That my friend would be the Astrological Zodiac sign Uranus !

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

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Christopher Tyler" <ch...@totalhighspeed.net>
> To: af@afmug.com
> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 1:56:38 PM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?

> 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.

Reply via email to