Re: OT Flame War



"Ogg Oggibly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Frank Olson" <[email protected]> wrote in
> message news:md_jd.157594$%k.9002@pd7tw2no...
>> "Ogg Oggibly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>> I find it funny you can't bring yourself to condemn atrocities on women
>>> and children for the apparent reason that they are being committed my
>>> Muslims.

>>
>>
>> "Action" - I lend financial support to Amnesty International (an
>> organization that tries to intervene in such atrocities). If, by this
>> action I have not adequately demonstrated my disgust at such atrocities
>> perhaps you can suggest a more effective means (my *saying so* in this
>> Group doesn't benefit anyone or anything but your own ego).

>
> Are you a feminist too? Do you also give money to that worthless NOW?
> Does it give you a warm and fuzzy feeling.
>
> You want me to tell you how to condemn Muslim atrocities against women and
> children that won't benefit anyone?
>
> As Ed Dolan would say - You are ****ed up.
>
> As Arnold would say - You are a girly man.
>
> Ogg O



And you are??? Let's see... another "hypocritical Republican"?? You and
Mr. Ed are a match "made in Minnesota" (Mr. Dolan's version of "heaven on
earth").
 
Ogg Oggibly wrote:

> You seem hung up on not accepting the wide spread and condoned abuses of
> women and children by Islam, Islamic governments, and Muslim clerics.


Nowhere have I denied such things happen, what I have said is that you
cannot simply say that such things are "Islam" in the wider sense of the
hundreds of millions of Muslims and what the majority typically believe
and how they typically behave, or pretend that it doesn't happen outside
of Islam. Yet you do things like post a dictionary definition of a word
to suggest that all those hundreds of millions of people are at war with
me at the same time as denying you are persecuting a whole religion for
the actions of extremists within their fold.

> The clock is ticking down on 13 year old Zhila Izad in Marivan, Iran.


Oooooh, let's wring our hands a bit more to distract us from thinking
about what the ghastly apologist is saying!

> holy men will be casting their stones at her shortly. How do you think it
> would feel to be killed by having large rocks hit you while you are kneeling
> in a field.


Appalling. But it won't be any better for a girl being stoned by Hindus
than for a girl being stoned by Muslims. And that happens too. If you
think it doesn't you're kidding yourself.

> Why do you have such a HUGE PROBLEM admitting this is being
> done in an Islamic Republic by Muslim clerics to a 13 year old girl whose 15
> year old brother got her pregnant thereby dishonoring her family.


I don't have any such problem. But why do you persist in condemning a
subset of such abusers (those that happen to be Muslim), rather than all
of them?

> Have you written yet to comfort Zhila in her last days and to let her know
> religion has nothing to do with those stones that will soon be flung at her?


No. There again, the Muslim postgrad down the corridor has a daughter
I've met a few times, out with her dad on her bike. Should I assume
she'll be abused and/or killed because of her father's religion, or
would I be safer to assume she'll grow up loved by her parents like most
(but not all) children, irrespective of their professed faith?

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
"Frank Olson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:Tv6kd.164687$Pl.6231@pd7tw1no...
> "Ogg Oggibly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Frank Olson" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> message news:md_jd.157594$%k.9002@pd7tw2no...
>>> "Ogg Oggibly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>>> I find it funny you can't bring yourself to condemn atrocities on women
>>>> and children for the apparent reason that they are being committed my
>>>> Muslims.
>>>
>>>
>>> "Action" - I lend financial support to Amnesty International (an
>>> organization that tries to intervene in such atrocities). If, by this
>>> action I have not adequately demonstrated my disgust at such atrocities
>>> perhaps you can suggest a more effective means (my *saying so* in this
>>> Group doesn't benefit anyone or anything but your own ego).

>>
>> Are you a feminist too? Do you also give money to that worthless NOW?
>> Does it give you a warm and fuzzy feeling.
>>
>> You want me to tell you how to condemn Muslim atrocities against women
>> and children that won't benefit anyone?
>>
>> As Ed Dolan would say - You are ****ed up.
>>
>> As Arnold would say - You are a girly man.
>>
>> Ogg O

>
>
> And you are??? Let's see... another "hypocritical Republican"?? You and
> Mr. Ed are a match "made in Minnesota" (Mr. Dolan's version of "heaven on
> earth").
>

Hypercritical Republican.

As far as Minnesota goes, well everybody has to be somewhere.

Being confined to Earth, I make an effort to spend as much time as possible
in its temperate zones.

Ogg O

Sig. - Support Howard Dean for Democrat National Party chairman.
 
"Frank Olson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:7r6kd.166631$%k.43043@pd7tw2no...
> "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...

[...]
>> If you gave a damn about the evil in the world being caused by Islamic
>> extremists, you would have voted for Bush.

>
> If you give a damn about the evils of Terrorism, you'd be "over there"
> fighting, not "over here" moaning.
>
>
>> But you don't, and so you didn't.

>
> Sure Ed... Sure...


It can't be easy being a liberal apologist for evil in the world. In other
times you would have spoken for the Soviets and other assorted communist
thug regimes and made excuses for them the same way as you do now for the
Islamic extremists. It is cowards and blackguards like you that will be the
death of the West - ever a traitor and a scoundrel.

Of those who thought the War On Terrorism was important, 80% voted for Bush.
Of those who thought moral values were important, 80% voted for Bush. Of
those who thought economic issues were important, 80% voted for Kerry. Now
you see why the whole world associates liberals with stupidity and evil.
They do not know how to vote on the important issues of our time. Instead
they give to worthless things like Amnesty International to salve their
guilty consciences when all they are doing is perpetuating evil in the world
by always voting wrong in elections.

Frank Olson - ever the eternal blockhead. But that is what you would expect
from a liberal pacifist who has fled to Canada. Let him stay in Canada until
death do they part. I do not consider him an American. He is French at
heart. He would be right at home in that perfidious nation of cowards and
scoundrels.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota
 
"Peter Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Ogg Oggibly wrote:
>
>> You seem hung up on not accepting the wide spread and condoned abuses of
>> women and children by Islam, Islamic governments, and Muslim clerics.

>
> Nowhere have I denied such things happen, what I have said is that you
> cannot simply say that such things are "Islam" in the wider sense of the
> hundreds of millions of Muslims and what the majority typically believe
> and how they typically behave, or pretend that it doesn't happen outside
> of Islam.


Yet, all those other millions of Muslims are strangely quiet about what is
happening in the world in the name of their religion. That is because they
understand it perfectly. That is what you have to explain - you confounded
blockhead!

Yet you do things like post a dictionary definition of a word
> to suggest that all those hundreds of millions of people are at war with
> me at the same time as denying you are persecuting a whole religion for
> the actions of extremists within their fold.


Dictionary definitions of words are what count since that is how the whole
world understands things. Other "definitions" are invariably nothing but
making excuses and trying to evade the truth.

>> The clock is ticking down on 13 year old Zhila Izad in Marivan, Iran.

>
> Oooooh, let's wring our hands a bit more to distract us from thinking
> about what the ghastly apologist is saying!
>
>> holy men will be casting their stones at her shortly. How do you think
>> it would feel to be killed by having large rocks hit you while you are
>> kneeling in a field.

>
> Appalling. But it won't be any better for a girl being stoned by Hindus
> than for a girl being stoned by Muslims. And that happens too. If you
> think it doesn't you're kidding yourself.


It is not happening in the West that I know of. Maybe that is because the
West is Christian and not Muslim - although that is changing more and more
with every passing year.

>> Why do you have such a HUGE PROBLEM admitting this is being done in an
>> Islamic Republic by Muslim clerics to a 13 year old girl whose 15 year
>> old brother got her pregnant thereby dishonoring her family.

>
> I don't have any such problem. But why do you persist in condemning a
> subset of such abusers (those that happen to be Muslim), rather than all
> of them?


Because the Muslims do not universally condemn the practice. They do not
speak out against it, any more than they do not speak out against Islamic
terrorism. On the contrary, they understand it perfectly. That is what you
have to explain - you confounded blockhead!

>> Have you written yet to comfort Zhila in her last days and to let her
>> know religion has nothing to do with those stones that will soon be flung
>> at her?

>
> No. There again, the Muslim postgrad down the corridor has a daughter
> I've met a few times, out with her dad on her bike. Should I assume
> she'll be abused and/or killed because of her father's religion, or would
> I be safer to assume she'll grow up loved by her parents like most (but
> not all) children, irrespective of their professed faith?


There are no group conflicts in the world according to this idiot from
Scotland. He knows as little about other cultures as he does about human
nature. It must be nice to be able to go through life being a perpetual
idiot. Now you see why I don't give a damn if fools like him manage to get
themselves murdered.

--
****ing Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota
 
"Frank Olson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:Tv6kd.164687$Pl.6231@pd7tw1no...
> "Ogg Oggibly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Frank Olson" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> message news:md_jd.157594$%k.9002@pd7tw2no...
>>> "Ogg Oggibly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>>> I find it funny you can't bring yourself to condemn atrocities on women
>>>> and children for the apparent reason that they are being committed my
>>>> Muslims.
>>>
>>>
>>> "Action" - I lend financial support to Amnesty International (an
>>> organization that tries to intervene in such atrocities). If, by this
>>> action I have not adequately demonstrated my disgust at such atrocities
>>> perhaps you can suggest a more effective means (my *saying so* in this
>>> Group doesn't benefit anyone or anything but your own ego).

>>
>> Are you a feminist too? Do you also give money to that worthless NOW?
>> Does it give you a warm and fuzzy feeling.
>>
>> You want me to tell you how to condemn Muslim atrocities against women
>> and children that won't benefit anyone?
>>
>> As Ed Dolan would say - You are ****ed up.
>>
>> As Arnold would say - You are a girly man.
>>
>> Ogg O

>
>
> And you are??? Let's see... another "hypocritical Republican"?? You and
> Mr. Ed are a match "made in Minnesota" (Mr. Dolan's version of "heaven on
> earth").


Ogg has got it right. You are a girly man. But I say you are ****ed up.
Hey - we are both right! You are not only a girly man, but you are also
****ed up. But I wonder if this isn't a redundancy. I mean, aren't all girly
men ****ed up? Therefore, it is most likely not necessary to say it both
ways. Just one way. Which do you prefer - girly man or ****ed up? Please get
back to me on this right away as I am up nights thinking about how to
reference you for the benefit of the others on this newsgroup. Girly man or
****ed up? Which is it going to be?

All of the above also applies with special force to another supreme asshole
living in Scotland by the name of Peter Clinch. He is on the same level as
Frank Olson of Canada. Maybe the two of them could get together and have a
love feast to see who could be the more cowardly in defending Islamic
extremists. The rest of us need to have pointed out to us for the umpteenth
time that these murdering scum who go by the name of Muslims are not really
all that bad and that we should learn to love the ****ing bastards in the
name of Christian charity and brotherly love, even while they are slitting
our throats. Speaking of throats, now please excuse me while I go to the
smallest room in my house and puke at the mere thought of Frank Olson and
Peter Clinch.

--
****ing Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota
 
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 13:32:08 -0600 "Edward Dolan"
used 67 lines of text to write in newsgroup:
alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent

>Ogg has got it right. You are a girly man. But I say you are ****ed up.
>Hey - we are both right! You are not only a girly man, but you are also
>****ed up. But I wonder if this isn't a redundancy. I mean, aren't all girly
>men ****ed up? Therefore, it is most likely not necessary to say it both
>ways. Just one way. Which do you prefer - girly man or ****ed up? Please get
>back to me on this right away as I am up nights thinking about how to
>reference you for the benefit of the others on this newsgroup. Girly man or
>****ed up? Which is it going to be?
>
>All of the above also applies with special force to another supreme asshole
>living in Scotland by the name of Peter Clinch. He is on the same level as
>Frank Olson of Canada. Maybe the two of them could get together and have a
>love feast to see who could be the more cowardly in defending Islamic
>extremists. The rest of us need to have pointed out to us for the umpteenth
>time that these murdering scum who go by the name of Muslims are not really
>all that bad and that we should learn to love the ****ing bastards in the
>name of Christian charity and brotherly love, even while they are slitting
>our throats. Speaking of throats, now please excuse me while I go to the
>smallest room in my house and puke at the mere thought of Frank Olson and
>Peter Clinch.
>
>--
>****ing Regards,
>
>Ed Dolan - Minnesota



BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!

Frank, you're not going to let him get away with that RU?


--
-Graham

Remove the 'snails' from my email
 
"Peter Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Ogg Oggibly wrote:
>
>> You seem hung up on not accepting the wide spread and condoned abuses of
>> women and children by Islam, Islamic governments, and Muslim clerics.

>
> Nowhere have I denied such things happen, what I have said is that you
> cannot simply say that such things are "Islam" in the wider sense of the
> hundreds of millions of Muslims and what the majority typically believe
> and how they typically behave, or pretend that it doesn't happen outside
> of Islam. Yet you do things like post a dictionary definition of a word
> to suggest that all those hundreds of millions of people are at war with
> me at the same time as denying you are persecuting a whole religion for
> the actions of extremists within their fold.
>
>> The clock is ticking down on 13 year old Zhila Izad in Marivan, Iran.

>
> Oooooh, let's wring our hands a bit more to distract us from thinking
> about what the ghastly apologist is saying!



Yeah. Wring your hands. Jerk.


>> holy men will be casting their stones at her shortly. How do you think
>> it would feel to be killed by having large rocks hit you while you are
>> kneeling in a field.

>
> Appalling. But it won't be any better for a girl being stoned by Hindus
> than for a girl being stoned by Muslims. And that happens too. If you
> think it doesn't you're kidding yourself.



I haven't heard of Hindus stoning anybody. I did about a five minute google
and didn't turn up anything other than a good number of Hindus that were
stoned to death by Muslims. If you know of recent Hindu stonings I would
appreciate you pointing me to them. I will show no reluctance to condemn
them.


>
>> Why do you have such a HUGE PROBLEM admitting this is being done in an
>> Islamic Republic by Muslim clerics to a 13 year old girl whose 15 year
>> old brother got her pregnant thereby dishonoring her family.

>
> I don't have any such problem. But why do you persist in condemning a
> subset of such abusers (those that happen to be Muslim), rather than all
> of them?



I thought I made that clear a while back. Give me a second and I will copy
and paste it here for you to read again.

"Let me make this clear to you. I AM NOT EQUATING THE ACTIONS OF EXTREMISTS
MUSLIMS, ISLAMIC GOVERNMENTS AND CLERICS WITH ALL MUSLIMS."

"I have no problem condemning abuses of women and children be it my next
door
neighbor, a local priest, a Hindu, or an Islamic State/Nation, or whoever."


>
>> Have you written yet to comfort Zhila in her last days and to let her
>> know religion has nothing to do with those stones that will soon be flung
>> at her?

>
> No. There again, the Muslim postgrad down the corridor has a daughter
> I've met a few times, out with her dad on her bike. Should I assume
> she'll be abused and/or killed because of her father's religion, or would
> I be safer to assume she'll grow up loved by her parents like most (but
> not all) children, irrespective of their professed faith?
>



No the female child of the post graduate Muslim (why do you always feel the
need to mention the educational attainments of your Muslim acquaintances) is
relatively safe in Scotland which happens, I believe to be a predominately
Christian country which would deal harshly with the crime of stoning. But
let's move that educated female child, who grew up among the Scottish
infidels, to a Islamic Republic and her chances of being stoned to death go
from nil to the real possibility of becoming a Zhila. It is this reality
that your brain seems not to be able to accept. If you believe in civilized
human rights, you should give thought, if that is possible, to supporting
the separation of mosque and state.

Ogg O

Sig - In the worst tragedy in seven years at the annual Muslim pilgrimage,
244 worshippers were trampled to death and hundreds more were hurt beneath a
crush of people making their way to a ritualistic stoning of the devil.

If this had been the Devil's doing he would have arranged for a stone
building collapse on them.
 
"Frank Olson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:Vi6kd.164482$nl.73341@pd7tw3no...
> "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>> The Koran is what anyone wants to make of it. So is the Bible. Christians
>> stopped making a horror of the Bible several centuries ago.

>
> Oh?? Really?? How do you explain the Biblical "horrors" of this century
> then?? David Koresh. Jim Jones. Bountiful.


The horrors of this century are all being committed by Muslims. The horrors
of the last century, which you reference, were very small cults, aberrations
of Christianity. However, the main horrors of the last century were
committed by leftist ideologues, like ****** and Stalin and Mao, etc. In
other words, they were like you that way since you are also nothing but a
leftist ideologue.

>> The Muslims are still making a horror of their Koran.

>
> So are people that espouse Christianity.


Not right now today they aren't.

>> "Islam" (as a religion) is open to interpretation just as
>>> Chrisianity is. God gave us the ability to reason and the freedom to
>>> interpret His Word. Individuals that choose to "spin" that Word abound.
>>> "Extremists" exist in *every* faith. You can't condemn an entire people
>>> because of the actions of a few insane individuals.

>>
>> The very great numbers of Muslims who are choosing to interpret their
>> religion one way as opposed to another way are never just a few, but
>> rather constitute the vast majority in various regions of the world, most
>> particularly in the Middle East.

>
> And this premise is based on what statistical evidence??


The great statistic of believing what you see with your own two eyes.

>>>> The same goes for Tom Sherman who prefers to bash Christianity and
>>>> refer us to cartoon sites making jokes of hanging women and stoning
>>>> children in lieu of condemning these atrocities.
>>>
>>> Islamic fundamentalism isn't responsible for these atrocities. Men (and
>>> even some women) are.


But all those men (and women) turn out to be Muslims. Most peculiar? Or just
coincidental?

>> It is precisely and exactly Islamic fundamentalism that is indeed
>> responsible for the atrocities that Muslims are committing in the world
>> today. What men think matters and religious thought gone astray is just
>> as dangerous as any other kind of thought gone astray, maybe more so.

>
> You obviously don't know how a "fundamentalist" interprets the Quran.


Sure I do. It is a simple religion for simple people. Anyone who is not an
idiot like you can understand it.

>>>> We've already covered the point there is not much you can do about what
>>>> is happening in other counties. As I told you earlier at least you
>>>> could speak up, take a stand, and condemn the abuse. You could even do
>>>> that now if wished.
>>>
>>> I've always believed that "actions are louder than words". I find it
>>> funny that people like you (and Mr. Dolan) would "insist" I "take a
>>> stand" or condemn a certain action (or religion) to prove I'm "worthy"
>>> or "a patriotic American". I'm one voice in a cosmic fugue (perhaps
>>> not as strident as Mr. Dolan's, but at least I'm not horribly "off
>>> key").

>>
>> You are an apologist for a religion that is an abomination. To equate
>> Islam with Christianity is your biggest mistake.

>
> I *never* have "equated" one with the other.


You do nothing but that. You are doing it in this present post of yours.
Muslims commit murders, so do Christians. Blah, blah, blah. How tiresome!

>> One has evolved into a universal religion worthy of all mankind and the
>> other has never evolved and is suited only for savages.

>
> And you sir are blind. I'm surprised actually. I thought you capable of
> at least a semblance of intelligence.


Flattery will get you nowhere with me. You must appeal to my intellect if
you would get through to me.

>> Ogg has already shown to you what they are capable of when it comes to
>> their treatment of women.

>
> Ogg has shown me what *men* are capable of. *Men* are capable of the same
> thing in North America (and they're not necessarily Muslim either).


Nope, we Christians and other civilized types do not stone anyone, let alone
little girls, for having "dishonored" some male ape with a bit of sexual
experimentation. Frank, you g.d. blockhead, you are a ****ing idiot and I am
really getting fed up with you. You may yet force me to go to a dictionary
of invective to get some new names to call you. Just calling you an idiot
doesn't do justice to what you are.

>> 9/11 has shown the entire world what they are capable of in their
>> treatment of non-Muslims - and all in the name of their religion.

>
> 9/11 demonstrated what a few sick twisted individuals are capable of when
> working in concert. I'm sure you'll continue to "extol their bravery",
> but the bottom line is they were fanatics as well as Terrorists.
> Reasonable men do not strap 10 lbs of Semtex to their toros and walk up to
> a bus load of kids to blow it up. You should read a bit more on the
> psychology the Terrorists employ at their so called "training camps". The
> men and women that "voluteer" themselves for immolation are not rational
> beings.


Men who are religious fanatics do exactly what we see them doing. Today it
is only Muslims who embody this degree of fanaticism. They are not crazy and
they are brave and courageous. They are giving their lives for a cause that
they believe in.

Time to wake up Frank and touch reality before you find yourself flying
through the ether, just another victim of a "sick twisted individual." Now
please excuse me while I go to the smallest room in my house and puke while
I think of you and your ****ed up philosophy.

>> It is their despicable religion that motivates them in almost everything
>> they think and do.

>
> The Christian faith has been responsible for more atrocities than I can
> list here. But do go on...


But not lately. And lately is all I care about at the moment.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota
 
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 14:15:46 -0600 "Edward Dolan"
used 138 lines of text to write in newsgroup:
alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent

>You may yet force me to go to a dictionary
>of invective to get some new names to call you. Just calling you an idiot
>doesn't do justice to what you are.



http://www.mikegallay.com/prisspec.html



--
-Graham

Remove the 'snails' from my email
 
"Edward Dolan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

<snip>
> Note how old Pete here does not want to talk about >Muslims, who at the
> moment are committing all the atrocities in the world.

<snip>

Apparently neither does his girlfriend who doesn't want to talk about what
is going on in her homeland. Or maybe like Peter she is apathetic about the
Jihad declared in Amsterdam and feels its just another isolated incidence by
some bad apples whose motivations are of no interest or consequence.

Ogg O
 
"Frank Olson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:7r6kd.166631$%k.43043@pd7tw2no...
> "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> >> "Action" - I lend financial support to Amnesty International (an
> >> organization that tries to intervene in such atrocities). If, by this
> >> action I have not adequately demonstrated my disgust at such atrocities
> >> perhaps you can suggest a more effective means (my *saying so* in this
> >> Group doesn't benefit anyone or anything but your own ego).

> >
> > You voted wrong in the election of Nov. 2, of that I have no doubt.

>
> Supposition. You don't know how I voted. For your info, Bush is a lot

more
> "friendly" to Canada regarding soft-wood lumber and other trade issues

than
> Kerry. You want to tell us again how you imagine I voted??


John Parker/Teresa Gutierrez or Roger Calero/Arrin Hawkins?

Hey here's who Ed voted for, someone from his state and I'm sure Ed likes
that beret

http://www.politics1.com/ind04.htm#harens
 
"G. Morgan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 14:25:53 GMT "Frank Olson"
> used 42 lines of text to write in newsgroup:
> alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
>
> >Quoted in it's entirety from an article submitted by Shanu Wahid in

response
> >to this:

>
>
> I have nothing of value to add to that. I just wanted to be the one
> to take this thread to *500* posts!
>
>
> --
> -Graham


Why is that any different from any of your other posts? :)
 
Mr. Ed Dolan wrote:

> ...
> Of those who thought the War On Terrorism was important, 80% voted for Bush.
> Of those who thought moral values were important, 80% voted for Bush....


So people are ignorant. What else is new?

--
Tom Sherman - Greater QCA
"Use your head, Mr. Ed" – Slugger
 
Ogg Oggibly who? wrote:

> ...
> I have no problem condemning abuses of women and children be it my next door
> neighbor, a local priest, a Hindu, or an Islamic State/Nation, or whoever....


So you will condemn the killing of children in Iraq by the US military
and Palestinian children by the IDF?

--
Tom Sherman - Greater QCA
 
G. Morgan wrote:

> On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 18:44:29 -0600 "Tom Sherman"
> used 23 lines of text to write in newsgroup:
> alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
>
>
>>But hey, it is okay to kill tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi's in the
>>name of neo-imperialism.

>
>
> What is it with "neo" being thrown around everywhere lately?
> Neo-conservatives, now neo-imperialism. Did Foxnews and CNN get
> together to create a neo-word-order? I prefer to call a spade a spade
> (oh ****, I forgot to whom I was replying to).
>
> To answer your question though, the innocent Iraqi's are "collateral
> damage".


"Collateral damage" - there is a euphemism!

Why not call it what it is - unintentional homicide in an action that
meets the "just war" criteria, and in case such as Iraq, murder.

--
Tom Sherman

"To hell with Bush, he is another Mongol in a line of invaders who have
destroyed Iraq." - Mohammed al-Jubouri.
 
Edward Dolan wrote:

> "G. Morgan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 18:44:29 -0600 "Tom Sherman"
>>used 23 lines of text to write in newsgroup:
>>alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
>>
>>
>>>But hey, it is okay to kill tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi's in the
>>>name of neo-imperialism.

>>
>>What is it with "neo" being thrown around everywhere lately?
>>Neo-conservatives, now neo-imperialism. Did Foxnews and CNN get
>>together to create a neo-word-order? I prefer to call a spade a spade
>>(oh ****, I forgot to whom I was replying to).
>>
>>To answer your question though, the innocent Iraqi's are "collateral
>>damage".

>
>
> Graham has got it exactly right, but that is something liberals like Mr.
> Sherman will never grasp because they are opposed to war - period! Better
> that evil should exist in the world forever than that anyone should ever do
> anything decisively about it - like going to war. No, they would have us
> palavering about the evil in the world at the UN until the end of time.
>
> But it is debatable just how "innocent" anyone is in the world also. I would
> say there are degrees of guilt. The Iraqis allowed themselves for a variety
> of reasons to be ruled by a tyrant. This normally does have consequences not
> just for the tyrant but for the subjects of the tyrant too. But all in all,
> the Iraqi's got off very light due to American forbearance. Most conquered
> peoples are treated the way the Nazis treated the peoples they conquered in
> the course of WW II. But Mr. Sherman probably thinks Americans are not any
> better than Nazis. After all, war is war.


That is very similar to the justification given by Usama bin Laden for
attacking the US - after all we are responsible for the actions of our
government - even if is put in place by rigged elections.

--
Tom Sherman

"Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon the
nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those
conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and
refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by
convince himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better
sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception." - Mark
Twain
 
Mark Leuck wrote:

> "Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>Edward Dolan wrote:
>>
>>
>>>...The fact is that the poor in this country
>>>live better than do the poor in any other country in the world including
>>>Europe's poor....

>>
>>Mr. Dolan opens his mouth and removes all doubt of his willful
>>ignorance. How is being homeless, hungry, and without medical care
>>better than having the provision of housing, food and medical care
>>guaranteed.
>>
>>This has to be one of the most idiotic things Mr. Dolan has ever
>>written, which is saying a lot.
>>
>>--
>>Tom Sherman - Greater QCA
>>Vote Ed Dolan for Village Idiot

>
>
> BTW Here's a followup to what you say about the homeless, San Francisco
> spends almost 200 million for an estimated 9,000 to 15,000 homeless in the
> city, if we take the 15,000 figure (given by homeless advocates who usually
> inflate the figure) simple math shows the local goverment spends approx.
> $13,333 per homeless individual which is more than the current poverty rate
> in many other states, it also tells you one reason WHY they are homeless to
> begin with, people tend to follow the money
>
>
> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2003/11/30/MNGIK3BE671.DTL&type=printable


If you believe that people become homeless for the money, you truly are
insane.

--
Tom Sherman
 
Mark Leuck wrote:

> "Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>Edward Dolan wrote:
>>
>>
>>>...The fact is that the poor in this country
>>>live better than do the poor in any other country in the world including
>>>Europe's poor....

>>
>>Mr. Dolan opens his mouth and removes all doubt of his willful
>>ignorance. How is being homeless, hungry, and without medical care
>>better than having the provision of housing, food and medical care
>>guaranteed.
>>
>>This has to be one of the most idiotic things Mr. Dolan has ever
>>written, which is saying a lot.
>>
>>--
>>Tom Sherman - Greater QCA
>>Vote Ed Dolan for Village Idiot

>
>
> Oddly enough Mr Dolan is correct on this one, the US government has this
> habit of raising the poverty limit whenever statistical numbers become
> lower, in other words what is considered poverty today is nothing like it
> was back in the 30's. These days you can have basic housing, cars etc and
> still be considered within the poverty level. (I know this because I was
> once in that category)
>
> http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/04poverty.shtml
>
> If you notice the minimum yearly earnings required to qualify ($9,310) for
> one individual is FAR greater than what people make in MOST other countries
> in the world. Also if you consider all the various government and private
> organizations in the US that deal with the homeless, hungry etc one has no
> excuse for not being able to find help if they need it which often isn't
> available in many other countries
>
> Flame me if you will but the stats do not support your opinion. You can
> argue HOW it is being administered but not that it isn't available, now if
> you don't mind I must throw up for agreeing with Mr Ed


So when was the last time you were homeless, Mr. Leuck? When was the
last time you had to wait when ill until you were sick enough to require
hospitalization to get medical care? Have you ever spent time in a
shelter? Is that really better than having guaranteed housing, medical
care, and income above the poverty level?

Are children living in a government provided PRIVATE apartment with
adequate clothing, medical care, and food really worse off than homeless
children sleeping in a car or crowded shelter in the US are?

This has to be one of the most stupid and/or ignorant claims I have ever
seen.

--
Tom Sherman

"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of
those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have
too little." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt
 
Mr. Ed Dolan wrote:

> "Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>Edward Dolan wrote:
>>
>>
>>>...The fact is that the poor in this country
>>>live better than do the poor in any other country in the world including
>>>Europe's poor....

>>
>>Mr. Dolan opens his mouth and removes all doubt of his willful ignorance.
>>How is being homeless, hungry, and without medical care better than having
>>the provision of housing, food and medical care guaranteed.
>>
>>This has to be one of the most idiotic things Mr. Dolan has ever written,
>>which is saying a lot.

>
>
> I do not see any poor people starving in the streets. Until I do I will not
> worry excessively about them. We have welfare programs to pick up those who
> fall by the wayside.


If Worthington is like many small towns in the US, the police pick up
homeless people and drop them off in a larger city.

There are plenty of homeless people in the US. And the government
provided benefits are not enough to live on properly, or to even rent an
apartment (it is hard to get hired when one is homeless).

--
Tom Sherman
"Use your head, Mr. Ed" – Slugger