On May 14, 9:22 pm, dxAce wrote:
"ve3..." wrote:
On May 14, 6:24 pm, D Peter Maus wrote:
ve3... wrote:
There will be no unanswered insults. If you stop telling lies
about Canada, I will stop telling the truth about the US.

Funny. That's exactly what's happening from down here. Someone
got tired of the gratuitous insults from Canada, and took a 'no insult
unanswered' stance.

So, again, you're bitching because someone hit you back first.

Canadian insults stop, US insults will stop.

Your call.

I suppose you come by it honestly. When your PM levies personal
insults at our President, it kind of becomes national policy.

Get your facts right. Stephen Harper, the Prime Minister, has his
head so far up Bush's ass he needs assistants to hold his shoelaces.
Harper, a well-known neocon, can't call an election because his
ratings are too low. Please cite the occasion where Harper insulted
Bush.

And here we have it. History starts at a random point of
convenience. Go back one PM. The aide to Chretien that called Bush a
moron in an official memo. He resigned. Interestingly, however, he was
not fired by Chretien, nor was the remark retracted by the PM.

So, you get YOUR facts, straight, buckwheat. History doesn't
start with your entry into the fray. And you don't get to start a 'no
insult unanswered' retaliation when it was your countrymen who started
the insult fest first.

"Mii," and "MichaelMoore" have been taking gratuitous shots at
the US since long before you showed your handle here. Had you done your
own homework, gotten your own facts straight, you would have known that.
But then, you're Canadian, and beyond the reach of criticism, aren't you?

No insult unanswered, indeed.

I suppose you don't know that the Anti-US insults came across
the border for weeks unanswered before some members here started let no
insult go unanswered. But then, why would you. Everyone knows there are
no enemies on the Left...or to the North. That you are, by geography, if
not politics, beyond the reach of criticism. And that you must let no
insult go unanswered. If for no other reason than to assert your
righteousness.

No insult unaswered, indeed.

Arrogance in DNA. You let your countrymen lob shots across the
border, and then you object to the response with indignation.

"MOM, he hit me back first."

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""
First of all, I consider your calling me "buckwheat" a gratuitous
insult so you had better get ready for some "incoming."

Who gives a rats ass what *you* consider.

(1) You make a big fuss about "getting your facts right." Why don't
you follow your own advice? "Go back one PM." That would be John
Turner. If you are talking about Chretien, that's back TWO PM's. When
you say "your PM" I think it quite reasonable to think you are
referring to the present PM. And the aide was a "she" not a "he."
Great example of "getting your facts straight."

PM? Does that stand for PussyMan? In CanaDuhs case I guess it does.

(2) You say history starts at a random point of convenience.
Convenient to who? You?

Better him than a dumbass Canuck.

How far back do you want to go? Chretien
didn't like Bush. Diefenbaker didn't like Kennedy. King didn't like
Roosevelt.........

Seems like a pattern! Dumbass Canucks behaving like dumbass Canucks.

Go figure, I don't like dumbass Canucks.



Cartier thought the Jamestown settlers were trailer trash.

Wrong! Canucks are trailer trash.

So what?

You have to set the terms of reference at the beginning of the
discussion, not when you want to shift your argument.

My term of reference is that there seems to be an abundance of dumbass Canucks.

That's why I
ignored your previous rant about terrorists and Al-quieda about which
you objected.

Keep ignoring those folks and there will be a prayer rug in your sorry ass
future.

Aw, what was I thinking! You present is pretty sorry ass!

It had nothing to do with the topic we were discussing.
Please stay on topic and stop dragging red herrings across the thread.

(3) I admit that I didn't know about the early feud, but I speak for
myself so it is not relevant. I don't think Cato got a fair shake just
because he was Canadian and he knew nothing about the earlier feud but
some of the inhabitants of this site are close to psychotic and were
drooling at the prospect of a new victim.

Drooling? Isn't that what you psychotic Canucks spend a lot of time doing?
Drooling over the USofA.

To sum up: I will not initiate an insult but if you think I will
ignore one you have another think coming.

Run along now!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """"""""
VE3 insult return fact to DxEcch May 16 2007

Fact #2

"I would argue that the most serious threat to the United States is
not someone hiding in a cave in Afghanistan But our own fiscal
irresposibility."
David Walker, comptroller General of the Unied States...March 2007

"ve3..." wrote:

On May 14, 9:22 pm, dxAce wrote:
"ve3..." wrote:
On May 14, 6:24 pm, D Peter Maus wrote:
ve3... wrote:
There will be no unanswered insults. If you stop telling lies
about Canada, I will stop telling the truth about the US.

Funny. That's exactly what's happening from down here. Someone
got tired of the gratuitous insults from Canada, and took a 'no insult
unanswered' stance.

So, again, you're bitching because someone hit you back first.

Canadian insults stop, US insults will stop.

Your call.

I suppose you come by it honestly. When your PM levies personal
insults at our President, it kind of becomes national policy.

Get your facts right. Stephen Harper, the Prime Minister, has his
head so far up Bush's ass he needs assistants to hold his shoelaces.
Harper, a well-known neocon, can't call an election because his
ratings are too low. Please cite the occasion where Harper insulted
Bush.

And here we have it. History starts at a random point of
convenience. Go back one PM. The aide to Chretien that called Bush a
moron in an official memo. He resigned. Interestingly, however, he was
not fired by Chretien, nor was the remark retracted by the PM.

So, you get YOUR facts, straight, buckwheat. History doesn't
start with your entry into the fray. And you don't get to start a 'no
insult unanswered' retaliation when it was your countrymen who started
the insult fest first.

"Mii," and "MichaelMoore" have been taking gratuitous shots at
the US since long before you showed your handle here. Had you done your
own homework, gotten your own facts straight, you would have known that.
But then, you're Canadian, and beyond the reach of criticism, aren't you?

No insult unanswered, indeed.

I suppose you don't know that the Anti-US insults came across
the border for weeks unanswered before some members here started let no
insult go unanswered. But then, why would you. Everyone knows there are
no enemies on the Left...or to the North. That you are, by geography, if
not politics, beyond the reach of criticism. And that you must let no
insult go unanswered. If for no other reason than to assert your
righteousness.

No insult unaswered, indeed.

Arrogance in DNA. You let your countrymen lob shots across the
border, and then you object to the response with indignation.

"MOM, he hit me back first."

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""
First of all, I consider your calling me "buckwheat" a gratuitous
insult so you had better get ready for some "incoming."

Who gives a rats ass what *you* consider.

(1) You make a big fuss about "getting your facts right." Why don't
you follow your own advice? "Go back one PM." That would be John
Turner. If you are talking about Chretien, that's back TWO PM's. When
you say "your PM" I think it quite reasonable to think you are
referring to the present PM. And the aide was a "she" not a "he."
Great example of "getting your facts straight."

PM? Does that stand for PussyMan? In CanaDuhs case I guess it does.

(2) You say history starts at a random point of convenience.
Convenient to who? You?

Better him than a dumbass Canuck.

How far back do you want to go? Chretien
didn't like Bush. Diefenbaker didn't like Kennedy. King didn't like
Roosevelt.........

Seems like a pattern! Dumbass Canucks behaving like dumbass Canucks.

Go figure, I don't like dumbass Canucks.



Cartier thought the Jamestown settlers were trailer trash.

Wrong! Canucks are trailer trash.

So what?

You have to set the terms of reference at the beginning of the
discussion, not when you want to shift your argument.

My term of reference is that there seems to be an abundance of dumbass Canucks.

That's why I
ignored your previous rant about terrorists and Al-quieda about which
you objected.

Keep ignoring those folks and there will be a prayer rug in your sorry ass
future.

Aw, what was I thinking! You present is pretty sorry ass!

It had nothing to do with the topic we were discussing.
Please stay on topic and stop dragging red herrings across the thread.

(3) I admit that I didn't know about the early feud, but I speak for
myself so it is not relevant. I don't think Cato got a fair shake just
because he was Canadian and he knew nothing about the earlier feud but
some of the inhabitants of this site are close to psychotic and were
drooling at the prospect of a new victim.

Drooling? Isn't that what you psychotic Canucks spend a lot of time doing?
Drooling over the USofA.

To sum up: I will not initiate an insult but if you think I will
ignore one you have another think coming.

Run along now!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """"""""
VE3 insult return fact to DxEcch May 16 2007

Fact #2

"I would argue that the most serious threat to the United States is
not someone hiding in a cave in Afghanistan But our own fiscal
irresposibility."
David Walker, comptroller General of the Unied States...March 2007

You just don't get it, do you boy? Oh well, that's the dumbass Canuck way!

snipped the irrelevant and immature refuse...


VE3 insult return fact to DxEcch May 16 2007

Fact #2

"I would argue that the most serious threat to the United States is
not someone hiding in a cave in Afghanistan But our own fiscal
irresposibility."
David Walker, comptroller General of the Unied States...March 2007


If we weren't chasing them around those caves in Afghanistan, they would be
chasing you around your neighborhood. Hope you got your AK 47 locked and
loaded mr canadian. You really need to get your head out of the sand and
realize these guys are gonna kill you just because you're over here. They
don't care who you are. You should be GRATEFUL that OUR troops are in
Afghanistan keeping them in those caves.
B

On May 16, 2:00 pm, dxAce wrote:
"ve3..." wrote:
On May 14, 10:52 pm, D Peter Maus wrote:
ve3... wrote:
(3) I admit that I didn't know about the early feud, but I speak for
myself so it is not relevant.

I am not resposible for what someone else says on the site whether he
is a Canadian or not. I AM resposible for what I say and I make every
effort to tell the truth

So, history begins and ends with you.

The history of my postings begins with me.. how else could it be?

I had no idea you were so significant.

That's your opinion, not mine.

You may consider me properly awed.

You're odd alright.

It's not often that I find someone so determined to perpetuate a
bitchfest that they admit to not caring about the facts.

I challenge you to find one of my facts that is wrong.

Nice going.

You're welcome

"Mommy...he hit me back first."

Please get past the childish level.
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""""""""""""""

Your post does, however raise a question that I have been hunting for
because the thoughts are alien to Canadians. It is, pure and simple,
the American trait to discriminate which is based on the First
Amendment.
Europe, Britain, and Canada all have laws against discrimination.
It is unlawful to discriminate against a person because of race,
religion, national origin, etc. It does not even occur to a Canadian
that he would be discriminated against because of his national origin.
It's just not done. So that is why Canadians signing on to this
website, as they have a perfect right to do, are immediately attacked
by a local gang, who, I hasten to add, in no way represent the
friendly Americans I am used to.
Well boys, have your fun, because the Hate Speech laws currently
going through Congress, and they will pass, will make it Illegal to
speak against a person because of his national origin..All it would
take is a complaint, backed up by web evidence, to get an ambitious
Federal Prosecuting Attorney on your case.
The free-wheeling days of slurs, insults, and name-calling are
coming to a close. If I were you, I would weigh my words carefully in
future.

How does pointing out the fact that you're a dumbass Canuck equate to being
"Hate Speech"?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""
I would read the proposed bills in the Senate and House of
Representatives. If the US bills are the same as the Canadian and US
bills (they have the same authors) you will find out if you keep it
up. I will observe with interest

"ve3..." wrote:

On May 16, 2:00 pm, dxAce wrote:
"ve3..." wrote:
On May 14, 10:52 pm, D Peter Maus wrote:
ve3... wrote:
(3) I admit that I didn't know about the early feud, but I speak for
myself so it is not relevant.

I am not resposible for what someone else says on the site whether he
is a Canadian or not. I AM resposible for what I say and I make every
effort to tell the truth

So, history begins and ends with you.

The history of my postings begins with me.. how else could it be?

I had no idea you were so significant.

That's your opinion, not mine.

You may consider me properly awed.

You're odd alright.

It's not often that I find someone so determined to perpetuate a
bitchfest that they admit to not caring about the facts.

I challenge you to find one of my facts that is wrong.

Nice going.

You're welcome

"Mommy...he hit me back first."

Please get past the childish level.
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""""""""""""""

Your post does, however raise a question that I have been hunting for
because the thoughts are alien to Canadians. It is, pure and simple,
the American trait to discriminate which is based on the First
Amendment.
Europe, Britain, and Canada all have laws against discrimination.
It is unlawful to discriminate against a person because of race,
religion, national origin, etc. It does not even occur to a Canadian
that he would be discriminated against because of his national origin.
It's just not done. So that is why Canadians signing on to this
website, as they have a perfect right to do, are immediately attacked
by a local gang, who, I hasten to add, in no way represent the
friendly Americans I am used to.
Well boys, have your fun, because the Hate Speech laws currently
going through Congress, and they will pass, will make it Illegal to
speak against a person because of his national origin..All it would
take is a complaint, backed up by web evidence, to get an ambitious
Federal Prosecuting Attorney on your case.
The free-wheeling days of slurs, insults, and name-calling are
coming to a close. If I were you, I would weigh my words carefully in
future.

How does pointing out the fact that you're a dumbass Canuck equate to being
"Hate Speech"?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""
I would read the proposed bills in the Senate and House of
Representatives. If the US bills are the same as the Canadian and US
bills (they have the same authors) you will find out if you keep it
up. I will observe with interest

You do that, and I think you'll find that I'll be pointing out that you're a
dumbass Canuck for some time to come.

LMFAO at the dumbass yet again.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

On May 15, 10:00 pm, Telamon
wrote:
In article ,
D Peter Maus wrote:





ve3... wrote:
On May 12, 6:27 pm, Telamon
wrote:
Would you please stop the USA VS Canada crap posts.

Telamon
Ventura, California
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""
I know the truth hurts and you want it to all go away. It is simple.
Stop posting insults to Canada and I will stop replying. Please note
that all my posts have been provoked. I have much better things to do
but if an insult is posted, I will reply in kind.

Since Telamon doesn't post insults until insulted, your argument is
very much the 5 year old screaming, "Mom!--He hit me back FIRST."

Since this BS originated north of the border....if you stop, he will
have nothing to pursue. If you stop, Ace will have nothing to which me
might respond.

I know the truth hurts and you want desperately to be blameless,
but, it's simple....you're not.

Stop your gratuitous shots at the US, and the in-kind replies will
stop.

I suppose you come by it honestly. When your PM levies personal
insults at our President, it kind of becomes national policy.

Pretty hypocritical to live off the fat of our economy, while
insulting our officials. Especially in light of the US involvement in
thwarting the attack on a Canadian city.

Keep it up, and we'll send back Shatner.

I don't logically expect the Trolling idiots to stop this off topic
thread, I was hoping other normal people that post to the news group to
stop. Oh well.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""""'
This is pretty sloppy work. I expected better attention to detail from
you. You have listed four points that have been refuted and
unanswered, including one of your own. You have to read all the posts,
as I did, to get the complete pcture. I would suggest you consider
this as a first draft and review your material for a second draft.
If you decide to let this one stand, I will respond in three days.

On May 16, 2:00 pm, dxAce wrote:


How does pointing out the fact that you're a dumbass Canuck equate to being
"Hate Speech"?- Hide quoted text -
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""""""
CANADIAN HATE SPEECH LAW: Coming soon to a DA near you.
For the full summary Google "Canadian Hate Speech Law"
The section of interest (setion 13) is posted below.

Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act prohibis the
communicationby means of a telecommunication undertaking (including
the internet) of messages that are likely to expose a person to hatred
or contempt on the basis of:
race
national or ethnic origin
colour
religion
age
sex
sexual orientation
marital status
family status
disability
conviction for which a pardon has been granted.

Of course, the US version may use different wording, but the concepts
are the same in Europe and Britain. I haven't checked Australia.
Violations of the act are subject to the Criminal code. In the US they
would be felonies. Heavy s..t. Now you may have some kind of death
wish and want to take on a Federal prosecutor but I wouldn't want to
spend a year scurrying around corners looking out for Bubba.

"ve3..." wrote:

On May 16, 2:00 pm, dxAce wrote:


How does pointing out the fact that you're a dumbass Canuck equate to being
"Hate Speech"?- Hide quoted text -
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""""""
CANADIAN HATE SPEECH LAW: Coming soon to a DA near you.
For the full summary Google "Canadian Hate Speech Law"
The section of interest (setion 13) is posted below.

Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act prohibis the
communicationby means of a telecommunication undertaking (including
the internet) of messages that are likely to expose a person to hatred
or contempt on the basis of:
race
national or ethnic origin
colour
religion
age
sex
sexual orientation
marital status
family status
disability
conviction for which a pardon has been granted.

Of course, the US version may use different wording, but the concepts
are the same in Europe and Britain. I haven't checked Australia.
Violations of the act are subject to the Criminal code. In the US they
would be felonies. Heavy s..t. Now you may have some kind of death
wish and want to take on a Federal prosecutor but I wouldn't want to
spend a year scurrying around corners looking out for Bubba.

Do dumbass Canucks scurry?

Brian O wrote:
snipped the irrelevant and immature refuse...


VE3 insult return fact to DxEcch May 16 2007

Fact #2

"I would argue that the most serious threat to the United States is
not someone hiding in a cave in Afghanistan But our own fiscal
irresposibility."
David Walker, comptroller General of the Unied States...March 2007


If we weren't chasing them around those caves in Afghanistan, they would be
chasing you around your neighborhood. Hope you got your AK 47 locked and
loaded mr canadian. You really need to get your head out of the sand and
realize these guys are gonna kill you just because you're over here. They
don't care who you are. You should be GRATEFUL that OUR troops are in
Afghanistan keeping them in those caves.
B




Why are attacks and violence at all-time high if the troops are keeping
the Taliban hiding in caves? There's mo some of them have found a new
home in Pakistan.

I'm in favour of the war against the Taliban and against the war in Iraq
but both operations were done in a half-assed manner.

JB

D Peter Maus wrote:
John Barnard wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:
ve3... wrote:
On May 12, 6:27 pm, Telamon
wrote:
Would you please stop the USA VS Canada crap posts.

Telamon
Ventura, California
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""
I know the truth hurts and you want it to all go away. It is simple.
Stop posting insults to Canada and I will stop replying. Please note
that all my posts have been provoked. I have much better things to do
but if an insult is posted, I will reply in kind.





Since Telamon doesn't post insults until insulted, your argument
is very much the 5 year old screaming, "Mom!--He hit me back FIRST."


Since this BS originated north of the border....if you stop, he
will have nothing to pursue. If you stop, Ace will have nothing to
which me might respond.


I know the truth hurts and you want desperately to be blameless,
but, it's simple....you're not.


Stop your gratuitous shots at the US, and the in-kind replies will
stop.

I suppose you come by it honestly. When your PM levies personal
insults at our President, it kind of becomes national policy.

Fortunately, he's not PM anymore. Personally, I couldn't stand the
bast*rd!


Pretty hypocritical to live off the fat of our economy, while
insulting our officials. Especially in light of the US involvement
in thwarting the attack on a Canadian city.

Keep it up, and we'll send back Shatner.


We'll take Shatner off your hands and you get to keep Celine Dion.


LOL! Now that's just plain mean.

Sorry, Peter, it was just too good of an opportunity to take ;-).

JB