Cancer.
In Chinese zodiac, it's the "cock".
Source: am cancer/cock
On Jan 23, 2017 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.
>
>
>
>
