![]() |
|
I know enough about hitler's Germany.I might have fell off the wagon
long ago,so to speak,but I didn't land on my head! By the way, www.cryptome.org is a website I like and I have been checking out everyday for over five years when I first got internet access with my webtv box.(hey,it serves me A OK) Article at cryptome.org about,FCC Rules On Radio Frequency Devices.In case y'all want to check it out. webtv does not suck either.There are lots of folks who are on the msntv (formerly webtv) one plan thingy and they use their computes on the msntv one plan and webtv is free.OK,now cuss me out for useing webtv,frankly,I don't care.I have a Velocity Micro $1,290.00 ProMagix computer that I bought earlier this year but I only will use it for World War Two gaming soon as I get satellite internet access.Going to hang on to my webtv access too. cuhulin |
I have DirecTV.My favorite channel on there (In fact,I am listening to
it right now) is channel 833 Easy Listening.My kind of music,my tv set is sometimes a radio) cuhulin |
Didn't Canada outlaw the Bible? I wish them crazy canuks would come to
my house and just try!!! to outlaw my Bible!!! They would be in for a mighty big supprise!!! cuhulin |
Know what's on the canuk dimes? I heard tell their queen is on one side
and a beaver is on the other side of their canuk dimes. cuhulin |
Michael Lawson wrote:
What, you've never heard of military tribunals for military personnel? I'm a pessimist. Remember Calley taking the fall? There seem to be 'justice' only when someone is trying to save face in front of the media. A soldier also knows what the deal is when signing up. Prisoners are treated differently and rightfully so. My question stands, because the two are different types. A member of the US military convicted of a capital crime can be sentenced to death. Quite different than executing prisoners of war or mass murder. We were talking about killing captured enemy combatants...or in the US case, captured enemy non combatants. Killing a captured unarmed enemy soldier is plain wrong. You know it. Does that make Nuremberg a "Death Camp"?? Hardly. But the inference is there, because people were executed there, that I because I think that the trials at Nuremberg were justified as were the outcome, that I must be one sick puppy. Nuremberg wasn't done unilaterally by the US. It was decided there that the chain of command, up to the top was guilty. Why does this same decision then NOT apply to the US military? Why was Bush trying to get immunity from the UN even BEFORE the atrocities started? If we now apply what was decided at Nuremberg, half the US military would be either hung or in prison, along with Perle, Wolfowitz, Cheney, Bush..etc.. Using Nuremberg in context to the middle East, is counterproductive. Russian camps in Siberia were evil. Why are the US camps in Cuba and everywhere else not? Or that because I feel that a guy by the name of Dahmer should have been executed, I am a sick puppy. I should not have used that phrase. The death penalty is nothing more than revenge killing. If the Arabs are looked upon so badly for doing revenge killings, why do it here? If you want legalize revenge killings, fine, let the families deal with the perpetrators as their consciences allow. The state has no business in the death trade. The death sentence isn't even a deterrent. Look at Texas. If the death penalty worked as a deterrent, that would be the state with the best behaved and courteous people in your country. It isn't. If someone does get a life sentence, then it should mean that. They work on a State run farm (NOT Halliburton) growing food and making clothes. They get paid minimum wage, which is immediately sent to any family they have left behind. That cuts down on the welfare rolls. A REAL life sentence is a bigger deterrent to crime than some death penalty that may or may not be carried out..in five or ten or twenty years. Not forgetting all those tried on faulty evidence or just framed to get convictions. mike |
Dang right.Like Goober on the Andy Griffith tv show once said,I might be
a hillbilly but I ain't no dummy. ~Alice~ |
So,let us study the name Bubba. (and Sissy) Teaching a baby to say
Brother or Sister,what does a baby usually say.Bubba,,, Sissy.Sure,those are such enduring names coming from the mouths of babys.Call me Bubba any old time! cuhulin |
I say let us fold our part of our U.S.Military unbrella that covers
canukland and watch them canuks run like Chicken Little. cuhulin |
Because on certain Holidays I take a nip or two from my bottle of Old
Crow Whiskey.Otherwise,I drink my Beer like it's going out of style.Have a Beer. --- [] cuhulin |
Man - you must have gotten a bad batch. The way my dear Grampa, Harry
Jensen (the old viking, rest his soul) used to make lutefisk, it was luscious! Sweet, melt-in-your-mouth, buttery and fattening as hell! Every Christmas, that plus my Gramma's (rest her soul) fabulous sweet-kraut and apple-cinnamon-crisp-whipped cream extravaganza made Christmas dinner something to remember year 'round. We didn't need a SW radio to get Norway - we had it in spades right in the house :-) Bruce Jensen |
m II wrote:
Ashcroft was busy that week. Notice all the references to domestic concentration camps. ======================== http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=...G=Search&meta= Similar search, but for "kill all the christians", turns up over one million hits: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=kill+all+the+christians&btnG=Google +Search Eighty thousand for "god hates liberals", 47,900 hits for "god loves ashcroft". Hell, I got 729 hits for "m II is a gallon of elephant urine", so it must be so. -- The state religion of the USA is atheism, as established by the courts. |
bpnjensen wrote:
Man - you must have gotten a bad batch. The way my dear Grampa, Harry Jensen (the old viking, rest his soul) used to make lutefisk, it was luscious! Sweet, melt-in-your-mouth, buttery and fattening as hell! Every Christmas, that plus my Gramma's (rest her soul) fabulous sweet-kraut and apple-cinnamon-crisp-whipped cream extravaganza made Christmas dinner something to remember year 'round. We didn't need a SW radio to get Norway - we had it in spades right in the house :-) Bruce Jensen I may have been a bit too harsh in my description, but I've heard nasty rumours of a very bad smell given off by the stuff. Perhaps they're not rumours after all: http://www.oldlutheran.com/humor/ohlutefisk.html mike |
Black Day 911.Do a search for that.
cuhulin |
klintoon set some of those terrorist free.How soon some folks forget.I
Never Forget! cuhulin |
Their "talmud" is not in my vocalbulary.
cuhulin |
"m II" wrote in message news:KIvtd.208$U47.53@clgrps12... Brian Hill wrote: I got family in Finland on my Dads side. I spent some time visiting my cousin in Turku. We got drunk as hell and sat in the sauna. Then we all ran around naked and jumped in the freezing water and beat each other with sticks. Yea their some real smart MFs over there. LOL!!! :) Is Finland the home of the Lutkefisk abomination? May be Norway..either way, I'd be armed with a stick too if anyone got near me with that gastronomical equivalent of nerve gas. mike Naw, I think it's Norwegian? But the Fins eat it too as well as the Swedes. I'm a pickled Clupeidae man. And not that crap with the bones still left in it! -- 73 and good DXing. Brian ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ A lot of radios and 100' of rusty wire! Zumbrota, Southern MN Brian's Radio Universe http://webpages.charter.net/brianhill/ EMAIL- (Hide the $100 to reply!) |
But there are some beautifull wimmins in Norway.I think I will hit my
penpals link again and scope around in Norway. cuhulin |
TV news is wonderful entertainment, because entertainment best delivers
the most eyeballs to the commercials whose sales are the whole point of commercial television. Some old people remember when the networks competed for credibility to lend prestige to their organizations. Problem is, really excellent news is a guaranteed money-loser. In the days of Edward R. Murrow, it was understood that news was not to be judged on profitability, on the same model that big automakers will turn out an impressive low-production sports car at a loss to lend prestige to the nameplate. That's simply no longer true anywhere in US TV news. News programs are expected to turn a profit. These considerations are incompatible with accuracy, balance or depth in a population with a short attention span. If you want to be informed, alternate between at least 7 or 8 newspapers from at least a few different countries. If you want to be entertained, try a good fictional show instead. It's hard to say what TV news is good for, but for being informed... not so much. :) |
The problem with this is Bill O'Reilly is an inveterate liar, the worst
hypocrite to hit the airwaves in a geneartion, and a total and complete coward. This is proven. http://mediamatters.org/items/200412160011 If you believe anything he or Ann Coulter says, you are mentally deficient. Enough said. Have a nice day :) |
This old people person (that's me,folks) knows that those so called
"news" A@@Holes are full of S...! cuhulin |
|
ill O'Reilly
The O'Reilly Factor FOX News Channel 1211 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036 Dear Mr. O'Reilly: In May of this year, I asked that you allow me to come on The O'Reilly Factor to discuss your attacks on philanthropist George Soros. Your producer denied my request, saying you were no longer discussing the topic. Yet in subsequent weeks, you continued to discuss Mr. Soros on your radio and television programs. Despite my offer to discuss Soros, you still did not invite me on -- even complaining during your June 1 Radio Factor, "I mean, we really can't get anybody in here [to defend Soros] that's not a raving, raving Far-Left person, and why we would want to do that, I don't know." In recent months, you have repeatedly attacked me and my organization, Media Matters for America: On the June 28 O'Reilly Factor, you referred to Media Matters as a "Far Left website"; On the August 5 Radio Factor, you likened Media Matters to Mao Zedong; On the August 5 O'Reilly Factor, you claimed your critics are "hiding"; in response, I reiterated my willingness to appear on your television show; During your August 7 debate with New York Times columnist Paul Krugman on CNBC, you compared Media Matters to the Ku Klux Klan and Fidel Castro; On August 13, Media Matters noted your recent attacks on us, and wondered how long it would be before you compared us to Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels. It took less than a month: On the September 14 Radio Factor, you referred to comments I made as "Joseph Goebbels Nazi stuff"; On the December 9 Radio Factor, you called Media Matters "the most vile, despicable human beings in the country"; On the December 14 Radio Factor, you called Media Matters "sneaky"; accused us of "tak[ing] things out of context"; called us a "Far Left, deceitful, disgusting website"; and called us "character assassins" and "despicable weasels." As you can see, Mr. O'Reilly, you have repeatedly and personally attacked me, Media Matters for America, and my fine staff, calling us "vile," "despicable," and "weasels," and comparing us to the Ku Klux Klan, Castro, Mao, and the Nazis. And you have refused my repeated requests to appear on your broadcast. You once offered your viewers your definition of the word "coward." On the January 5, 2004, O'Reilly Factor, you declared: "If you attack someone publicly, as these men did to me, you have an obligation to face the person you are smearing. If you don't, you are a coward." Well, Mr. O'Reilly, you have attacked me publicly on numerous occasions, and you refuse to face me. You, sir, are a coward -- by your own definition of the term. You are "hiding under your desk" (to paraphrase your August 26, 2003, claim about a "coward" who declined to appear on your show) rather than allowing me on your program to discuss your insults. You are "gutless," to borrow the phrase you used on January 10, 2003, and February 8, 2001, to describe people who would not appear on your program. I attach additional examples of your pejorative descriptions of those who decline invitations to appear on your broadcast. Your frequent complaint that your words are taken out of context appears to have spurred your recent assault on my organization. While reasonable people can disagree about conclusions we, or you, have drawn about your comments, you are simply wrong to say that we took you out of context. I remain willing and eager to appear on either your television or radio program to discuss your contention that my organization has taken your comments out of context. Should you continue to refuse this offer, it is only reasonable that the American people will conclude that you are not only -- as you would put it -- a "coward," but a hypocrite as well. Sincerely, David Brock President and CEO Media Matters for America http://mediamatters.org/ On 18 Dec 2004 14:10:44 GMT, "-=jd=-" wrote: On Sat 18 Dec 2004 12:11:50a, "Ross" wrote in message roups.com: The problem with this is Bill O'Reilly is an inveterate liar, the worst hypocrite to hit the airwaves in a geneartion, and a total and complete coward. This is proven. http://mediamatters.org/items/200412160011 If you believe anything he or Ann Coulter says, you are mentally deficient. Enough said. Have a nice day :) Would you agree that those who rely upon and place faith in blatantly biased websites like mediamatters.org are not equally (to borrow your phrase) "mentally deficient"? -=jd=- |
O'Reilly is a POS.
cuhulin |
|
On 19 Dec 2004 04:03:51 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote: Show me where the bias results in factal inaccuracy. Give me one example of Brock lying. The right wing press as embodied in Fox News lies a lot. Show me where Air America or Mediamatters lies. Do you know Brock's history? He used to be one of them. He used to be a lying right-wing hit man: ''Timeline of Brock's Career 1986: Brock comes to Washington to write for Insight, a conservative weekly magazine published by the Washington Times' parent company October 1991: Professor Anita Hill testifies at the confirmation hearing for Supreme Court justice nominee Clarence Thomas. Brock later recalls watching the hearings from his office at the Washington Times, where he was an editor; and that at first, he "believed that what (Hill) was saying was quite possibly true." About a month later, Brock gets an assignment to write about Hill for the American Spectator, a conservative journal based in Arlington, Va. March 1992: The Spectator publishes Brock's sharply critical piece on Hill, whom he describes as "a bit nutty and a bit slutty." April 1993: Brock's book, The Real Anita Hill: The Untold Story, is published. In an interview on C-SPAN, Brock says the book's key message is that, "when you look at the evidence, the battle of credibility is settled hands down in favor of Clarence Thomas. Anita Hill's testimony is really shot through with false, incorrect and misleading statements." December 1993: In the January 1994 Spectator, Brock, now on the magazine's staff, writes about what would come to be called "Troopergate": allegations by Arkansas state troops that they helped procure women for Clinton when he was Arkansas governor. October 1996: Brock's much-awaited biography of Hillary Rodham Clinton, The Seduction of Hillary Rodham, is an unexpectedly sympathetic portrait that startles and angers many of his conservative supporters. July 1997: In an Esquire magazine article titled "I Was A Right- Wing Hit Man," Brock writes that because of the way conservatives dispossessed him over the Hillary Clinton biography, "I want out. David Brock the Road Warrior of the Right is dead." November 1997: Brock is fired from the staff of the Spectator. April 1998: In an open letter to President Clinton published in Esquire, Brock apologizes for his "Troopergate" expose, which he says was written not "in the interest of good government or serious journalism," but as part of an anti-Clinton crusade. June 2001: The August issue of Talk magazine publishes an adaptation from Brock's forthcoming book, Blinded by the Right: The Conscience of an Ex-Conservative. In it, Brock says he "lost his soul" by knowingly writing things about Hill that he knew were not true, and became "a witting cog in the Republican sleaze machine." (weekdays) '' (weekends) Based on that copy/paste operation, it *is* apparently safe to presume that your response to my former question (...Would you agree that those who rely upon and place faith in blatantly biased websites like mediamatters.org are not equally (to borrow your phrase) "mentally deficient"?...) is a resounding YES! -=jd=- |
O'Reilly LIES!! Limbaugh LIES!! Sean Hannity LIES!! It's not spin. It's not bias. It's lying. |
So instead of refuting my allegation that these people lie, you change
the subject. Our country is doomed if people like me, who only insist on factual accuracyin the news media, are branded as ''naive...extremists''. On 20 Dec 2004 02:07:48 GMT, "-=jd=-" wrote: On Sun 19 Dec 2004 06:23:08p, David wrote in message : O'Reilly LIES!! Limbaugh LIES!! Sean Hannity LIES!! It's not spin. It's not bias. It's lying. Apologies if I struck a nerve. I've noticed extremists like yourself tend to have very tender toes that are often too easily stepped on. It's just a bit amusing to see you present yourself and your preferred information sources as (purportedly) the bastion of truth and unbiased information. It's cute in a "Puh- leeeze!!" kind of way... Like I said before, if you want to wear that yoke of hypocracy like a badge of honor, that's *your* bag. Just don't cop an attitude if we get a chuckle out of your naivety - and at your expense. -=jd=- |
"David" wrote in message ... O'Reilly LIES!! Limbaugh LIES!! Sean Hannity LIES!! It's not spin. It's not bias. It's lying. Rather LIES! Moore LIES! Al Franken LIES! It's not spin. It's not bias. It's lying. |
You can't argue with an ideologue. It's like trying to deprogram a
cultist. On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 12:51:02 -0600, "MnMikew" wrote: "David" wrote in message .. . O'Reilly LIES!! Limbaugh LIES!! Sean Hannity LIES!! It's not spin. It's not bias. It's lying. Rather LIES! Moore LIES! Al Franken LIES! It's not spin. It's not bias. It's lying. |
David wrote: You can't argue with an ideologue. It's like trying to deprogram a cultist. Go tote your portable, 'tard boy. dxAce Michigan USA On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 12:51:02 -0600, "MnMikew" wrote: "David" wrote in message .. . O'Reilly LIES!! Limbaugh LIES!! Sean Hannity LIES!! It's not spin. It's not bias. It's lying. Rather LIES! Moore LIES! Al Franken LIES! It's not spin. It's not bias. It's lying. |
You would know oh great loony one.
"David" wrote in message ... You can't argue with an ideologue. It's like trying to deprogram a cultist. On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 12:51:02 -0600, "MnMikew" wrote: "David" wrote in message .. . O'Reilly LIES!! Limbaugh LIES!! Sean Hannity LIES!! It's not spin. It's not bias. It's lying. Rather LIES! Moore LIES! Al Franken LIES! It's not spin. It's not bias. It's lying. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:29 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com