From Wikipedia...
I think it is fairly accurate !
:)
---------------------------------------
Astrologers believe Geminis have a volatile temperament, that their
strength however is their versatility, and that their versatility
allows them to learn a little about everything and develop skills in
many areas. Geminis are considered to hold mysteriously unique
artistic and creative abilities unlike other signs. Often considered
to be very intelligent individuals, they have a wide appreciation for
the arts <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arts>, philosophy
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy>, history
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History> and the natural sciences
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_sciences>. They do not like
boring people or routine procedures and therefore struggle to deal
with authoritative figures. They are enlightened to talk about any
subject which they find interesting and where they can stimulate their
naturally intellectual personalities. Geminis are noted to be drastic
and hasty yet very responsible and disciplined. They are considered to
be the most misunderstood of all signs due to their dual personality
expressed by the twins <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twins> of their
sign. Because of this, don't be surprised to often find Geminis in
different moods and therefore mood swings can occur often for Geminis
because of their high degree of mental processing and thinking. This
makes them quite philosophical people. Geminis are sensitive as well
but use their high intelligence to counter anything that upsets them
==========================================
Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232
Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *ch...@wbmfg.com
*To: *af@afmug.com
*Sent: *Monday, January 23, 2017 1:18:16 PM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
Well.... June 21
Perhaps....
*From:* Faisal Imtiaz
*Sent:* Monday, January 23, 2017 10:47 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
>Sometimes when I am trolling, I touch a nerve. I can switch to
either side of an argument at will for fun.
Are you a Gemini by any chance ?
Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232
Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *ch...@wbmfg.com
*To: *af@afmug.com
*Sent: *Monday, January 23, 2017 12:14:54 PM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
I don’t think anyone has ever been knocked off the list.
Shouted down at times. Insulted. But never knocked off.
Sometimes when I am trolling, I touch a nerve. I can switch
to either side of an argument at will for fun.
With the exception of being a Clinton supporter. Just cannot
make myself go there.
*From:* That One Guy /sarcasm
*Sent:* Sunday, January 22, 2017 7:47 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
just fyi if jaime gets knocked off the list, im taking my toys
and going home
in 4 years hes going to be showing us pictures of tecate and
some insanely tasty looking crow anyway :-)
On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Jaime Solorza
<losguyswirel...@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't buy that... Respect your opinion but I don't buy
that 63 list...
I have no confidence in Trump... I think he is bad for our
country... I will not change my mind. If you want to
knock me off list... It's cool... I have always remained
true to my beliefs. My last post on this one...
On Jan 22, 2017 3:50 PM, "Josh Reynolds"
<j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote:
Have you ever looked at the list of people killed who
were involved in some way with the JFK assassination?
On Jan 22, 2017 4:34 PM, "Chuck McCown"
<ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable
fact, these 63 people are as dead as you can get
and all of them either spilled the beans on the
Clintons or had information that could harm the
Clintons.
So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of
Trump, I have not yet heard of anyone he had
whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it.
1. Susan Coleman:
2. Larry Guerrin:
3. Kevin Ives
4. Don Henry:
5. Keith Coney:
6. Keith McKaskle:
7. Gregory Collins:
8. Jeff Rhodes:
9. James Milam:
10. Richard Winters:
11. Jordan Kettleson:
12. Alan Standorf:
13. Dennis Eisman: .
14. Danny Casalaro:
15. Victor Raiser:
16. R. Montgomery Raiser:
17. Paul Tully:
18. Ian Spiro:
19. Paula Gober:
20. Jim Wilhite:
21. Steve Willis,
22. Robert Williams,
23. Todd McKeahan
24. Conway LeBleu:
25. Sgt. Brian Haney,
26. Sgt. Tim Sabel,
27. Maj. William Barkley,
28. Capt. Scott Reynolds:
29. John Crawford:
30. John Wilson:
31. Paul Wilcher:
32. Vincent Foster:
33. Jon Parnell Walker:
34. Stanley Heard
35. Steven Dickson:
36. Jerry Luther Parks:
37. Ed Willey:
38. Gandy Baugh:
39. Herschell Friday:
40. Ronald Rogers:
41. Kathy Furguson:
42. Bill Shelton:
43. Stanley Huggins:
44. Paul Olson:
45. Calvin Walraven:
46. Alan G. Whicher:
47. Duane Garrett:
48. Ron Brown:.
49. Charles Meissner:
50. William Colby:
51. Admiral Jeremy Boorda:
52. Lance Herndon:
53. Neil Moody:
54. Barbara Wise:
55. Doug Adams:
56. Mary C. Mahoney:
57. Ronald Miller:
58. Sandy Hume:
59. Jim McDougal:
60. Johnny Lawhon:
61. Charles Wilbourne Miller:
62. Carlos Ghigliotti:
63. Tony Moser:
From: Josh Reynolds
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to
make his money. Some were legal, some were not.
You may consider that smart, and that's your
right. I do not.
On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler"
<jon-ispli...@michwave.net> wrote:
He had money, knew to hire the right people, and
made good decisions. Historically that's not been
common in politics. It's always been mostly 'spenders'
Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.
On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds
<j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote:
Net worth is in no way an indicator of
intelligence. In fact, it often happens by
accident, or in spite of intelligence.
On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler"
<jon-ispli...@michwave.net> wrote:
Considering his net worth he might he smarter than
any of us. But if your looking for miracles you
might be better off reading the bible.
Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.
On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza
<losguyswirel...@gmail.com> wrote:
Empty promises just like his brain. But it's
okay to grope now.... Waiting for right time to do
it comrades
On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds"
<j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote:
https://streamable.com/md28v
I still cannot settle down with the idea that a
Trump presidency is not some kind of joke taken
too far...
On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime Solorza
<losguyswirel...@gmail.com> wrote:
Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response
to this..
https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpost.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751
On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza"
<losguyswirel...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new
white house website. The bullshit is going to get
worse...no million and half attended
inauguration.... Women's March had a lot more...
His ego is bruised. Let me Trumpspeak... So sad.
On Jan 22, 2017 12:47 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm"
<thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
there is this gem now
http://www.hewillnotdivide.us/
24x7 real time stream of people being idiots ala
transformers guy
On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Stefan Englhardt
<s...@genias.net> wrote:
Today we’ve great possibilities to spread news.
But it is very difficult to get the real
information unbiased. Breitbart is known to be
very biased even here over the ocean. But it seems
the „normal“ media in USA is biased, too.
E.g. we never understood how Bush jun. got his
second election where it was clear he started a
war based on wrong information. This is
unthinkable here. It would be the one point which
would dominate the discussion and would make him
unvotable here. Your media seemed to move the
discussion away from this fact and relativated his
guilty to make him votable.
Another example is the Hillary Email discussion.
This is a topic which is minor at best but was
discussed the whole time.
I guess it is possible Trump kills a person in TV
and get reelected if media helps him. Unthinkable?
But killing one person is much less a problem than
starting a war where thousands are killed.
Breitbart would find 100 reasons why this person
has to die and would find other topics to report.
Good and neutral media are the base of a working
democracy. For sure you have a problem.
Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] Im Auftrag
von That One Guy /sarcasm
Gesendet: Sonntag, 22. Januar 2017 07:05
An: af@afmug.com
Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
Im pretty confident the next few days is setting
the stage to effectively shutting down "media
access". Im all for it in the current environment.
Between press releases, Publicly accessible data,
FOIA responses, live streamed events, and one on
one interviews (and yes...twitter) the press
really is the dialup internet method of getting
information. We know more in real time then the
press could ever package up and present. The
current mindset of media in press conferences is
that of militants (both sides of the media isle)
and there is zero professionalism from either one.
Neither really gives a damn what the answer is
anyway, theyre going to report whatever their
preconceived response was either way.
Question: Did we send B52 Bombers to hit an ISIS
target?
Answer: Yes
CNN under Obama: Obama authorizes successful
airstrike removing 100 ISIS fighters in final days
of his presidency. This act ensures that those who
would commit terror will be addressed accordingly,
even during the transition of power.
Breitbart under Obama: Obama, the snake furthers
military conflict day before leaving office,
leaving all Americans at risk during a tumultuous
time of transition. Kills 100, ensuring a
retaliatory response.
Had the same attack been authorized today:
CNN under Trump: MILITARY FIASCO: Trump bombs
random targets. Top military officials, speaking
on condition of anonymity, refuse to verify there
were no civilian casualties, at least 100
confirmed dead. War crime charges possible?
Breitbart under Trump: God Emperor Trump
authorized the removal of 100 ISIS top leaders in
his first act as Commander in Chief. Rumors of
ISIS surrender. Barack Obama potentially one of
the dead operatives.
On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 11:45 PM, Jeremy
<jeremysmi...@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm all for it. I think that everyone is probably
just impressed by the first white house press
briefing and the remarks at Langley. What an
amazing public speaker this one is. Have you ever
had a friend or friend's uncle or something who
did too much meth? You know how they start out
with one sentence and then before you know it they
have told fifteen other stories before they ever
get to the point...if they ever do??? We have
four years of that to look forward to. Just watch
the full speech at the CIA, you will see what I
mean. Or don't....save yourself the pain.
On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 10:27 PM, Josh Reynolds
<j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote:
Can we talk about politics yet? :P
--
If you only see yourself as part of the team but
you don't see your team as part of yourself you
have already failed as part of the team.
--
If you only see yourself as part of the team but
you don't see your team as part of yourself you
have already failed as part of the team.
--
If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see
your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part
of the team.
