On Jul 14, 9:26 am, Zeke Zzzzpt wrote:
RHF wrote:
Zeke - The WSJ and the AP are not the BBC [.]
- - - I Got News For You - Neither the WSJ or the AP
opperates a Shortwave Radio Station.


(OT) : Zeke - Present What The BBC Actually Said : Quote the New Story
Headline and give a Link : Do Not Propagandize

- No they don't "opperate" short wave stations...but
- your lack of thinking causes you to miss the point.

Your lack of factualality causes you to make False and misleading
points.

- There were TWO stories on BBC. The FIRST story
- (that I heard and quoted) and then the SECOND story
- of Bush's denial that you quoted.

But the first was not a American Bashing Story
- - - Which is what you tried to turn it in to.

And I liked the second story better because it
Told the Truth : As I See It [.]

Here Is What The BBC-News Said Bush Said :
"US President George W Bush has Denied that Al-Qaeda
is as Strong as it was at the Time of the 9/11 Attacks."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6896248.stm

Zeke - Present What The BBC Actually Said :
TIP - Quote the New Story Headline and give a Link
-if- the BBC Broadcasted the News Story On-the-Air
it is on their website.
* Do NOT promote Your Liberal Anti-American Political
Propaganda : Let the Readers Decide for themselves
the Facts as They See Them and Their Own Conclusions.

- Think for a minute (I know it's hard, but try):
- there had to be something that came first
- (my quoted story) for there to be something
- for Bush to deny (your second story). Timing
- is everything. You simply missed the first
- BBC story.

I did 'think' {Oh It Hurts My Tiny Little Brain}
and caught you Propagandizing [.]
The fact that you are still trying to peddle these
Liberal Democrat Lies and Left-Wing Distortions
is simply more evidence that your agenda was
to Bash America and Blame the US President
George "W" Bush.

- My reason for quoting the AP and especially the
- Journal was as a *secondary* source. Again, if you
- would think just a little bit, it is much easier for
- someone to research/check/verify my facts with
- printed material easily obtained and widely available
- rather than trying to track down a radio newscast
- from a day or two ago.

Zeke You are backtracking again. - While I go forward :
Fighting for Truth, Justice and the American Way !
- - - Oh No Not 'think' again {Oh It Hurts My Tiny Little Brain}

- - Zeke - Thanky you for providing this Post as
- - Proof Positive that you are simply propagating :
- - Liberal Lies and Left-Wing Distortions.

- OK, so again you think what came from the front
- page of the Wall Street Journal (my *secondary*
- source) is liberal and left wing. Your opinion,
- can't argue with that.

Zeke - You do not need a 2nd Source -if- You are Truthful
to begin with. See what a mess your Liberal Lies and
Left-Wing Distortions have got you into . . .

- - Why did you not tell the Truth and Post :
- - "Stunning News Read on the WSJ and AP"
- - - - - Oops cause this is a Shortwave News Group
- - and you wanted to justify your Off-Topic Post
- - with claiming the BBC was your Source.
- - - - - liar, Liar. LIAR !

- Again, you are wrong, Wrong, WRONG!
- It *was* on the Beeb and it WAS the
- source--but you missed it. Just because
- YOU missed it, it doesn't mean it doesn't
- exist.

But your follow-on statements were not from the BBC
there were simply more LL&LWD . {Propaganda}

Here Is What The BBC-News Said Bush Said :
"US President George W Bush has Denied that Al-Qaeda
is as Strong as it was at the Time of the 9/11 Attacks."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6896248.stm

Zeke - Present What The BBC Actually Said :
TIP - Quote the New Story Headline and give a Link
-if- the BBC Broadcasted the News Story On-the-Air
it is on their website.
* Do NOT promote Your Liberal Anti-American Political
Propaganda : Let the Readers Decide for themselves
the Facts as They See Them and Their Own Conclusions.

- And thank you for exactly illustrating my point of
- why I did quote the WSJ (as a *secondary* source).
- For those that missed the broadcast (quite easy
- to do), the WSJ is widely available for back-up verification.

Zeke - You are backtracking again. - While I go forward :
Fighting for Truth, Justice and the American Way !
-and- point out your LL&LWD {Propaganda}

- So, to summarize -your- (non-thinking) views:

Oh No - Not 'think' again {Oh It Hurts My Tiny Little Brain}

- 1) Just because -you- missed the first broadcast,
- you don't think it exists. (Even though the second
- broadcast you quoted would not have existed had
- there not been the first broadcast).

Whether I heard the BBC Broacast or not does not
mean that it did not exist : But your follow-on
statements which were not from the BBC there were
simply more LL&LWD . {Propaganda}

Here Is What The BBC-News Said Bush Said :
"US President George W Bush has Denied that Al-Qaeda
is as Strong as it was at the Time of the 9/11 Attacks."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6896248.stm

Zeke - Present What The BBC Actually Said :
TIP - Quote the New Story Headline and give a Link
-if- the BBC Broadcasted the News Story On-the-Air
it is on their website.
* Do NOT promote Your Liberal Anti-American Political
Propaganda : Let the Readers Decide for themselves
the Facts as They See Them and Their Own Conclusions.

- 2) You fault me and falsely accuse me of lying just
- because I provided a back-up, SECONDARY, widely
- available print reference that is much easier to track
- down than an ephemeral radio newscast.

Zeke - No I "FAULT YOU" for Your follow-on statements
which were not from the BBC there were simply more
LL&LWD . {Propaganda}


- 3) You seem to imply that we can only post something
- heard on the Beeb if it is exclusive to them. Don't dare
- post it if it might also appear somewhere else. Yeah, right...

Post your Liberal Left Wing Anti-American Political
Propaganda in a Bash America and Blame Bush
Political Newgroup. Your original post has generated
23 Replies that did not have to be here.

yeah, Yeah. YEAH ! - Right is Right -and- Liberal Lies
and Left-Wing Distortions are Propaganda .

- 4) You think the Wall Street Journal is left-wing and liberal.

No I did not say that -but- Clearly You Are !
-and- I Did Say That .

- 5) Finally, you dodged and totally ignored the original issue:

I Dodged Nothing - I Pointed Out Your Bash America
and Blame Bush Propaganda.

CAUTION - Liberal Lies and Left-Wing Distortions
{Propaganda Follows} .
- Why, after SIX years, TWO never-ending (and ever-worsening)
- wars and half a TRILLION dollars, does the U.S. Government
- itself says we are at the exact same point we were at on
- September 10, 2001.

Here Is What The BBC-News Said Bush Said :
"US President George W Bush has Denied that Al-Qaeda
is as Strong as it was at the Time of the 9/11 Attacks."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6896248.stm

Zeke - Present What The BBC Actually Said :
TIP - Quote the New Story Headline and give a Link
-if- the BBC Broadcasted the News Story On-the-Air
it is on their website.
* Do NOT promote Your Liberal Anti-American Political
Propaganda : Let the Readers Decide for themselves
the Facts as They See Them and Their Own Conclusions.

- Heckuva job, RHF!

- - - Thank You Very Much ! ~ RHF

Zeke - You have quoted a few lines from some where.

BUT then you when on to Propagate two more
Liberal Democrat Lies and Left-Wing Distortions :

1 ... and after -all that-, we are back at Square One???

2 Truly, we can say "Heckuva job, George"!

- - - and Yes IMHO President George "W" Bush is Doing
a Great Job as President and Commander-in-Chief.

Zeke - Please join me in saying :
God {Allah} Bless America and All Americans - Amen ~ RHF
- - - Oh the Silence . . . says it all .

RHF wrote:


Your lack of factualality causes you to make False and misleading
points.

Huh? A DIRECT word-for-word quote from the front page of the Wall
Street Journal is a lack of factuality? And what was false and misleading?

a) Direct quote from WSJ said "unsafe as 9/10/2001"

b) I said wars went on for 6 years (Afghanistan+Iraq). True fact!

c) I said the total cost so far was about half a trillion. True Fact!

d) I then asked a legitimate question of why they felt we were "unsafe"
after all that time and money.

I'm sorry, but I don't know what can be more factual than that, nor do I
see what is "false or misleading" about any of the statements I made.
Please be SPECIFIC in which statement(s) of mine you believe are "false
or misleading".

Also, even though the WSJ was my *secondary* source, I hope you can now
see why I mentioned it; unless you have an actual recording of a radio
broadcast, it can be difficult to remember exactly what was said. If you
have a secondary source in *print* (from a conservative, right-wing
source no less), it can go a long way towards removing confusion (except
in your case, where it seems to be causing confusion).

- There were TWO stories on BBC. The FIRST story
- (that I heard and quoted) and then the SECOND story
- of Bush's denial that you quoted.

But the first was not a American Bashing Story
- - - Which is what you tried to turn it in to.

I didn't try and "turn it" into anything. Just a direct quote from a
conservative, right wing source, which in turn lead to a fair,
reasonable and perfectly justified question--namely, after all this time
and all this money, why are we still at 9/10/01? Again, a FAIR and
REASONABLE question. NO bashing intended, but if you insist on seeing it
that way, that's YOUR problem.

And I liked the second story better because it
Told the Truth : As I See It [.]

Well, gee, -personal- likes. So what? Just because you "like" something
is not germane to an intellectual discussion. I'm pretty sure you like
pizza more than you like Brussel sprouts, but so what?

* Do NOT promote Your Liberal Anti-American Political
Propaganda

Legitimately asking if our tax dollars were spent wisely is
"Anti-American"? Legitimately asking why we are no safer is propaganda?
I'm sorry, but you have that backwards: it's Pro-American!

- Think for a minute (I know it's hard, but try):
- there had to be something that came first
- (my quoted story) for there to be something
- for Bush to deny (your second story). Timing
- is everything. You simply missed the first
- BBC story.

I did 'think' {Oh It Hurts My Tiny Little Brain}
and caught you Propagandizing [.]
The fact that you are still trying to peddle these
Liberal Democrat Lies and Left-Wing Distortions
is simply more evidence that your agenda was
to Bash America and Blame the US President
George "W" Bush.

Please see all of my responses above. Not bashing, not a lie, no
distortions--except in your overheated "Tiny Little Brain".

And yes, W does get the credit--or the blame. "The buck stops here"
means the President's desk--for better or worse. What part of that
simple statement don't you understand? W is not perfect; he can and has
made mistakes, and like all of us, he is responsible for what he has
done, good or bad. And 70+% of the American public thinks he has done
bad. (Just to anticipate you, that was not bashing or propaganda, Just a
simple statement of fact from many polls as presented by many sources).

Fighting for Truth, Justice and the American Way !

Jeez, try not to get your cape caught in your zipper...and don't slam
the door on that telephone booth.

- OK, so again you think what came from the front
- page of the Wall Street Journal (my *secondary*
- source) is liberal and left wing. Your opinion,
- can't argue with that.

Zeke - You do not need a 2nd Source -if- You are Truthful
to begin with.

I'm sorry you *STILL* don't get it. Yes, I was truthful to begin with.
However, a radio newscast (and radio waves) are a very ephemeral thing.
Once the broadcast is over, it's gone. A second source is given as a
-courtesy- for those who wish to verify my statement but missed the
broadcast.

But your follow-on statements were not from the BBC
there were simply more LL&LWD . {Propaganda}

My follow up statements were true:

-the war has gone on for 6 years
-we have spent half a trillion dollars

And after those two facts, I asked a simple, logical and legitimate
question any reasonably intelligent person would be within their rights
to ask.

Whether I heard the BBC Broacast or not does not
mean that it did not exist : But your follow-on
statements which were not from the BBC there were
simply more LL&LWD . {Propaganda}

No, it was simply a logical and legitimate question any reasonably
intelligent person would be within their rights to ask.

Fact: We have been fighting the "Global War on Terrorism" for 6 years.

Fact: We have spent half a trillion to date.

Fact: The Beeb (and the right wing WSJ) reported we were in as much
danger as we were before the "War on Terrorism" started.

Now, it seems that any person with half a brain would be within their
rights to ask why this is so. Not bashing, not anti-American, not
propaganda--just a simple, fair, legitimate question.

Now please, don't be so rigid in your "party-line" thinking and don't be
such a nazi that you think people should not be able to question their
government without being accused of being "anti-American". If your "Tiny
Little Brain" gave it a just moment's thought, you would realize
questioning your government is PRO-American. That's how America came
into being--by "questioning" King George (the English one).

Zeke Zzzzpt wrote:

RHF wrote:

Your lack of factualality causes you to make False and misleading
points.

Huh? A DIRECT word-for-word quote from the front page of the Wall
Street Journal is a lack of factuality? And what was false and misleading?

a) Direct quote from WSJ said "unsafe as 9/10/2001"

b) I said wars went on for 6 years (Afghanistan+Iraq). True fact!

c) I said the total cost so far was about half a trillion. True Fact!

d) I then asked a legitimate question of why they felt we were "unsafe"
after all that time and money.

I'm sorry, but I don't know what can be more factual than that, nor do I
see what is "false or misleading" about any of the statements I made.
Please be SPECIFIC in which statement(s) of mine you believe are "false
or misleading".

Also, even though the WSJ was my *secondary* source, I hope you can now
see why I mentioned it; unless you have an actual recording of a radio
broadcast, it can be difficult to remember exactly what was said. If you
have a secondary source in *print* (from a conservative, right-wing
source no less), it can go a long way towards removing confusion (except
in your case, where it seems to be causing confusion).

- There were TWO stories on BBC. The FIRST story
- (that I heard and quoted) and then the SECOND story
- of Bush's denial that you quoted.

But the first was not a American Bashing Story
- - - Which is what you tried to turn it in to.

I didn't try and "turn it" into anything. Just a direct quote from a
conservative, right wing source, which in turn lead to a fair,
reasonable and perfectly justified question--namely, after all this time
and all this money, why are we still at 9/10/01? Again, a FAIR and
REASONABLE question. NO bashing intended, but if you insist on seeing it
that way, that's YOUR problem.

And I liked the second story better because it
Told the Truth : As I See It [.]

Well, gee, -personal- likes. So what? Just because you "like" something
is not germane to an intellectual discussion. I'm pretty sure you like
pizza more than you like Brussel sprouts, but so what?

* Do NOT promote Your Liberal Anti-American Political
Propaganda

Legitimately asking if our tax dollars were spent wisely is
"Anti-American"? Legitimately asking why we are no safer is propaganda?
I'm sorry, but you have that backwards: it's Pro-American!

- Think for a minute (I know it's hard, but try):
- there had to be something that came first
- (my quoted story) for there to be something
- for Bush to deny (your second story). Timing
- is everything. You simply missed the first
- BBC story.

I did 'think' {Oh It Hurts My Tiny Little Brain}
and caught you Propagandizing [.]
The fact that you are still trying to peddle these
Liberal Democrat Lies and Left-Wing Distortions
is simply more evidence that your agenda was
to Bash America and Blame the US President
George "W" Bush.

Please see all of my responses above. Not bashing, not a lie, no
distortions--except in your overheated "Tiny Little Brain".

And yes, W does get the credit--or the blame. "The buck stops here"
means the President's desk--for better or worse. What part of that
simple statement don't you understand? W is not perfect; he can and has
made mistakes, and like all of us, he is responsible for what he has
done, good or bad. And 70+% of the American public thinks he has done
bad. (Just to anticipate you, that was not bashing or propaganda, Just a
simple statement of fact from many polls as presented by many sources).

Fighting for Truth, Justice and the American Way !

Jeez, try not to get your cape caught in your zipper...and don't slam
the door on that telephone booth.

- OK, so again you think what came from the front
- page of the Wall Street Journal (my *secondary*
- source) is liberal and left wing. Your opinion,
- can't argue with that.

Zeke - You do not need a 2nd Source -if- You are Truthful
to begin with.

I'm sorry you *STILL* don't get it. Yes, I was truthful to begin with.
However, a radio newscast (and radio waves) are a very ephemeral thing.
Once the broadcast is over, it's gone. A second source is given as a
-courtesy- for those who wish to verify my statement but missed the
broadcast.

But your follow-on statements were not from the BBC
there were simply more LL&LWD . {Propaganda}

My follow up statements were true:

-the war has gone on for 6 years
-we have spent half a trillion dollars

And after those two facts, I asked a simple, logical and legitimate
question any reasonably intelligent person would be within their rights
to ask.

Whether I heard the BBC Broacast or not does not
mean that it did not exist : But your follow-on
statements which were not from the BBC there were
simply more LL&LWD . {Propaganda}

No, it was simply a logical and legitimate question any reasonably
intelligent person would be within their rights to ask.

Fact: We have been fighting the "Global War on Terrorism" for 6 years.

Fact: We have spent half a trillion to date.

Fact: The Beeb (and the right wing WSJ) reported we were in as much
danger as we were before the "War on Terrorism" started.

Now, it seems that any person with half a brain would be within their
rights to ask why this is so. Not bashing, not anti-American, not
propaganda--just a simple, fair, legitimate question.

Now please, don't be so rigid in your "party-line" thinking and don't be
such a nazi that you think people should not be able to question their
government without being accused of being "anti-American". If your "Tiny
Little Brain" gave it a just moment's thought, you would realize
questioning your government is PRO-American. That's how America came
into being--by "questioning" King George (the English one).

Zeke Zzzzpt wrote:

RHF wrote:

Your lack of factualality causes you to make False and misleading
points.

Huh? A DIRECT word-for-word quote from the front page of the Wall
Street Journal is a lack of factuality? And what was false and misleading?

a) Direct quote from WSJ said "unsafe as 9/10/2001"

b) I said wars went on for 6 years (Afghanistan+Iraq). True fact!

c) I said the total cost so far was about half a trillion. True Fact!

d) I then asked a legitimate question of why they felt we were "unsafe"
after all that time and money.

I'm sorry, but I don't know what can be more factual than that, nor do I
see what is "false or misleading" about any of the statements I made.
Please be SPECIFIC in which statement(s) of mine you believe are "false
or misleading".

Also, even though the WSJ was my *secondary* source, I hope you can now
see why I mentioned it; unless you have an actual recording of a radio
broadcast, it can be difficult to remember exactly what was said. If you
have a secondary source in *print* (from a conservative, right-wing
source no less), it can go a long way towards removing confusion (except
in your case, where it seems to be causing confusion).

- There were TWO stories on BBC. The FIRST story
- (that I heard and quoted) and then the SECOND story
- of Bush's denial that you quoted.

But the first was not a American Bashing Story
- - - Which is what you tried to turn it in to.

I didn't try and "turn it" into anything. Just a direct quote from a
conservative, right wing source, which in turn lead to a fair,
reasonable and perfectly justified question--namely, after all this time
and all this money, why are we still at 9/10/01?

Much better to be 9/10/01 than at 9/11/01 any way one slices, dices, spindles
and/or mutilates it.

Think about it.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

On Jul 15, 7:21 am, Zeke Zzzzpt wrote:
RHF wrote:
Your lack of factualality causes you to make False and misleading
points.

Huh? A DIRECT word-for-word quote from the front page of the Wall
Street Journal is a lack of factuality? And what was false and misleading?

a) Direct quote from WSJ said "unsafe as 9/10/2001"

b) I said wars went on for 6 years (Afghanistan+Iraq). True fact!

c) I said the total cost so far was about half a trillion. True Fact!

d) I then asked a legitimate question of why they felt we were "unsafe"
after all that time and money.

I'm sorry, but I don't know what can be more factual than that, nor do I
see what is "false or misleading" about any of the statements I made.
Please be SPECIFIC in which statement(s) of mine you believe are "false
or misleading".

Also, even though the WSJ was my *secondary* source, I hope you can now
see why I mentioned it; unless you have an actual recording of a radio
broadcast, it can be difficult to remember exactly what was said. If you
have a secondary source in *print* (from a conservative, right-wing
source no less), it can go a long way towards removing confusion (except
in your case, where it seems to be causing confusion).

- There were TWO stories on BBC. The FIRST story
- (that I heard and quoted) and then the SECOND story
- of Bush's denial that you quoted.

But the first was not a American Bashing Story
- - - Which is what you tried to turn it in to.

I didn't try and "turn it" into anything. Just a direct quote from a
conservative, right wing source, which in turn lead to a fair,
reasonable and perfectly justified question--namely, after all this time
and all this money, why are we still at 9/10/01? Again, a FAIR and
REASONABLE question. NO bashing intended, but if you insist on seeing it
that way, that's YOUR problem.

And I liked the second story better because it
Told the Truth : As I See It [.]

Well, gee, -personal- likes. So what? Just because you "like" something
is not germane to an intellectual discussion. I'm pretty sure you like
pizza more than you like Brussel sprouts, but so what?

* Do NOT promote Your Liberal Anti-American Political
Propaganda

Legitimately asking if our tax dollars were spent wisely is
"Anti-American"? Legitimately asking why we are no safer is propaganda?
I'm sorry, but you have that backwards: it's Pro-American!

- Think for a minute (I know it's hard, but try):
- there had to be something that came first
- (my quoted story) for there to be something
- for Bush to deny (your second story). Timing
- is everything. You simply missed the first
- BBC story.

I did 'think' {Oh It Hurts My Tiny Little Brain}
and caught you Propagandizing [.]
The fact that you are still trying to peddle these
Liberal Democrat Lies and Left-Wing Distortions
is simply more evidence that your agenda was
to Bash America and Blame the US President
George "W" Bush.

Please see all of my responses above. Not bashing, not a lie, no
distortions--except in your overheated "Tiny Little Brain".

And yes, W does get the credit--or the blame. "The buck stops here"
means the President's desk--for better or worse. What part of that
simple statement don't you understand? W is not perfect; he can and has
made mistakes, and like all of us, he is responsible for what he has
done, good or bad. And 70+% of the American public thinks he has done
bad. (Just to anticipate you, that was not bashing or propaganda, Just a
simple statement of fact from many polls as presented by many sources).

Fighting for Truth, Justice and the American Way !

Jeez, try not to get your cape caught in your zipper...and don't slam
the door on that telephone booth.

- OK, so again you think what came from the front
- page of the Wall Street Journal (my *secondary*
- source) is liberal and left wing. Your opinion,
- can't argue with that.

Zeke - You do not need a 2nd Source -if- You are Truthful
to begin with.

I'm sorry you *STILL* don't get it. Yes, I was truthful to begin with.
However, a radio newscast (and radio waves) are a very ephemeral thing.
Once the broadcast is over, it's gone. A second source is given as a
-courtesy- for those who wish to verify my statement but missed the
broadcast.

But your follow-on statements were not from the BBC
there were simply more LL&LWD . {Propaganda}

My follow up statements were true:

-the war has gone on for 6 years
-we have spent half a trillion dollars

And after those two facts, I asked a simple, logical and legitimate
question any reasonably intelligent person would be within their rights
to ask.

Whether I heard the BBC Broacast or not does not
mean that it did not exist : But your follow-on
statements which were not from the BBC there were
simply more LL&LWD . {Propaganda}

No, it was simply a logical and legitimate question any reasonably
intelligent person would be within their rights to ask.

Fact: We have been fighting the "Global War on Terrorism" for 6 years.

Fact: We have spent half a trillion to date.

Fact: The Beeb (and the right wing WSJ) reported we were in as much
danger as we were before the "War on Terrorism" started.

Now, it seems that any person with half a brain would be within their
rights to ask why this is so. Not bashing, not anti-American, not
propaganda--just a simple, fair, legitimate question.

Now please, don't be so rigid in your "party-line" thinking and don't be
such a nazi that you think people should not be able to question their
government without being accused of being "anti-American". If your "Tiny
Little Brain" gave it a just moment's thought, you would realize
questioning your government is PRO-American. That's how America came
into being--by "questioning" King George (the English one).

(OT) : Caution - Be 'nice' To Zeke -or- He Might Call You A "Nazi"

Zeke - Present What The BBC Actually Said :
Quote the New Story Headline and give a Link :
Do Not Propagandize
* Everyone in this NewsGroup can 'choose' to Read
-or- Not Read Your Post.
* Everyone in this NewsGroup can 'choose' to Click-On
and Read -or- Not Click-On and Read the Link.
* Everyone in this NewsGroup can 'decide' for Themselves
what their Conclusions Are about Your Post and the Link.
- - - Your Propagandizing just gets in the way of the Truth :
As The Read See It [.]
The-Bottom-Line : Some Will Agree -and-
Some Will Disagree - It Is Their Choice.

Zeke - Simply put your original Post was written {slanted}
as Bush Bashing / Blame Bush Propaganda [.]

Everything Else You Do Zeke is Backtracking to Cover-Up that Fact.

Now in this Post Zeke - You Lose-It by calling 'me' a "NAZI" .

Oh I Am So Hurt - You Called Me a NAZI
Oh Meo Oh Myo - How Will I Ever Recover ?

NOTE TO ZEKE : Remember the First-One to use the Word
"NAZI" {Call Someone a NAZI} in a Post the Loses the Debate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_Law
- - - zekey, Zekey. ZEKEY ! - YOU LOSE [.]

Why It Just Hurts My Tiny Brain to 'think'
about all those Big Things that You Said. ~ RHF

RHF wrote:

Zeke - Present What The BBC Actually Said :

RHF, your "Tiny Little Brain" (your term, not mine) must be severely
overheating. I've already said it three times... I DID NOT TAPE the
newscast. Presumably, most people don't tape every newscast (although
I'm sure some do). I paraphrased / quoted the story as best I could
without actually taping it. This is EXACTLY WHY I gave an ADDITIONAL
print reference that is easily obtainable and widely available to
others. It is the SAME story. It was NOT -exclusive- to the BBC (but
certainly heard there). Why is your "Tiny Little Brain" having such a
hard time understanding this? It really ain't that complicated.

Quote the New Story Headline and give a Link :

I DID quote a link, readily available to all, especially those who did
not tape the broadcast: "The July 12 Wall Street Journal, Page 1, Column
2". You don't have to get everything off the web, you know. If the WSJ
is too left-wing and too liberal for you or you're too lazy to go to
your local library, that's your problem.

Now in this Post Zeke - You Lose-It by calling 'me' a "NAZI" .

Oh I Am So Hurt - You Called Me a NAZI
Oh Meo Oh Myo - How Will I Ever Recover ?

NOTE TO ZEKE : Remember the First-One to use the Word
"NAZI" {Call Someone a NAZI} in a Post the Loses the Debate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_Law
- - - zekey, Zekey. ZEKEY ! - YOU LOSE [.]

Huh?

NOTE TO RHF: Give ME a link showing where -I- agreed to such a thing. I
don't consider myself bound to "Godwin"--whoever he is. Plus he seems to
overlook and arbitrarily eliminate the possibility that in some
debates, such a comparison may indeed be legitimate and justified. In
any event, the debate is not about that.

Bottom line: I think it is every American's right and even duty to
question their government when it is felt to be necessary. I consider it
pro-American. Our Founding Fathers thought so too.

You, on the other hand, seem to BLINDLY and MINDLESSLY follow along,
right OR wrong. Furthermore, you call people liars, liberals,
anti-American and propagandists for those who dare to exercise their
rights to question. Sounds pretty anti-American and Fascist to me.

auf Wiedersehen, Herr RHF...