't
>>need to be strengthened, now would it.
>
>Sorry pussyboy. It is the single most effective gun legislation
>passed in the last 20 years. 250,000 criminals without gun and that
>really really psses of the NRA maggots!
Again, if it is such a blazing success, why does it need to be strengthened.
By your own admission Brady contains absolutely no provisions to prosecute a
violation. Seems to everyone here that all it did was cause the denied to
go elsewhere to get a gun, which isn't that hard to do.
So, how was Brady a success?
dra...@bellsouth.net
weapons (liberal hysteria syndrome) is a diagnostic sign of sexual
immaturity. What you seem to be doing is regurgitating some second rate Jr.
College professors opinion. The real important man told you something so
you believe every word of it don't you Juan? I'd love to see your MMPI. Any
professional worth their salt would tell you that, undergrad education is no
treatment for Bi-Polar Disorder nor any other for that matter. Obviously it
hasn't helped you! I love that "recent data" part, what recent data,
where? Who's data? Yours? I'll have to remember that next time JCHA comes
around, I'll just say "well recent data shows" I'm sure that will work. You
don't mind if I tell them that you use it to make your point so it must be
right. You portray yourself as an educated, analytical source of
information, but what you are is boring, childish, and selfserving. Your
facts are never clear. Never concise. Never repeatable on a large scale.
Ergo, totally worthless. Example; I have 8 employees in my Laboratory, 2
male employees married 2 female employees, therefore. I can extrapolate that
if they were Liberals they would probably be homosexual and the guys would
marry the guys and the girls would file a lawsuit for family leave because
they want to have a baby by artifiical insemination by some really educated
Brainmeister named Juan, and want me to pay for it. Leave the "recent data"
to people whom have and idea that the data is worthless unless repeatable
(Physical Science Ok) (Pysch. Social, etc. forget it) Anyone that tells
you that you can take a small sample of human behavior and extrapolate it
over as large populace is a liar. Including you. The facts are clear to
some of us none the less, you have a political agenda subverting the 2nd
Amendment, but wave the 1st as a club. You see yourself as the truth and
the light and all that oppose you as less than human. When your made to
order statistics are challanged you reply with profanity about the
opposition's penis or family. You are a joke!
Not to be taken seriously, but like a toddler who misbehaves. If you are
indeed educated you must have skipped Speech/Debate and opted for Art
History or some such crap as that. I think I'll go to deja.news and send
all your posts to HCI and ask them if you speak for them. I've got a friend
at CNBC maybe I could get you a spot on Hardtalk, how about that? How about
it boys and girls, think Sarah Brady would just stroke?
John Chase
>
> In article <9281189...@news.remarQ.com>, jima...@sssnet.com says...
> >
> >
> >later <la...@anonymous.com> wrote in message
> >news:7iqqao$oel$1...@nntp3.atl.mindspring.net...
> >> Juan Liberale was accused of hate speech. He denies it.
> >>
> >> What does the jury say?
> >>
> >> What do you say?
> >
> >I doubt Juan believes in juries anymore than he believes in any other
> >civilized tenet. The rest of the world is only an annoyance to his
> >superiority delusion. They keep proving him wrong.
>
> It seems to me that you little right wing cocksuckers
> are the ones who have accepted the doctrine of guilty
> until proven innocnet lately. Just like the worlds
> most famous conservative, Adolf.
Adolf Who?
>
> --
> Why does the GOP want criminals to have guns?
To justify the continued existence of cops.
> Why does the GOP want hate crimes to go unpunished?
Because hate is an emotion, not a crime.
> Why does the GOP want poor children to go hungry?
So they can solicit charity from you.
> Why does the GOP want your children to smoke?
Because they hold stock in tobacco farms.
> Why does the GOP want religious bigots to decide the laws?
Because they don't believe in "political correctness".
> Why does the GOP want you to pay taxes for the rich?
Because if the rich paid their own taxes, they wouldn't be rich any
more.
> Why does the GOP want women to be subservient?
Because the Bible says so.
> Why does the GOP want you to pay for segregated schools?
Because integrated schools have failed.
> Why does the GOP want children to have guns?
Because they are the future militia.
> Why does the GOP want our water to be poisoned?
Because otherwise you won't conserve water.
> Why does the GOP want our air to be polluted?
So you can't see them.
> Why does the GOP want your wages to be less?
Because you aren't worthy of more.
> Why does the GOP want guns to be unlocked?
So people can use them when they need to.
> ----
> The person most likely to kill you with a gun
> is living in your house!
BWAHAHAHAHA. Not even in your dreams.
> ----
> http://www.gwbush.com
> "There ought to be limits to freedom".
> - G.W. "Chicken George II" Bush
Wrong: That was "uncle slick".
> ----
> Chicken George the 1st was asleep as CIA director, bought off as
> China Ambassador, out-of-the-loop as Vice President and
> a complete failure as President! What a record! Sure, let's
> give his coke snorting son a try now!
> ----
> I was astounded to read these courageous remarks by Charlton
> Heston. I am thankful to hear a man with such high esteem say
> essentially the same things for which I have been reviled by
> the liberal media. His words should be reproduced and put into
> the hands of every American. - David Duke, Republican
You wouldn't be "intolerant" now, would you?
-jc-
later
Juan Liberale wrote in message
<5CD5840D5DFEC7A1.EBBD9E8B...@library-proxy.airnews.ne
t>...
>
>It seems to me that you little right wing cocksuckers
>are the ones who have accepted the doctrine of guilty
>until proven innocnet lately. Just like the worlds
>most famous conservative, Adolf.
>
and a National Socialist at that. An awful like the socialists here in the
US.
Plus, you must remember, you are now on trial, and your innocence subject to
judgment by your peers, whom you have elected to place yourself amongst.
You may no longer be innocent.
Roy Batty
Pat Hines
>
> In article <3752...@news.inil.com>, Apocolypse@theend says...
> >
> >Sgt Eglestone,
> >
> > Not only is what you request not possible ( therein lies the beauty )
> >but even if it were, the abrasive little street urchin you pose the
> >challenge to is not at all up to the task. You might, however, expect to
> >view some of the more rabid examples of liberal "thought" crafted in the
> >gutter. Everyone is good at something. It seems "Mr" Liberale's forte is
> >the expletitive riddled, pointless, rant. I suspect that the volume and
> >vulgarity are meant to distract from the fact that this individual has
> >little to say of any substance.
> >
> >regards,
> >
> >Kurtz
>
> Oh, how sweet, Eggy has a boyfriend!
Mr. Kurtz certainly has your number, Wan Liberal...ZERO.
Pat Hines
tjwilson
tjw
Steven Payne wrote:
> > --
> > Why does the GOP want criminals to have guns?
> > Why does the GOP want hate crimes to go unpunished?
> > Why does the GOP want poor children to go hungry?
> > Why does the GOP want your children to smoke?
> > Why does the GOP want religious bigots to decide the laws?
> > Why does the GOP want you to pay taxes for the rich?
> > Why does the GOP want women to be subservient?
> > Why does the GOP want you to pay for segregated schools?
> > Why does the GOP want children to have guns?
> > Why does the GOP want our water to be poisoned?
> > Why does the GOP want our air to be polluted?
> > Why does the GOP want your wages to be less?
> > Why does the GOP want guns to be unlocked?
> > ----
> > The person most likely to kill you with a gun
> > is living in your house!
> > ----
> > Chicken George the 1st was asleep as CIA director, bought off as
> > China Ambassador, out-of-the-loop as Vice President and
> > a complete failure as President! What a record! Sure, let's
> > give his coke snorting son a try now!
> > ----
> > I was astounded to read these courageous remarks by Charlton
> > Heston. I am thankful to hear a man with such high esteem say
> > essentially the same things for which I have been reviled by
> > the liberal media. His words should be reproduced and put into
> > the hands of every American. - David Duke, Republican
Juan Liberale
GEWE...@prodigy.net says...
>
>
>Juan Liberale <JLib...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:C54492FC4E8B1250.3C17F415...@library-proxy.airnew
>s.net...
>>
>e
>>
>> >So, you admit it's a failure then, if it was a blazing success, it
>wouldn't
>> >need to be strengthened, now would it.
>>
>> Sorry pussyboy. It is the single most effective gun legislation
>> passed in the last 20 years. 250,000 criminals without gun and that
>> really really psses of the NRA maggots!
>>
>>
>nabbed?
Why are you morons so fucking dense? Wait, I just answered
my own question. OK, I will type this real slow with tiny
words so you can keep up. See Brady? See Brady stop crime?
See the NRA shit their pants? Brady good. NRA bad. Brady
stops crime. NRA wants more crime. Brady does not make it a
crime for a felon to attempt a purchase. NRA straw man does
not work. NRA little maggots. Liberals fuck conservatives
every day. Liberals good. Conservatives are inbred little red neck
fools.
>> --
>Why does the Juan Liberale want only criminals to have guns?
>Why does the Juan Liberale want gun crimes to go unpunished?
>Why does the Juan Liberale beat his children?
>Why does the Juan Liberale want gunowners to die?
>Why does the Juan Liberale want athiestic bigots to decide the laws?
>
>The person most likely to kill Juan Liberale with a gun
>is Juan Liberale!
>-------------------------------
>
>"If you don't understand weapons you don't understand fighting.
>If you don't understand fighting you don't understand war.
>If you don't understand war you don't understand history.
>And if you don't understand history you might as well live with your head in
>a sack."
>-----Jeff Cooper
>
>
>
>
>
--
Juan Liberale
>
>>Sorry pussyboy. It is the single most effective gun legislation
>>passed in the last 20 years. 250,000 criminals without gun and that
>>really really psses of the NRA maggots!
>
>
>Again, if it is such a blazing success, why does it need to be strengthened.
>By your own admission Brady contains absolutely no provisions to prosecute a
>violation. Seems to everyone here that all it did was cause the denied to
>go elsewhere to get a gun, which isn't that hard to do.
>
>So, how was Brady a success?
Brady was a law to keep guns from criminals. It works.
That really really pisses off you NRA maggots
Why does it piss you off? How does it advance the
gunloon cause for criminals to have guns? I can only
deduce that it pisses you off because most of you are
felons.
Juan Liberale
>
>Your education is showing JL, way back in 1952 Freud wrote that fear of
>weapons (liberal hysteria syndrome) is a diagnostic sign of sexual
>immaturity. What you seem to be doing is regurgitating some second rate Jr.
>College professors opinion. The real important man told you something so
>you believe every word of it don't you Juan? I'd love to see your MMPI. Any
>professional worth their salt would tell you that, undergrad education is no
>treatment for Bi-Polar Disorder nor any other for that matter. Obviously it
>hasn't helped you! I love that "recent data" part, what recent data,
Sorry dipshit. The mentals defectives are the exception to
the education rule. There is nothing going to help you punks
with brain defects.
>where? Who's data? Yours? I'll have to remember that next time JCHA comes
>around, I'll just say "well recent data shows" I'm sure that will work. You
>don't mind if I tell them that you use it to make your point so it must be
>right. You portray yourself as an educated, analytical source of
>information, but what you are is boring, childish, and selfserving. Your
>facts are never clear. Never concise. Never repeatable on a large scale.
>Ergo, totally worthless. Example; I have 8 employees in my Laboratory, 2
>male employees married 2 female employees, therefore. I can extrapolate that
>if they were Liberals they would probably be homosexual and the guys would
>marry the guys and the girls would file a lawsuit for family leave because
>they want to have a baby by artifiical insemination by some really educated
>Brainmeister named Juan, and want me to pay for it. Leave the "recent data"
>to people whom have and idea that the data is worthless unless repeatable
>(Physical Science Ok) (Pysch. Social, etc. forget it) Anyone that tells
>you that you can take a small sample of human behavior and extrapolate it
>over as large populace is a liar. Including you. The facts are clear to
>some of us none the less, you have a political agenda subverting the 2nd
>Amendment, but wave the 1st as a club. You see yourself as the truth and
>the light and all that oppose you as less than human. When your made to
>order statistics are challanged you reply with profanity about the
>opposition's penis or family. You are a joke!
So, do this. When you see my name on a post, don't read the
motherfucker.
>Not to be taken seriously, but like a toddler who misbehaves. If you are
>indeed educated you must have skipped Speech/Debate and opted for Art
>History or some such crap as that. I think I'll go to deja.news and send
>all your posts to HCI and ask them if you speak for them. I've got a friend
>at CNBC maybe I could get you a spot on Hardtalk, how about that? How about
>it boys and girls, think Sarah Brady would just stroke?
I think you exaggerate you self value. A bunch!
>
>
>> Recent data shows those who worship their guns suffer from
>> bipolar disorder (manic depressive disorder) at a rate five
>> times the national average and are three times more likely
>> to suffer the effect of obsessive compulsive disorder. They
>> also, as a group, are second only to police officers in their
>> suicide rate. Clearly, guns are attractive to troubled
>> individuals.
>>
>> A college education seems to be the one thing that may break
>> the cycle, however the segment of the population where this
>> is prominent is also the segment least likey to achieve higher
>> education.
>
>
>
--
betweentheeyes
<snip>
silverback
wrote:
>
>Juan Liberale wrote in message
><5CD5840D5DFEC7A1.EBBD9E8B...@library-proxy.airnews.ne
>t>...
>>In article <9281189...@news.remarQ.com>, jima...@sssnet.com says...
>>>
>>>.
>>
>>It seems to me that you little right wing cocksuckers
>>are the ones who have accepted the doctrine of guilty
>>until proven innocnet lately. Just like the worlds
>>most famous conservative, Adolf.
>>
>FYI, Adolf was a liberal (who overthrew the rightwing/conservative Kaiser),
>and a National Socialist at that. An awful like the socialists here in the
>US.
hey fool Hitler was a right wing extremist that believed in
corporatism just like the republiCONS and other right wing idiots in
this country today. Plus you don't even know history. The Kaiser was
disposed of at the end of WWI, Hitler and the Nazis had nothing to do
with that. But thanks to the Kaiser many of those businesses that you
claim the government ran and operated were taken over by the Kaiser.
In fact if a business was to fail and their was no buyer the Kaiser
just took the businees over and it remained as a government ran
business for the most part. Although there are some exceptions like
the electric ult. that the Nazis privatized ooops that sounds more
like right wing idiots like the drooling idiot that was mistakenly
elected prez.
>
>Plus, you must remember, you are now on trial, and your innocence subject to
>judgment by your peers, whom you have elected to place yourself amongst.
>You may no longer be innocent.
>
>
*****************************************************
GDY Weasel
emailers remove the spam buster
For those seeking enlightenment visit the White Rose at
http://www.spiritone.com/~gdy52150/whiterose.htm
Do your patriotic duty and vote for your favorite blithering idiot at
http://www.spiritone.com/~gdy52150/award.html
======================================================
Michael Ejercito's solution to global warming
If the goverment wanted to end global warming, it would use its
nuclear arsenal to put enough dust into the atmoshpere
to reduce sunlight, creating a nuclear winter.
************************************************
Harry Hope
wrote:
>I own guns so I can kill people like you
There you have him. A true American gunnut.
Harry
"I believe everyody in the world should have guns. Citizens should
have bazookas and rocket launchers too. I believe that all citizens
should have their weapons of choice. However, I also believe that only
I should have the ammunition. Because frankly, I wouldn't trust the
rest of the goobers with anything more dangerous than string."
Scott Adams
Steven Payne
Juan Liberale wrote:
> In article <3IG43.2563$hq5...@news4.mia>, dra...@bellsouth.net says...
> >
> >Your education is showing JL, way back in 1952 Freud wrote that fear of
> >weapons (liberal hysteria syndrome) is a diagnostic sign of sexual
> >immaturity. What you seem to be doing is regurgitating some second rate Jr.
> >College professors opinion. The real important man told you something so
> >you believe every word of it don't you Juan? I'd love to see your MMPI. Any
> >professional worth their salt would tell you that, undergrad education is no
> >treatment for Bi-Polar Disorder nor any other for that matter. Obviously it
> >hasn't helped you! I love that "recent data" part, what recent data,
>
> Sorry dipshit. The mentals defectives are the exception to
> the education rule. There is nothing going to help you punks
> with brain defects.
"Juan" he's trying to help explain your problem in the Fantasy world you live in
Read this post again better still copy it and repost it often, At least this one
has facts..
Steve
>
> >where? Who's data? Yours? I'll have to remember that next time JCHA comes
> >around, I'll just say "well recent data shows" I'm sure that will work. You
> >don't mind if I tell them that you use it to make your point so it must be
> >right. You portray yourself as an educated, analytical source of
> >information, but what you are is boring, childish, and selfserving. Your
> >facts are never clear. Never concise. Never repeatable on a large scale.
> >Ergo, totally worthless. Example; I have 8 employees in my Laboratory, 2
> >male employees married 2 female employees, therefore. I can extrapolate that
> >if they were Liberals they would probably be homosexual and the guys would
> >marry the guys and the girls would file a lawsuit for family leave because
> >they want to have a baby by artifiical insemination by some really educated
> >Brainmeister named Juan, and want me to pay for it. Leave the "recent data"
> >to people whom have and idea that the data is worthless unless repeatable
> >(Physical Science Ok) (Pysch. Social, etc. forget it) Anyone that tells
> >you that you can take a small sample of human behavior and extrapolate it
> >over as large populace is a liar. Including you. The facts are clear to
> >some of us none the less, you have a political agenda subverting the 2nd
> >Amendment, but wave the 1st as a club. You see yourself as the truth and
> >the light and all that oppose you as less than human. When your made to
> >order statistics are challanged you reply with profanity about the
> >opposition's penis or family. You are a joke!
>
> So, do this. When you see my name on a post, don't read the
> motherfucker.
There you see sexual content again reread the post often It's good for you..
Steve
Snip the repost of crap
OldSalt
<snip>
>I'd love to see your MMPI. Any professional worth their salt would
> tell you that, undergrad education is no treatment for Bi-Polar
>Disorder nor any other for that matter. Obviously it hasn't helped you!
Hi again Dragoon. Sorry but Juan the Wino isn't a bipolar. I
think I mentioned in an earlier post to you that I have my diagnosis
of him and, actually, after I assumed that profile of him, I just
kinda leave him be for the most part. But, at any any rate if he
is on Lithium and I had any say about it.....wellllllllll.....I'd be
tapering him right off of that asap !!!!!!!!! I think he is a Major
Depressive Disorder ... could be single episode but I would say
probably recurrent episode. I would treat him with an
anti-depressant such as Trazadone. I would elect to use Trazadone
because it has a very short half life and therefore, if he is
drinking or abusing other drugs, it will be outta his system fairly
pronto. I would also elect to add one of my favorites ---
Risperdal. I don't think that Wino Juan is psychotic all the time of
course.... if so he wouldn't be able to type to us all here. But I
do think he loses reality from time to time thus he warrants the
Risperdal. It's an excellent anti-psychotic as far as very few extra
pyramidial symptoms, or anticholenergic side effects .... and he might
benefit from it. But then maybe again, we might benefit if we just
ignored his sorry ass...... YA KNOW WHAT I MEAN ??!!!!!!!!!!!!!
OldSalt
<snip>
>
>You gotta stop living in such deep denial. It's not good for you.
Hey Zepp.....you're trying to say that Milt will really answer
anything beyond 2 posts and try to challenge someone ?? I haven't
seen that at all. He smart mouthed me about something and when I
challenged him back, he just didn't answer. I think Milt is more
like WILTED MILT. He's pretty limp.
OldSalt
wrote:
>Leave Juan alone. He's suffering from Tourett's Syndrome.
>tjw
>
Tj - I just laugh at that .... it is toooooooo funny !!!! and it
fits. hehehehehe
Gail W.
>
> In article <3IG43.2563$hq5...@news4.mia>, dra...@bellsouth.net says...
> >
> >Your education is showing JL, way back in 1952 Freud wrote that fear of
> >weapons (liberal hysteria syndrome) is a diagnostic sign of sexual
> >immaturity.
Pretty amazing feat for someone who died in 1939!
--
Happy trails, SK
Juan Liberale
>
>I own guns so I can kill people like you
Of course you do. It is the profile of the coward
I have posted here often. It is little gun monkeys like
you that we need to prevent from having access to guns.
It is for little gun monkeys like you that the NRA exists.
>
http://world.std.com/~mhuben/libindex.html
Juan Liberale
says...
>
>
>Juan Liberale wrote in message
><5CD5840D5DFEC7A1.EBBD9E8B...@library-proxy.airnews.ne
>t>...
>>In article <9281189...@news.remarQ.com>, jima...@sssnet.com says...
>>>
>>>.
>>
>>It seems to me that you little right wing cocksuckers
>>are the ones who have accepted the doctrine of guilty
>>until proven innocnet lately. Just like the worlds
>>most famous conservative, Adolf.
>>
>FYI, Adolf was a liberal (who overthrew the rightwing/conservative Kaiser),
>and a National Socialist at that. An awful like the socialists here in the
>US.
>
>judgment by your peers, whom you have elected to place yourself amongst.
>You may no longer be innocent.
>
You just hang in there and by the time you make it to
the eighth grade, your understanding of history will
be vastly improved.
Juan Liberale
>
>Juan Liberale wrote:
>>
>> In article <3IG43.2563$hq5...@news4.mia>, dra...@bellsouth.net says...
>> >
>> >Your education is showing JL, way back in 1952 Freud wrote that fear of
>> >weapons (liberal hysteria syndrome) is a diagnostic sign of sexual
>> >immaturity.
>
Ahhhh, Mr Dragoon was too busy rolling his big fat
cigar back and forth in his hands to realize he was
simply being the repository for yet another NRA lie
being passed off as fact. Just their magic hitler quote!
C'mon Draggy, you are no better than the rest of the
uneducated NRA trailer trash red necks!
>
>
>
>
>--
>Happy trails, SK
>
>http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/3053/index.html
--
http://world.std.com/~mhuben/libindex.html
Zepp
Did you actually write a coherant post that he could respond to? This
is the first one I've seen from you were I could even figure out what
your topic was, and at that, it doesn't make much sense.
You're probably safe from Milt. There's a saying: "The gazelle fears
the lion, but the flea does not". Now hop along...
Panhead
>
> I own guns so I can kill people like you
I hope you can fire two at a time so that you can shoot *both*
of his faces.
The one that wants all good people to be safe by disarming them
and, the one that wants only the criminals to have them so that
only they can kill us.
Harry Hope
>I own guns so I can kill people like you
There you have him. A true American gunnut.
Nullifier
Harry Hope wrote in message <3753f23f....@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
>On Mon, 31 May 1999 23:38:53 -0700, "Roy Batty" <Louis...@Yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>>I own guns so I can kill people like you
>
>There you have him. A true American gunnut.
>
>Harry
You're repeating yourself needlessly
dra...@bellsouth.net
was written.
Gail W. <gai...@jps.net> wrote in message news:3753CD...@jps.net...
> Juan Liberale wrote:
> >
> > In article <3IG43.2563$hq5...@news4.mia>, dra...@bellsouth.net says...
> > >
> > >Your education is showing JL, way back in 1952 Freud wrote that fear of
> > >weapons (liberal hysteria syndrome) is a diagnostic sign of sexual
> > >immaturity.
>
> Pretty amazing feat for someone who died in 1939!
>
>
>
>
dra...@bellsouth.net
OldSalt <aC...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3753b701...@news.fast.net...
I would elect to use Trazadone
> because it has a very short half life and therefore, if he is
> drinking or abusing other drugs, it will be outta his system fairly
> pronto. I would also elect to add one of my favorites ---
> Risperdal. I don't think that Wino Juan is psychotic all the time of
> course.... if so he wouldn't be able to type to us all here
I doubt that either one of the drugs you name would be effective. Juan
seems to have a frank Personality Disorder. Although Psychiatry is not area
of expertise I do have a shrink on my staff. I'll see if he'll take a look
at Juan's posts and give me an outhouse opinion. BTW, Trazadone is quite
effective in reducing situational delayed sleep onset. (50mg PO Q HS)
If you're reading this Juan, don't despair, there is hope for you. BTW, I
don't smoke cigars, but I do have a partner that goes down to Puerto Rico
once a month and brings me back a few Cuban's(cigars that is) Also, I have
never been a member of the NRA.
Bill Bonde
>
> On Mon, 31 May 1999 23:38:53 -0700, "Roy Batty" <Louis...@Yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >I own guns so I can kill people like you
>
> There you have him. A true American gunnut.
>
> Harry
>
you are going to turn over a new leaf and actually debate gun control
here?
Bill Bonde
>
> In article <3753...@news-in.i-i-corp.com>, Louis...@Yahoo.com says...
> >
> >I own guns so I can kill people like you
>
>
kill someone with a knife or a baseball bat or a garden tool? I really
don't think that much of OJ or that 22 year old wacko in Seattle who
killed his mother and 2 year old nephew with a knife and a 60 year old
woman with a hoe. And I certainly wouldn't call them brave and American
military pilots cowards just because the Americans choose to avoid
making the battle 'fair'.
> I have posted here often.
>
This you have.
> It is little gun monkeys like
> you that we need to prevent from having access to guns.
>
IF the person in question really does want to kill you because of your
political viewpoints, then you are correct, he shouldn't have access to
firearms or knifes or baseball bats or hoes. Of course if the guy is
just frustrated by your silliness, perhaps we can understand.
> It is for little gun monkeys like you that the NRA exists.
>
As you know, the NRA supports long prison terms for people who commit
gun crimes and other violent acts. If at some point you decide it's time
to move past your silly personal attacks and actually debate issues, I
think everyone here will be a lot happier.
Buck
Buck
Volt...@geocities.com wrote in message
<377d0bca...@news.mindspring.com>...
>On Tue, 1 Jun 1999 10:51:55 -0500, <dra...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>>Sorry, I was looking at the publishing date of the material. Not he time
it
>>was written.
>
>
>We are used to you Gun Buddies being ignorant.
>
> Jim
says...
>>> > >
>>> > >Your education is showing JL, way back in 1952 Freud wrote that fear
of
>>> > >weapons (liberal hysteria syndrome) is a diagnostic sign of sexual
>>> > >immaturity.
>>>
>
>
>Join The War On Right Wing Ignorance:
>http://clusterone.home.mindspring.com/
>
>======================================================
>"I can't believe they'd be naming any facility with the
>word intelligence in it after George Bush."
>
> -- Barbara Bush on the CIA Headquarters Building
> after learning that her husband plans to skydive
> again to celebrate his 75th birthday.
>======================================================
Buck
I've been doing a little work (seriously) on this alter ego who labels
him/her self "Juan Liberale". The things I find most fascinating are (1) How
much of his/her non-working hours he/she spends on the NGs, (2) The probable
alter ego role of the NGs in counteracting his/her day to day necessity of
absolutely avoiding all interpersonal confrontation, confrontation being
something which he/she is clearly unable to effectively deal with in the
real world (see next), and (3) the projection of so much of his/her
childhood sexual trauma/frustration onto any one who would stand in
opposition to him/her in this anonymous venue that he/she can act out in
without suffering sanction.
I'm collecting a sample of postings that I am going to show (blind) to two
different mental health professionals that I know, and I'm going to develop
a little 'drive by' profile of this type. I'll share it with the NG.
Regards, Buck
OldSalt wrote in message <3753b701...@news.fast.net>...
>On Mon, 31 May 1999 20:31:33 -0500, <dra...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
><snip>
>>I'd love to see your MMPI. Any professional worth their salt would
>> tell you that, undergrad education is no treatment for Bi-Polar
>>Disorder nor any other for that matter. Obviously it hasn't helped you!
>Hi again Dragoon. Sorry but Juan the Wino isn't a bipolar. I
>think I mentioned in an earlier post to you that I have my diagnosis
>of him and, actually, after I assumed that profile of him, I just
>kinda leave him be for the most part. But, at any any rate if he
>is on Lithium and I had any say about it.....wellllllllll.....I'd be
>tapering him right off of that asap !!!!!!!!! I think he is a Major
>Depressive Disorder ... could be single episode but I would say
>probably recurrent episode. I would treat him with an
>because it has a very short half life and therefore, if he is
>drinking or abusing other drugs, it will be outta his system fairly
>pronto. I would also elect to add one of my favorites ---
>Risperdal. I don't think that Wino Juan is psychotic all the time of
Buck
Alt.Smokers.Cigars sometime. You might enjoy it. (There's a Lefty
pornographer over there that I bitch slap once in a while, but there's also
a huge repository of information on the sacred leaf.)
Regards, Buck
dra...@bellsouth.net wrote in message ...
>> because it has a very short half life and therefore, if he is
>> drinking or abusing other drugs, it will be outta his system fairly
>> pronto. I would also elect to add one of my favorites ---
>> Risperdal. I don't think that Wino Juan is psychotic all the time of
Steve Hix
(Harry Hope) wrote:
> On Mon, 31 May 1999 23:38:53 -0700, "Roy Batty" <Louis...@Yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >I own guns so I can kill people like you
>
> There you have him. A true American gunnut.
Right. (It's OK, though, if a gun-control enthusiast
advocates killing gun owners on sight, right?)
He's a character from "Bladerunner".
Nullifier
Volt...@geocities.com wrote in message <375646dd...@news.mindspring.com>...
>
>Try again, Hick.
>
> Jim
Translation: Yes if a gun-control enthusiast advocates
killing gun owners on sight, it is ok.
BTW 'lil Jimmy Crow...speaking of hicks
Texas is full of 'em.
Nullifier
Volt...@geocities.com wrote in message <37584e66...@news.mindspring.com>...
>On Tue, 01 Jun 1999 18:42:45 GMT, "Buck" <thus...@flash.net> wrote:
>
>>Oh relax little Nazi! Sometimes a gun is just a gun!
>
>
> Jim
It's your tongue, 'lil Jimmy Crow
Nullifier
Volt...@geocities.com wrote in message <375a4f61...@news.mindspring.com>...
>On Tue, 01 Jun 1999 18:57:59 GMT, "Buck" <thus...@flash.net> wrote:
>
>>Well, as Freud said, "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar." Check out
>>Alt.Smokers.Cigars sometime. You might enjoy it. (There's a Lefty
>>pornographer over there that I bitch slap once in a while, but there's also
>>a huge repository of information on the sacred leaf.)
>
>
>I hear lung cancer is a nasty way to go.
>
> Jim
Jimmy only likes those pink cigars (with the vein and purple tips).
Juan Liberale
says...
>
>On Mon, 31 May 1999 23:38:53 -0700, "Roy Batty" <Louis...@Yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>>I own guns so I can kill people like you
>
>There you have him. A true American gunnut.
He is just a typical NRA scumbag. Did you notice how quickly
Panhead got his mouth around the morons dick!
>
>Harry
>
>"I believe everyody in the world should have guns. Citizens should
>have bazookas and rocket launchers too. I believe that all citizens
>should have their weapons of choice. However, I also believe that only
>I should have the ammunition. Because frankly, I wouldn't trust the
>rest of the goobers with anything more dangerous than string."
>
> Scott Adams
>
>
--
Juan Liberale
>
>Juan Liberale wrote:
>>
>> In article <3753...@news-in.i-i-corp.com>, Louis...@Yahoo.com says...
>> >
>> >I own guns so I can kill people like you
>>
>>
>What is the profile of a 'coward'? Are you saying that a real man would
>kill someone with a knife or a baseball bat or a garden tool? I really
>don't think that much of OJ or that 22 year old wacko in Seattle who
>killed his mother and 2 year old nephew with a knife and a 60 year old
>woman with a hoe. And I certainly wouldn't call them brave and American
>military pilots cowards just because the Americans choose to avoid
>making the battle 'fair'.
>
No, you ignorant little fuck, You are a coward because
you cannot imagine life without your gun.penis and you are
willing to shoot people over words. You are an absolute
wothless piece of cowardly shit.
>
>
>> I have posted here often.
>>
>This you have.
>
>
>> It is little gun monkeys like
>> you that we need to prevent from having access to guns.
>>
>IF the person in question really does want to kill you because of your
>political viewpoints, then you are correct, he shouldn't have access to
>firearms or knifes or baseball bats or hoes. Of course if the guy is
>just frustrated by your silliness, perhaps we can understand.
>
>
>
>> It is for little gun monkeys like you that the NRA exists.
>>
>As you know, the NRA supports long prison terms for people who commit
>gun crimes and other violent acts. If at some point you decide it's time
>to move past your silly personal attacks and actually debate issues, I
>think everyone here will be a lot happier.
The NRA supports ready access to guns by criminals.
Juan Liberale
>
>OS,
>I've been doing a little work (seriously) on this alter ego who labels
>him/her self "Juan Liberale". The things I find most fascinating are (1) How
>much of his/her non-working hours he/she spends on the NGs, (2) The probable
>alter ego role of the NGs in counteracting his/her day to day necessity of
>absolutely avoiding all interpersonal confrontation, confrontation being
>something which he/she is clearly unable to effectively deal with in the
>real world (see next), and (3) the projection of so much of his/her
>childhood sexual trauma/frustration onto any one who would stand in
>opposition to him/her in this anonymous venue that he/she can act out in
>without suffering sanction.
>I'm collecting a sample of postings that I am going to show (blind) to two
>different mental health professionals that I know, and I'm going to develop
>a little 'drive by' profile of this type. I'll share it with the NG.
If you look at the psychological profile of those who are
the so called rabid gun owners. Almost to a man (it is a
male phenomenon) they were physically and/or sexually
abused as children. At home, meekness meant survival. This
meekness carries over into the day at school and is picked
up on by fellow students. So we have the poor guy being
abused at home and bullied at school. To him, a gun is the
great equalizer. His manhood. He no longer has to be afraid
of being pushed around or abused, his fears are abated by
his gun.
Unfortunately, most are not content with being equal, they
in turn become the bully. Their gun did not make them equal,
but superior. This is where the cycle begins. They have a
strong tendancy to raise their children n exactly the same
manner they so despised. And the beat goes on.
Recent data shows those who worship their guns suffer from
bipolar disorder (manic depressive disorder) at a rate five
times the national average and are three times more likely
to suffer the effect of obsessive compulsive disorder. They
also, as a group, are second only to police officers in their
suicide rate. Clearly, guns are attractive to troubled
individuals.
A college education seems to be the one thing that may break
the cycle, however the segment of the population where this
is prominent is also the segment least likey to achieve higher
education.
Juan Liberale
says...
>
>On 1 Jun 1999 12:53:10 GMT, JLib...@hotmail.com (Juan Liberale)
>wrote:
>
>>In article <7ivr1s$sek$1...@nntp2.atl.mindspring.net>, la...@anonymous.com
>>says...
>>>
>>>
>>>Juan Liberale wrote in message
>>><5CD5840D5DFEC7A1.EBBD9E8B...@library-proxy.airnews.n
e
>>>t>...
>>>>In article <9281189...@news.remarQ.com>, jima...@sssnet.com says...
>>>>>
>>>>>.
>>>>
>>>>It seems to me that you little right wing cocksuckers
>>>>are the ones who have accepted the doctrine of guilty
>>>>until proven innocnet lately. Just like the worlds
>>>>most famous conservative, Adolf.
>>>>
>>>FYI, Adolf was a liberal (who overthrew the rightwing/conservative Kaiser),
>>>and a National Socialist at that. An awful like the socialists here in the
>>>US.
>>>
>>>Plus, you must remember, you are now on trial, and your innocence subject
to
>>>judgment by your peers, whom you have elected to place yourself amongst.
>>>You may no longer be innocent.
>>>
>>
>>You just hang in there and by the time you make it to
>>the eighth grade, your understanding of history will
>>be vastly improved.
>
What makes you think he is already in the seventh?
>
> Jim
>
>Ecrasons l'infame
>
>Join The War On Right Wing Ignorance:
>http://clusterone.home.mindspring.com/
>
>======================================================
>"I can't believe they'd be naming any facility with the
>word intelligence in it after George Bush."
>
> -- Barbara Bush on the CIA Headquarters Building
> after learning that her husband plans to skydive
> again to celebrate his 75th birthday.
>======================================================
--
Nullifier
Juan Liberale wrote in message ...
>In article <37542A24...@mailexcite.com>, std...@mailexcite.com says...
>>
>>Juan Liberale wrote:
>>>
>>> In article <3753...@news-in.i-i-corp.com>, Louis...@Yahoo.com says...
>>> >
>>> >I own guns so I can kill people like you
>>>
>>> Of course you do. It is the profile of the coward
>>>
>>What is the profile of a 'coward'? Are you saying that a real man would
>>kill someone with a knife or a baseball bat or a garden tool? I really
>>don't think that much of OJ or that 22 year old wacko in Seattle who
>>killed his mother and 2 year old nephew with a knife and a 60 year old
>>woman with a hoe. And I certainly wouldn't call them brave and American
>>military pilots cowards just because the Americans choose to avoid
>>making the battle 'fair'.
>>
>
>No, you ignorant little fuck, You are a coward because
>you cannot imagine life without your gun.penis and you are
>willing to shoot people over words. You are an absolute
>wothless piece of cowardly shit.
Ha ha...listen to how upset Juany is!
You don't suppose he would meet Bill to have it out unarmed?
Michael Cidras
Juan Liberale wrote in message
t>...
>In article <7ivcvs$88l$1...@remarQ.com>, cidr...@pcisys.net says...
>>
>
>>>Sorry pussyboy. It is the single most effective gun legislation
>>>passed in the last 20 years. 250,000 criminals without gun and that
>>>really really psses of the NRA maggots!
>>
>>
>>Again, if it is such a blazing success, why does it need to be
strengthened.
>>By your own admission Brady contains absolutely no provisions to prosecute
a
>>violation. Seems to everyone here that all it did was cause the denied to
>>go elsewhere to get a gun, which isn't that hard to do.
>>
>>So, how was Brady a success?
>
>Brady was a law to keep guns from criminals. It works.
>That really really pisses off you NRA maggots
Did it really? Are you saying those denials didn't get a weapon from
somewhere else?
Is that what you are saying? If it is I guess all those studies that say
criminals get more guns from other than legitimate sources must be wrong,
they were stopped by Brady end of subject.
>Why does it piss you off? How does it advance the
>gunloon cause for criminals to have guns? I can only
>deduce that it pisses you off because most of you are
>felons.
It doesn't piss me off, it saddens me to see ineffective legislation that
has no punishment for the offender. It saddens me even more to see fools
like you touting such legislation as being the best thing to happen in 20
years (your words, different subthread).
You yourself have even wrote in this thread that the lack of a punitive
portion to Brady needs to be tightened up. So which is it Juan, is Brady
effective, or is it not. If it's effective, why does it need to be
tightened up.
Michael Cidras
Juan Liberale wrote in message
t>...
>Why are you morons so fucking dense? Wait, I just answered
>my own question. OK, I will type this real slow with tiny
>words so you can keep up. See Brady? See Brady stop crime?
See criminal now go to Juan's travelling out-of-the-trunk gun shop and
purchase gun.
See one, possibly two new crimes committed.
>See the NRA shit their pants?
Because a criminal got a gun illegally and Brady didn't do a damn thing.
>Brady good. NRA bad. Brady
>stops crime.
Brady ineffectual, NRA pissed at ineffectual gun control law.
>NRA wants more crime. Brady does not make it a
>crime for a felon to attempt a purchase.
Brady does nothing to prosecute the felon who lied on the ATF Form 4473, a
felony under 18 USC 922(a)(6).
>NRA straw man does
>not work. NRA little maggots. Liberals fuck conservatives
>every day. Liberals good. Conservatives are inbred little red neck
>fools.
The more I see you post, the more I get the definite feeling you are a
criminal who sells guns out of your car's trunk and praise Brady for your
increase in business.
Nullifier
Michael Cidras wrote in message <92828268...@news.remarQ.com>...
>The more I see you post, the more I get the definite feeling you are a
>criminal who sells guns out of your car's trunk and praise Brady for your
>increase in business.
Or Worse. Judging from his absolute lack of redeeming qualities,
he may be a member of the current administration.
dra...@bellsouth.net
genitalia. Can't you say something intelligent. Jesus Christ man if you
want to make a valid point say someting that makes sense. Its really not
that hard, try it. Say "look friend, 100 million souls have been lost from
gun violence in the last 100 years and firearms kill babies, and my uncle
killed my aunt with a pistol during a drunken rage" anything meaningful,
just something other than your asshole this, and your penis that. Your
making a fool of yourself.
Do you expect anyone to listen to this kind of crap and say "yeah this
fellow's got a good arguement"
(Disclaimer; not intended to be gender specific, does not include tax, title
,or license, may cause cancer in laboratory animals, Bill Clinton, family
and friends, empoyees of the Federal government not eligible)
<Volt...@geocities.com> wrote in message
news:37584e66...@news.mindspring.com...
> On Tue, 01 Jun 1999 18:42:45 GMT, "Buck" <thus...@flash.net> wrote:
>
> >Oh relax little Nazi! Sometimes a gun is just a gun!
>
> Then what is that thing up your ass?
>
> Jim
>
> >Volt...@geocities.com wrote in message
> ><377d0bca...@news.mindspring.com>...
> >>On Tue, 1 Jun 1999 10:51:55 -0500, <dra...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>>Sorry, I was looking at the publishing date of the material. Not he
time
> >it
> >>>was written.
> >>
> >>No problem.
> >>
> >>We are used to you Gun Buddies being ignorant.
>
dra...@bellsouth.net
a rectum but its important none the less.
I want you to try, as hard as it may seem try anyway. Read this and ponder,
don't just start typing "bite my ass" "your mother loves monkeys"
"your sister's scrotum is tattoo'd, or any other weird crap, just friggin
read it and think.....
"If in the hand of a criminal a gun is a threat, in the hand of a
responsible citizen it is a means to stand up to that threat. A gun is the
only defense against the misuse of a gun and therefore an invaluable
instrument of justice and fair play."
Don't believe me, The logic behind this is indisputable. From 1865 to 1900
there were 600 firearm murders in the mean old Wild West, while in New York,
where the US Court system ruled, 1886 alone saw 799 firearm murders. This
holds true even today. The large cities still beat rural America in firearm
murder rates, but exercise the most control the use and sale of guns. Now
tell me why I'm wrong?
Juan Liberale <JLib...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:0D279802E29B2D8E.BA22880C...@library-proxy.airnew
s.net...
Nullifier
Juan Liberale wrote in message
>In article <9B%43.730$eU6...@news2.mia>, dra...@bellsouth.net says...
>>
>>I'm only going to say this once, so pay attention, its not about a penis or
>>a rectum but its important none the less.
>>I want you to try, as hard as it may seem try anyway. Read this and ponder,
>>don't just start typing "bite my ass" "your mother loves monkeys"
>>"your sister's scrotum is tattoo'd, or any other weird crap, just friggin
>>read it and think.....
>
>don't read the motherfucker! See how easy that is? You
>will not be offended and you will not feel obligated to
>share with us the importance you hold in your big,
>important, manly lab. Even a conservative should be able
>to grasp that concept.
Not only will he and others read your trash and call you on it, eventually you will
cave in and learn something. You are on you way to an education whether you
like it or not, boy. I don't mind taking yet another ISP away from you if I decide to.
Remember how you cried last time Shawny?
Nullifier
Juan Liberale wrote in message
>In article <7j1u1i$i...@chronicle.concentric.net>, Nu...@Void.com says...
>legislation! hahahahaha!
Careful girly, you're drooling on your keyboard.
The repuke controlled congress
>cannot even control their own agenda, much less set an
>agenda! You lose!
Since haven't voted GOP I guess you'll have to have this explained to you.
*You* make the right wing look good and the left wing look bad.
The real losers: anyone willing to claim your thoroughly worthless ass
as a constituent or friend. You "Juan" are the absolutely lowest form of
scum slurping bottomfeeder on Usenet. Even Lantz is more intelligent and
thought provoking.
If you were the only example of liberal thought here, thousands would
be driven to the GOP and Libertarian parties. But fortunately for most
everyone, you are known for the valueless, venal butt nugget you truly are.
Frank
Nullifier
Frank wrote in message <37549A63...@yahoo.com>...
>Rock on, Volt...@geocities.com!
>Frank
Oh look, Jimmy got lonely so he made a friend.
Michael Cidras
Nullifier wrote in message <7j1u1i$i...@chronicle.concentric.net>...
>
>Michael Cidras wrote in message <92828268...@news.remarQ.com>...
>
>>The more I see you post, the more I get the definite feeling you are a
>>criminal who sells guns out of your car's trunk and praise Brady for your
>>increase in business.
>
>Or Worse. Judging from his absolute lack of redeeming qualities,
>he may be a member of the current administration.
A member of the White House press pool perhaps?
no one of consequence
]On Mon, 31 May 1999 23:38:53 -0700, "Roy Batty" <Louis...@Yahoo.com>
]wrote:
]
]>I own guns so I can kill people like you
]
]
]
]There you have him. A true American gunnut.
So therefore, most of your opponents aren't gunnuts.
Oh wait, you continually label those who disagree with you on gun control
as gunnuts. I guess the idiot above is the one example you will seize upon
to smear others with.
--
|Patrick Chester (aka: claypigeon, Sinapus) wol...@io.com |
|"You know I like her. Scares the hell out of me sometimes, but I do like|
|her. Just, uh, don't tell her that." Dr. Franklin about Ivanova. -B5 |
|Wittier remarks always come to mind just after sending your article.... |
Juan Liberale
>
>>The more I see you post, the more I get the definite feeling you are a
>>criminal who sells guns out of your car's trunk and praise Brady for your
>>increase in business.
>
>Or Worse. Judging from his absolute lack of redeeming qualities,
>he may be a member of the current administration.
But the GOP maggots are being forced into some tough
legislation! hahahahaha! The repuke controlled congress
cannot even control their own agenda, much less set an
agenda! You lose!
>
>
--