Peace Themed Jerseys?

On 12 Jan 2004 07:26:13 GMT, David Reuteler wrote:

i dunno, that sounds like damn good advice to me & that's what i was taught
to do when spreading vegemite. a very light amount across toast (butter
optional). i'm not quite so fond of it when it's caked on like peanut butter
which i'm guessing is how most people who really hate it have experienced it.

Ah, but every now and then a really thick layer with crunchy wholenut
peanut butter over the top and maybe some really strong cheese...
Mmmm! Comfort food.

Marmite and vegemite are also good spread thinly over the top of
cheese on toast before grilling.

Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 13:27:25 -0500, Stephen Harding
wrote:

if the current trend to shift all world problems on to US policies,
helps free you to ignore centuries of British "oppression" (or would that
simply be "management") of Ireland, go right ahead.

There is no trend to shift world problems onto US policies. It's more
that the US policies which have caused world problems are coming home
to roost. Most places would be quite happy if the US were to butt
out. For some reason people don't like having their countries
decimated and their regions destabilised - foreigners are funny that
way.

Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 14:05:15 GMT, "B. Lafferty"
wrote:
snip

Subject was: Lies Finally Being Exposed On Several Topics, None Of
Which Relate To The Topic Of This Newsgroup, But All Do Fit In
Nicely With The Other 450 Messages That Were Waiting For Me When I
Checked It Tonight

Does anybody know why we have such a proliferation of trolling here
in rec.bicycles.misc [and cross-posted] in the last week or two?
--
Rick Onanian

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 19:23:34 -0500, Rick Onanian wrote:
Does anybody know why we have such a proliferation of trolling here
in rec.bicycles.misc [and cross-posted] in the last week or two?

Clash of the Titans of amb and rbr.

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 19:23:34 -0500, Rick Onanian wrote:

Does anybody know why we have such a proliferation of trolling here
in rec.bicycles.misc [and cross-posted] in the last week or two?

You posted 11 times in that thread, and you don't know?

--
-BB-
To reply to me, drop the attitude (from my e-mail address, at least)

"Kevan Smith" wrote

The U.S. funded the mujahadeen fight against the Soviet invasion of
Afghanistan.

Yes.

I can still remember watching the news and seeing them firing
American-made
ainti-aircraft missiles at Soviet helicopters.

Yes.

Those mujahadeen later morphed
into Al Qaeda, the Taliban and the so-called "Northern Alliance" which
first had
power in post-Soviet Afghanistan and which has nominal power now.

Yes.

Al Qaeda is
essentially a reactionary fascist organization -- it has a specific set of
complaints against U.S. policy and actions, and it seeks a return to some
past
romanticized age of supposed greater religious and societal purity.

Yes.

Perhaps "built" is too strong a verb, but "led to" would certainly be
accurate.

Yes, we funded Afghani rebels in the fight against the fUSSR. Yes, the
Taliban/Al Qaeda/NA has 'issues' (valid or not) with US policies. Not the
least of which is the continuing US presence in the Holy Land (Saudi/Mecca).

But how does "US Funded" lead to "a specific set of complaints against U.S.
policy and actions," worthy of major terrorist acts?

If anything, their 'issues' should be with the UN, for establishing the
continued air cover over the two Iraqi no-fly zones. Or, also with Britain
and France, both of whom flew CAP missions alongside us for years. Or maybe
the Saudi/Kuwaiti/Qatari/Bahraini govt, for inviting us in. Or the fUSSR for
attacking in the first place.

Or anyone of a number of other scapegoats.

This seems to be just another iteration of the centuries old 'religious'
excuse.
"Those guys, those infidels over there are the source of your misery. We
must eradicate them!"

Which is, in reality, nothing to do with religion, but merely with power.
Religion is just an easy rally point to garner local support and recruits.

Pete

In rec.bicycles.misc Rick Onanian wrote:
: Does anybody know why we have such a proliferation of trolling here
: in rec.bicycles.misc [and cross-posted] in the last week or two?

sorry, rick, my fault.
--
david reuteler

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

There is no trend to shift world problems onto US policies. It's more
that the US policies which have caused world problems are coming home
to roost. Most places would be quite happy if the US were to butt
out. For some reason people don't like having their countries
decimated and their regions destabilised - foreigners are funny that
way.

Oh yeah! US policies destabilizing the Middle East...or the
Balkans...or the Korean peninsula!

You're a hoot Guy!


SMH

Kevan Smith wrote:

Nothing justifies the killing of innocents. Nothing.

That goes for the U.S., too.

I don't think anyone disagrees with the concept of not "killing
innocents". The problem is how to get at the bad guys without
doing so.

I don't sympathize one bit with causes that claim you have to kill people in
order to improve the world.

Seems to me, someone popping Osama back in the 80's or early 90's
would have saved the lives of several thousand people.

What if some soul had assasinated Adolf Hitler in 1935? Don't you
think there would be a very large number of people that would not
have died in 1939-45?

If you like to play the blame shift game, e.g. "the US built Al Qaeda",
wouldn't you be guilty of the deaths of all those millions during WWII
if you had been responsible for the policy of "no political assasinations",
which I might add, was largely the policy of the US at the time OBL
was "easily killable".

There is a wonderful quote by John Stuart Mill which I'm certain you will
NOT subscribe to:

War is an ugly thing, but it is not the ugliest of things;
the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling
which thinks that nothing is worth war, is much worse.

A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing
he cares about more than his own personal safety, is a miserable
creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept
so by better men than himself.


SMH

Rick Onanian wrote:

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 14:05:15 GMT, "B. Lafferty"
wrote:
snip

Subject was: Lies Finally Being Exposed On Several Topics, None Of
Which Relate To The Topic Of This Newsgroup, But All Do Fit In
Nicely With The Other 450 Messages That Were Waiting For Me When I
Checked It Tonight

Does anybody know why we have such a proliferation of trolling here
in rec.bicycles.misc [and cross-posted] in the last week or two?

It's the beginning of an election year.

Mark "no party doll" Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame