OT Flame War

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 18:06:21 -0600, "Edward Dolan"
wrote:

Jeez! This time I count three sentences, although two of them are rather
short. But always the mention of the arse.

Yes, and as long as the arse keeps replying, the arse's name will keep
coming up in the attributions. Jeez, Ed, how obvious does sarcasm
have to be before you notice it?

Try to mix your sarcasm with some wit if you want to get my attention.
Unless and until, you are just the world's most tiresome bore.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 01:38:34 -0600, "Edward Dolan"
wrote:

All I ever go by are the words I see in front of me on the computer screen.
Nothing else ever matters in the slightest.

Be fair, Ed - you go by only /some/ of the words you see before you.
Evidence which is against you, you have previously discounted because
although it is robust, it disagrees with you - you have told me in the
past that you are right and the evidence wrong.

It is right-wing zealots like you who are the best recruiting
sergeants for the terrorists, hence your honorary jihad-name El-Ohssa.

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

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

"Peter Clinch" wrote in message
...
Ogg Oggibly wrote:

Yeah. Wring your hands. Jerk.

That's what /you're/ doing.

He meant Ed Dolan would like to wring your neck, you g.d. ****ing asshole!

I haven't heard of Hindus stoning anybody.

Forms of execution and lynching tend to move across religious boundaries.
It's that "local customs" thing again, regrettably. Note that stoning was
quite normal in the Middle East well before Islam even existed, as you can
find in the Bible. It is actually the God commanded death of
transgressions of /Biblical/ law, so no particular surprise that another
creed's Holy Book is apparently keen on it too. But just like followers
of the Bible don't necessarily feel the need to stone people, nor does it
it automatically follow that the Koran's devotees do. Some do, but by no
means the majority.

Note Clinch's obsession with ancient history. He does not like to examine
what the Muslims are PRESENTLY doing in the world. I wonder why that is?

If you know of recent Hindu stonings I would appreciate you pointing me
to them. I will show no reluctance to condemn them.

So you say, but you'll actually bang on and on and on and on and on and on
and on and on some more about how dreadful Muslims and their religion are.

Who else is going around the world committing one atrocity after another? No
Hindus that I know of.

I thought I made that clear a while back. Give me a second and I will
copy and paste it here for you to read again.

"Let me make this clear to you. I AM NOT EQUATING THE ACTIONS OF
EXTREMISTS
MUSLIMS, ISLAMIC GOVERNMENTS AND CLERICS WITH ALL MUSLIMS."

So you say, but then you do just what you say you don't do, by dopey
things like saying there is a global war on. Global means everywhere and
war is what was happening in Falluja yesterday. That is not happening
everywhere, thus there is not a global war going on between Muslims and
anyone else.

The Islamic extremists have struck in several countries around the world in
the last few years. Ever hear of what happened in Spain, Indonesia, various
African nations? Seems pretty global to me. If I were Guy Chapman I would at
this point tell you to get your head out of your ass (arse). Consider that
you have been told as I know he hates those g.d. Muslims the same as I do.

"I have no problem condemning abuses of women and children be it my next
door
neighbor, a local priest, a Hindu, or an Islamic State/Nation, or
whoever."

You say you don't have a problem doing it, but the only people you ever
get round to condemning in actuality are Muslims.

We are waiting for those Hindus to make a splash in the world like the
Muslims have. I know if I were a Hindus living in India, I would make it my
full time job to wage war are on Muslims. My motto would be the only good
Muslim is a dead Muslim.

No the female child of the post graduate Muslim (why do you always feel
the need to mention the educational attainments of your Muslim
acquaintances)

I work in a University so the examples I tend to meet are at University, I
mention what they do to underline they're pretty normal people.

University people can be the dumbest people on earth. I ought to know as I
was around them for a time. A more unimpressive group of folks I have never
met in my life. I don't know what makes them so stupid because they are
literate. I think they are just constantly reading the wrong things all the
time. Kind of like Mr. Sherman that way.

relatively safe in Scotland which happens, I believe to be a
predominately Christian country which would deal harshly with the crime
of stoning. But let's move that educated female child, who grew up among
the Scottish infidels, to a Islamic Republic and her chances of being
stoned to death go from nil to the real possibility of becoming a Zhila.
It is this reality that your brain seems not to be able to accept.

The reality is that most Muslims live in Muslim states and about half of
them are female. That would be, a very conservative ballpark estimate,
say 300 million people in significant danger of being stoned. That's self
evidently nonsense.

There are many Muslims now living in the West which they seem to enjoy. Why
don't you as a Christian (non-Muslim) go to the heartland of Muslim-land
(Saudi Arabia) and see how you like living there. One thing I can tell you
for sure. They will never accept you unless and until you convert. You will
be a permanent freak there and essentially hated. Enjoy!

If you believe in civilized human rights, you should give thought, if
that is possible, to supporting the separation of mosque and state.

I prefer disestablishment, as it happens, but OTOH the Church of England
is an established state religion and shows that it is not necessarily a
sure fire route to evildoing.

The Turks are just about the only Muslims who have managed a degree of
secularism in their civil society - but just barely.

Apparently neither does his girlfriend who doesn't want to talk about
what is going on in her homeland. Or maybe like Peter she is apathetic
about the Jihad declared in Amsterdam and feels its just another isolated
incidence by some bad apples whose motivations are of no interest or
consequence.

I never said that, I said she didn't pass on the information that her
friends and relations were quaking in their boots as they "braced for
Jihad", probably, I surmised, because none of them told her that they
were. Note that quaking in one's boots because of an impending war that
you think has just been declared is /not/ the same thing as serious
concern. The Dutch have a great love of debate and free speech and the
national outcry appears to be that this was denied to Theo van Gogh by his
murder, and quite right too. Though there is a wave of anti-Muslim
feeling at present and the Dutch party leader interviewed on the BBC was
keen to use the word "jihad", he was also keen to point out he was only
interested in hunting down fanatics and that almost all the country's
Muslims (nearly a million) were "normal people like you and me". And they
are, though you seem to think that their faith directs them towards evil.
That certain members of their faith are trying to use the religion to do
that I won't deny, but you've been pointed at plenty of examples of that
from other faiths too, yet you persist in pouring all of your ire into one
place.

If there are already a million Muslim emigrants in the Netherlands, then
that means the Dutch will soon be a minority in their own country. It will
serve them right too. The churches will all become mosques and the Dutch
will not be welcome in their own country. That folks is what is known as a
revolting situation.

But Clinch is all for it. He is no doubt already thinking about converting
to Islam. He will soon be praying five times a day with his head to the
ground and his ass to the air. This will suit him because he is nothing if
not an ostrich anyway. If he gets married and has a daughter and he catches
her fooling around with a boy, he will be all for stoning the horrible
little bitch to death for dishonoring him.

You've now crossed over into making up things I didn't say and gratuitous
insults, so time to bow out here.

Jesus Christ! You still here? Get the **** gone why don't you - and don't
come back, you crazy screwball Muslim sympathizer. May Allah have a hundred
camels cover you with dung and **** and blow spit in your ugly face.

--
****ing Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 01:38:34 -0600, "Edward Dolan"
wrote:

All I ever go by are the words I see in front of me on the computer
screen.
Nothing else ever matters in the slightest.

Be fair, Ed - you go by only /some/ of the words you see before you.
Evidence which is against you, you have previously discounted because
although it is robust, it disagrees with you - you have told me in the
past that you are right and the evidence wrong.

No, we are just disagreeing about what constitutes relevant evidence. And
then I always go on to say that evidence by itself is next to nothing. It
has to be interpreted and put into a larger scheme of things in order to
make sense of it. You are in awe of evidence. I treat it with the contempt
that it deserves until it has been properly analyzed (by me of course). All
uneducated people have way too much respect for evidence and never know how
to treat it. You are lucky to know someone like me.

It is right-wing zealots like you who are the best recruiting
sergeants for the terrorists, hence your honorary jihad-name El-Ohssa.

It is far better to be a right wing zealot than a left wing zealot as the
former has an honorable history in the annals of mankind where as the latter
has a very dishonorable history, especially in recent times. You work your
side of the street and I will work my side of the street.

Arab terrorists are made in their own miserable societies and it has nothing
to do with the West. OBL's real target is the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, not
the US.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

"Peter Clinch" wrote in message
...

snip

You've now crossed over into making up things I didn't say and
gratuitous insults, so time to bow out here.


Cool. Go work on the computer network. Take care of yourself and don't
loose your head.

Ogg O

Sig - Leftist seem willing to support Islamic states that aim to destroy
human freedom, enslave women, persecute Jews and other minority religions,
and wage jihad on civilazation.

"Edward Dolan" wrote in message
...

"G. Morgan" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 14:15:46 -0600 "Edward Dolan"
used 138 lines of text to write in newsgroup:
alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent

You may yet force me to go to a dictionary
of invective to get some new names to call you. Just calling you an idiot
doesn't do justice to what you are.


http://www.mikegallay.com/prisspec.html

Many thanks Graham. You have come to my rescue just in the nick of time as
I am running out of words to throw at the cretins infesting this
newsgroup. I will save that web site to my Favorites and will resort to it
as the occasion demands. Look for some new and fresh name calling from me
in the near future.



Heh... Mike Gallay's a Canadian... I wouldn't be at all surprised if he's
a Liberal to boot... Way to go Ed!!!

"G. Morgan" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 05:11:34 GMT "Frank Olson"
used 196 lines of text to write in newsgroup:
alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent

L. Ron Hubbard did it... I figure I can come up with a religion for
idiots
too...


Isn't that the same kind of generalization you're accusing Ed of?


Not at all... My hat's off to Mr. Hubbard (the founder of the "Church" of
Scientology). If you read how he did it, you'll see it's a lot easier
"founding" a church than it is bringing the monster to life... Drat!! Now
you've got me comparing "religion" to Frankenstein's monster... What will
Ed make of *this*?? :-))

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 05:47:19 -0600, "Edward Dolan"
wrote:

I guess; corportate America does like to ensure that the genuine
starvation wages are applied only to brown folks in faraway places,
out of sight, out of mind.

Every nation in the world is sovereign. That is what constitutes the very
definition of a nation. It was Britain that had colonies. We Americans were
never really into that much.

We had colonisation, you have Coca-Colanisation. It's the same thing
but with worse teeth.

The fact is that the poor in this country
live better than do the poor in any other country in the world including
Europe's poor.

As long as they're not sick. Or unemployed.

The unemployed are taken care of fairly well, at least temporarily.

Until they get sick, you mean? ;-)

But I
will admit that there has to be a better way of paying for health care than
the present system that prevails here. I do part company with the
conservatives and the Republicans on this issue.

Pleased to hear it.

But the US has the responsibility of providing for the security of the
West and indeed the entire world.

Only because it has arrogated it. Nobody asked, and I think quite a
few people would be perfectly happy if it dropped that role.

Europe has been given a free ride ever since the conclusion of WW II.

Really? I'm sure that will come as a great comfort to the service
widows. Since the Coronation, over half a century ago, there has only
been one year in which no British serviceman has been killd on active
service.

I
think the US may shortly withdraw from Europe as the threats are now
emanating from elsewhere in the world.

Translation: now you no longer need "the world's largest aircraft
carrier" aka Airstrip One.

But the US, as the only remaining
super power, will continue to have world responsibilities for the
foreseeable future.

Not really. Your government might choose to see themselves as the
world's Wyatt Earp, but very often US intervention is heavy-handed and
causes more pain than it solves. Look at the Balkans and the Middle
East for example.

Once again you confuse opposition to illegal invasions with treason, a
common mistake among right-wing zealots.

You are not on the right side in the War on Terrorism. Because you aren't
you are in effect betraying the West and your natural heritage. It is really
quite shameful.

Once again you confuse opposition to illegal invasions with treason, a
common mistake among right-wing zealots.

I was against terrorism back int he days when the CIA was running the
terorrists, and I'm still against it now. Bombing the **** out of
civilians is not a proven route to reducing terrorism.

The level of threat to my country from Saddam Hussein was
approximately zero, and the same applied to the USA. The only group
of terrorists which attacked the USA were trained and equipped by the
CIA, and anyway they attacked mainly in response to US foreign policy
****ups. So Saddam gassed the Marsh Arabs? So did Churchill. We of
the west have absolutely nothing to be smug about here, and no
justification whatever for feelings of moral supriority.

The entire above paragraph is too stupid for words - and so ... no words.

The entire paragraph is true. Saddam posed NO threat to my country,
and NO threat to the US.

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

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 05:24:02 -0600, "Edward Dolan"
wrote:

All I ever go by are the words I see in front of me on the computer
screen. Nothing else ever matters in the slightest.

Be fair, Ed - you go by only /some/ of the words you see before you.
Evidence which is against you, you have previously discounted because
although it is robust, it disagrees with you - you have told me in the
past that you are right and the evidence wrong.

No, we are just disagreeing about what constitutes relevant evidence.

Not really. The first time we had this conversation you told me you
didn't care about evidence, because you knew you were right (even
though the evidence clearly showed you were wrong). I don't see a lot
of change since.

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

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 04:07:55 -0600, "Edward Dolan"
wrote:

Yes, and as long as the arse keeps replying, the arse's name will keep
coming up in the attributions. Jeez, Ed, how obvious does sarcasm
have to be before you notice it?

Try to mix your sarcasm with some wit if you want to get my attention.
Unless and until, you are just the world's most tiresome bore.

Oh no, Ed, you are nowhere close to losing that crown yet, don't
worry.

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

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University