Driver to drive?

[John Fields]

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 16:11:07 GMT, Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com>
wrote:

Dirk Bruere at Neopax wrote:
John Fields wrote:

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 15:24:57 GMT, Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com
wrote:


Squeezing jello in Iraq
By Scott Ritter



---
Scott Ritter is a traitorous son of a bitch who should be shot.


On the grounds that he was right and Bush was wrong...


If you ever have to go into battle, I guarantee that Ritter is the kind
of man you want in charge- not those political bullshitters in the
administration- who have been wrong about every damned projection they
have made so far- proven total idiots and incompetents. Remember, Bush
is a dangerous idiot and liar.

---
If I ever went into battle I'd want someone in charge who was as
willing to get behind his commander in chief and follow his orders as
he would expect me to get behind him and follow his.

I would _certainly_ not want some opinionated son of a bitch up there
telling me that there's no way that I'm going to win the fight that
I'm being sent to risk my life on.

But you seem to be well versed in military matters, and you must know
that we're at war right now, so why are you supporting that traitor
and his seditious behavior?

--
John Fields

 

[John Fields]

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 16:03:37 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax
<dirk@neopax.com> wrote:

John Fields wrote:

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 15:24:57 GMT, Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com
wrote:


Squeezing jello in Iraq
By Scott Ritter


---
Scott Ritter is a traitorous son of a bitch who should be shot.

On the grounds that he was right and Bush was wrong...

---
On the grounds that we're at war and by his traitorous actions he's
aiding and abetting the enemy.

--
John Fields

 

[John Fields]

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 16:41:01 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax
<dirk@neopax.com> wrote:

At war?
I thouigh Bush declared victory some time last year...

---
Do you know the difference between a battle and a war?

--
John Fields

 

[Paul Burridge]

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 15:58:36 GMT, Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com>
wrote:

They sound like ideal candidates for road checkpoint duty. The
terrorists released a video of that suicide bombing that killed three of
the Black Watch- it was not pretty. The terrorist came up on the scene
after the British left- filmed large areas of blood stained sand and a
forearm and hand the British left behind.

I have nothing but respect for *all* the coalition troops - aside from
those c*nts in Abu G'raib, of course. "Lions led by donkeys" - that's
what they are. And the Bush 'n' Bliar show are the donkeys.
--

"What is now proved was once only imagin'd." - William Blake, 1793.

 

[John Larkin]

After they clean out Fallujah, maybe some of them can help out in The
Hague.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3998347.stm


John

 

[Paul Burridge]

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 10:43:46 -0600, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 16:41:01 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax
dirk@neopax.com> wrote:


At war?
I thouigh Bush declared victory some time last year...

---
Do you know the difference between a battle and a war?

Isn't it best to wait until you've finally won the war before you
install a new government?? (even if it *is* only a puppet one).

--

"What is now proved was once only imagin'd." - William Blake, 1793.

 

[Rolavine]

From: John Fields jfields@austininstruments.com

---
On the grounds that we're at war and by his traitorous actions he's
aiding and abetting the enemy.


This attitude is absurd. If we are making mistakes then it is the duty of our

'free' press to inform us of it. It is obvious to anyone following the news,
that most of the insurgents and their leaders have left Fallujah. Ridder is
only telling us that we are fighting a Gurerrilla war in Iraq, with our
military planners being out of touch with that. Again, this was obvious to
anyone!

On John's grounds we would have to suspend the first amendment whenever we find
ourselves in a conflict. If that were the case the enemy would have won even
before the first shot was fired.

Dissent in America has as much to do with our sucess as agreement, maybe even
more.

And this is a lesson from 7th grade civics!

Rocky

 

[Paul Burridge]

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 08:47:34 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote:

After they clean out Fallujah, maybe some of them can help out in The
Hague.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3998347.stm

"We are living in an increasingly explosive world"

- Me (two minutes ago)


--

"What is now proved was once only imagin'd." - William Blake, 1793.

 

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

John Fields wrote:

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 16:41:01 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax
dirk@neopax.com> wrote:



At war?
I thouigh Bush declared victory some time last year...


---
Do you know the difference between a battle and a war?

I seem to have missed the declaration of war.

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

 

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Paul Burridge wrote:

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 04:49:20 GMT, Rich The Philosophizer
null@example.net> wrote:


On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 20:42:03 +0100, Frithiof Andreas Jensen wrote:


"Fred Bloggs" <nospam@nospam.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:418D5DA1.1010609@nospam.com...

Apparently this is still practiced:

"However, a small number of Orthodox rabbis advocate an ancient practice
in which the circumciser sucks

And I thought the Catholic Church had problems ;-))

Nah, they only drink the blood and eat the flesh of some dead guy, who
also happens to be their main icon.

God Forbid they should ever accidentally get their mouth near the
mutilated penis of a helpless baby!


They're not *still* engaging in this odious 'practice' are they? I
thought we'd agreed to ban it. Why hasn't our edict outlawing this
Satanic abuse been observed?

Makes the term 'cocksucking Jew' quite accurate in some cases eh?
Stands right besides 'Xian bugger'.

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

 

[John Larkin]

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 16:59:17 +0000, Paul Burridge
<pb@notthisbit.osiris1.co.uk> wrote:

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 08:47:34 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote:


After they clean out Fallujah, maybe some of them can help out in The
Hague.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3998347.stm

"We are living in an increasingly explosive world"

- Me (two minutes ago)

In the big picture, probably not. Megadeath wars are actually fading
away.


After WWI, we figured wars were over, so we disarmed.

After WWII, we wanted to disarm, but the Russkies stopped us.

After the Cold War, we started to disarm, but the Muslims stopped us.

If the Muslim world ever settles down to something like democracy and
peace, what's next?

John

 

[ChrisGibboGibson]

Fred Bloggs wrote:

[snip]

and a
forearm and hand the British left behind.

A brit soldier would have eaten that.

Gibbo

 

[John Fields]

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 18:27:13 +0100, "Frank Bemelman"
<f.bemelmanx@xs4all.invalid.nl> wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> schreef in bericht
news:krf4p0dqejsl8spojik6bggh08jpj9vqdj@4ax.com...
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 16:11:07 GMT, Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com
wrote:



Dirk Bruere at Neopax wrote:
John Fields wrote:

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 15:24:57 GMT, Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com
wrote:


Squeezing jello in Iraq
By Scott Ritter



---
Scott Ritter is a traitorous son of a bitch who should be shot.


On the grounds that he was right and Bush was wrong...


If you ever have to go into battle, I guarantee that Ritter is the kind
of man you want in charge- not those political bullshitters in the
administration- who have been wrong about every damned projection they
have made so far- proven total idiots and incompetents. Remember, Bush
is a dangerous idiot and liar.

---
If I ever went into battle I'd want someone in charge who was as
willing to get behind his commander in chief and follow his orders as
he would expect me to get behind him and follow his.

Ah, you want a puppet on a string in charge, and be a puppet
on a string yourself too.

---
That's what being in the military is all about, Frank. You don't get
to vote on whether you'll do what you're told to or not, you just do
it, or else you don't and you accept the consequences. We don't
currently have a draft in effect, so it's all pretty simple really
since the rules are all written down and if you read them before you
enlist you can decide right then whether you want to join up or not.
Or have you heard differently?
---

Doesn't sound like you at all, really.

---
Maybe it isn't...
---

You have no fucking brains at all, now do you, when there is
the tiniest amount of critism about this war. You're a piece
of programmed american patriotic shit, no less.

---
And you, Frank?

When there's the tiniest amount of disagreement with what you consider
the right way for the US to conduct its military affairs you're more
than ready to denounce anyone who dares to have an opinion different
from yours.

Wait 'til a few more of your van Goghs get murdered for daring to
voice anti-Islamic points of view and maybe, just maybe, you'll begin
to realize that this isn't an American war, it just seems like it is
because most of the rest of you chickenshits would rather just sit
around and pretend that you're so above-it-all while someone else does
your dirty work for you.

"Sorry, Uncle Sam, we can't help you right now but call us when the
bread is baked and we'll help you to eat it"...

--
John Fields

 

[Steve Taylor]

John Fields wrote:

If it was obvious to _anyone_ then I'm sure it was also obvious to our
military planners who, I daresay, have access to better intelligence
than you or I or Ritter.

All in all, are you sure you can trust military or any other kind of
"intelligence" gathering that was so "successful" and "accurate" pre-war ?

Your military planners have this idea that superior firepower can win
hearts and minds. Scientific observation of the results suggests this is
wrong. So what next ?

Steve

 

[Steve Taylor]

Fred Bloggs wrote:

Frontline troops are 'unfit and illiterate'

I went into a public-'ouse to get a pint o'beer,
The publican 'e up an' sez, "We serve no red-coats here."
The girls be'ind the bar they laughed an' giggled fit to die,
I outs into the street again an' to myself sez I:

O it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, go away";
But it's ``Thank you, Mister Atkins,'' when the band begins to play,
The band begins to play, my boys, the band begins to play,
O it's ``Thank you, Mr. Atkins,'' when the band begins to play.

I went into a theatre as sober as could be,
They gave a drunk civilian room, but 'adn't none for me;
They sent me to the gallery or round the music-'alls,
But when it comes to fightin', Lord! they'll shove me in the stalls!

For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, wait outside";
But it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide,
The troopship's on the tide, my boys, the troopship's on the tide,
O it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide.

Yes, makin' mock o' uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an' they're starvation cheap;
An' hustlin' drunken soldiers when they're goin' large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin' in full kit.

Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy how's yer soul?"
But it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll,
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll.

We aren't no thin red 'eroes, nor we aren't no blackguards too,
But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;
An' if sometimes our conduck isn't all your fancy paints:
Why, single men in barricks don't grow into plaster saints;

While it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, fall be'ind,"
But it's "Please to walk in front, sir," when there's trouble in
the wind,
There's trouble in the wind, my boys, there's trouble in the wind,
O it's "Please to walk in front, sir," when there's trouble in the
wind.

You talk o' better food for us, an' schools, an' fires an' all:
We'll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don't mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow's Uniform is not the soldier-man's disgrace.

For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Chuck him out, the brute!"
But it's "Saviour of 'is country," when the guns begin to shoot;
An' it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' anything you please;
But Tommy ain't a bloomin' fool - you bet that Tommy sees!

Rudyard Kipling

 

[John Fields]

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 17:36:00 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax
<dirk@neopax.com> wrote:

John Fields wrote:

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 16:41:01 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax
dirk@neopax.com> wrote:



At war?
I thouigh Bush declared victory some time last year...


---
Do you know the difference between a battle and a war?

I seem to have missed the declaration of war.

---
http://www.brainyencyclopedia.com/encyclopedia/j/jo/joint_resolution_to_authorize_the_use_of_united_states_a.html

--
John Fields

 

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

John Larkin wrote:

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 16:59:17 +0000, Paul Burridge
pb@notthisbit.osiris1.co.uk> wrote:


On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 08:47:34 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote:


After they clean out Fallujah, maybe some of them can help out in The
Hague.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3998347.stm

"We are living in an increasingly explosive world"

- Me (two minutes ago)


In the big picture, probably not. Megadeath wars are actually fading
away.


After WWI, we figured wars were over, so we disarmed.

After WWII, we wanted to disarm, but the Russkies stopped us.

After the Cold War, we started to disarm, but the Muslims stopped us.

Bollocks.

If the Muslim world ever settles down to something like democracy and
peace, what's next?

Already lined up to be provoked in case the Moslems don't live up to their
neocon reputation - China.

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

 

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

John Fields wrote:

On 10 Nov 2004 16:58:35 GMT, rolavine@aol.com (Rolavine) wrote:


From: John Fields jfields@austininstruments.com

---
On the grounds that we're at war and by his traitorous actions he's
aiding and abetting the enemy.



This attitude is absurd. If we are making mistakes then it is the duty of our
'free' press to inform us of it.


---
It is the duty of the press to report factual matters, not to
propagandize, but that's not what we're talking about.

Ritter is an individual using the weight of the authority of his
_former_ position to sow the seeds of insurrection _now_.

And for what purpose? To get us out of Iraq? It ain't gonna happen.
To blow his own horn? Now we're probably getting close!
---


It is obvious to anyone following the news,
that most of the insurgents and their leaders have left Fallujah. Ridder is
only telling us that we are fighting a Gurerrilla war in Iraq, with our
military planners being out of touch with that. Again, this was obvious to
anyone!


---
If it was obvious to _anyone_ then I'm sure it was also obvious to our
military planners who, I daresay, have access to better intelligence
than you or I or Ritter. Such being the case, the reasoning behind

Like the WMDs you mean...

taking Fallujah may have been to deny to it to the guerrillas as a
convenient gathering place and to disperse them. But who knows for
sure? Certainly not you or I or Ritter.
---

I seem to be hearing an echo...
Like something I heard about 35yrs ago.

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

 

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

John Fields wrote:

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 17:36:00 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax
dirk@neopax.com> wrote:


John Fields wrote:


On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 16:41:01 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax
dirk@neopax.com> wrote:




At war?
I thouigh Bush declared victory some time last year...


---
Do you know the difference between a battle and a war?

I seem to have missed the declaration of war.


---
http://www.brainyencyclopedia.com/encyclopedia/j/jo/joint_resolution_to_authorize_the_use_of_united_states_a.html

I'm afraid that is *not* a declaration of war.

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org