Let's give Gothic people a reason to be depressed.
Chuck Lysaght
Dale Houstman
Chuck Lysaght wrote:
> Heh-heh. This was funny.
>
> http://maddox.xmission.com/gothics.html
This is even funnier...
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/020603_plagiarized.html
Sjonkel Rolf
wrote:
>Heh-heh. This was funny.
>
>http://maddox.xmission.com/gothics.html
Nails it right on the head. Excactly the way I feel as a gothic
person.
Chr.
De nederlandsche Cacaofabriek
> This is even funnier...
>
> http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/020603_plagiarized.html
The thought of a billion dollar secret agency plagiarising a student's
online script for a very important report is indeed funny; even more
funny because it describes Iraq as it was in 1991. While the whole
'evidence' propaganda machine of the Bush administration was already
only credible for mental midgets, this surely must be the epitome of
surrealism. It makes you wonder what the fuck those guys are doing in
those offices all day.........
Z.U.Oraqref
raph
"Dale Houstman" <dm...@citilink.com> wrote in message
news:3E450C67...@citilink.com...
Come on Dale! In Upchuck's little playworld of g.i. joe, truth is a
neurological weapon to be inoculated against with CNN and Bushism's. If he
finds out his playtime stories and special effects TV isn't real, he may
succumb to filing his teeth, wearing black lipstick and coming out only at
night. It will be hard enough on the poor soul when porn spam photo's of his
girlfriend fucking Iraqi POWs start pouring into his email.
raph
"Chuck Lysaght" <chuck_...@poetic.com> wrote in message
news:d633c9aa.03020...@posting.google.com...
If you think that was funny, then you just lumped yourself in the same
category.
- Here's a few shockers to your stupid little world - in all the bullshit
you believe in:
- they still haven't proven that Al Qaeda or Bin Laden for that matter is in
any way responsible for 9/11
- The U.S. has a history of using purposely unprevented disasters such as
Pearl Harbour to enter into wars which are beneficial for business while
"American as mom's apple pie" idiots such as yourself never see the ulterior
motive.
- There is considerable proof that Saddam never gassed "his own people" or
any innocent civilians for that matter.
- As Dale posted, Britain's intelligence dossier on Iraq was plagiarized
from a grad student in California, and since repeated by Powell at his
recent U.N. appeal for war.
- That the components of any gas he used in the 10 year Iran/Iraq war was
illegally supplied by American corporations
- Over half a million Iraqi children have been killed via sanctions with
hundreds of thousands more to die in the coming war (that's just children)
- That America has no concern about collateral damage, as in the first Gulf
war when they extensively bombed water purification plants. Coverage will be
muted and/or in lockstep with every government military issue report.
- Saddam is no threat to anyone and the U.N. inspectors have discovered
literally nothing except for tons of diplomatic pressure.
etc., etc.
Chuck, keep reading G.I. Joe comics and picking on your nocturnal equals -
it's amusing if sad.
De nederlandsche Cacaofabriek
> - Saddam is no threat to anyone
Saddam a threat to no one! Come on man, he has like, ehm, he has, eh....
he has Mobile Laboratoria that produce Anthrax to gas our
postoffices!!!!!!! These laboratoria cannot be detected by radar and
thus are invisible to our inspectors!!!!!
Hillbilly P.Hill
Dale Houstman
True. I mentioned it to Chuck mainly because his sense of humor is so
low and adolescent, but he cannot appreciate the true black humor of the
power processes he supports without a cogent thought. He watches Fox
News (funny in itself) and thinks he's had a vision.
dmh
Dale Houstman
One has to try and take the duct tape from his eye/asshole now and
again. Not that I expect much.
dmh
Z.U.Oraqref
Dale Houstman wrote:
>> The thought of a billion dollar secret agency plagiarising a student's
>> online script for a very important report is indeed funny; even more
>> funny because it describes Iraq as it was in 1991. While the whole
>> 'evidence' propaganda machine of the Bush administration was already
>> only credible for mental midgets, this surely must be the epitome of
>> surrealism. It makes you wonder what the fuck those guys are doing in
>> those offices all day.........
>>
>> Z.U.Oraqref
>
>
> True. I mentioned it to Chuck mainly because his sense of humor is so
> low and adolescent, but he cannot appreciate the true black humor of the
> power processes he supports without a cogent thought. He watches Fox
> News (funny in itself) and thinks he's had a vision.
What's even more 'funny' is the wide coverage this news gets in the
American press. It shows clearly the country indeed has a free press
which is not at all tied by corperatal and political interests and
censorship.
Even now the news is already a day old and Blair has admitted that at
least half of his report was plagiarised, there is no way to get around
this news; it's all over CNN, for example:
Z.U.Oraqref
Dale Houstman
The fact that this story has gotten some (not enough) coverage in no way
shows that the press is free from corporate and government influence.
Thousands of other - more important - stories get ignored or stifled
EVERY DAY, and can only be discovered in smaller venues that most people
- as the government knows - do not read. For example, the fact that the
U.S. government removed an unknown number of pages from the Iraq U.N.
reports was not widely disseminated, and it obviously deserved front
page status. It isn't only a matter of showing or not showing a story:
sometimes revleations cannot be buried. But they can be made to seem
unimportant or silly by placement, tone, etc. Recently, a national
anti-war committee's "ad" in answer to Bush's gab-fest was refused an
airing because the huge corporation that own most of the country's cable
decided it was full of "unverifiable statements." What ad isn't, and how
verifiable was the blather spewed by the Bushbaby? Photos are cropped or
altered or left out altogether, unsubstantiated communications are
presented as facts, hearsay becomes law. Any astute
reader/listener/viewer can easily identify the processes of censorship
in its subtler forms. The U.S. press remains high on my enemy list of
those most responsible for an ignorant and sheep-like citizenry.
dmh
dmh
Horatio
"De nederlandsche Cacaofabriek" <in...@cacaofabriek.com> wrote in message
news:3E451448...@cacaofabriek.com...
They have to read through everything published by every micro-college in the
states to finger dissidents. Between that and reading all our mail, it's a
wonder they even have time to choose which fabricated sociology essay to
plagiarize.
-Horatio
Horatio
proving there is a huge difference between the /right/ of a free press and
an actual one. Large corporations (the kind that own most American news
agencies) are easily coerced through implied threats. Corporations are
inextricably tied to government influence; the reason I only trust news from
small press agencies.
Regards
-Horatio
J Rinier
<snip>
>Recently, a national
> anti-war committee's "ad" in answer to Bush's gab-fest was refused an
> airing because the huge corporation that own most of the country's cable
> decided it was full of "unverifiable statements." What ad isn't, and how
> verifiable was the blather spewed by the Bushbaby?
That was Comcast. I wrote them a letter. Piss and vinegar. I haven't
received a response, and I'm shocked. (beat) The funny part is that the ad
wasn't even incendiary, just a few folks offering a simple sentiment: 'war
sucks, I don't want it.'
When Comcast merges with ATT Broadband, I'm changing my service provider.
Does it matter? Shit no, my measly hundred bucks a month is more a drop in
the sea than a drop in the bucket.
Ah well, fuck em, they're cowards; I wrote my letter and I'll take my
dollars elsewhere. What else is there to do?
J Rinier
<snip>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.449 / Virus Database: 251 - Release Date: 1/27/2003
Chuck Lysaght
What does this have to do with Gothics?
Chuck Lysaght
Do you contribute anything besides mean-spirited and sick comments
directed at people?
Joshua P. Hill
<in...@cacaofabriek.com> wrote:
>Dale Houstman wrote:
>
>> This is even funnier...
>>
>> http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/020603_plagiarized.html
>
>The thought of a billion dollar secret agency plagiarising a student's
>online script for a very important report is indeed funny; even more
>funny because it describes Iraq as it was in 1991. While the whole
>'evidence' propaganda machine of the Bush administration was already
>only credible for mental midgets
Takes one to know one
>, this surely must be the epitome of
>surrealism. It makes you wonder what the fuck those guys are doing in
>those offices all day.........
>
>Z.U.Oraqref
Josh
Chuck Lysaght
> "Chuck Lysaght" <chuck_...@poetic.com> wrote in message
> news:d633c9aa.03020...@posting.google.com...
> > Heh-heh. This was funny.
> >
> > http://maddox.xmission.com/gothics.html
>
> If you think that was funny, then you just lumped yourself in the same
> category.
>
> - Here's a few shockers to your stupid little world - in all the bullshit
> you believe in:
>
> - they still haven't proven that Al Qaeda or Bin Laden for that matter is in
> any way responsible for 9/11
Are you that fucking stupid?
>
> - The U.S. has a history of using purposely unprevented disasters such as
> Pearl Harbour to enter into wars which are beneficial for business while
> "American as mom's apple pie" idiots such as yourself never see the ulterior
> motive.
Bullshit.
>
> - There is considerable proof that Saddam never gassed "his own people" or
> any innocent civilians for that matter.
Incredible bullshit.
>
> - As Dale posted, Britain's intelligence dossier on Iraq was plagiarized
> from a grad student in California, and since repeated by Powell at his
> recent U.N. appeal for war.
There was nothing on the news about it. And do you know why? It's bullshit.
>
> - That the components of any gas he used in the 10 year Iran/Iraq war was
> illegally supplied by American corporations
Bullshit.
>
> - Over half a million Iraqi children have been killed via sanctions with
> hundreds of thousands more to die in the coming war (that's just children)
Bullshit.
>
> - That America has no concern about collateral damage, as in the first Gulf
> war when they extensively bombed water purification plants. Coverage will be
> muted and/or in lockstep with every government military issue report.
Bullshit.
>
> - Saddam is no threat to anyone and the U.N. inspectors have discovered
> literally nothing except for tons of diplomatic pressure.
Incredible. Raph, you're a fucking idiot.
>
> etc., etc.
>
> Chuck, keep reading G.I. Joe comics and picking on your nocturnal equals -
> it's amusing if sad.
Go fuck yourself, you son of a whore.
Tiny Human Ferret
I vote we all cast spells on him because of that page.
--
Be kind to your neighbors, even | "Global domination, of course!"
though they be transgenic chimerae. | -- The Brain
"People that are really very weird can get into sensitive
positions and have a tremendous impact on history." -- Dan Quayle
Katrina Luode
kat
"Tiny Human Ferret" <ixnayamsp...@earthops.net> wrote in message
news:3E458581...@earthops.net...
The Monstrous Wrath of Wotan
Hehe. Very nicely argued, Chuck. I'm always convinced more by your style
of down-to-earth comments than the silly old rational arguments of that
Raph. What is logic, evidence and skepticism next to "you're a fucking
idiot"? It's well known that the first draft of Churchill's "iron curtain"
speech consisted of only eight words: "Go fuck yourself, you son of a
whore".
If only he'd left it at that, we wouldn't be ruled by communists today.
Girl the Bourgeois Individualist
"Chuck Lysaght" <chuck_...@poetic.com> wrote in message
news:d633c9aa.03020...@posting.google.com...
> >
> >
> > from a grad student in California, and since repeated by Powell at his
> > recent U.N. appeal for war.
>
> There was nothing on the news about it. And do you know why? It's bullshit.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2735031.stm
(just to pick the easiest to prove).
Girl.
Renay St. James
He watches Fox
> News (funny in itself) and thinks he's had a vision.
*****seriously, that's a news program? I've flipped
past it in the mornings a couple times. honestly thought
it was parody.
Renay
Renay St. James
> Do you contribute anything besides mean-spirited and sick comments
> directed at people?
*****altered state again tonight, Chuckles?
Renay
Chuck Lysaght
> <snip>
>
> >Recently, a national
> > anti-war committee's "ad" in answer to Bush's gab-fest was refused an
> > airing because the huge corporation that own most of the country's cable
> > decided it was full of "unverifiable statements." What ad isn't, and how
> > verifiable was the blather spewed by the Bushbaby?
>
> That was Comcast. I wrote them a letter. Piss and vinegar. I haven't
> received a response, and I'm shocked. (beat) The funny part is that the ad
> wasn't even incendiary, just a few folks offering a simple sentiment: 'war
> sucks, I don't want it.'
>
> When Comcast merges with ATT Broadband, I'm changing my service provider.
> Does it matter? Shit no, my measly hundred bucks a month is more a drop in
> the sea than a drop in the bucket.
>
> Ah well, fuck em, they're cowards; I wrote my letter and I'll take my
> dollars elsewhere. What else is there to do?
Never get emotional about "unverifiable statements".
pandora
"Renay St. James" <rena...@rjames.com> wrote in message
news:zfi1a.40334$vm2.23066@rwcrnsc54...
That's actually a good way to view it.
pandora
> Renay
>
>
>
>
J Rinier
news:<KTb1a.37275$HN5.1...@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net>...
> > <snip>
> >
> > >Recently, a national
> > > anti-war committee's "ad" in answer to Bush's gab-fest was refused an
> > > airing because the huge corporation that own most of the country's
cable
> > > decided it was full of "unverifiable statements." What ad isn't, and
how
> > > verifiable was the blather spewed by the Bushbaby?
> >
> > That was Comcast. I wrote them a letter. Piss and vinegar. I haven't
> > received a response, and I'm shocked. (beat) The funny part is that
the ad
> > wasn't even incendiary, just a few folks offering a simple sentiment:
'war
> > sucks, I don't want it.'
> >
> > When Comcast merges with ATT Broadband, I'm changing my service
provider.
> > Does it matter? Shit no, my measly hundred bucks a month is more a drop
in
> > the sea than a drop in the bucket.
> >
> > Ah well, fuck em, they're cowards; I wrote my letter and I'll take my
> > dollars elsewhere. What else is there to do?
>
> Never get emotional about "unverifiable statements".
Humans get emotional about dinner, Chuckles. They get emotional about an
ingrown toenail. Why pat the hand that's pulling wool over your
half-stitched eyes, Chuckler? I'd rather grasp it and see it what it is
hidden in the palm; unfortunately, no can do. I have to settle with
accusing it of Wool. So- verify that.
Not only do I get emotional, I cognate. After the paint chips have dried
and you've had one of your lovely dinners, you may want to give it a try.
Or you may just want to verify the tastiness of paint. Lead-based, a'cuss.
J Rinier
J Rinier
Pretty sure it is; however, it is the Fox Sportsnet that allows me to watch
the EPL, so there is that slight redeeming value. Cuss ya have to be a
soccer fan. And awake at four in the morning. Heh. (check, check)
J Rinier
>
> Renay
Chuck Lysaght
Bullshit, yet again.
A Girl and her Pika
>
How about sending Hired Goons to cast a spell on him, then kill him?
~~ Gloria
"'Cause life is waiting for you, it's all messed up, but we're alive. . ." ~
Our Lady Peace -- "Life"
http://www27.brinkster.com/rainingonme/default.htm
http://www.livejournal.com/users/socktree
Dale Houstman
J Rinier wrote:
> <snip>
>
>>Recently, a national
>>anti-war committee's "ad" in answer to Bush's gab-fest was refused an
>>airing because the huge corporation that own most of the country's cable
>>decided it was full of "unverifiable statements." What ad isn't, and how
>>verifiable was the blather spewed by the Bushbaby?
>
>
> That was Comcast. I wrote them a letter. Piss and vinegar. I haven't
> received a response, and I'm shocked. (beat) The funny part is that the ad
> wasn't even incendiary, just a few folks offering a simple sentiment: 'war
> sucks, I don't want it.'
>
> When Comcast merges with ATT Broadband, I'm changing my service provider.
> Does it matter? Shit no, my measly hundred bucks a month is more a drop in
> the sea than a drop in the bucket.
>
> Ah well, fuck em, they're cowards; I wrote my letter and I'll take my
> dollars elsewhere. What else is there to do?
>
>
>
> J Rinier
>
>
>
One has to make a lot of decisions and initiate a lot of actions while
being fully aware they don't make any impact at all, if only for your
own peace of mind and in the hope that eventually enough individual
responses will end up in a cascade. It happens. And so on we go...
dmh
Joshua P. Hill
wrote:
Now that you've explained this garbled nonsense elsewhere, it's clear
that you were making a lame attempt at irony.
Of course, I saw just about the same coverage in the New York Times
and Washington Post as I did in the British papers.
But don't let that stop you. I mean, we wouldn't want to let facts get
in the way of stupid smears, now, would we.
Josh
.
It was reported that the council was upset over the US getting
the report first and editing it. The story was not important
since the council then demanded, and got, unedited copies.
> It isn't only a matter of showing or not showing a story:
> sometimes revleations cannot be buried. But they can be made to seem
> unimportant or silly by placement, tone, etc. Recently, a national
> anti-war committee's "ad" in answer to Bush's gab-fest was refused an
> airing because the huge corporation that own most of the country's cable
> decided it was full of "unverifiable statements." What ad isn't,
> and how
> verifiable was the blather spewed by the Bushbaby? Photos are cropped or
> altered or left out altogether, unsubstantiated communications are
> presented as facts, hearsay becomes law. Any astute
> reader/listener/viewer can easily identify the processes of censorship
> in its subtler forms. The U.S. press remains high on my enemy list of
> those most responsible for an ignorant and sheep-like citizenry.
>
A shrink would have a field day with your posts, they're all
well seasoned with obvious ego and bias issues that
overwhelm any sense of reality or logic.
Jonathan
s
> dmh
>
> dmh
>
Dale Houstman
. wrote:
>>>
>>
>>The fact that this story has gotten some (not enough) coverage in no way
>>shows that the press is free from corporate and government influence.
>>Thousands of other - more important - stories get ignored or stifled
>>EVERY DAY, and can only be discovered in smaller venues that most people
>>- as the government knows - do not read. For example, the fact that the
>>U.S. government removed an unknown number of pages from the Iraq U.N.
>>reports was not widely disseminated, and it obviously deserved front
>>page status.
>
>
>
> It was reported that the council was upset over the US getting
> the report first and editing it. The story was not important
> since the council then demanded, and got, unedited copies.
It is still important, because it speaks to the intent and manipulations
of the U.S. government and throws light on what that government will do
to get its way. Just because the problem was later cleared up by some
other agency's efforts doesn't wipe out the fact that the U.S. is
engaged in some rather shadey maneuvers.
>
>
>
>
>>It isn't only a matter of showing or not showing a story:
>>sometimes revleations cannot be buried. But they can be made to seem
>>unimportant or silly by placement, tone, etc. Recently, a national
>>anti-war committee's "ad" in answer to Bush's gab-fest was refused an
>>airing because the huge corporation that own most of the country's cable
>>decided it was full of "unverifiable statements." What ad isn't,
>>and how
>>verifiable was the blather spewed by the Bushbaby? Photos are cropped or
>>altered or left out altogether, unsubstantiated communications are
>>presented as facts, hearsay becomes law. Any astute
>>reader/listener/viewer can easily identify the processes of censorship
>>in its subtler forms. The U.S. press remains high on my enemy list of
>>those most responsible for an ignorant and sheep-like citizenry.
>>
>
>
>
> A shrink would have a field day with your posts, they're all
> well seasoned with obvious ego and bias issues that
> overwhelm any sense of reality or logic.
Right, blind boy. I must admit we are ALL impressed by your non-biased
thoughts. At any rate, the statement above ISN'T biased, merely a true
accounting of what happens everyday in the republic you are content to
blandly follow without a hint of personal cognition. And - really - are
you telling me that personal opinion is inferior to government news
handouts? Oddly pathetic that...
dmh
Alain Cislaghi
Presented this way, it sounds like something that'd make superb
material for an excellent socio political sci fi novel a la hmm.. let
say pkdick, yeah.
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> . wrote:
...
> > It was reported that the council was upset over the US getting
> > the report first and editing it. The story was not important
> > since the council then demanded, and got, unedited copies.
>
> It is still important, because it speaks to the intent and manipulations
> of the U.S. government and throws light on what that government will do
> to get its way. Just because the problem was later cleared up by some
> other agency's efforts doesn't wipe out the fact that the U.S. is
> engaged in some rather shadey maneuvers.
Whereas your Mommy and her Priest always told the TrVth.
THEREFORE, you Deserve it at All Times.
Yup.
--
------(m+
~/:o)_|
A computer without language
is an expensive cut of meat.
http://scrawlmark.net
David bin Bedlam
[...]
> When Comcast merges with ATT Broadband, I'm changing my service provider.
> Does it matter? Shit no, my measly hundred bucks a month is more a drop in
> the sea than a drop in the bucket.
$100 a month for Internet service? WHY, even if you are filthy rich?
> Ah well, fuck em, they're cowards; I wrote my letter and I'll take my
> dollars elsewhere. What else is there to do?
Off the top of my head:
You might also try google searches for terms and concepts that these
might mention....
The
--
"People, en masse, are average." -Ashurbanipal, on alt.angst
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(C) 2002 TheDavid(TM) | David, P.O. Box 21403, Louisville, KY 40221
David bin Bedlam
[about the US Gov't deletion of half the report of Iraqi inspections]
In alt.angst . <ho...@attbi.com> wrote:
> "Dale Houstman" <dm...@citilink.com> wrote in message
>> U.S. government removed an unknown number of pages from the Iraq U.N.
>> reports was not widely disseminated, and it obviously deserved front
>> page status.
> It was reported that the council was upset over the US getting
> the report first and editing it. The story was not important
> since the council then demanded, and got, unedited copies.
Or, rather, what the U.S. government CLAIMED were unedited copies.
It must feel good to be gullible.
By the way, how many Iraqis were among the hijackers on 9/11?
David bin Bedlam
Oh:
news:alt.society.anarchy
news:alt.politics.radical-left
news:alt.politics.socialism.trotsky
etc.
David bin Bedlam
> Chuck Lysaght wrote:
>> Heh-heh. This was funny.
>>
>> http://maddox.xmission.com/gothics.html
> This is even funnier...
> http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/020603_plagiarized.html
Then there's this:
EFF FAQ: The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)
(Sep. 27, 2001)
http://www.eff.org/Censorship/Terrorism_militias/fisa_faq.html
And it gets worse . . .
David O'Bedlam, Lord Hammersey
I'm not sure how easily y'all can get and read the below;
I don't "point and click" to read usenet. However...
References: <FVa1a.465267$U47.3...@news.easynews.com>
Warning: it's an archive of PDF and RTF files.
Michael Cook
> > Chuck Lysaght wrote:
> > > Heh-heh. This was funny.
> > >
> > > http://maddox.xmission.com/gothics.html
> >
> >
> > This is even funnier...
> >
> >
> > http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/020603_plagiarized.html
>
hey idiot, what does your org post have to do with aapc?
Michael Cook
news:<KTb1a.37275$HN5.1...@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net>...
> > <snip>
> >
> > >Recently, a national
> > > anti-war committee's "ad" in answer to Bush's gab-fest was refused an
> > > airing because the huge corporation that own most of the country's
cable
> > > decided it was full of "unverifiable statements." What ad isn't, and
how
> > > verifiable was the blather spewed by the Bushbaby?
> >
> > That was Comcast. I wrote them a letter. Piss and vinegar. I haven't
> > received a response, and I'm shocked. (beat) The funny part is that
the ad
> > wasn't even incendiary, just a few folks offering a simple sentiment:
'war
> > sucks, I don't want it.'
> >
> > When Comcast merges with ATT Broadband, I'm changing my service
provider.
> > Does it matter? Shit no, my measly hundred bucks a month is more a drop
in
> > the sea than a drop in the bucket.
> >
> > Ah well, fuck em, they're cowards; I wrote my letter and I'll take my
> > dollars elsewhere. What else is there to do?
>
> Never get emotional about "unverifiable statements".
never steal, lie, cheat....................................
Michael Cook
> > "Dale Houstman" <dm...@citilink.com> wrote in message
> > news:3E450C67...@citilink.com...
> > >
> > >
> > > Chuck Lysaght wrote:
> > > > Heh-heh. This was funny.
> > > >
> > > > http://maddox.xmission.com/gothics.html
> > >
> > >
> > > This is even funnier...
> > >
> > >
> > > http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/020603_plagiarized.html
> > >
> >
> > neurological weapon to be inoculated against with CNN and Bushism's. If
he
> > finds out his playtime stories and special effects TV isn't real, he may
> > succumb to filing his teeth, wearing black lipstick and coming out only
at
> > night. It will be hard enough on the poor soul when porn spam photo's of
his
> > girlfriend fucking Iraqi POWs start pouring into his email.
>
> Do you contribute anything besides mean-spirited and sick comments
> directed at people?
stupid (yes i mean you chuck) answer your own question
Michael Cook
"Chuck Lysaght" <chuck_...@poetic.com> wrote in message
news:d633c9aa.03020...@posting.google.com...
> "raph" <berg...@onebox.com> wrote in message
> > "Chuck Lysaght" <chuck_...@poetic.com> wrote in message
> > news:d633c9aa.03020...@posting.google.com...
> > category.
> >
> > - Here's a few shockers to your stupid little world - in all the
bullshit
> > you believe in:
> >
> > - they still haven't proven that Al Qaeda or Bin Laden for that matter
is in
> > any way responsible for 9/11
>
> Are you that fucking stupid?
> >
> > - The U.S. has a history of using purposely unprevented disasters such
as
> > Pearl Harbour to enter into wars which are beneficial for business while
> > "American as mom's apple pie" idiots such as yourself never see the
ulterior
> > motive.
>
> Bullshit.
> >
> > - There is considerable proof that Saddam never gassed "his own people"
or
> > any innocent civilians for that matter.
>
> Incredible bullshit.
> >
> > from a grad student in California, and since repeated by Powell at his
> > recent U.N. appeal for war.
>
> There was nothing on the news about it. And do you know why? It's
bullshit.
> >
was
> > illegally supplied by American corporations
>
> Bullshit.
> >
> > - Over half a million Iraqi children have been killed via sanctions with
> > hundreds of thousands more to die in the coming war (that's just
children)
>
> Bullshit.
> >
> > - That America has no concern about collateral damage, as in the first
Gulf
> > war when they extensively bombed water purification plants. Coverage
will be
> > muted and/or in lockstep with every government military issue report.
>
> Bullshit.
> >
> > - Saddam is no threat to anyone and the U.N. inspectors have discovered
> > literally nothing except for tons of diplomatic pressure.
>
> Incredible. Raph, you're a fucking idiot.
> >
> > etc., etc.
> >
> > Chuck, keep reading G.I. Joe comics and picking on your nocturnal
equals -
> > it's amusing if sad.
>
> Go fuck yourself, you son of a whore.
still a class act, heh chuck
speaking of whores.......ok, not today.
Michael Cook
you forgot the rest of your post
a cut and paste error?
E Selow
By responding you offer the connection yourself.
Elvira
Girl the Bourgeois Individualist
"David bin Bedlam" <thed...@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message
news:v4egkjq...@corp.supernews.com...
> In alt.angst J Rinier <gotg...@attbi.com> wrote:
> [...]
>
> > When Comcast merges with ATT Broadband, I'm changing my service provider.
> > Does it matter? Shit no, my measly hundred bucks a month is more a drop
in
> > the sea than a drop in the bucket.
>
> $100 a month for Internet service? WHY, even if you are filthy rich?
>
> > Ah well, fuck em, they're cowards; I wrote my letter and I'll take my
> > dollars elsewhere. What else is there to do?
>
> Off the top of my head:
>
> http://www.wsws.org
>
> http://www.zmag.org
>
> http://flag.blackened.net
>
> http://www.alternet.org
>
www.indymedia.ie. There's also www.struggle.ws, a spin-off of
flag.blackened.net
Girl.
Dennis M. Hammes
Half of the people, on average, constitute 50% of the population.
And half of the people, on average, /are below average/.