US Democrats And Liberals Upset That Times Square Bomber Was A Pakistani Muslim Terrorist
Clint
call a right-wing extremist. Before the
Islamilic terrorist was apprehended, NY mayor Bloomberg opined that
the bomber was probably a lone white
middle-aged kook who was protesting Obama's health-care bill. New York
Democrat congressman Adler, another self-hating socialist Jew, said
about the same thing as Bloomberg while using different words.
A Canadian leftist crackpot on can.politics was a little premature and
ecstatic when he saw the first photographs of the Islamofascist from
security camera's, showing that the Pakistani almost looked white and
bald.
Political correctness has come a long way with the American and
Canadian liberal-fascists. They hate Christian white people more than
they do Islamic terrorists. In fact Obama's cabinet has been told not
to use the words Islamic terrorism--call these bombings or attempted
bombings "man-made disasters" says our impeccable leader.
Witziges R�tsel
news:c20ee835-ac15-4f94...@e1g2000vbg.googlegroups.com...
Chom Noamsky
> They hate Christian white people more than
> they do Islamic terrorists.
What's the difference? Religious fundamentalism of any kind is
inherently fascist. Islam is simply what white fundamentalist Americans
wish they could become... a return to the fusion of state and church and
theocratic authority. Most liberals and leftists oppose theocratic rule
and therefore oppose religious fascism. America's religious right
shares much in common with Islam... the two are far more alike than
different.
Ronald Reagan
> Rightists wanted the bomber so much to be a foreigner like me
Instead he turned out to be a US citizen who became naturalized under the
Bush administration. Another failure of Republican policy.
Well, at least they stopped allowing subversive white foreign filth like you
into the country begining back in the Bush administration.
Ross John "Trace / apn123547 Bmarino / Crap Detector / Remailer / Clint /
Clay / Lance" Lambourn is a right wing freedom hating hypocrite, asshole,
attention starved loon and liar. He is a retired career civil servant who
resides in Canada sucking from the social safety net and living off a tax
payer funded pension. It's no end of irony that he sees himself as a
capitalist. He frequently uses the above pseudonyms to fake support for the
gibberish he posts on Usenet. A Canadian living in Canada, he is mentally
unstable and abnormally obsessed With President Obama - likely because
Lambourn is disgusting racist who refers to people by their race and
frequently utters Nazi-like screeds against "socialist Jews".
He is also a noted seditious America hating traitor who has continually
called for the suspension of the US Constitution and the cancellation of
American civil liberties. Lambourn is consumed with hate and bitterness and
expresses it by posting incoherent screeds based on his distorted and
delusional view of the world.
Most know him for his early morning, booze fueled rants which rarely make
sense and serve no other purpose than to feed his perverse cravings for
public ridicule.
M I Wakefield
"Witziges R�tsel" <z...@roer.invalid.com> wrote in message
news:hrsigu$2bd$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Lambourn has proven over time that he knows exactly what World Nut Daily and
Faux News tell him to know.
Lloyd
sounds like he's another American wannabe.
znuybv
Why are there so mant liberal fascists? they're not religious.
Chom Noamsky
> Why are there so mant liberal fascists? they're not religious.
If they are fascist then they aren't liberals.
Freestyle
The reality is that since it turns out that the perp was Islamic, the
Conservatits regret the bomb didn't go off.
They would like nothing more than for Americans to die in a Muslim
Terrorist attack on Obama's watch.
Clint
>
> - Show quoted text -
***
You pathetic moron.
Chom Noamsky
> You pathetic moron.
What would you be doing right now if the terrorist bomb had killed
people? You would be screaming like a stuck pig that it was all Obama's
fault. You are a mindless partisan flake.
First Post
wrote:
Personally I would feel the same way I did the day the towers fell.
Shocked and saddened.
Anger may have come later.
And I can still remember that within 24 hours of the towers falling
there were some cold blooded individuals posting the photos of people
jumping to their deaths to get away from being burned alive.
One jerk put a music video he made of those photos up in the
music-videos binary group with "It's a Beautiful Day" as the
soundtrack.
Those are the true sick cold individuals, some of which post here
daily.
And giving the devils their due. Most liberal political posters did
refrain from blaming Bush for a decent amount of time after the
tragedy. Definitely not all but most.
I would expect no less from any conservative posters here regarding
blame if that had happened with the car bomb.
Anyone that immediately jumps on a political soapbox when something
like that happens is a cold blooded SOB.
Billary
Only in your eyes idiot. Christians don't plant bombs, detonate little
kids or crash airplanes. In fact Barry Obama associates with more
known more bombers than any christian I've ever heard of. Get the hint
moron?
Freestyle
So, all those abortion clinic bombers were atheists?
Christians have massacred millions over centuries in the name of
Jesus.
Present foot. Open Mouth. Place foot in Mouth.
You are one seriously dopey wingnut.
Chom Noamsky
> On May 5, 4:08 pm, Chom Noamsky<e...@elk.burgers> wrote:
>> On 5/5/2010 12:49 PM, Clint wrote:
>>
>>> They hate Christian white people more than
>>> they do Islamic terrorists.
>>
>> What's the difference? Religious fundamentalism of any kind is
>> inherently fascist. Islam is simply what white fundamentalist Americans
>> wish they could become... a return to the fusion of state and church and
>> theocratic authority. Most liberals and leftists oppose theocratic rule
>> and therefore oppose religious fascism. America's religious right
>> shares much in common with Islam... the two are far more alike than
>> different.
>
> Only in your eyes idiot. Christians don't plant bombs, detonate little
> kids or crash airplanes.
Christians have killed FAR MORE Muslims over the last two decades than
vice versa. Christian killing is much more anonymous and sanitized
because they can hide behind the face and authority of the state. It's
still killing, and Christians are demonstrably every bit as murderous as
Muslims and then some.
> In fact Barry Obama associates with more
> known more bombers than any christian I've ever heard of. Get the hint
> moron?
What hint is that? That your currency is mindless partisan rhetoric?
SaPeIsMa
"Chom Noamsky" <e...@elk.burgers> wrote in message
news:ESkEn.3440$Z6.4@edtnps82...
> On 5/5/2010 1:17 PM, znuybv wrote:
>
>> Why are there so mant liberal fascists? they're not religious.
>
> If they are fascist then they aren't liberals.
>
You need to educate yourself about both fascism and liberal fascism
They are NOT exclusive terms
Ty reading this as a start
Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini
to the Politics of Meaning
by Jonah Goldberg
It's an EYE-OPENER, that is unless this the area where you would be in
denial
SaPeIsMa
"Chom Noamsky" <e...@elk.burgers> wrote in message
> On 5/5/2010 12:49 PM, Clint wrote:
>> They hate Christian white people more than
>> they do Islamic terrorists.
>
> What's the difference? Religious fundamentalism of any kind is inherently
> fascist. Islam is simply what white fundamentalist Americans wish they
> could become..
Which shows how ignorant and biased you STILL are on many subjects
> . a return to the fusion of state and church and theocratic authority.
At least that's what ignorati well programmed on the left, which in great
part you still are, have been programmed to believe
The GREAT MAJORITY of Americans, INCLUDING many on the far Xstian right
recognize the value of the separation of Church and State, and have NO
DESIRE to create a theocracy in the US
The are QUITE WELL INFORMED of the failures of theocracies throughout
history and modern times.
> Most liberals and leftists oppose theocratic rule and therefore oppose
> religious fascism.
Maybe they do and maybe the don't
Their attacks on religion and religious symbols by the left, have more to
do with breaking down the moral stucture of American society to make it
easier to implement a socialist nirvana
It should also be noted that these definitons of the religious right that
you spout have been the bread and butter of the left for nearly 100 years
Also, I'll remind you, that by your definitrion of the religious right, the
very Framers of the US Constitution would qualify for that label, and yet
they were the ones who believed that you must NOT have a "state religion"
and freedom of choice of your religion Puts the kibbosh on your
definition of what the American religious right believes or does not believe
Maybe you need to look at your own prejudices on this issue before you
pronounce yourself on it again
> America's religious right shares much in common with Islam... the two are
> far more alike than different.
Only in the ignorant fantasies of well-programmed and still not completely
thinking and rational leftist like you
Get yourself EDUCATED
SaPeIsMa
"Chom Noamsky" <e...@elk.burgers> wrote in message
I'll remind you of all the mindless morons who screamed and (many still are
screaming) that 9/11 was Bush's fault, even though the event was initiated
and put in motion while Clinton was in power
There are many things that are beyond the President's control and yet end up
being something he is blamed for.
SaPeIsMa
"Witziges R�tsel" <z...@roer.invalid.com> wrote in message
news:hrsigu$2bd$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
He described the modern "liberal" which are nothing but leftists in
disguise, to a "T"
You may be thinking of the old meaning of "liberal", but that term does NOT
apply to the alleged "progressives" who have co-opted the term for
camouflage
Chom Noamsky
Liberals are not leftists. Do try to educate yourself a little bit
better, or at least stop getting your information from comic books.
Classic liberalism is about promoting individual freedom and individual
rights, including economic, social and political. Hence the term
"liberal fascist" is an oxymoron.
You are not a classic liberal because you oppose women having the
discretion to have abortions and you oppose same sex rights. On
abortion and same sex rights you bend towards the authoritarian fascist
side of things.
SaPeIsMa
"Chom Noamsky" <e...@elk.burgers> wrote in message
> On 5/5/2010 3:10 PM, Billary wrote:
>> On May 5, 4:08 pm, Chom Noamsky<e...@elk.burgers> wrote:
>>> On 5/5/2010 12:49 PM, Clint wrote:
>>>
>>>> They hate Christian white people more than
>>>> they do Islamic terrorists.
>>>
>>> What's the difference? Religious fundamentalism of any kind is
>>> inherently fascist. Islam is simply what white fundamentalist Americans
>>> wish they could become... a return to the fusion of state and church and
>>> theocratic authority. Most liberals and leftists oppose theocratic rule
>>> and therefore oppose religious fascism. America's religious right
>>> shares much in common with Islam... the two are far more alike than
>>> different.
>>
>> Only in your eyes idiot. Christians don't plant bombs, detonate little
>> kids or crash airplanes.
>
> Christians have killed FAR MORE Muslims over the last two decades than
> vice versa.
Really ?
And naturally you can BACK UP that claim with some REAL data ?
Or is this just more henny-penny factoid ?
> Christian killing is much more anonymous and sanitized because they can
> hide behind the face and authority of the state. It's still killing, and
> Christians are demonstrably every bit as murderous as Muslims and then
> some.
>
You'll need to back up your claim with FACTS
Take as many screens as you need
>> In fact Barry Obama associates with more known bombers than any christian
>> I've ever heard of. Get the hint moron?
>
> What hint is that? That your currency is mindless partisan rhetoric?
Look in the mirror
You're still doing quite a bit of it without even firing a neuron
SaPeIsMa
"Chom Noamsky" <e...@elk.burgers> wrote in message
> On 5/5/2010 3:56 PM, SaPeIsMa wrote:
>>
>> "Chom Noamsky" <e...@elk.burgers> wrote in message
>> news:ESkEn.3440$Z6.4@edtnps82...
>>> On 5/5/2010 1:17 PM, znuybv wrote:
>>>
>>>> Why are there so mant liberal fascists? they're not religious.
>>>
>>> If they are fascist then they aren't liberals.
>>>
>>
>> You need to educate yourself about both fascism and liberal fascism
>> They are NOT exclusive terms
>>
>> Ty reading this as a start
>> Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini
>> to the Politics of Meaning
>> by Jonah Goldberg
>> It's an EYE-OPENER, that is unless this the area where you would be in
>> denial
>
> Liberals are not leftists. Do try to educate yourself a little bit
> better, or at least stop getting your information from comic books.
>
The modern ones are
> Classic liberalism is about promoting individual freedom and individual
> rights, including economic, social and political. Hence the term "liberal
> fascist" is an oxymoron.
>
But the classic liberals are todays conservatives and the term liberal has
been co-opted by the left with another word "progressive" for camouflage
But instead of arguing OUT OF IGNORENCE and PREJUDICE, come back AFTER
you've read the book
And that way, you won't be behaving like a classic MODERN "liberal" aka
"progressive" aka leftist
> You are not a classic liberal because you oppose women having the
> discretion to have abortions and you oppose same sex rights. On abortion
> and same sex rights you bend towards the authoritarian fascist side of
> things.
LOL
There you go, being a good leftist again, trying to redefine the terminology
to suit your agend
Go read the book
And by the way, YOU KNOW SHIT about my position regarding
- abortion
-same sex rights
So once again, you're just doing knee-jerk leftist blather
Go read the book so you stop being IGNORANT
First Post
wrote:
Another word that describes them is "extremist".
In the mind of an extremist there are only absolutes, black and white.
That is why you see the kinds of posts coming from them that you do.
It seems that nowadays those that are not the extremists are in the
minority at least from the point of view from the left.
Any sign at all of being willing to meet halfway results in total
rejection by them of their own. Just ask Lieberman.
ArmyOfDorkness
"Billary" <billarycl...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0295bf57-7166-4b66...@h9g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
Tim McVeigh and that dude last month who flew into the IRS building. White
Christians
>
ArmyOfDorkness
"Clint" <cice...@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:2592e9fb-c7a8-414f...@s29g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
Sorry. But it's true
Chom Noamsky
A good example would be the Tea Party's desire to kill health reform for
the sake of killing health reform. Rush Limbaugh played the unbending
inflexible extremist, his stated mission was to do whatever he could to
defeat and destroy Obama. There was no middle ground and no bipartisan
cooperation. And what happened... well the Tea Party and Republicans
were completely and utterly destroyed, biggest political defeat for them
in three decades.
f. barnes
> On 5/5/2010 4:34 PM, First Post wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
Obamacare is a different animal than it would have been without the
Tea Party. It's much less intrusive.
Billary
> "Billary" <billaryclinton2...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Now you've proven what a complete and utter moron you are. "That
dude" who flew the plane into the IRS building was a left wing nut of
the highest order. And you would know that if you had read his
"manifesto" instead of listening to Keith Doberman and Ed Shits and
Rachel Madwoman tell you what he was or wasn't. But that would
require brain power. Which you clearly lack. You probably don't even
have the brain power to look it up yourself. So I saved you a lot of
effort. Here is the link. Try not to let your brain hurt while you
take time to think for yourself okay?
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2010/0218102stack1.html
Chom Noamsky
> Obamacare is a different animal than it would have been without the
> Tea Party. It's much less intrusive.
Not nearly as different as it could have been with bipartisan
cooperation. Taking the radical obstructionist Tea Party approach just
proved how lost and out of touch American conservatives are these days.
The PHANTOM
It would be his fault although he'd be standing at the podium pointing
the finger at the "previous administration".
SaPeIsMa
"Chom Noamsky" <e...@elk.burgers> wrote in message
Actually it's on par with killing the Canadian Gun Registry for pretty much
the same reasons
It's a TOTAL FNANCIAL and OPERATIONAL BOONDOGGLE
Too bad you haven't taken the time to EDUCATE yourself on the details and
are still spouting the stupid socialist ideology on this issue
> Rush Limbaugh played the unbending inflexible extremist, his stated
> mission was to do whatever he could to defeat and destroy Obama. There
> was no middle ground and no bipartisan cooperation. And what happened...
> well the Tea Party and Republicans were completely and utterly destroyed,
> biggest political defeat for them in three decades.
Are you really THIS STUPID ?
10 The nonsense about Rush is on par with henny-penny babbling about the
NRA
2) There was NOT "bipartisan cooperation" because OBAMBI didn't bother to
invite the Republicans to participate
(Just check when he actually invideted Republ leaders to the White
House to start the Bipartisan thingy...)
3) Obambacare was so unpopular that Obambi had to actually strongarm
Democrates to get it passed
4) You had better look at the next November electiosn to see how badly
the Tea PArty and Republicans have been "completely and utterly destroyed"
The destruction is more fantasy and wishfull thinking (a la
henny-penny) than anything else
Chom Noamsky
> Actually it's on par with killing the Canadian Gun Registry for pretty
> much the same reasons
> It's a TOTAL FNANCIAL and OPERATIONAL BOONDOGGLE
> Too bad you haven't taken the time to EDUCATE yourself on the details
> and are still spouting the stupid socialist ideology on this issue
I have and I don't like Obama's reforms - they didn't go nearly far
enough. Single payer like Canada's is the only way to go, as proven by
the fact Canadians boast better health statistics (as do all nations
that lean towards social democracy when compared the the United States).
> Are you really THIS STUPID ?
> 10 The nonsense about Rush is on par with henny-penny babbling about the
> NRA
> 2) There was NOT "bipartisan cooperation" because OBAMBI didn't bother
> to invite the Republicans to participate
> (Just check when he actually invideted Republ leaders to the White House
> to start the Bipartisan thingy...)
> 3) Obambacare was so unpopular that Obambi had to actually strongarm
> Democrates to get it passed
> 4) You had better look at the next November electiosn to see how badly
> the Tea PArty and Republicans have been "completely and utterly destroyed"
> The destruction is more fantasy and wishfull thinking (a la henny-penny)
> than anything else
Ask David Frum, he's the Republican and conservative who said it!
Ahaahahahahah!!!
SaPeIsMa
"Chom Noamsky" <e...@elk.burgers> wrote in message
> On 5/5/2010 6:22 PM, SaPeIsMa wrote:
>
>> Actually it's on par with killing the Canadian Gun Registry for pretty
>> much the same reasons
>> It's a TOTAL FNANCIAL and OPERATIONAL BOONDOGGLE
>> Too bad you haven't taken the time to EDUCATE yourself on the details
>> and are still spouting the stupid socialist ideology on this issue
>
> I have and I don't like Obama's reforms - they didn't go nearly far
> enough. Single payer like Canada's is the only way to go, as proven by
> the fact Canadians boast better health statistics (as do all nations that
> lean towards social democracy when compared the the United States).
>
And yet, Canada has started moving away from the single-payer system
Why is that ?
And you still have to demonstrate that there is a CAUSAL relationship
between nationalised health care and better health statistics
Until then your boast is an EMPTY ONE (no surprise there)
>> Are you really THIS STUPID ?
>> 10 The nonsense about Rush is on par with henny-penny babbling about the
>> NRA
>> 2) There was NOT "bipartisan cooperation" because OBAMBI didn't bother
>> to invite the Republicans to participate
>> (Just check when he actually invideted Republ leaders to the White House
>> to start the Bipartisan thingy...)
>> 3) Obambacare was so unpopular that Obambi had to actually strongarm
>> Democrates to get it passed
>> 4) You had better look at the next November electiosn to see how badly
>> the Tea PArty and Republicans have been "completely and utterly
>> destroyed"
>> The destruction is more fantasy and wishfull thinking (a la henny-penny)
>> than anything else
>
> Ask David Frum, he's the Republican and conservative who said it!
> Ahaahahahahah!!!
<sigh>
You're still just as stupid as henny-penny in all else.
Witziges R�tsel
"SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:auudnQCmBLxyZHzW...@bright.net...
the Dark Ages?
SaPeIsMa
<lol>
Why are you against honesty and using your brain ?
Do leftist long for stupidity and subservience ?
Witziges R�tsel
> "Witziges R�tsel" <z...@roer.invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:hrufnj$dng$1...@news.eternal-september.org..
being intellectual? Do they scorn intelligence as well as progress?
Doug Bashford
Re: US Democrats And Liberals Upset That Times Square Bomber Was A
Pakistani Muslim Terrorist
Interesting.
========insert from: Chom Noamsky:
> Liberal Fascism
> It's an EYE-OPENER, that is unless this the area where
> you would be in denial
Liberals are not leftists. Do try to educate yourself a little bit
better, or at least stop getting your information from comic books.
Classic liberalism is about promoting individual freedom and
individual
rights, including economic, social and political. Hence the term
"liberal fascist" is an oxymoron.
========end insert
Since Chom Noamsky seems to be interested in historical facts,
also consider the founders of Conservativism:
The Conservative Mind - From Burke to Eliot.rtf 01-Jul-09
What the Conservative leadersip is hiding:
The true Conservative philosophy.
Check it out!
The founding fathers of modern Conservatism:
Edmund Burke(1729-1797)
Leo Strauss (1899 � 1973)
Russell Kirk (1918 � 1994)
Wanna find out what I'm talking about? Find out what the
father of conservatism said about ruling the middle class.
That would be Edmund Burke (1729-1797). He is the brain
of the conservative brains, constantly cited by modern brains
such as Buckley.
He says men are stupid, and so, should be clones of the state:
"We are afraid to put men to live and trade each on
his own private stock of reason, because we suspect
that this stock in each man is small, and that the
individuals would do better to avail themselves of
the general bank and capital of nations and ages."
Burke hated the Enlightenment which brought our Jeffersonian
democracy and Constitution, and argued instead for the value of
state and "tradition."
Conservatives distrust and hate the middle class.
Conservativism is descibed as "the constant need to maintain
political, moral, and economic dikes against the ever-swelling sea
of popular ignorance, cupidity, violence, barbarism, and
fertility."[6] "
========
The "little man" is stupid:
Before the question, "Is George W. Bush a true conservative," can be
answered, I must first find the true meaning of the word,
"Conservative." Upon delving into the sea of information available
through the Internet, I discovered a definition written by a member of
the Conservative party of England in 1845, Benjamin Disraeli. Mr.
Disraeli stated, "A conservative government is an organized
hypocrisy."
I continued reading and found another definition provided by two
gentlemen, Will and Ariel Durant, whose positions were not provided in
the article, and they define the conservative philosophy of the times,
1845 England, as
"Defending the necessity of religion, the wisdom of tradition, the
authority of the family, the advantages of legitimate monarchy and the
constant need to maintain political, moral, and economic dikes against
the ever swelling sea of popular ignorance, cupidity, violence,
barbarism, and fertility."
--the Right Wing www.freerepublic.com/~bchan/
Conservatives want kings, bedroom police, and "economic dikes" against
the middle class, whom they distrust and find dispicable.
(particularly obvious when reading Burke.)
Not much has changed, except they are now getting their way.
for starters...just a pointer.
Test it.
The insane twist the facts to fit their world view.
The rational change their world view to fit the facts.
SaPeIsMa
Nah !
It's the other way around
The idiot liberals like to belive that they're smarter than anyone else
One only has to look at all the messes they have created over time because
they're seriously disconnected from reaity, and are unable to differentiate
between their wishfull fantasies and the real world
Patriot Games
>Clint wrote
>> Rightists wanted the bomber so much to be a foreigner like me
>Instead he turned out to be a US citizen who became naturalized under the
>Bush administration.
Liar. Naturalized under Buckwheat.
>Another failure of Republican policy.
Liar. The only Bush Admin failure was NOT finding you so you could be
dragged into the street, sprayed with gasoline and lit up.
Mitchell Holman
news:l-Odndxq69pQ837W...@bright.net:
>
> The idiot liberals like to belive that they're smarter than anyone
> else One only has to look at all the messes they have created over
> time because they're seriously disconnected from reaity, and are
> unable to differentiate between their wishfull fantasies and the real
> world
You mean "wishfull fantasies" like trickle-down economics,
"we know just where Saddam's WMDs are", "America does not use
torture", "we found the weapons of mass destruction", Nelson
Mandela is dead", "all crimes are hate crimes"?
Frito Pendejo
> Clint wrote
>
>> Rightists wanted the bomber so much to be a foreigner like me
>
> Instead he turned out to be a US citizen who became naturalized under the
>
>
> Well, at least they stopped allowing subversive white foreign filth like you
> into the country begining back in the Bush administration.
>
> Ross John "Trace / apn123547 Bmarino / Crap Detector / Remailer / Clint /
> Clay / Lance" Lambourn is a right wing freedom hating hypocrite, asshole,
> attention starved loon and liar. He is a retired career civil servant who
> resides in Canada sucking from the social safety net and living off a tax
> payer funded pension. It's no end of irony that he sees himself as a
> capitalist. He frequently uses the above pseudonyms to fake support for the
> gibberish he posts on Usenet. A Canadian living in Canada, he is mentally
> unstable and abnormally obsessed With President Obama - likely because
> Lambourn is disgusting racist who refers to people by their race and
> frequently utters Nazi-like screeds against "socialist Jews".
>
> He is also a noted seditious America hating traitor who has continually
> called for the suspension of the US Constitution and the cancellation of
> American civil liberties. Lambourn is consumed with hate and bitterness and
> expresses it by posting incoherent screeds based on his distorted and
> delusional view of the world.
>
> Most know him for his early morning, booze fueled rants which rarely make
> sense and serve no other purpose than to feed his perverse cravings for
> public ridicule.
I'm responding to this thread because what you are describing sounds like Zepp
in reverse: a left-wing freedom-hating Canadian who resides in the USA, living
on taxpayer funded disability benefits, posting under dozens of pseudonyms per
month to fake support for the gibberish he posts on Usenet. He is mentally
unstable and abnormally obsessed with ex-President Bush, and accuses everyone
who disagrees with him of being Nazis.
The Clay/Lance Lambourn you describe sounds like he suffers from the same
mental disorder as Bryan "Zepp" Jamieson. They might even be the same person,
since nobody said that multiple personalities have to agree with each other.
As I analyze the posts in this newsgroup, I realize that almost all the users
are just sockpuppets of a few trolls with no lives. I also wonder if drugs
might be involved, crystal meth in particular, since the manic energy and
psychotic hysteria these trolls exhibit can't possibly be natural.
Barry King
> On 2010-05-05 20:11, Ronald Reagan wrote:
I will respond to your post in 3 months.
Bill Lebt
"Taco Bell dishwasher Frito Pendejo" <fr...@pendejo.com> wrote in message
news:RJmdnVeL3tUf_tbR...@earthlink.com...
> On 2010-05-05 20:11, Ronald Reagan wrote:
>> Clint wrote
>>
>>> Rightists wanted the bomber so much to be a foreigner like me
>>
>> Instead he turned out to be a US citizen who became naturalized under the
>> Bush administration. Another failure of Republican policy.
>>
>>
>> Well, at least they stopped allowing subversive white foreign filth like
>> you
>> into the country begining back in the Bush administration.
Bush was busy aborting babies in Iraq with illegal napalm.
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 5309 (20100724) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.