better be capricorn On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 12:56 PM, Christopher Tyler < ch...@totalhighspeed.net> wrote:
> What's the astrological sign for a**hole? > (written in good humor of course) > > -- > Christopher Tyler > MTCRE/MTCNA/MTCTCE/MTCWE > Total Highspeed Internet Services > 417.851.1107 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: ch...@wbmfg.com > To: af@afmug.com > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:47:13 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > It has to look like a hot chick, that’s all I’m sayin’ about that.... > > From: Bill Prince > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 11:35 AM > To: af@afmug.com > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > I've also heard tell that Geminis are bisexual. > > > > bp > <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> > > On 1/23/2017 10:30 AM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote: > > 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, philosophy, > history and the 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 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. > > > > -- 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.