Rickets, The enemy of world democracy.
 

It's funny how he wants to overthrow a government that is going out of its
way to help spread democracy around the globe and he'll believe any and
everything that would help to stop it. I like how the opposition to the war
screams that we are killing our people which volunteered to go there in the
first place and believe in this campaign. He'll you can barely call it a war
with only 1800 losses in over three years. We lost more men between
1989-1996 ( 18,000+) in the military from normal operations and the Gulf war
combined. We would have lost 1800 even if we would have stayed home. If only
people looked at the numbers and the stats.

B.H.

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 16:56:34 -0500, "Brian Hill"
wrote:

He'll you can barely call it a war
with only 1800 losses in over three years. We lost more men between
1989-1996 ( 18,000+) in the military from normal operations and the Gulf war
combined.

How noble, how ****ing noble!

On 28 Aug 2005 15:42:37 -0700, "RHF"
wrote:

2. DaviD - Or is what 'you' post here just so many
hollow words that hold no meaning to 'you' ?

Try learning how to compose a meangful question or a sentence
and maybe he can answer!

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 18:20:43 -0500, "Brian Hill"
wrote:

Yes and if we can get rid of all the Sadam's and Bin Laden's maybe we wont
even have to train so hard.

Only the brainless fantasize thath you can get rid of ALL of them.
YOu can descourage, you can limit. You can even kill a few, but there
are many more. This is a fallen world. You cannot destroy "terrorism"
and more than you can destroy human greed.

On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 00:54:32 GMT, m II wrote:

Some would say that is BS. Thanks to neocon idiocy, there is now a
fundamentalist Islamic State where previously there was none. Hussein hated the
fundamentalists and that is why Bin Laden had contracts out on him on at least
two occasions. Nice going, BUSH.

Is it really an Islamic State already? You may have a point.
If it becomes that, then we have not only lost the war on non-exitent
WMD that
we lied about, but we have also handed a victory to the militant
Muslims.

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 16:56:34 -0500, "Brian Hill"
wrote:


It's funny how he wants to overthrow a government that is going out of its
way to help spread democracy around the globe and he'll believe any and
everything that would help to stop it. I like how the opposition to the war
screams that we are killing our people which volunteered to go there in the
first place and believe in this campaign. He'll you can barely call it a war
with only 1800 losses in over three years. We lost more men between
1989-1996 ( 18,000+) in the military from normal operations and the Gulf war
combined. We would have lost 1800 even if we would have stayed home. If only
people looked at the numbers and the stats.

B.H.


This has nothing to do with numbers.

It has everything to do with making things worse. It has to do with
creating new generations of enemies.

The United States should lead the world by example. Not like a ****ty
parent who says ''do as I say, not as I do''.

On 28 Aug 2005 15:42:37 -0700, "RHF"
wrote:

BH - DaviD lacks the courage to stand-up for the words
that he so freely uses when posting here so frequently.
.
SO TELL US - WHAT ARE 'YOU' DAVID ?
.
1. DaviD - Tell me, are 'you' now advocating (inciting) an
active rebellion against the current US Federal Government ?
.
2. DaviD - Or is what 'you' post here just so many
hollow words that hold no meaning to 'you' ?
.
So David - Which is it #1 or #2 : Do 'you' have the personal
courage to publicly answer "Yes" or "No" to either ?
.
DaviD - Are 'you' a Man of Your Words . . .
{ Or simply a very wordy man of no real standing ? }
.
.
i want to know ~ RHF
. . . . .

I will not answer any of your questions until you use proper
punctuation. Otherwise I must assume you are mentally ill.

David wrote:

On 28 Aug 2005 15:42:37 -0700, "RHF"
wrote:

BH - DaviD lacks the courage to stand-up for the words
that he so freely uses when posting here so frequently.
.
SO TELL US - WHAT ARE 'YOU' DAVID ?
.
1. DaviD - Tell me, are 'you' now advocating (inciting) an
active rebellion against the current US Federal Government ?
.
2. DaviD - Or is what 'you' post here just so many
hollow words that hold no meaning to 'you' ?
.
So David - Which is it #1 or #2 : Do 'you' have the personal
courage to publicly answer "Yes" or "No" to either ?
.
DaviD - Are 'you' a Man of Your Words . . .
{ Or simply a very wordy man of no real standing ? }
.
.
i want to know ~ RHF
. . . . .

I will not answer any of your questions until you use proper
punctuation. Otherwise I must assume you are mentally ill.

Like you?

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Brian Hill wrote:
It's funny how he wants to overthrow a government that is going out of its
way to help spread democracy around the globe and he'll believe any and
everything that would help to stop it.

Who is he.....
Which government...



I like how the opposition to the war
screams that we are killing our people which volunteered to go there in the
first place and believe in this campaign. He'll you can barely call it a war
with only 1800 losses in over three years.

Who is he......
1,800 people seems like a lot of people to have die needlessly, and the
number is a lot higher if you include contractors and other
nationalities. And how could we forget the tens of thougnds of Iraqis
who have been killed so far. I'm certain the parents and loved ones of
those killed would think the losses were of some significance, wouldn't
you?

We lost more men between
1989-1996 ( 18,000+) in the military from normal operations and the Gulf war
combined. We would have lost 1800 even if we would have stayed home. If only
people looked at the numbers and the stats.

And that justifies the invasion of a soverign country? It must,
because the Bush administration has given no other credible
justification.

George Bush is goiung to do just what Lyndon Johnson did in Viet Nam -
leave the cleanup and inevtiable messy exit to another president.
That's a fine legacy George!!




B.H.

"John S." wrote:

Brian Hill wrote:
It's funny how he wants to overthrow a government that is going out of its
way to help spread democracy around the globe and he'll believe any and
everything that would help to stop it.

Who is he.....
Which government...

I like how the opposition to the war
screams that we are killing our people which volunteered to go there in the
first place and believe in this campaign. He'll you can barely call it a war
with only 1800 losses in over three years.

Who is he......
1,800 people seems like a lot of people to have die needlessly, and the
number is a lot higher if you include contractors and other
nationalities. And how could we forget the tens of thougnds of Iraqis
who have been killed so far. I'm certain the parents and loved ones of
those killed would think the losses were of some significance, wouldn't
you?

We lost more men between
1989-1996 ( 18,000+) in the military from normal operations and the Gulf war
combined. We would have lost 1800 even if we would have stayed home. If only
people looked at the numbers and the stats.

And that justifies the invasion of a soverign country? It must,
because the Bush administration has given no other credible
justification.

Yada, yada, yada... more left-wing propaganda. Plenty of justification out threre,
'tard. It's just that you and your minions continually dismiss it as false.

If you can't come up with anything better you'd best be prepared to lose a lot of
nationwide elections in 2006 and 2008.

George Bush is goiung to do just what Lyndon Johnson did in Viet Nam -
leave the cleanup and inevtiable messy exit to another president.
That's a fine legacy George!!

Rather than let him leave the cleanup to someone else would you support changing
things so that GWB could run again in 2008? That would give you at least one less
thing to whine about, wouldn't it?

dxAce
Michigan
USA

"Chameleon" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 18:20:43 -0500, "Brian Hill"
wrote:

Yes and if we can get rid of all the Sadam's and Bin Laden's maybe we wont
even have to train so hard.

Only the brainless fantasize thath you can get rid of ALL of them.
YOu can descourage, you can limit. You can even kill a few, but there
are many more. This is a fallen world. You cannot destroy "terrorism"
and more than you can destroy human greed.


I thought I told you shut up? Now move along.

B.H.

dxAce wrote:
"John S." wrote:

Brian Hill wrote:
It's funny how he wants to overthrow a government that is going out of its
way to help spread democracy around the globe and he'll believe any and
everything that would help to stop it.

Who is he.....
Which government...

I like how the opposition to the war
screams that we are killing our people which volunteered to go there in the
first place and believe in this campaign. He'll you can barely call it a war
with only 1800 losses in over three years.

Who is he......
1,800 people seems like a lot of people to have die needlessly, and the
number is a lot higher if you include contractors and other
nationalities. And how could we forget the tens of thougnds of Iraqis
who have been killed so far. I'm certain the parents and loved ones of
those killed would think the losses were of some significance, wouldn't
you?

We lost more men between
1989-1996 ( 18,000+) in the military from normal operations and the Gulf war
combined. We would have lost 1800 even if we would have stayed home. If only
people looked at the numbers and the stats.

And that justifies the invasion of a soverign country? It must,
because the Bush administration has given no other credible
justification.

Yada, yada, yada... more left-wing propaganda. Plenty of justification out threre,
'tard. It's just that you and your minions continually dismiss it as false.

Well, lets look at the record so far. We are for all intents and
purposes still in charge of a country that has just regained its
position as the largest single producer of opium. And George isn't
even getting a piece of the action. Just more dead. Great job so far
George.

And of course we are in charge of another country, but I keep
forgetting the reason we are there. Oh, yes...we are still hoping for
weapons of mass destruction but more recently we also decided to
install democracy. Or did George change the reason once more this
week. And in the meanwhile the average citizen has numerous miltia
groups to worry about, minimal utilities and a crumbling
infrastructure, a US installed government that is imploding and roving
gangs that break into houses, shoot or imprison people and stop cars at
will. The average citizen of that country sees the U.S. losing its will
and getting ready to pull out, as predicted. So what will we leave in
our wake.....another Viet Nam to collapse on itself.

I'm sure the next president will look forward to that mess.


If you can't come up with anything better you'd best be prepared to lose a lot of
nationwide elections in 2006 and 2008.

Couldn't get much worse actually. Just like the mess Johnson left for
Nixon.


George Bush is goiung to do just what Lyndon Johnson did in Viet Nam -
leave the cleanup and inevtiable messy exit to another president.
That's a fine legacy George!!

Rather than let him leave the cleanup to someone else would you support changing
things so that GWB could run again in 2008? That would give you at least one less
thing to whine about, wouldn't it?

dxAce
Michigan
USA

"John S." wrote:

dxAce wrote:
"John S." wrote:

Brian Hill wrote:
It's funny how he wants to overthrow a government that is going out of its
way to help spread democracy around the globe and he'll believe any and
everything that would help to stop it.

Who is he.....
Which government...

I like how the opposition to the war
screams that we are killing our people which volunteered to go there in the
first place and believe in this campaign. He'll you can barely call it a war
with only 1800 losses in over three years.

Who is he......
1,800 people seems like a lot of people to have die needlessly, and the
number is a lot higher if you include contractors and other
nationalities. And how could we forget the tens of thougnds of Iraqis
who have been killed so far. I'm certain the parents and loved ones of
those killed would think the losses were of some significance, wouldn't
you?

We lost more men between
1989-1996 ( 18,000+) in the military from normal operations and the Gulf war
combined. We would have lost 1800 even if we would have stayed home. If only
people looked at the numbers and the stats.

And that justifies the invasion of a soverign country? It must,
because the Bush administration has given no other credible
justification.

Yada, yada, yada... more left-wing propaganda. Plenty of justification out threre,
'tard. It's just that you and your minions continually dismiss it as false.

Well, lets look at the record so far. We are for all intents and
purposes still in charge of a country that has just regained its
position as the largest single producer of opium. And George isn't
even getting a piece of the action. Just more dead. Great job so far
George.

And of course we are in charge of another country, but I keep
forgetting the reason we are there. Oh, yes...we are still hoping for
weapons of mass destruction but more recently we also decided to
install democracy. Or did George change the reason once more this
week. And in the meanwhile the average citizen has numerous miltia
groups to worry about, minimal utilities and a crumbling
infrastructure, a US installed government that is imploding and roving
gangs that break into houses, shoot or imprison people and stop cars at
will. The average citizen of that country sees the U.S. losing its will
and getting ready to pull out, as predicted. So what will we leave in
our wake.....another Viet Nam to collapse on itself.

One thing is for sure... you 'tard boys will whine no matter what happens.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 16:56:34 -0500, "Brian Hill"
wrote:


He'll you can barely call it a war
with only 1800 losses in over three years. We lost more men between
1989-1996 ( 18,000+) in the military from normal operations and the Gulf war
combined.


Uh, haven't you overlooked a little something? Aren't those ~14,000 kids
with arms, legs and other various missing body parts also "losses"?

David Rickets meets bin Laden

....within Marxism, it is the Trotskyites that are spearheading the turn to
radical Islam... Trotskyites are in fact the most zealous among the Marxists
in seeking to unite with the jihadists.
....
It is in Europe that the political convergence between Marxists and
Islamists is most advanced.
....
Here in Canada, the tiny and splintered -- but often surprisingly
influential -- Marxist movement has come down firmly on the side of radical
Islam and jihad. One of the most sycophantic in its praise of all things
Islamist is the Trotskyist Socialist Voice.
....
The largest Marxist group in Canada, the quasi-Trotskyist International
Socialists ( IS ) , has also chosen to cast its lot with the Islamists
against the West. In fact, as far back as 1994, the IS's parent group in
Britain, the Socialist Workers Party ( SWP ) , published a pamphlet entitled
"The Prophet and the Proletariat", in which they called for "defending
Islamists against the state", and for "occasionally" siding with radical
Islamists while maintaining an ideological distance. Today, in the pages of
the IS publication Socialist Worker, in which the Islamist torturers in
Fallujah, serial murderers of women in Mosul, and holders of sharia courts
in Najaf and Sadr City, are all labeled "heroic", that "distance" has all
but disappeared.
....
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...e.asp?ID=19295
____________________________________________
"RHF" wrote in message
oups.com...
BH - DaviD lacks the courage to stand-up for the words
that he so freely uses when posting here so frequently.
.
SO TELL US - WHAT ARE 'YOU' DAVID ?
.
1. DaviD - Tell me, are 'you' now advocating (inciting) an
active rebellion against the current US Federal Government ?
.
2. DaviD - Or is what 'you' post here just so many
hollow words that hold no meaning to 'you' ?
.
So David - Which is it #1 or #2 : Do 'you' have the personal
courage to publicly answer "Yes" or "No" to either ?
.
DaviD - Are 'you' a Man of Your Words . . .
{ Or simply a very wordy man of no real standing ? }
.
.
i want to know ~ RHF
. . . . .

"Carter-K8VT" wrote in message
.. .

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 16:56:34 -0500, "Brian Hill"
wrote:


He'll you can barely call it a war with only 1800 losses in over three
years. We lost more men between 1989-1996 ( 18,000+) in the military from
normal operations and the Gulf war combined.


Uh, haven't you overlooked a little something? Aren't those ~14,000 kids
with arms, legs and other various missing body parts also "losses"?

Yea it's a shame. You can't stop them from doing what they believe in
Carter. Do you not agree? This war isn't going to stop and a lot of us are
for it. Including the majority our troops. Theres nothing you can do but
complain.

B.H.

On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 17:48:52 -0500, "Brian Hill"
wrote:


Yea it's a shame. You can't stop them from doing what they believe in
Carter. Do you not agree? This war isn't going to stop and a lot of us are
for it. Including the majority our troops. Theres nothing you can do but
complain.

B.H.


You may think your actions are meaningless and that they won't help,
but that is no excuse, you must still act. -- Mohandas Karamchand
Gandhi

David wrote:

On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 17:48:52 -0500, "Brian Hill"
wrote:


Yea it's a shame. You can't stop them from doing what they believe in
Carter. Do you not agree? This war isn't going to stop and a lot of us are
for it. Including the majority our troops. Theres nothing you can do but
complain.

B.H.


You may think your actions are meaningless and that they won't help,
but that is no excuse, you must still act. -- Mohandas Karamchand
Gandhi

I don't think he meant to act stupid, like you do, 'tard boy.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 19:36:18 -0400, dxAce
wrote:


I don't think he meant to act stupid, like you do, 'tard boy.

dxAce
Michigan
USA
Dare To Be Stupid
by Al Yankovic

NOTE: The "Instrumental" version has no lyrics besides the "Dare to be
stupid" refrain.


Lyrics:

Put down your chainsaw and listen to me
It's time for us to join in the fight
It's time to let your babies grow up to be cowboys
It's time to let the bedbugs bite

You better put all your eggs in one basket
You better count your chickens before they hatch
You better sell some wine before it's/its time
You better find yourself an itch to scratch

You better squeeze all the Charmin you can while Mr. Wimpole's not
around
Stick your head in the microwave and get yourself a tan

Talk with your mouth full
Bite the hand that feeds you
Bite on more than you chew
What can you do
Dare to be stupid

Take some wooden nickles
Look for Mr. Goodbar
Get your mojo working now
I'll show you how
You can dare to be stupid

You can turn the other cheek
You can just give up the ship
You can eat a bunch of sushi and forget to leave a tip

Dare to be stupid
Come on and dare to be stupid
It's so easy to do
Dare to be stupid
We're all waiting for you
Let's go

It's time to make a mountain out of a molehill
So can I have a volunteer
There's no more time for crying over spilled milk
Now it's time for crying in your beer

Settle down, raise a family, join the PTA
Buy some sensible shoes and a Chevyrolet
And party 'till you're broke and they drive you away
It's OK, you can dare to be stupid

It's like spitting on a fish
It's like barking up a tree
It's like I said you gotta buy one if you wanna get one free

Dare to be stupid (yes)
Why don't you dare to be stupid
It's so easy to do
Dare to be stupid
We're all waiting for you
Dare to be stupid

Burn your candle at both ends
Look a gift horse in the mouth
Mashed potatoes can be your friends

You can be a coffee achiever
You can sit around the house and watch Leave It To Beaver
The future's up to you
So what you gonna do

Dare to be stupid
Dare to be stupid
What did I say
Dare to be stupid
Tell me, what did I say
Dare to be stupid
It's alright
Dare to be stupid
We can be stupid all night
Dare to be stupid
Come on, join the crowd
Dare to be stupid
Shout it out loud
Dare to be stupid
I can't hear you
Dare to be stupid
OK, I can hear you now
Dare to be stupid
Let's go, Dare to be stupid
Dare to be stupid
Dare to be stupid
Dare to be stupid
Dare to be stupid
Dare to be stupid
Dare to be stupid
Dare to be stupid

Brian Hill wrote:

Don't be picken on my buddy RHF. ;)


Pickin? Bud? Say no more..nudge nudge, wink wink...







mike

Chameleon - The Questions are The Questions

Now here is MII with the "AG Report" from Cana-Duh :
" the marijuana crop was really good this year "
http://www.freedomtoexhale.com/can.htm
http://www.hempfiles.com/php/viewnews.php?id=218

Hello DaviD - And Everyone Once Again Please Note :

On 29 Aug 2005 23:39:51 -0700, "RHF"
wrote:

Hello DaviD - And Everyone Once Again Please Note :
.
That DaviD is Silent to Both Questions [.]
.
DaviD - You would require Huevos to Answer #1 Yes [.]
.
DaviD - You would need to be Honest with yourself to Answer #2 Yes [.]
.
.
david - let your yes be your yes and your no be your no ~ RHF
. . . . .

You'll have to think for yourself.

DaviD - " You'll have to think for yourself. "