| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Fred Stone" |
| Date: |
08 Mar 2005 08:44:37 AM |
| Object: |
Not to *gloat* or anything... |
http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/000760.html
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"You know you're over the target when you start receiving flak."
.
|
|
| User: "Jeff Dee" |
|
| Title: Re: Not to *gloat* or anything... |
10 Mar 2005 10:45:52 AM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/000760.html
I notice that the headline, "Was Bush right after all?" is followed by a
big fat red asterisk. The asterisk is repeated in a box in the left-hand
column, where presumably the Independent had something further to say
that would clarify its position. There are many things the Independent
might say to clarify the headline, "Was Bush right after all?" that
would lead one to conclude that the Independent's answer to its own
headline is a resounding "no". But since I can't read the asterisked
explanation, I don't know what that clarification actually says. But I
*do* know that since I *can't* see it, I have no particular reason to
conclude that your gloating is justified.
Excuse me for caring about the nuances.
-Jeff Dee
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kate " |
|
| Title: Re: Not to *gloat* or anything... |
08 Mar 2005 07:44:03 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 14:44:37 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:
http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/000760.html
LOL, you gloating that you were wrong about the Guardian?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Not to *gloat* or anything... |
09 Mar 2005 08:06:19 AM |
|
|
(Kate ) wrote in news:42505453.361472718@news-
west.newscene.com:
On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 14:44:37 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:
http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/000760.html
LOL, you gloating that you were wrong about the Guardian?
No, Katie dear, even the Guardian can't deny reality forever. That feat is
reserved for gulliberals like *you*.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"You know you're over the target when you start receiving flak."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kate " |
|
| Title: Re: Not to *gloat* or anything... |
09 Mar 2005 04:59:03 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 14:06:19 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:
cobalt@newscene.com (Kate ) wrote in news:42505453.361472718@news-
west.newscene.com:
On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 14:44:37 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:
http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/000760.html
LOL, you gloating that you were wrong about the Guardian?
No, Katie dear, even the Guardian can't deny reality forever. That feat is
reserved for gulliberals like *you*.
Hmmm, you swore they lie all the time, now you quote them with glee
when they say something not against your hero. I guess you are
showing your extremely convienent standards of truth. Another lovely
post of hypocracy for Fred.
LOL, you are such a lamo.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Not to *gloat* or anything... |
09 Mar 2005 06:42:18 PM |
|
|
(Kate ) wrote in
news:42547e7f.437805078@news-west.newscene.com:
On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 14:06:19 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:
(Kate ) wrote in news:42505453.361472718@news-
west.newscene.com:
On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 14:44:37 GMT, Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/000760.html
LOL, you gloating that you were wrong about the Guardian?
No, Katie dear, even the Guardian can't deny reality forever. That
feat is reserved for gulliberals like *you*.
Hmmm, you swore they lie all the time,
Feel free to cite my exact words on that. Google is my friend.
now you quote them with glee
when they say something not against your hero. I guess you are
showing your extremely convienent standards of truth. Another lovely
post of hypocracy for Fred.
Silly Kate, you must be desperate indeed if this is how low you will go
in order to find something to hit me with.
LOL, you are such a lamo.
Look away from that mirror, Katie dear.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"You know you're over the target when you start receiving flak."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kate " |
|
| Title: Re: Not to *gloat* or anything... |
09 Mar 2005 09:36:03 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 00:42:18 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:
cobalt@newscene.com (Kate ) wrote in
news:42547e7f.437805078@news-west.newscene.com:
On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 14:06:19 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:
cobalt@newscene.com (Kate ) wrote in news:42505453.361472718@news-
west.newscene.com:
On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 14:44:37 GMT, Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/000760.html
LOL, you gloating that you were wrong about the Guardian?
No, Katie dear, even the Guardian can't deny reality forever. That
feat is reserved for gulliberals like *you*.
Hmmm, you swore they lie all the time,
Feel free to cite my exact words on that. Google is my friend.
now you quote them with glee
when they say something not against your hero. I guess you are
showing your extremely convienent standards of truth. Another lovely
post of hypocracy for Fred.
Silly Kate, you must be desperate indeed if this is how low you will go
in order to find something to hit me with.
LOL - here's it is so simple even you can understand it. If you think
some source lies or you don't trust it - you don't gloat about it
agreeing with you on something. In other words - you've outed
yourself with this thread. Apparently you respect those newspapers
and you think that their opinion is important to you.
LOL, you are such a lamo.
Look away from that mirror, Katie dear.
I've long ago learned to turn off my irony meter when reading your
posts. You haven't blown one up since, but nice try.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Not to *gloat* or anything... |
09 Mar 2005 10:17:37 PM |
|
|
(Kate ) wrote in
news:4256bf4a.454391406@news-west.newscene.com:
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 00:42:18 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:
(Kate ) wrote in
news:42547e7f.437805078@news-west.newscene.com:
On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 14:06:19 GMT, Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
(Kate ) wrote in news:42505453.361472718@news-
west.newscene.com:
On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 14:44:37 GMT, Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/000760.html
LOL, you gloating that you were wrong about the Guardian?
No, Katie dear, even the Guardian can't deny reality forever. That
feat is reserved for gulliberals like *you*.
Hmmm, you swore they lie all the time,
Feel free to cite my exact words on that. Google is my friend.
Whoops, no cite!
now you quote them with glee
when they say something not against your hero. I guess you are
showing your extremely convienent standards of truth. Another
lovely post of hypocracy for Fred.
Silly Kate, you must be desperate indeed if this is how low you will
go in order to find something to hit me with.
LOL - here's it is so simple even you can understand it. If you think
some source lies or you don't trust it - you don't gloat about it
agreeing with you on something. In other words - you've outed
yourself with this thread. Apparently you respect those newspapers
and you think that their opinion is important to you.
LOL yourself. It's of interest to me when they have to *admit* that they
might have been wrong in the first place. But keep trying, Kate, you
might find a point eventually.
LOL, you are such a lamo.
Look away from that mirror, Katie dear.
I've long ago learned to turn off my irony meter when reading your
posts. You haven't blown one up since, but nice try.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"You know you're over the target when you start receiving flak."
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Not to *gloat* or anything... |
09 Mar 2005 11:20:08 PM |
|
|
Right about what, exactly? That Saddam had nukes? That apparantly
wasn't the case, afterall.
Or perhaps that the invasion of Iraq would lead to freedom and peace in
the Mideast? Certainly the pro-democracy demonstrations in Lebanon are
a good sign, but there have also recently been pro-Syrian,
anti-American demonstrations in Lebanon as well. Demonstrations in the
tens of thousands. So it seems that the chances of another violent
civil war there are equally as likely as a peaceful democracy being
created.
It's probably best not to count your chickens before they hatch. Just
look at what happened at Tiannamen Square.
PS: I do hope that Lebanon ends up with a peaceful democracy, btw. I
just understand that the history of the Mideast is turbulent, and
situations there don't tend to resolve themselves overnight. You'll
probably twist my words around anyways, but I just wanted to state my
actual opinion for the record.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Godfrey" |
|
| Title: Re: Not to *gloat* or anything... |
10 Mar 2005 01:58:52 AM |
|
|
On 9 Mar 2005 21:20:08 -0800, wrote:
Right about what, exactly? That Saddam had nukes? That apparantly
wasn't the case, afterall.
Or perhaps that the invasion of Iraq would lead to freedom and peace in
the Mideast? Certainly the pro-democracy demonstrations in Lebanon are
a good sign, but there have also recently been pro-Syrian,
anti-American demonstrations in Lebanon as well. Demonstrations in the
tens of thousands. So it seems that the chances of another violent
civil war there are equally as likely as a peaceful democracy being
created.
More likely, if history is any sort of barometer. But still, there is
a surge of hope in the region right now- in Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq,
Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Palestine. Regardless of how one feels
about Bush's justifications for war, things seem to be changing for
the better over there. And if it works out, I think history will
assign Bush a lion's share of the credit.
It's probably best not to count your chickens before they hatch. Just
look at what happened at Tiannamen Square.
No doubt about it- it's way to early for either side to gloat. This
could all end very badly. But I wonder- could it be much worse for
the people of the Middle East than it was before 9/11? Particularly
for people of Afghanistan, Iraq and the Palestinian territories?
Where repression, illiteracy and hunger are the norm, almost any
change is a good thing.
Time will tell.
-Godfrey
"Faith is not a justification, but an admission that
there is no justification. If there are rational
reasons to believe something, then "faith" is
superfluous. If there are no rational reasons to
believe something, then continued belief is, by
definition, irrational."
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Yang, AthD h.c, Kicking AWOLs Cocaine Snorting Ass" |
|
| Title: Re: Not to *gloat* or anything... |
10 Mar 2005 12:52:46 AM |
|
|
On 9 Mar 2005 21:20:08 -0800, wrote:
Right about what, exactly? That Saddam had nukes? That apparantly
wasn't the case, afterall.
But Saddam has PESTICIDES!
You must excuse Fred Stone. He's a loon.
Or perhaps that the invasion of Iraq would lead to freedom and peace in
the Mideast? Certainly the pro-democracy demonstrations in Lebanon are
a good sign, but there have also recently been pro-Syrian,
anti-American demonstrations in Lebanon as well. Demonstrations in the
tens of thousands. So it seems that the chances of another violent
civil war there are equally as likely as a peaceful democracy being
created.
It's probably best not to count your chickens before they hatch. Just
look at what happened at Tiannamen Square.
PS: I do hope that Lebanon ends up with a peaceful democracy, btw. I
just understand that the history of the Mideast is turbulent, and
situations there don't tend to resolve themselves overnight. You'll
probably twist my words around anyways, but I just wanted to state my
actual opinion for the record.
-----
Yang
a.a. #28
AthD (h.c.) conferred by the regents of the LCL
a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
EAC Econometric Forecast and Sorcery Division
Proudly plonked by Lani Girl and Crazyalec (aka aka Yang's little poltregeist *****)
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.6 trillion and worsening
The Bush 'economic' policy: 12 million FEWER jobs than Clinton and counting
The Bush Iraq lie: -1512 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
Having Bush ***** up my country: Worthless
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kate " |
|
| Title: Re: Not to *gloat* or anything... |
10 Mar 2005 12:38:13 AM |
|
|
On 9 Mar 2005 21:20:08 -0800, wrote:
Right about what, exactly? That Saddam had nukes? That apparantly
wasn't the case, afterall.
I know - the point was that Bush fucked up, lied and pretty much
screwed his country over so he could advance neo-con theories of US
hegemony without permission - and that was what outraged the country -
not whether the theory may or may not work to encourage democracy
somewhere else. He just flat out didn't have the right to do what he
did and should be in jail for it as well as much of his
administration. duh. Not that Fred will ever actually admit to
himself what the liberals have been telling him over and over since he
showed up here.
Or perhaps that the invasion of Iraq would lead to freedom and peace in
the Mideast? Certainly the pro-democracy demonstrations in Lebanon are
a good sign, but there have also recently been pro-Syrian,
anti-American demonstrations in Lebanon as well. Demonstrations in the
tens of thousands. So it seems that the chances of another violent
civil war there are equally as likely as a peaceful democracy being
created.
It's probably best not to count your chickens before they hatch. Just
look at what happened at Tiannamen Square.
PS: I do hope that Lebanon ends up with a peaceful democracy, btw. I
just understand that the history of the Mideast is turbulent, and
situations there don't tend to resolve themselves overnight. You'll
probably twist my words around anyways, but I just wanted to state my
actual opinion for the record.
Not to mention that Arafat's death probably was far more important and
had more to do with changing the political environment at this point
than anything Bush said, threatened or caused. That a liberal
columnist will explore the possibility of it is yet another example of
how liberals are honest. Neo-cons think honesty is a sign of weakness
and have outright said so.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
