9/11...5th Anniversary

"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" wrote in message
oups.com...

What is a "mout"?

Military Operations in Urban Terrain.

"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" wrote in message
ups.com...
[...]
A hell of a lot more people have died due to greed driven violence and
billions more (if not the entire human species) will likely die
unpleasant deaths due to collective inability of societies to live in a
sustainable manner. Compared to this, what are a few thousand people, a
few high-rise buildings, and a few aeroplanes? Most people on the
planet now living are doomed to a "short, nasty and brutish existence
(as Hobbes might put it), so get over September 11, 2001 already. If
you found the events of that day shocking, it is because you were
living the deluded "American" existence of being above the miseries of
other societies.

Sure, and there are several thousand American deaths associated with the War
in Iraq but note how Mr. Sherman and all the other left wing liberal ding
bats want to a make big thing about that, but not about 9/11. Hells Bells,
don't you know it is all our fault that we were attacked in the first place
by the Islamists? Yea, Mr. Sherman would like us to forget about 9/11 but
not about our war deaths in Iraq. Why is that pray tell? It is because he is
nothing but a Bush Hater and, in essence, an America Hater.

Human civilization has passed its peak, and the downhill ride is going
to be ugly. Enjoy!

Yes, thanks to liberal left wing ding bats like you! Marx and Lenin anyone?

Why must you
reduce and *******ize my message into a compare and contrast scenario
in order to assess which event took more skill, cunning and precision
to implement? What I wrote had nothing remotely to do with the Ford
Pinto. What I wrote had nothing remotely to do with Pearl Harbor.

I changed the subject line to reflect the change in subject. This is
proper Usenet etiquette.

No, you should never do that with a new topic. That is what is known as
hijacking and only scoundrels do it. Post your own original message with its
own topic heading if you can't stand to see it as a response to someone
else's message. You should not have changed the subject heading.

I could change the subject heading right now if I were as big a scoundrel as
you are. How about ... "Tom Sherman's lack of Usenet etiquette," since that
is what the topic is becoming.
[...]

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"JimmyMac" wrote in message
oups.com...
[...]
I though you claimed time and time again that I NEVER post ANY original
messages and I thought that you denied being a troll. Like me? Forget
it. You and I will never be buds. I just think that you enjoy the
respite from me getting in your face an giving you **** like you do to
others.

I haven't had any 'buds' since I was 12 years of age and I sure as hell
don't want any now. But I especially do not like those who go about in life
with chips on their shoulders, ever so sensitive that you can't say boo to
them. Hey Jim - BOO!
[...]

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" wrote in message
ups.com...

JimmyMac wrote:
Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
Frankly, I rather like those like Jim McNamara who post on various
occasions
and holidays reminding us of how we can be better than we normally are.
Life
goes by quickly and we are soon dead and in our graves.

Thanks for you support I guess. You know there There is much that I
could contribute to this the course that this thread has taken, but
simply don't have the time or the incloination at the momentand I don't
feel that the direction it is going has anything to do with my original
post. On another note, Tom has been trying to draw me in for some
reason. I guess he has recovered from our last skirmish and is itchin'
for a fight.

Don't troll the newsgroups with self-promotion disguised as the
patriotic line" and expect not to have it pointed out.

It was nothing but an anniversary observation. In the past others used to do
this sort of thing on various holidays too. As long as such messages are
tied to something appropriate I do not consider it trolling. Unlike you
however, I am not offended by patriotism no matter how it is presented. Jim
is not into self-promotion. That is what you and I are all about.

On still another note, although Ed Gin was more than
just a casual cycling acquaintance at one time, I am certainly not
saddened by the mentioning of hm being an ex-friend as Tom asserted. I
would have it no other way. EX works for me....

Why do so many people report evidence that indicates the contrary? Is
there a Chicagoland vendetta against Jimmy Mac?

Jim has a few minor faults but they pale into insignificance compared to the
villainous criminal vandal troll Ed Gin. But let's face it, only Ed Dolan
the Great is perfect in every respect. It is why He is well on His way to
becoming a God. Yea, He is just too Great for mere Sainthood!

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
JimmyMac wrote:
Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
JimmyMac wrote:
Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
JimmyMac wrote:
Edward Dolan wrote:
"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" wrote in message
oups.com...

Mr. Ed Dolan the Grate wrote:
"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" wrote in message
oups.com...

JimmyMac wrote:
[...]
These tragic events exploited the naive vulnerabilities of a free
world
nation and exposed an egregious failure within its intelligence
community. The level of precision and the enormity of scale of this
methodical, systematic attack were unprecedented. This was a
catastrophe of unparalleled proportion.

You have just hurt the feelings of Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto. Remember
that little incident on Oahu on December 7, 1941?
[...]

Pearl Harbor was not on the same scale as the World Trade Center. Why?
Because it was an attack on a military base which was located in a
territory
of the U.S. halfway around the world - not quite the same thing as an
attack
on the civilian population of New York City.

The level of skill and precision exhibited by the thousands of Japanese
naval personnel involved in the Pearl Harbor attack certainly exceeds
that required to mug a few pilots and crash into a building. [1]

Yes, but intent is everything. The fact is that the Japanese could not have
struck the U.S. homeland even if they had wanted to. Moreover, they attacked
military bases, not innocent civilians like the scum bag Islamists. I think
the Japanese also invaded the Aleutian Islands later on, another distant
territory of the U.S. I mean, just how pathetic can you get!

Speaking of deliberately crashing airplanes into things, the Japanese
resorted to "kamikaze" attacks due to the attrition of trained pilots.
It takes much less skill to fly an airplane into a ship than to hit it
with a bomb or torpedo launched from an airplane.

Yes, but the Japanese only became desperate in last stages of the war when
they knew all had been lost. But the murderous kamikaze nature of our two
enemies were and are the same. It is always best not to be a fanatic about
anything unless you wish to die.

I will take Mr. Sherman at his word that he is merely being flippant and
not
behaving like some far left wing liberal nut and screwball (all one
word),
as he is want to do from time to time.

When a car is successful, the name is reused on several generations of
redesign, e.g. Toyota Corolla, Honda Accord. Notice that Ford Motor
Company has NOT reused the "Pinto" (or "badge engineered" Mercury
Bobcat) names.

Your tirade about the Pinto belonged on its own thread, not on Jim's heart
felt remembrance to the 9/11 episode. However, it would have been OK for you
to post it there anyway provided you had not changed the subject heading.
NEVER do that with a fresh topic! Once a thread has gone on and one and has
gotten off the original topic, only then is it OK to change the subject
heading.

Frankly, I rather like those like Jim McNamara who post on various occasions
and holidays reminding us of how we can be better than we normally are. Life
goes by quickly and we are soon dead and in our graves.

Thanks for you support I guess. You know there There is much that I
could contribute to this the course that this thread has taken, but
simply don't have the time or the incloination at the momentand I don't
feel that the direction it is going has anything to do with my original
post. On another note, Tom has been trying to draw me in for some
reason. I guess he has recovered from our last skirmish and is itchin'
for a fight.

Don't troll the newsgroups with self-promotion disguised as the
patriotic line" and expect not to have it pointed out.

Opinion state as fact and yours is an opinion that is as of yet
unsupported by any like commentary from the readership. Your response
was unfitting and you have since attempted to divert the focus of
intent from you to me ... clever, but you failed. You misconstrued my
intent, but that matters not because you matter not.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

Thank you for providing us with your self-portrait.

For some reason when people mention September 11, 2001, there is a
ridiculous unwritten rule in the US that it gives validity to whatever
else they say, and put it beyond criticism. JimmyMac exploited this to
self-promote his writing. Enough said.

Opinion stated as fact, again??? What you have presented is a
declaration that is made emphatically as if no supporting evidence were
necessary. Perhaps you should have qualified your OPINION with
something like ... "It is my own personal opinion", because that is
all that it is. No matter how many times you repeat your opinion, it
will not become any more or less true than it was in initially. It
should be obvious that repitition alone is not a substitute for a valid
argument. An unsubstantiated assertion does not a fact make. Now,
enough has been said!!!

Written, not said. However, it is enough, since reading this is making
me sleepy.

Semantics not substance. You initially wrote ... Enough said. In my
rejoinder, I ended with ... Now, enough has been said, so you picking
nits with whom ... me, you or "C" both of the above? If you so sleepy,
then take a nap. You are obviously a victim of sleep deprivation.

On still another note, although Ed Gin was more than
just a casual cycling acquaintance at one time, I am certainly not
saddened by the mentioning of hm being an ex-friend as Tom asserted. I
would have it no other way. EX works for me....

Why do so many people report evidence that indicates the contrary? Is
there a Chicagoland vendetta against Jimmy Mac?

More opinion stated as fact. This is getting to be a bad habit. And
just who are these nebulous "so many" and where is your "evidence" ...
proof I belive you prefer to call it. The burden of proof rests with
the accuser and unsubstantiated assertion does not a fact make. I am
unaware of any vendetta and frankly I couldn't care less and I am
reasonably certain that Ed's other ex-friends feel likewise. The
original thread had nothing to do with Ed Gin and it should have
remained as such.

Oh, why do so many people lie to me?

Perhpas because you are blinded by your affinity with your associates
that you are receptive to whatever is said of me, or perhaps becuase
you are not open-minded and objective, unwilling to hear but only one
side of a story, but what does this have do do with your
unsubstantiated assertion??? Since no names or evidence have been
provided, why should I not assume that you are lying?

Yo JimmyMac - you may repeat things told in confidence on a public
forum, but I do try not to be that much of an anti-social jerk.

Another unsubstantiated accusation??? You Tommy ... you don't have to
make much of an effort to be a jerk. That seems to come naturally. I
take it this is one of those honor among theves or client privledge
sort of things. How very conventient for you. I am not in the habit
of reapting in a public forum things told in convfidence, but I am also
not in the habit of making accusation and innuendos in a public forum
that cannot be substantiated in a public forum, and therein lies a
difference. I trust that clears thinng ups for you.

Regardless, like
I said before, I couldn't care less. In the greater scheme of things
this matters no ... Ed Gin matters not and Ed Gin's mout piece (you)
matter not.

What is a "mout"?

A typo ... mouth lacking an 'h", like your response was lacking in
substance. Your defense of your flippant, irrelevant intrusion into
this thread and the excuses offered for your unsubstantiated assertions
have been woefully inept.

Jim McNamara.



--
Tom Sherman - Here, not there.

Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
JimmyMac wrote:
Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
JimmyMac wrote:
Edward Dolan wrote:
"JimmyMac" wrote in message
oups.com...

Edward Dolan wrote:
"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" wrote in message
oups.com...

JimmyMac wrote:
[...]
These tragic events exploited the naive vulnerabilities of a free
world
nation and exposed an egregious failure within its intelligence
community. The level of precision and the enormity of scale of this
methodical, systematic attack were unprecedented. This was a
catastrophe of unparalleled proportion.

You have just hurt the feelings of Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto. Remember
that little incident on Oahu on December 7, 1941?
[...]

Pearl Harbor was not on the same scale as the World Trade Center. Why?
Because it was an attack on a military base which was located in a
territory
of the U.S. halfway around the world - not quite the same thing as an
attack
on the civilian population of New York City.

I will take Mr. Sherman at his word that he is merely being flippant and
not
behaving like some far left wing liberal nut and screwball (all one
word),
as he is want to do from time to time.

Also, I do not think it was proper of you to change the topic heading of
Jim's post. After all, he is entitled to say whatever he wants to say on
this forum as are you and I. If you want to blather on about Ford Pintos,
then post your own original message on the subject. Do not hijack the
topics
of others.

I didn't think I'd ever say this, but I am for the most part in
agreement with you. WIth wounds still fresh for many, Tom Sherman's
response was one with inappropriate levity, however, he never indicated
that he was merely being flippant so there is not need to take him at
his word.

Here was his signature to his message that we both object to:

Tom Sherman - I Feel Flippant!

I somehow overlooked the signature, but placing the "disclaimer" at the
very bottom is akin to inserting an escape clause for the
unjustifiable. Tempted though I was, I didn't dignify Tom's nonsense
with a responce. Had I responded, I would likey have said that not
mentioning Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto and/or the attack on Pearl Harbor
should not be misconstured. An ommission does not equate to an
oversight or connote any intention on the part of the author (me). The
focal point of the subject matter was 9/11 an it was the 5 year
anniversary. It was not the anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor.
Tom's curious, light-hearted response appears to reveal an
inappropriate lack of sensitivity not toward me the author but toward
the victims....

Well, sometimes people show off their overwrought, hyperbolic, want to
be a columnist but didn't make it writing - do you expect me to respond
seriously? How much precision does it take to knife a pilot with a box
cutter anyhow? More than launching hundreds of aircrafts after
traveling thousands of miles in radio silence?

Tom,

I really didn't even expect you to reply, let alone in such a flippant
and telling fashion. Jealousy doesn't become you, Tom.

Jealous of the original post? ROTFL.

Actually, I
wasn't showing off and I'll certainly not apologize for being
articulate, but I will accept your "want to be columnist" comment as a
compliment. I never tried to be a writer although I have had several
articles published in magazines and newspapers, so you could say I made
the grade. Hyperbole? What I wrote was sincere and heart felt ...
yes, but exaggerated ... no. Words can't possibly begin to express the
emotion of that day. What you don't understand is that what I wrote
was about the event itself, the aftermath that ensued and the effects
it had on people. I fail to comprehend why you insist on distorting
and demeaning my original message and/or my intentions.

A hell of a lot more people have died due to greed driven violence and
billions more (if not the entire human species) will likely die
unpleasant deaths due to collective inability of societies to live in a
sustainable manner. Compared to this, what are a few thousand people, a
few high-rise buildings, and a few aeroplanes? Most people on the
planet now living are doomed to a "short, nasty and brutish existence
(as Hobbes might put it), so get over September 11, 2001 already. If
you found the events of that day shocking, it is because you were
living the deluded "American" existence of being above the miseries of
other societies.

Human civilization has passed its peak, and the downhill ride is going
to be ugly. Enjoy!

Why must you
reduce and *******ize my message into a compare and contrast scenario
in order to assess which event took more skill, cunning and precision
to implement? What I wrote had nothing remotely to do with the Ford
Pinto. What I wrote had nothing remotely to do with Pearl Harbor.

I changed the subject line to reflect the change in subject. This is
proper Usenet etiquette.

A complaint about comparing and contrasting is funny coming from
someone who wrote "The level of precision and the enormity of scale of
this methodical, systematic attack were unprecedented", as this
statement is a comparison.

What you wrote in response had everything to do with a lack of
sensitivity and compassion and now you are attempting to rationalize
the unjustifiable. Too late, Tom ... What's done is done. For some
reason known only to you, you were apparently unable to take what I
wrote at face value. You couldn't help yourself. I suppose you are
a victim of your engineer mentality and I can't help you there.

Oh please! Don't start off-topic trolls and expect not to be called out
on it.

Trolling is your personal sentiment regarding the intention of my post
besides showcasing my colmnist wannabe writing skills (another of your
unsubstantiated asseritons). I know what "off-topc" means and I know
what a "toll" is, but could you please define "off-topic trolls for
us??? I would have had no issue if you had only obtjected to the post
as being off-topic, but that isn't what you did now was it???
Fruthermore, I acknowledged up front that my post was off-topic.

Jim McNamara


--
Tom Sherman - Here, not there.

Edward Dolan wrote:
"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" wrote in message
ups.com...

JimmyMac wrote:
Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
Frankly, I rather like those like Jim McNamara who post on various
occasions
and holidays reminding us of how we can be better than we normally are.
Life
goes by quickly and we are soon dead and in our graves.

Thanks for you support I guess. You know there There is much that I
could contribute to this the course that this thread has taken, but
simply don't have the time or the incloination at the momentand I don't
feel that the direction it is going has anything to do with my original
post. On another note, Tom has been trying to draw me in for some
reason. I guess he has recovered from our last skirmish and is itchin'
for a fight.

Don't troll the newsgroups with self-promotion disguised as the
patriotic line" and expect not to have it pointed out.

It was nothing but an anniversary observation. In the past others used to do
this sort of thing on various holidays too. As long as such messages are
tied to something appropriate I do not consider it trolling. Unlike you
however, I am not offended by patriotism no matter how it is presented. Jim
is not into self-promotion. That is what you and I are all about.

Agreed... oh not again ;^)

On still another note, although Ed Gin was more than
just a casual cycling acquaintance at one time, I am certainly not
saddened by the mentioning of hm being an ex-friend as Tom asserted. I
would have it no other way. EX works for me....

Why do so many people report evidence that indicates the contrary? Is
there a Chicagoland vendetta against Jimmy Mac?

Jim has a few minor faults but they pale into insignificance compared to the
villainous criminal vandal troll Ed Gin. But let's face it, only Ed Dolan
the Great is perfect in every respect. It is why He is well on His way to
becoming a God. Yea, He is just too Great for mere Sainthood!

Whether we admit it or not, we all have faults. That is part an parcel
of what it means to be human, but I confess to being baffled here ...
how does one bridge the gap and transcend from aetheist to a God.?

Jim McNamara


Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"JimmyMac" wrote in message
ups.com...

Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
Jim has a few minor faults but they pale into insignificance compared to
the
villainous criminal vandal troll Ed Gin. But let's face it, only Ed Dolan
the Great is perfect in every respect. It is why He is well on His way to
becoming a God. Yea, He is just too Great for mere Sainthood!

Whether we admit it or not, we all have faults. That is part an parcel
of what it means to be human, but I confess to being baffled here ...
how does one bridge the gap and transcend from aetheist to a God.?

I refer to God and the Gods pretty much as the ancients used to do. I am
convinced that the ancient Greeks and Romans never really believed all that
nonsense about their gods and goddesses. I think only the ancient Jews were
ever stupid enough to really believe in their invisible single God which
they called Yahweh.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"JimmyMac" wrote in message
oups.com...



[...]
Actually, I
wasn't showing off and I'll certainly not apologize for being
articulate, but I will accept your "want to be columnist" comment as a
compliment. I never tried to be a writer although I have had several
articles published in magazines and newspapers, so you could say I made
the grade. Hyperbole? What I wrote was sincere and heart felt ...
yes, but exaggerated ... no. Words can't possibly begin to express the
emotion of that day. What you don't understand is that what I wrote
was about the event itself, the aftermath that ensued and the effects
it had on people. I fail to comprehend why you insist on distorting
and demeaning my original message and/or my intentions. Why must you
reduce and *******ize my message into a compare and contrast scenario
in order to assess which event took more skill, cunning and precision
to implement? What I wrote had nothing remotely to do with the Ford
Pinto. What I wrote had nothing remotely to do with Pearl Harbor.
What you wrote in response had everything to do with a lack of
sensitivity and compassion and now you are attempting to rationalize
the unjustifiable. Too late, Tom ... What's done is done. For some
reason known only to you, you were apparently unable to take what I
wrote at face value. You couldn't help yourself. I suppose you are
a victim of your engineer mentality and I can't help you there.

[....]

Jimmy seems to be in love with his own words. I find his posts verbose
while at the same time obtuse. They make my hair hurt, so I do my best to
avoid reading them.

On the other hand, Tom Sherman, who is unfortunately woefully wrongheaded on
most political matters, consistently writes in an interesting style with
clarity and wit. It's easy to enjoy reading his posts, even if you don't
agree with them. A major accomplishment in my opinion.

hhs wrote:
"JimmyMac" wrote in message
oups.com...



[...]
Actually, I
wasn't showing off and I'll certainly not apologize for being
articulate, but I will accept your "want to be columnist" comment as a
compliment. I never tried to be a writer although I have had several
articles published in magazines and newspapers, so you could say I made
the grade. Hyperbole? What I wrote was sincere and heart felt ...
yes, but exaggerated ... no. Words can't possibly begin to express the
emotion of that day. What you don't understand is that what I wrote
was about the event itself, the aftermath that ensued and the effects
it had on people. I fail to comprehend why you insist on distorting
and demeaning my original message and/or my intentions. Why must you
reduce and *******ize my message into a compare and contrast scenario
in order to assess which event took more skill, cunning and precision
to implement? What I wrote had nothing remotely to do with the Ford
Pinto. What I wrote had nothing remotely to do with Pearl Harbor.
What you wrote in response had everything to do with a lack of
sensitivity and compassion and now you are attempting to rationalize
the unjustifiable. Too late, Tom ... What's done is done. For some
reason known only to you, you were apparently unable to take what I
wrote at face value. You couldn't help yourself. I suppose you are
a victim of your engineer mentality and I can't help you there.

[....]

Jimmy seems to be in love with his own words. I find his posts verbose
while at the same time obtuse. They make my hair hurt, so I do my best to
avoid reading them.

On the other hand, Tom Sherman, who is unfortunately woefully wrongheaded on
most political matters, consistently writes in an interesting style with
clarity and wit. It's easy to enjoy reading his posts, even if you don't
agree with them. A major accomplishment in my opinion.

Well, I have the unfair advantage of getting paid for technical
writing, so I have plenty of practice writing for a demanding audience.

The disadvantage of technical writing is that the puns, humor and
facetiousness that make Usenet fun are strictly forbidden.

--
Tom Sherman - Here, not there.
I am supporting cannibalism by eating more nuts.