Hey, Endless Summer Nights is a great song.
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Scott Stroz wrote:
>
> Not gonna try to weasel my way out of that by saying I was working,
> because I have been to a Richard Marx concert as a ticket holder.
>
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 3:39 PM, Jerry Barnes wrote:
>
Not gonna try to weasel my way out of that by saying I was working,
because I have been to a Richard Marx concert as a ticket holder.
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 3:39 PM, Jerry Barnes wrote:
>
> "Hell I got called there once for a fight at a Richard Marx concert."
>
> So, you admit going to a Richar
"Hell I got called there once for a fight at a Richard Marx concert."
So, you admit going to a Richard Marx concert.
J
-
Ninety percent of politicians give the other ten percent a bad reputation.
- Henry Kissinger
Politicians are people who, when they see light at the end of the tunnel,
go ou
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Scott Stroz wrote:
>
> Yea...that about sums it up.
>
> Funny, though, unlike other concerts, there was rarely violence. Hell
> I got called there once for a fight at a Richard Marx concert.
>
Not that surprising. Weed mellows.
Yea...that about sums it up.
Funny, though, unlike other concerts, there was rarely violence. Hell
I got called there once for a fight at a Richard Marx concert.
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> Too many mushrooms and too much puke?
>
> .
>
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Scot
No, that was when Trey was still getting high. They needed extra paramedics
just in case he collapsed on stage.
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Sam wrote:
> Too many mushrooms and too much puke?
>
> .
>
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Scott Stroz wrote:
> >
> > When I was still a paramedic
Too many mushrooms and too much puke?
.
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Scott Stroz wrote:
>
> When I was still a paramedic, there was a open air amphitheater in our
> coverage area. I hated working on the nights Phish was there. Some of
> the busiest nights I had in my 14 year career.
>
When I was still a paramedic, there was a open air amphitheater in our
coverage area. I hated working on the nights Phish was there. Some of
the busiest nights I had in my 14 year career.
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 2:32 PM, Casey Dougall - Uber Website
Solutions wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 2
Sharin' in the Weekapaug Groove..
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 1:32 PM, Casey Dougall - Uber Website Solutions <
ca...@uberwebsitesolutions.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> > Phish still tours?
> > That explains why there was a OWS movement in the first pla
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Sam wrote:
> Phish still tours?
> That explains why there was a OWS movement in the first place.
>
The Phish and Dave Matthews Band tours are a whole ecosystem that don't
care about OWS one way or the other, they are not protesters by any means.
~
Phish still tours?
That explains why there was a OWS movement in the first place.
.
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 2:18 PM, GMoney wrote:
>
> Is that still going on? Now that Phish is back out on tour, i figured
> all those people would have something else to do.
>
~~~
Is that still going on? Now that Phish is back out on tour, i figured
all those people would have something else to do.
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Sam wrote:
>
>
> http://cnsnews.com/news/article/iran-s-supreme-leader-praises-us-occupy-movement
>
> The Ayatollah Ali Khamenei the su
there's an interesting idea
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 5:38 AM, Casey Dougall - Uber Website Solutions <
ca...@uberwebsitesolutions.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 8:15 AM, Larry C. Lyons >wrote:
>
> > it wouldn't be the first time that the country dumped itself into debt
> > over an u
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 8:14 AM, Sam wrote:
>
>
> http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/01/19/bush_s_cia_director_we_determined_attacking_iran_was_a_bad_idea
>
> Looks like the Bush team ruled against it. Seems like what Hayden is
> saying should still be confidential.
>
>
> "It's not so
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/01/19/bush_s_cia_director_we_determined_attacking_iran_was_a_bad_idea
Looks like the Bush team ruled against it. Seems like what Hayden is
saying should still be confidential.
"It's not so much that we don't want Iran to have a nuclear capacity,
it's
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 8:15 AM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
> it wouldn't be the first time that the country dumped itself into debt
> over an unnecessary war. The US has had a habit of doing such since
> 1812.
>
We have taxes because of wars... If Corporations want to continue to throw
us into confl
it wouldn't be the first time that the country dumped itself into debt
over an unnecessary war. The US has had a habit of doing such since
1812.
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 7:02 PM, PT wrote:
>
> And who is going to pay for another "conflict"?
>
> Dammit congress, you and your war profiteers .. I me
You guys should vote for Paul. He'd probably help them build a nuke.
That would probably solve the Israel problem.
.
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 7:02 PM, PT wrote:
>
> And who is going to pay for another "conflict"?
>
> Dammit congress, you and your war profiteers .. I mean, companies with
> defen
And who is going to pay for another "conflict"?
Dammit congress, you and your war profiteers .. I mean, companies with
defense contracts, might not care, but we are out of money.
So, we start screwing around with Iran. What is the return on that
investment? We have them surrounded, their nei
As long as those in power can profit from war, there will be war.
Their ability to use the propaganda machine to create villains has
become even more effective with the use of the Internet and 24/7
media. The only way to stop them is to refuse to be their propaganda
tool. Don't even say their na
amen
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 1:47 PM, GMoney wrote:
>
>
> http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/01/18/iran-threatens-us-persian-gulf-cities-with-missile-attacks
>
> A "nuclear Iran" is the next bogeyman that is being constructed to convince
> you that your sons and daughters should be sent t
I would be astonished beyond words if anyone in the current administration
suggested an invasion of Iran. What are they going to use to pay for it?
Some of the opposition candidates, however, I could see attempting it.
Imagine Bachmann breaking a nail in the middle of one of her migraines and
bl
I laid out what I figured was the plan for the Middle East years ago. Use
Iraq as a wedge in the Arab world. Spur the idea of democracy. Then divide
and conquer. Take a look at this 2009 Brookings report called 'Which Path to
Persia?' to get a sense of the current thinking about Iran.
http://www.
Didn't we do that during the riots they had?
-Original Message-
From: Gruss Gott [mailto:grussg...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 4:27 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: Iran planning to send ships near U.S. waters
That would be a great opportunity to show the Ir
afari [mailto:rastaf...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 10:26 AM
> To: cf-community
> Subject: Re: Iran planning to send ships near U.S. waters
>
>
> #ithinktheyareTHATcrazy
>
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfu
They may be crazy, but they aren't stupid...that would be a better phrase
-Original Message-
From: Ras Tafari [mailto:rastaf...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 10:26 AM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: Iran planning to send ships near U.S. waters
#ithinktheyareTHAT
That would be a great opportunity to show the Iranian people our satellite
surveillance technology
On Sep 28, 2011, at 8:57 AM, Scott Stewart wrote:
>
> I think one of their own vessels will sink just fine by itself without
> them having to scuttle it... they'll still blame it on us tho..
>
>> I think it will be much ado about nothing. Iran may want to beat it's chest
>> a bit but they aren't going to do anything that's going to get
>> them annihilated. They may be crazy, but they aren't that crazy.
>
>
>The rules of engagement at sea at pretty well defined and the US has a ton
>of e
>There is no way this ends well.
>
>On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 9:49 AM, Camer
>>
At least one of them though the end was well...
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430
I think one of their own vessels will sink just fine by itself without
them having to scuttle it... they'll still blame it on us tho..
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:36 AM, Scott Stroz wrote:
>
> Never said they would 'attack' However, I think they ARE crazy enough
> to sink one of their own vessel
Never said they would 'attack' However, I think they ARE crazy enough
to sink one of their own vessels and try to blaem us
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:07 AM, Medic wrote:
>
> I think it will be much ado about nothing. Iran may want to beat it's chest
> a bit but they aren't going to do anything t
Agree. Let them sail their cute little boat.
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 10:07 AM, Medic wrote:
>
> I think it will be much ado about nothing. Iran may want to beat it's chest
> a bit but they aren't going to do anything that's going to get
> them annihilated. They may be crazy, but they aren't tha
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:07 AM, Medic wrote:
> I think it will be much ado about nothing. Iran may want to beat it's chest
> a bit but they aren't going to do anything that's going to get
> them annihilated. They may be crazy, but they aren't that crazy.
The rules of engagement at sea at pre
#ithinktheyareTHATcrazy
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:07 AM, Medic wrote:
>
> I think it will be much ado about nothing. Iran may want to beat it's chest
> a bit but they aren't going to do anything that's going to get
> them annihilated. They may be crazy, but they aren't that crazy.
>
> On Wed, S
I think it will be much ado about nothing. Iran may want to beat it's chest
a bit but they aren't going to do anything that's going to get
them annihilated. They may be crazy, but they aren't that crazy.
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Scott Stroz wrote:
>
> There is no way this ends well.
>
There is no way this ends well.
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 9:49 AM, Cameron Childress wrote:
>
> Saw this on Twitter.
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2011/09/27/world/meast/iran-navy/index.html
>
> ...and is the third sailor from the right cupping the other dude's butt?
> Isn't that blasphemy in Iran?
>
>
that is definitely some cuppage.
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 9:49 AM, Cameron Childress wrote:
>
> Saw this on Twitter.
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2011/09/27/world/meast/iran-navy/index.html
>
> ...and is the third sailor from the right cupping the other dude's butt?
> Isn't that blasphemy in Iran?
>
>
It's probably a typo. It's suppose to read 1000m not km. Damn it, we
shouldn't have sold them those Air Hogs! They totally ripped the technology!
Where do you put the double A's?
On Aug 23, 2010 10:11 AM, "Larry C. Lyons" wrote:
>
> Looking at the photos I suspected the same thing, like somethin
Looking at the photos I suspected the same thing, like something out
of the 60's or early 70's.
As for a Target Drone, you're half right - its just a target.
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 10:58 AM, Scott Raley wrote:
>
> Its actually looks like a rip off of another US Target Drone
>
> On Mon, Aug 23,
Wow...the Sheik is hitting the hashish a bit harder than normal.
"The key message is friendship..."
It's a fricking BOMBER! What are they going to do? Paint smileys on the
bombs that the thing drops?
I can see this now "Hey Israel, let's be friends. We'll send our
friendship messenger right awa
Target is sponsoring drones now too?
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Scott Raley wrote:
>
> Its actually looks like a rip off of another US Target Drone
>
> On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Larry C. Lyons >wrote:
>
> >
> > Not much to worry about. Just another aerial target. I'll wait until
Its actually looks like a rip off of another US Target Drone
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
> Not much to worry about. Just another aerial target. I'll wait until
> Jane's Defense Weekly does an analysis.
>
> On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 7:58 AM, Vivec wrote:
> >
> > It's
Not much to worry about. Just another aerial target. I'll wait until
Jane's Defense Weekly does an analysis.
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 7:58 AM, Vivec wrote:
>
> It's capable of mounting several types of bombs and has a 1000km range.
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11052023
>
>
~~
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 4:05 PM, Gruss Gott wrote:
>
>> Denny wrote:
>>
>> Heh. I just read some Ayn Rand, so you guys are freaking cracking me up.
>>
>
> Watch Wallstreet again. Did you know they're making another one?? They are.
>
> Then read the History of Government Wealth Creation.
Readin
> Denny wrote:
>
> Heh. I just read some Ayn Rand, so you guys are freaking cracking me up.
>
Watch Wallstreet again. Did you know they're making another one?? They are.
Then read the History of Government Wealth Creation.
Actually I can save you some time there - you'll find the full text
b
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 12:18 PM, Gruss Gott wrote:
>
>> Gel wrote:
>>
>> That would mean putting human interest before Capitalist concerns...
>> So its doubtful.
>>
>
> Capitalism - aligning self-interest with systemic societal wealth
> creation - is the only thing that will save the planet.
Heh
> Gel wrote:
>
> That would mean putting human interest before Capitalist concerns...
> So its doubtful.
>
Capitalism - aligning self-interest with systemic societal wealth
creation - is the only thing that will save the planet.
and, as long as I'm going all GG on you, I'll quote the other famou
Yeah, me too, except people who are helping iraqis kill my friends and fellow
servicemembers, then i do not mind seeing them die, needlessly or not.
-Original Message-
Date: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 8:02:21 am
To: "cf-community"
From: "Michael Grant"
Subject:
I was under the impression that there was no state of war between US and
Iran.
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Michael Dinowitz <
mdino...@houseoffusion.com> wrote:
>
> Wasn't a question of good or bad. It was a statement as to what state
> of war, quasi-war, or whatever exists between the US
Wasn't a question of good or bad. It was a statement as to what state
of war, quasi-war, or whatever exists between the US and Iran.
Actually, between Iran and the various national forces in Iraq,
Afghanistan, etc.
On 9/29/09, Michael Grant wrote:
>
>>
>> Arming insurgents and terrorists usually
That would mean putting human interest before Capitalist concerns...
So its doubtful.
2009/9/29 Michael Dinowitz
>
> I wonder if either country will stop selling Iran the parts they need for
> their
> "we only want peaceful energy" program.
>
~~
Reading the news on a daily basis shows that it's coming faster and
faster as we find new 'hidden' sites, they test fire longer ranged
missiles, make more threats, etc. etc. etc.
The 5 year assessment was from those who want to show how long we have
to be diplomatic and sing kumbaya. 5 years was a
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Michael Dinowitz <
mdino...@houseoffusion.com> wrote:
>
> But we are not officially and openly at war with them at the moment.
> Not until their 5th nuke is launched. Maybe their 7th. No, we'll give
> them one more chance - their 11th. and on and on and on.
>
>
T
>
> Arming insurgents and terrorists usually constitutes an act of war.
>
Yesh, any country that would secretly arm insurgents or terrorists is just
evil.
0_o
*nods*
~|
Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something the
Arming insurgents and terrorists usually constitutes an act of war.
> Um, maybe I missed something, but since when is Iran at war with my
> countrymen and allies?
But we are not officially and openly at war with them at the moment.
Not until their 5th nuke is launched. Maybe their 7th. No, we'll
Um, maybe I missed something, but since when is Iran at war with my
countrymen and allies?
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Gruss Gott wrote:
>
> > Grant wrote:
> >
> > Not really the point. The Iranian military is just doing it's job the
> same
> > way the US, UK and Canadian militaries are d
> Grant wrote:
>
> Not really the point. The Iranian military is just doing it's job the same
> way the US, UK and Canadian militaries are doing theirs.
And their job is to kill your countrymen and your allies.
~|
Want to reach
Not really the point. The Iranian military is just doing it's job the same
way the US, UK and Canadian militaries are doing theirs.
I just personally don't find anyone dying funny.
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 9:54 AM, Gruss Gott wrote:
>
> > Grant wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Ha, this is funny stuff.
> >>
Surely they must be running out of virgins...
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 8:46 AM, Michael Grant wrote:
>
>>
>> Ha, this is funny stuff.
>>
> Ya, ha, seven crew dead. Hahaha.
>
> 0_o
>
>
>
~|
Want to reach the ColdFusion community
> Grant wrote:
>
>>
>> Ha, this is funny stuff.
>>
> Ya, ha, seven crew dead. Hahaha.
>
> 0_o
>
They don't like the US, but they don't like Canadians either: you have
freedom and democracy.
It's tragic when anyone is needlessly killed, but the Iranian military
is probably still fighting against
>
> Ha, this is funny stuff.
>
Ya, ha, seven crew dead. Hahaha.
0_o
~|
Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know
on the House of Fusion mailing lists
Archive:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/
Ha, this is funny stuff.
-Original Message-
Date: Monday, September 28, 2009 10:27:11 pm
To: "cf-community"
From: "Judah McAuley"
Subject: Iran loses last AWACs in air show accident
F-5 runs into the sole remaining AWACs and the remains crash down at
the tomb of Kohmeni.
http://www.st
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 7:51 PM, Ras Tafari wrote:
>
> yeah, i gotta agree it does NOT smell good in that neck of the woods.
>
> :( a bit scared
Smells like teen spirit. Don't be scared, be prepared!
I'm stocking up on deodo-rant, personally.
And 100 mile per hour tape, gotta have the tape. H
yeah, i gotta agree it does NOT smell good in that neck of the woods.
:( a bit scared
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 9:41 PM, Robert Munn wrote:
>
> See what happens when the list goes quiet? Iran is threatening Israel more
> than ever, Israelis are preparing for all-out war, and North Korea just
> te
They really want OJ put to death. I'm sure a peaceful guy like that could
not mean anyone else that sounds like juice.
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 1:43 PM, Cameron Childress wrote:
>
> http://failblog.org/2009/02/09/jihad-fail/
>
> -Cameron
>
> http://failblog.org/2009/02/09/jihad-fail/
Huked on phonecs wurkd for mi
~|
Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to
date
Get the Free Trial
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;2944008
It's the new Jihad Diet
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Cameron Ch wrote:
>
> http://failblog.org/2009/02/09/jihad-fail/
>
> -Cameron
>
~|
Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to
date
G
>You are making my point exactly. He is NOT being treated like any other spy.
>He IS being treated differently. The spies had jail terms measured in
>months.
The ones I mentioned all have been given the equivalent punishments. Pollard is
not being treated any differently. He is an American citiz
You are making my point exactly. He is NOT being treated like any other spy.
He IS being treated differently. The spies had jail terms measured in
months.
Why should someone spying for Israel be treated any differently than
> Virginia Jean Baynes. She was caught slipping military secrets to the
>
Isreal not set us up the bomb.
All our base... nevermind.
*doodlydo dweeooweeoo*
(that's the music)
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 8:22 PM, Michael Dinowitz <
mdino...@houseoffusion.com> wrote:
>
> To put this into thread context with the idea that spies are bad, should be
> s
Pollard gave military secrets to a foreign government. Whether and for what
reason he did so is immaterial. He could have done it for the noblest of
intentions, or a lot of money like Aldrich Aimes, or a Robert Hanssen, its
still spying for a foreign government.
Why should someone spying for
well, you can't say that we atheists didn't try to warn you. We said,
"Hey, don't make laws that are based on religious values and repeal
the ones you already have". We said, "Not everybody believes the same
beliefs so let's not legislate based on one set of beliefs". We said,
"Some day
You know that is so much bull shit. I'm critical of Israel when they deserve
it but as I said, when they are held to a double standard or are in the
right, I'll defend them. Point in fact, in the Pollard case they are totally
in the wrong. They have betrayed Pollard at every turn and have done zer
To put this into thread context with the idea that spies are bad, should be
shot, etc. What should we do about the spies we have in Iran? Should they not
do their job of letting us know what Iran is doing and/or stopping them? Should
we pull them all out? I mean, spying is wrong, spying is bad,
Tongue in cheek, which should have been said in my haste before Shabbos.
Point is, Pollard is being treated differently because he exposed the US
doing wrong. My saying he was upholding America's honor was a way to walk
around the point. Bottom line from the beginning of this fork is that
America'
I didn't say its ok, I'm saying that they are being held to a different
standard. EVERY other spy (those not specifically charged with treason) has
been released FAR faster than Pollard. He's "a special case". Why? Because
he made the US look bad by exposing their non-compliance to their sworn
wor
Larry...It was Israel. They can do no wrong, they are always right.
Haven't you realised this after years of discussions relating to
Israel on this list?
~|
Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic relea
>Hypocrisy
>Our agents should live and others should die? What if our agent is a foreign
>national? They should live as well? Double standard all the way.
>
>As for the case I was talking, the agent wasn't a spy, he was an American
>patriot willing to save America's honor.
Say what?? The man was
So its ok for someone to be a traitor for Israel, but not elsewhere. Why should
Israel get any special treatment? The guy should be locked away in a hole.
Spies are spies. if they are caught they should be dealt with harshly whether
they come from.
Moreover it was not commercial espionage that
*points*
It's sammy! :)
Hey sam!
*waves*
2009/2/20 Sam :
>
> Didn't Dianne Feinstein give out top secret information?
~|
Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to
date
Get the Free Trial
htt
No, it isnt a step towards war. It is par for the course.
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 5:20 PM, Michael Dinowitz <
mdino...@houseoffusion.com> wrote:
>
> I DESPISE double standards. Always have, always will. My defense of Israel
> is almost always based on the total double standard applied against it
Didn't Dianne Feinstein give out top secret information?
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Jerry Johnson wrote:
>
> Any American who gives or sells military secrets to a foreign government,
> ally or not, in my book is guilty of treason, and should be shot.
>
> Very simple.
>
> They basically ha
I DESPISE double standards. Always have, always will. My defense of Israel
is almost always based on the total double standard applied against it. This
is a double standard as well. We can kill their spies but they can't kill
ours? Sounds good on paper (or email) but it's a step towards war.
On F
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 5:02 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
> He should have been killed. Period.
One rule for all. We kill theirs and they should be allowed to kill ours.
> Also, the Liberty?
The liberty was investigated and found to be an accident. It's old news kept
alive by conspiracy theorists a
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 5:13 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
> Look it's a sore spot here. We killed people that passed secrets to the
> Russians when they were our allies, remember that?
Please refresh my memory as to when we killed a Russian agent and they were
our allies. WW2?
> Because of our "spec
Um, yes, Exactly. That is called betraying your country be giving military
secrets to a foreign power. That is spying.
Very simple, really.
And no, it isn't hypocrisy. It is a double standard. What it the problem
there?
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 5:06 PM, Michael Dinowitz <
mdino...@houseoffusion.
No they should be shot too.
Look it's a sore spot here. We killed people that passed secrets to the
Russians when they were our allies, remember that?
Because of our "special relationship" with Israel they need to keep
themselves above reproach.
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 5:06 PM, Michael Dinowit
Hypocrisy
Our agents should live and others should die? What if our agent is a foreign
national? They should live as well? Double standard all the way.
As for the case I was talking, the agent wasn't a spy, he was an American
patriot willing to save America's honor.
America violated its treaty wi
He should have been killed. Period.
Also, the Liberty?
Come on man, we share interests with Israel, we're their friend, but neither
of us is perfect.
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Michael Dinowitz <
mdino...@houseoffusion.com> wrote:
>
> Truth be told, treaties between American and Israel
Good to have, but they should be shot when youcatch them, it's not supposed
to easy work. It's black, covert.
You know the risks going in.
Quite honestly if I had it to do all over again, and a degree
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Michael Dinowitz <
mdino...@houseoffusion.com> w
Larry Lyons wrote:
>> territories. If they fire a nuke at Israel, that's Israel's business,
>> not ours.
>
> It is ours. Since the late 50's there have been several treaties and other
> agreements that states that if there's a nuclear attack on Israel, the US
> will nuke the perpetrator, on
Any American who gives or sells military secrets to a foreign government,
ally or not, in my book is guilty of treason, and should be shot.
Very simple.
They basically have declared "that other government is more important than
the safety of mine. My loyalties lie elsewhere".
Foreign nationals
Pound for pound, he is punished beyond the pale. He's still rotting in the
worst solitary confinement possible while North Korean spies go free in a
month. And this was a spy from an ally, something that is not uncommon (from
France, England, etc.)
But if we go with your view of things, how many
Are you actually saying the spy was punished too harshly?
I disagree. He should have been shot, on general principles.
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Michael Dinowitz <
mdino...@houseoffusion.com> wrote:
>
> Truth be told, treaties between American and Israel are not always worth
> the
> pape
Truth be told, treaties between American and Israel are not always worth the
paper they are printed on. America has screwed Israel on more than one
occasion which should have been covered by treaty. America was supposed to
give Israel intelligence reports about Saddam's weapons buildup and America
>Michael Dinowitz wrote:
>> Excuse me while I laugh. The rest of the world? Like who? The UN? Russia?
>> China? Go into the UN records and read what's going on (not just what hits
>> the news) and you'll see that the "rest of the world" isn't doing much and
>
>If they don't act then that's their b
Michael Dinowitz wrote:
> Why do I hear the specter of "going in alone" in what your saying. There is
> little to no chance that we will retaliate against Iran without UN and/or
> world backing. I just don't see it happening. As for Israel, well, they'll
As I said, I hope we would have the balls
Well with Obama and Hillary maybe we'll be able to get some backers.
Who knows. Europe seems tired of Afghanistan, I don't see them lending many
troops. Israel can't launch a first strike or other middle eastern
neighbors will respond. The best thing I could see happening would be using
Iraq a
> The flag is not illegal (by law) but displaying it may be grounds for
> punishment of one form or another based on where you are in England.
Since we both know some won't bother searching -
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article47306.ece - England
flag ban fury
http://www.thesun.co.
If anyone on earth uses a nuke first, I think it is our interest to get
involved.
Just like people rush a gunman in an enclosed room, it isn't safe to allow
_anyone_ to escalate to that extent.
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 12:59 PM, Justin Scott > wrote:
>
>
> > If they don't act then that's their b
1 - 100 of 763 matches
Mail list logo
