EAGLE Netlist conversion

Frank Bemelman · Nov 5, 2004

"Mark Fergerson" <nunya@biz.ness> schreef in bericht
news:hAQid.45384$G15.6541@fed1read03...

Where does some fucking jumped-up wannabe prophet get off
blaming _me_ for a local warlord's inability to convince the
locals to build a society instead of continuing centuries of
idiotic Hatfield/McCoyism? Fucking braindead asshole Arafat
does _not_ deserve to die peacefully in his sleep.

Arafat has won a Nobel Prize for Peace. Would you care to
explain? It's not a prize you win for sitting around the
table just once.

Deaths since september 2000, look here:

http://www.geocities.com/tents444/counters.htm#bann

974 Isrealis, 3426 Palestines.

Who is killing who?

--
Thanks, Frank.
(remove 'x' and 'invalid' when replying by email)

Jim Thompson · Nov 5, 2004

On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 10:50:23 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> wrote:

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 09:23:28 -0700, Jim Thompson
thegreatone@example.com> wrote:

Just on the news...

Kerry concedes in call to Bush.

Daschle loses Senate race!

"It's a wonderful day in the neighborhood" ;-)

...Jim Thompson

And this is even funnier:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2109217/

John

I particularly liked....

"Have you not noticed that Americans don't give two shits what
Europeans think of us? Each email someone gets from some arrogant Brit
telling us why to NOT vote for George Bush is going to backfire, you
stupid, yellow-toothed pansies. ... I don't give a rat's ass if our
election is going to have an effect on your worthless little life. I
really don't. "

Another funny, on this mornings FoxNews network, paraphrased because I
was working and didn't catch it all for a few moments...

Democrats, having a meeting to decide why they lost the election,
decided it was because Bush fought a dirty campaign.

My view on that:

(1) I didn't see a single Kerry ad that wasn't an out-and-out lie.

(2) Kerry had a "plan", but never gave any particulars... I guess
expecting, "Elect me, then I'll tell you".

(3) Taxing anyone over $200K gets every small business owner in the
US... not too smart.

(4) Never answering any question until 24 hours later, so he could run
a poll.

(5) Why do leftists hate Texans?

(6) Looking at a Red/Blue map, looks like the Blues choose appearance
over substance... the whole core of the US went for Bush. New England
and the Left Coast look like a bunch of sick puppies.

(7) Looks to me like it's time to penalize the Blue states, and do
away with any deductions for state/city income taxes... stop the
leaching off of the core... Boston, New York, LA and SF deserve the
fruit of their seed ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice

480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax

Jim Thompson · Nov 5, 2004

On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 12:35:13 -0700, Mark Fergerson <nunya@biz.ness>
wrote:

[snip]

Fucking braindead asshole Arafat
does _not_ deserve to die peacefully in his sleep.

Mark L. Fergerson

480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax

Nov 5, 2004

Arafat has won a Nobel Prize for Peace. Would you care to
explain? It's not a prize you win for sitting around the
table just once.

So did Jimmy Carter. They both deserve the same fate.

Winning a Noble Prize doesn't mean jack, anywhere but in the media, and the
minds of those who are totally clueless.

Arafat is a murderer, and a terrorist, and deserves nothing but death. Go
ahead, call me anything you want. Apparently some people think the man only
came into the world scene ten years ago. Well guess what, he has been
slaughtering and teaching hate for longer than some folks on this list have
been alive.

Good riddance to him, and take Jimmy C with you.

John

Jim Thompson · Nov 5, 2004

On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 13:08:18 -0700, uvcceet@juno.com wrote:

Arafat has won a Nobel Prize for Peace. Would you care to
explain? It's not a prize you win for sitting around the
table just once.

So did Jimmy Carter. They both deserve the same fate.

Winning a Noble Prize doesn't mean jack, anywhere but in the media, and the
minds of those who are totally clueless.

Arafat is a murderer, and a terrorist, and deserves nothing but death. Go
ahead, call me anything you want. Apparently some people think the man only
came into the world scene ten years ago. Well guess what, he has been
slaughtering and teaching hate for longer than some folks on this list have
been alive.

Good riddance to him, and take Jimmy C with you.

John

480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax

Spehro Pefhany · Nov 5, 2004

On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 10:50:23 -0800, the renowned John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> wrote:

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 09:23:28 -0700, Jim Thompson
thegreatone@example.com> wrote:

Just on the news...

Kerry concedes in call to Bush.

Daschle loses Senate race!

"It's a wonderful day in the neighborhood" ;-)

...Jim Thompson

And this is even funnier:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2109217/

John

What an idiotic stunt that was.

"The world will endure four more years of idiocy, arrogance and
unwarranted bloodshed, with no benevolent deity to watch over and save
us. John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr.where are
you now that we need you?"

Would this be the first time a British newspaper has openly called for
the assassination of an American president?

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

Clarence · Nov 5, 2004

<uvcceet@juno.com> wrote in message
news:418bde48$1$woehfu$mr2ice@giganews.aros.net...

Arafat has won a Nobel Prize for Peace. Would you care to
explain? It's not a prize you win for sitting around the
table just once.

So did Jimmy Carter. They both deserve the same fate.

Winning a Noble Prize doesn't mean jack, anywhere but in the media, and the
minds of those who are totally clueless.

Arafat is a murderer, and a terrorist, and deserves nothing but death. Go
ahead, call me anything you want. Apparently some people think the man only
came into the world scene ten years ago. Well guess what, he has been
slaughtering and teaching hate for longer than some folks on this list have
been alive.

Good riddance to him, and take Jimmy C with you.

John

He while your at it, get those hate mongers in the Democratic Party too!

Frank Bemelman · Nov 5, 2004

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> schreef in
bericht news:ekono0l5tdtqmhadlp0fdakff4a3bvhhto@4ax.com...

On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 20:34:57 +0100, "Frank Bemelman"
f.bemelmanx@xs4all.invalid.nl> wrote:

"Mark Fergerson" <nunya@biz.ness> schreef in bericht
news:KCMid.45358$G15.36434@fed1read03...

Now, once again, I ask you to tell me what exactly the
9-11 events were supposedly a "righteous" response to.

Bin laded explained that quite clear in his latest video.

IMO it boils down to the continious interfering in the middle
east, such as financial aid to Isreal, and to Egypt perhaps.

Jimmy Carter purchased his Nobel Prize (and Arafat's, thrown into the
bargain) with six billion dollars worth of bribes to Israel and Egypt,
perhaps the most expensive handshake in history.

I didn't know that. Typical US response, if they don't fancy
a plain war, they start throwing money at it, or whatever it takes
to upset someone elses neighbourhood.

--
Thanks, Frank.
(remove 'x' and 'invalid' when replying by email)

Terry Given · Nov 5, 2004

Lou wrote:

"E. Rosten" <look@my.sig> wrote in message news:418B66F6.6080205@my.sig...

Jim Thompson wrote:

Fox News Reports Arafat Dead

Let us hope that his successor is peace-thinking.

...Jim Thompson

It would appear he's not dead yet. Whether the coma is permenant or not
still seems to be up for debate.

-Ed

Wishful thinking on some people's behalf OR shoddy reporting - as is usually
the case. Even as late as last night, there was news only of his "coma". One
did say he was "brain" dead.... which if that is the case, all but completes
his physical death. That is IF that is true. I did hear he was on Life
Support, but they didn't specify why, so if he isn't "brain" dead yet -
either, then he is not dead - yet! Many go on Life Support and live to tell
about it. While his age and perhaps "unknown" condition may dictate
otherwise in the end, we can't count him down and out until he is OUT.

I'm not blaming any one news organization for this screw up, but these
reporters REALLY need to report FACTS not BULL SHIT. I've seen reports of
incidents I was at as a Public Servant, and had to wonder if I was at the
same incident - they had it so pumped full of bull shit. I've come to rely
very little on many things said via the news until the facts bear themselves
out. This urgency to be first for ratings - SUCKS. I'd rate them first - IF
ACCURATE.
We hear enough bull shit in our lives without being force-fed more. Perhaps
they bled the "death" to create more turmoil. Self serving bastards.

hear hear. My first experience with journalistic "professionalism" was
as a teenager, when I came 2nd in a national maths competition, and was
interviewed/photographed for the local rag (the Daily Post). They got my
name, my age, my form (grade) and the competition wrong. Other than that
the story was brilliant.

I blame advertising. Because it prompts the need for ratings, which
prompts not only a plethora of seriously shit TV programming (I havent
turned my TV on for 3 weeks, other than to watch the news last night to
see what they said about Arafat, which was coma) but I feel is
responsible for some seriously crap journalism. Shit like 20/20, 60
minutes etc - most of the stories (us, oz, nz) are just nonsense, and
the meaty stories demonstrate a complete lack of understanding on the
journo's part. Maybe its simply a lack of competence - the bell curve
strikes again. Especially when you integrate the LHS of the bell curve,
(50%) then work out what portion of TV viewers occupy that portion
(75%?) ie the target market is stupid people. Who better to know what
they want than other stupid people.

Ban TV I say. Its all shit anyway. For fucks sake, people who think Ray
Romano is funny really shouldnt be allowed to vote. And if they stopped
breathing for 15 minutes or so, the national average IQ would skyrocket.

As to peace once he were to die... that remains to be seen. No one can tell
what the outcome may be. HOPEFULLY it will get better, but it's anyone's
guess. Maybe someone more rational could step up to the plate and offer to
talk OR - all hell could break loose. We'll find out soon enough. As for US
being over there, all we're there for are the Oil interests. Those countries
have been fighting since the dawn of man. The US is NOT going to stop
CENTURIES of hatred. Pumping billions into that region and military power
is - driving our economy to the poor house, killing off our soldiers and
getting US to be very hated. We need to step back and let them finish what
they have been doing - on their own, THEN go in and mop up.

It removes Sharons biggest stumbling block. Betcha there's another,
right behind him - and nothing really changes. We'll see.....

As for 9/11.... I don't know who all may have been involved, but it is said
many Saudi's were. Our so-called friends. With friends like that, who needs
enemies?

ayup. Odd that no-one in power in the US seems to be pointing fingers at
the Saudis though. Perhaps its all that oil....

Cheers
Terry

Mark Fergerson · Nov 5, 2004

Frank Bemelman wrote:

"Mark Fergerson" <nunya@biz.ness> schreef in bericht
news:hAQid.45384$G15.6541@fed1read03...

Where does some fucking jumped-up wannabe prophet get off
blaming _me_ for a local warlord's inability to convince the
locals to build a society instead of continuing centuries of
idiotic Hatfield/McCoyism? Fucking braindead asshole Arafat
does _not_ deserve to die peacefully in his sleep.

Arafat has won a Nobel Prize for Peace. Would you care to
explain? It's not a prize you win for sitting around the
table just once.

No, he was awarded that for not blowing up Stockholm.

Exactly _what_ has Arafat done to stop all the killing?
Nothing.

Deaths since september 2000, look here:

http://www.geocities.com/tents444/counters.htm#bann

974 Isrealis, 3426 Palestines.

Who is killing who?

Who gives a fuck? The "Palestinians" cannot build a
society anyway. If you choose to claim that Israel couldn't
either without massive U.S. aid, where were all the
"helpful" Arabs when the "Palestinians" were in need?
Covering their own asses and hoping the Jews would kill all
the "Palestinians", that's where.

Mark L. Fergerson

Jim Thompson · Nov 5, 2004

On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 11:08:08 +1300, Terry Given <my_name@ieee.org>
wrote:

[snip]

As for 9/11.... I don't know who all may have been involved, but it is said
many Saudi's were. Our so-called friends. With friends like that, who needs
enemies?

ayup. Odd that no-one in power in the US seems to be pointing fingers at
the Saudis though. Perhaps its all that oil....

Cheers
Terry

There _has_ been finger pointing at the Saudi's but I don't think it's
the oil so much as a stable stepping-off point to manage the
Middle-East that keeps us there. The biggest problem with the Saudi's
is that they are really an extremist Islamic country, and
surreptitiously support the terrorist. We ought to flatten them.

Figures for oil imports....

http://api-ec.api.org/filelibrary/May03imp.pdf

My understanding is that part of Bush's second term plan is to open up
Alaska... screw the greenies... full-speed ahead.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice

480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax

Nov 5, 2004

In <eRSid.4079$op3.155379@news.xtra.co.nz>, on 11/06/04 at 11:08 AM,
Terry Given <my_name@ieee.org> said:

ayup. Odd that no-one in power in the US seems to be pointing fingers at the
Saudis though. Perhaps its all that oil....

Oil is an easy mark for ragging on politicians. True, there is a lot of
"wink-wink" and "kiss the right butt" going on between the US and much of the
middle-east, but when we throw away the desire to scream and yell at each
other, and blame either left or right, there is one incontrovertable fact that
simply cannot be overlooked: We need access to the crude.

Blame Bush for kissing up, attack Clinton or doing something similar, it
matters not which side it is. What would we do if we pissed off the Arabs cut
us off tomorrow? Its not about Bush's cronies getting rich, its not about
going to war for oil, its truly about making certain our economy doesn't fall
on its arse. We don't get crude from Iraq, so its okay to beat up on them,
but.......

It could happen. Not likely, but it could happen. As we depend more and more
on other nations for just about everything, we are setting ourselves up for a
big fall if we don't toe the line with those upon whom we throw our trust and
dependence. Kind of flies in the face of the concept of "independence" doesn't
it?

John

Terry Given · Nov 5, 2004

Tom MacIntyre wrote:

On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 13:10:41 +1300, Terry Given <my_name@ieee.org
wrote:

Tom MacIntyre wrote:

On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 10:58:10 +1300, Terry Given <my_name@ieee.org
wrote:

Dennis M. O'Connor wrote:

"Watson A.Name - "Watt Sun, the Dark Remover"" <NOSPAM@dslextreme.com
wrote...

"Dennis M. O'Connor" <dmoc@primenet.com> wrote ...

"hamilton" <hamilton@deminsional.com> wrote...

Here is truth:
Conservatives want to control your life, but will let you keep your

money.

Liberals want to control your money, but will let you keep your

life.

What bullshit. Kerry is advocating a draft ("mandatory service")
for all young adults. No "Conservative" is doing that.

Umm, the draft's already mandatory. It's part of the law.

No, registration for the draft is mandatory, and only for men.
The draft itself is inactive. No one is being drafted NOW.

But Kerry proposed mandatory service for all high school students.
And Democrat Rep. Charles Rangel of NY pushed a bill in Congress
for mandatory military service.

Forced servitude to the state is a common thing in socialist countries,
so it is no surprise that the Democrats are pushing it.

And show me someone from either side that is willing to let
competent adults make their own decisions about what they
eat, drink, breath, smoke or inject into themselves !

To quote your own words, "> What bullshit."

I see no meaning in your response.

Is Israel a socialist country?

Just because something is a common thing in socialist countries, does
that mean that it can't happen in non-socialist countries? Is it the
defining thing that makes a country socialist?

Tom

reverse your argument, and apply it to your statement re. forced servitude.

To paraphrase you:
banning gay marriage is a common thing in islamic countries,
so it is no surprise that the Republicans are pushing it.

there is no causal relationship, its just pointless rhetoric.

No, it is pointing out that mutual exclusivity is rare.

this is quite correct (sorry for the screw up in which I mistook you for
DMO'C). My entire point is that the original argument (basically
socialist countries do it therefore dems are socialist) was stupid - for
exactly the reason you pointed out, and clarified nicely here. My
mis-reading the name led me to argue that DMO'C contradicted himself
when in fact he did not - you pointed out the fallacious argument.

I'll try to read harder next time....

Tom

Cheers

Terry

Nov 5, 2004

In <k00oo05cn5b6h054gp5m6h2u1f8gmp3aje@4ax.com>, on 11/05/04 at 03:42 PM,
Jim Thompson <thegreatone@example.com> said:

Figures for oil imports....

http://api-ec.api.org/filelibrary/May03imp.pdf

My understanding is that part of Bush's second term plan is to open up
Alaska... screw the greenies... full-speed ahead.

I'm in, but let's make sure we have sufficient before cutting off our nose to
spite our faces

I have always felt that giving away our independence to another nation was
treason, and its been committed by both sides, so there is plenty of blame to
go around.

John

Nov 5, 2004

In <ekono0l5tdtqmhadlp0fdakff4a3bvhhto@4ax.com>, on 11/05/04 at 12:31 PM,
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> said:

Jimmy Carter purchased his Nobel Prize (and Arafat's, thrown into the
bargain) with six billion dollars worth of bribes to Israel and Egypt,
perhaps the most expensive handshake in history.

And he handed the Panama Canal over to the Chinese, for no charge.

If we ever end up in a conflict, and our access to the Canal is cut off, let
us remember to send Jimbo on a ahead to see if he can get the keys back
........

John

Rich The Philosophizer · Nov 5, 2004

On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 12:35:13 -0700, Mark Fergerson wrote:

Rich Grise wrote:

On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 08:04:46 -0700, Mark Fergerson wrote:

Now, once again, I ask you to tell me what exactly the
9-11 events were supposedly a "righteous" response to.

Afghanistan, Lebanon, Palestine, to name a few.
....
Where does some fucking jumped-up wannabe prophet get off
blaming _me_ for a local warlord's inability to convince the
locals to build a society instead of continuing centuries of
idiotic Hatfield/McCoyism? Fucking braindead asshole Arafat
does _not_ deserve to die peacefully in his sleep.

Doesn't take much to trip your wire, does it?

Thanks,
Rich

Terry Given · Nov 5, 2004

R. Steve Walz wrote:

Terry Given wrote:

R. Steve Walz wrote:

Rich Grise wrote:

On Thu, 04 Nov 2004 02:54:53 +0000, R. Steve Walz wrote:

Charles Schuler wrote:

Here is truth:

Conservatives want to control your life, but will let you keep
your money.

---------------------
Nonsense.
Conservatives want to keep your wages so low that you can never
afford to oppose thempolitically, invest your money and keep the
interest for themselves, and control your life by extracting monthly
tribute, rent/mortgage, for property that by birthright you should
have inherited.

Nah. That's the nazis. Ordinary conservatives just want to make
sure that nobody's having any fun, since fun is a sin.

----------------------------
Lots of what fools call fun is not, it's merely their own brainwashed
self-destructiveness from their abuse as a child. But the religiously
superstitious are against ACTUAL fun, like sexuality, but they seem
to support "sins" that are self-destructive, as being somehow better
than those that are NOT!

Liberals want to control your money, but will let you keep your
life.

-------------------------
Liberals want to take the money from the wealthy to disempower them,
and give it BACK to you who actually WORKED for it!

Well, yeah, this is a very noble ideal, but exhorting the monied
to do the right thing has been shown, repeatedly, for thousands of
years, to be futile. Sigh.

----------------------------
The moneyed are a minority. I'm exorting the Majority!
Fully half of ALL wealth and property in the USA is owned by fewer
than 2% of the people, did you KNOW that? Beyond that, the top 25%
own or receive 80% of our gross national product!! Now how long should
the Majority tolerate that, when they could change it TOMORROW if they
wished. The only obstacle is over-coming the disinformation that this
Majority believes!

dont 100 individuals control more than 75% of the worlds wealth?

--------------------------------
Since it takes between 1% and 2% (it varies year to year) to own 50%
of the US wealth, that wouldn't be true.

I forget where I ran across those numbers, but the US is not all of the
worlds economy - not even half. But they still sound wrong.

Mind you 80% of the worlds food comes from 4 crops - potatoes, corn,
rice, wheat.

------------------------------
I don't see the relation.

If I was a terrorist, I'd go for biological warfare against those crops.
I'd also take out airliners with a bottle of rubbing alcohol and a
cigarette lighter (they burn really well).

The intersting thing about darwinism is that he based a lot of his > ideas
on economic theories of the time, which basically were the strong eat
the weak.

-------------------
The Myth called "Social Darwinism" is not in any way, shape, or form
based on Darwin's Evolution of Species or natural selection.

NO competent theory of evolution suggests that advanced species such
as ours evolved by the strongest guys winning out, or we'd all look
like Neanderthal SwarzeNazi's, and you know what happened to the
Neanderthals!! They ain't here now! Humans evolved to be chief species
by being a hundred times MORE group-cooperative and group-coordinated
than any other species on this rock, and NOT by fighting amongst
ourselves AT ALL! Our superiority resides in keeping the brightest of
our nerds supported by the collective so they could innovate. It
resides in everybody running at danger to one of our weak, not running
away from it. We scared the shit out of every predator on earth because
we did things they didn't evolve to counter, like running at them en
masse, throwing things, and stabbing with sharp spears all at once!
NO other animal does anything like that, the non-victims flee, they
don't counter-attack en masse instantly as we do!

thats just semantics - how you define "strong." Survival of the
fittest....not the strongest. Nevertheless Darwin did get many ideas
from prevailing economic theory. And I care not a jot about "social
darwinism" whatever that may be.

Conservatives want to shift all the money to their camp. They seldom have
even a single care for disadvantaged folks and have a smug and nasty
tendency to label them with disparaging terms.

------------------------------------
Yup. It's called organized crime, they just pay millions to keep the
people who own printing presses and TV stations from saying that!

Pretty much, yeah.

----------------------
Yup.

Shitty choice (between liberal and conservative), in my humble opinion. I
don't much care for either label and prefer to discuss politics with folks
who understand the scientific method and who like to analyze rather than
spout party line crap.

----------------------------------
This delusion on your part indicates that the Right has successfully
brainwashed and terrified you out of voting against them. The Rich
pay vast fortunes to convince people that nothing they can do will
help them, and that everyone who says they will is lying. It's very
important to despirit the slaves.

Well, the rich find themselves in the enviable position of controlling
all the resources. (BTW, I'd appreciate it if you'd refrain from
capitalizing "The rich". My name is Rich, and I'm not one of them.)

----------------------------
Okay ;-> The Wealthy only control what we LET them control. If a
Majority became fully aware of their power to stop LETTING them,
then they can change that overnight. The Majority can simply decide
the wealthy ownership of other's property is in abeyance, and it
will be so!

Alas, the majority are sheep.

----------------
Except for that once in a while when they're not, otherwise we would
all still be serfs superintended in the fields by knights on horseback.

The ratio of foxes to sheep is quite small. Soma = TV

Also it depends how ruthless the minority
are, although annihilating all the serfs leaves only the masters to do
the shitty jobs.

------------------
The ruthlessness factor is important only to the point where you cause
your serfs to become ruthless. Then you're a goner.

maybe. Israel/palestine looks exactly like this, but the wealthy,
well-armed Israelis can flatten the palestinians no matter how pissed
off the palestinians get - hence the almost 4:1 casualty rate, and the
israelis havent even got nasty. Can 10,000,000 angry serfs with sticks
beat one ruthless bastard with a nuke? nope.

I think the argument here is that, eventually, nasty rulers will give up
before they wipe out all the serfs. or their minions will decide that
the serfs are right, and help take out the dictator. Or perhaps the
dictator simply runs out of bullets.

But the likelihood is by the time you wipe out 1/2 the
serfs the rest will pretty much fall in line.

------------------------
There are not enough soldiers under a nobility who will be able to take
on a Majority, and any larger army has to be raised from those slaves
themselves! As in Russia, the kids in the tanks do not fire on their
parents!!

And de-spiriting the slaves is very, very easy for them, since they
have already stolen all of the resources that the slaves have access
to, except for Will.

-----------------------
And there lies the rub, Majority Will can ONLY be undermined by
disinformation!

And distribution of resources is trivial, in the face of
institutionalized murder.
Thanks,
Rich

-----------------------------
The Majority can do whatever it wants, as soon as it WANTS!
-Steve

If and only if it decides to switch its brain on. Luckily watching TV
and eating pizza is more attractive to the great unwashed.

Cheers
Terry

----------------------------------------
So far. Wait. Watch.

-Steve

only time can tell.

Cheers
Terry

Rich The Philosophizer · Nov 5, 2004

On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 13:12:15 -0700, uvcceet wrote:

In <418bd5a5$0$21106$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>, on 11/05/04 at 08:34 PM,
"Frank Bemelman" <f.bemelmanx@xs4all.invalid.nl> said:

"Mark Fergerson" <nunya@biz.ness> schreef in bericht
news:KCMid.45358$G15.36434@fed1read03...

Now, once again, I ask you to tell me what exactly the
9-11 events were supposedly a "righteous" response to.

Bin laded explained that quite clear in his latest video.

Yes, and by all means, we must accept what he said as the truth.

Well, it's just as likely to be true as anything anybody else
says about it.

Of course, that thought can't occur to an obedient minion. It
would be contrary to the programming.

Thanks,
Rich

Rich The Philosophizer · Nov 5, 2004

On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 12:31:02 -0800, John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 20:34:57 +0100, "Frank Bemelman"
f.bemelmanx@xs4all.invalid.nl> wrote:

"Mark Fergerson" <nunya@biz.ness> schreef in bericht
news:KCMid.45358$G15.36434@fed1read03...

Now, once again, I ask you to tell me what exactly the
9-11 events were supposedly a "righteous" response to.

Bin laded explained that quite clear in his latest video.

IMO it boils down to the continious interfering in the middle
east, such as financial aid to Isreal, and to Egypt perhaps.

Jimmy Carter purchased his Nobel Prize (and Arafat's, thrown into the
bargain) with six billion dollars worth of bribes to Israel and Egypt,
perhaps the most expensive handshake in history.

Well, personally, if I had 6 billion dollars to spend, I'd feel
much better about myself buying a peace prize than going on
unholy crusades.

Thanks,
Rich

Rich The Philosophizer · Nov 5, 2004

On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 22:36:32 +0100, Frank Bemelman wrote:

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> schreef in
bericht news:ekono0l5tdtqmhadlp0fdakff4a3bvhhto@4ax.com...
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 20:34:57 +0100, "Frank Bemelman"
f.bemelmanx@xs4all.invalid.nl> wrote:

"Mark Fergerson" <nunya@biz.ness> schreef in bericht
news:KCMid.45358$G15.36434@fed1read03...

Now, once again, I ask you to tell me what exactly the
9-11 events were supposedly a "righteous" response to.

Bin laded explained that quite clear in his latest video.

IMO it boils down to the continious interfering in the middle
east, such as financial aid to Isreal, and to Egypt perhaps.

Jimmy Carter purchased his Nobel Prize (and Arafat's, thrown into the
bargain) with six billion dollars worth of bribes to Israel and Egypt,
perhaps the most expensive handshake in history.

I didn't know that. Typical US response, if they don't fancy
a plain war, they start throwing money at it, or whatever it takes
to upset someone elses neighbourhood.

So, are you saying that death and destruction are better than
life and love?

Why does this not surprise me?

:-/
Rich

EAGLE Netlist conversion

Frank Bemelman

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Spehro Pefhany

Guest

Clarence

Guest

Frank Bemelman

Guest

Terry Given

Guest

Mark Fergerson

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Guest

Terry Given

Guest

Guest

Guest

Rich The Philosophizer

Guest

Terry Given

Guest

Rich The Philosophizer

Guest

Rich The Philosophizer

Guest

Rich The Philosophizer

Guest

Log in

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor