"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 08:54:53 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 10:28:44 -0500, George M. Middius
wrote:



dave weil said:

They've found al Qaeda literature in America as well.

Your place or Trotsky's?

I see. So now I'm a terrorist.

To creatures like Mikey, maybe you are. Don't you advocate
evaluating people and and situations based on what you know and what
you can learn? To duh-Mikey's heavily religious and dogmatic way of
behaving, you might very well be an apocalyptic horseman.

What a dickhead.

Mikey has his reputation to protect.

What I can't figure out is why he isn't advocating invading Saudi
Arabia. Hell, they'd be easy prey as well...

Well they are one of, if not the most repressive regimes on earth, but
the
brilliance of our actions in Iraq is that other nations like N. Korea and
Libya, seem to paying closer attention to their possible fates.

Not too bright, are you? I note that you avoided the issue. Well,
maybe you *are* smarter than I give you credit for, since you don't
bother to address the *real* issue.

How many people who killed 3,000 people in NYC, Washington DC and
Pennsylvania were Saudis? How many were Iraquis?

How many al-Qaeda cells have been identified in Saudi Arabia? How many
in Iraq?

Nahhhh, your grasp of geopolitics is on par with your ability to
maintain a commercial speaker manufacturing concern.

I see, so you're advocating we invade Saudi Arabia.

"Michael McKelvy" wrote in message
...

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 08:54:53 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 10:28:44 -0500, George M. Middius
wrote:



dave weil said:

They've found al Qaeda literature in America as well.

Your place or Trotsky's?

I see. So now I'm a terrorist.

To creatures like Mikey, maybe you are. Don't you advocate
evaluating people and and situations based on what you know and what
you can learn? To duh-Mikey's heavily religious and dogmatic way of
behaving, you might very well be an apocalyptic horseman.

What a dickhead.

Mikey has his reputation to protect.

What I can't figure out is why he isn't advocating invading Saudi
Arabia. Hell, they'd be easy prey as well...

Well they are one of, if not the most repressive regimes on earth, but
the
brilliance of our actions in Iraq is that other nations like N. Korea
and
Libya, seem to paying closer attention to their possible fates.

Not too bright, are you? I note that you avoided the issue. Well,
maybe you *are* smarter than I give you credit for, since you don't
bother to address the *real* issue.

How many people who killed 3,000 people in NYC, Washington DC and
Pennsylvania were Saudis? How many were Iraquis?

How many al-Qaeda cells have been identified in Saudi Arabia? How many
in Iraq?

Nahhhh, your grasp of geopolitics is on par with your ability to
maintain a commercial speaker manufacturing concern.

I see, so you're advocating we invade Saudi Arabia.


According to your simplisitc thinking.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"Michael McKelvy" wrote in message
...

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 08:54:53 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 10:28:44 -0500, George M. Middius
wrote:



dave weil said:

They've found al Qaeda literature in America as well.

Your place or Trotsky's?

I see. So now I'm a terrorist.

To creatures like Mikey, maybe you are. Don't you advocate
evaluating people and and situations based on what you know and what
you can learn? To duh-Mikey's heavily religious and dogmatic way of
behaving, you might very well be an apocalyptic horseman.

What a dickhead.

Mikey has his reputation to protect.

What I can't figure out is why he isn't advocating invading Saudi
Arabia. Hell, they'd be easy prey as well...

Well they are one of, if not the most repressive regimes on earth, but
the
brilliance of our actions in Iraq is that other nations like N. Korea
and
Libya, seem to paying closer attention to their possible fates.

Not too bright, are you? I note that you avoided the issue. Well,
maybe you *are* smarter than I give you credit for, since you don't
bother to address the *real* issue.

How many people who killed 3,000 people in NYC, Washington DC and
Pennsylvania were Saudis? How many were Iraquis?

How many al-Qaeda cells have been identified in Saudi Arabia? How many
in Iraq?

Nahhhh, your grasp of geopolitics is on par with your ability to
maintain a commercial speaker manufacturing concern.

I see, so you're advocating we invade Saudi Arabia.



I meant to say, according to 'his' simplistic thinking, sorry.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 15:46:55 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 08:54:53 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 10:28:44 -0500, George M. Middius
wrote:



dave weil said:

They've found al Qaeda literature in America as well.

Your place or Trotsky's?

I see. So now I'm a terrorist.

To creatures like Mikey, maybe you are. Don't you advocate
evaluating people and and situations based on what you know and what
you can learn? To duh-Mikey's heavily religious and dogmatic way of
behaving, you might very well be an apocalyptic horseman.

What a dickhead.

Mikey has his reputation to protect.

What I can't figure out is why he isn't advocating invading Saudi
Arabia. Hell, they'd be easy prey as well...

Well they are one of, if not the most repressive regimes on earth, but
the
brilliance of our actions in Iraq is that other nations like N. Korea and
Libya, seem to paying closer attention to their possible fates.

Not too bright, are you? I note that you avoided the issue. Well,
maybe you *are* smarter than I give you credit for, since you don't
bother to address the *real* issue.

How many people who killed 3,000 people in NYC, Washington DC and
Pennsylvania were Saudis? How many were Iraquis?

How many al-Qaeda cells have been identified in Saudi Arabia? How many
in Iraq?

Nahhhh, your grasp of geopolitics is on par with your ability to
maintain a commercial speaker manufacturing concern.

I see, so you're advocating we invade Saudi Arabia.

I'm just saying that it's odd that you *aren't*.

I'm not. unlike you, advocating invading *anybody* (at this particular
point in history).

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 15:46:55 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 08:54:53 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 10:28:44 -0500, George M. Middius
wrote:



dave weil said:

They've found al Qaeda literature in America as well.

Your place or Trotsky's?

I see. So now I'm a terrorist.

To creatures like Mikey, maybe you are. Don't you advocate
evaluating people and and situations based on what you know and
what
you can learn? To duh-Mikey's heavily religious and dogmatic way of
behaving, you might very well be an apocalyptic horseman.

What a dickhead.

Mikey has his reputation to protect.

What I can't figure out is why he isn't advocating invading Saudi
Arabia. Hell, they'd be easy prey as well...

Well they are one of, if not the most repressive regimes on earth, but
the
brilliance of our actions in Iraq is that other nations like N. Korea
and
Libya, seem to paying closer attention to their possible fates.

Not too bright, are you? I note that you avoided the issue. Well,
maybe you *are* smarter than I give you credit for, since you don't
bother to address the *real* issue.

How many people who killed 3,000 people in NYC, Washington DC and
Pennsylvania were Saudis? How many were Iraquis?

How many al-Qaeda cells have been identified in Saudi Arabia? How many
in Iraq?

Nahhhh, your grasp of geopolitics is on par with your ability to
maintain a commercial speaker manufacturing concern.

I see, so you're advocating we invade Saudi Arabia.

I'm just saying that it's odd that you *aren't*.

I'm not. unlike you, advocating invading *anybody* (at this particular
point in history).

Nor am I. Saudi Arabia is not a threat to us. If it becomes
one............

On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 10:05:19 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:

I'm not. unlike you, advocating invading *anybody* (at this particular
point in history).

Nor am I. Saudi Arabia is not a threat to us. If it becomes
one............

I see. So now you've decided that we shouldn't have invaded Iraq. Good
for you.

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 10:05:19 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:

I'm not. unlike you, advocating invading *anybody* (at this particular
point in history).

Nor am I. Saudi Arabia is not a threat to us. If it becomes
one............

I see. So now you've decided that we shouldn't have invaded Iraq. Good
for you.

Why do think you win an argument by lying?

Are you stupid or just an asshole? Never mind.

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 19:10:23 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 10:05:19 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:

I'm not. unlike you, advocating invading *anybody* (at this particular
point in history).

Nor am I. Saudi Arabia is not a threat to us. If it becomes
one............

I see. So now you've decided that we shouldn't have invaded Iraq. Good
for you.

Why do think you win an argument by lying?

You just said that you aren't advocating invading *anyone* at this
particular point in history.

Make up your mind.

Are you stupid or just an asshole? Never mind.

Hey, I'm not the one who one minute agreed that we shouldn't be
invading anyone and then denying it the next.

Not too bright, are we, failed-speaker-manufacturer.

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 19:10:23 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 10:05:19 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:

I'm not. unlike you, advocating invading *anybody* (at this
particular
point in history).

Nor am I. Saudi Arabia is not a threat to us. If it becomes
one............

I see. So now you've decided that we shouldn't have invaded Iraq. Good
for you.

Why do think you win an argument by lying?

You just said that you aren't advocating invading *anyone* at this
particular point in history.

Make up your mind.

I'm sorry you couldn't make the connection that we've ALREADY invaded Iraq.

Are you stupid or just an asshole? Never mind.

Hey, I'm not the one who one minute agreed that we shouldn't be
invading anyone and then denying it the next.

Neither am I, liar

Not too bright, are we, failed-speaker-manufacturer.

Better to have failed, than to never have tried, waiter.