Bob Muncie > wrote:
> EJ Willson wrote:
> > blake murphy wrote:
> >> On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 23:06:54 -0600, Dave Balderstone wrote:
> >>> Stu > wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> .... and to alot of people it's just a extra day off. Most twenty
> >>>> somethings
> >>>> don't have a clue about what Rememberance Day is all about, and we
> >>>> have ourselves to blame for that.
> >>> Remembrance Day. You have an extra "e" in there.
> >>>
> >>> I read recently about school kids being asked what they though the
> >>> poem "In Flanders Fields" meant. The majority said "peace".
> >>>
> >>> Obviously they either didn't read the poem, or have been so
> >>> indoctrinated by what passes for education these days that they just
> >>> don't understand what fighting evil means.
> >>>
> >>> "It is the soldier, not the reporter who has given us the freedom of
> >>> the press. It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us the
> >>> freedom of speech. It is the soldier, not the campus organizer, who
> >>> gives us the freedom to demonstrate. It is the soldier who salutes
> >>> the flag, who serves beneath the flag, and whose coffin is draped by
> >>> the flag, who allows the protester to burn the flag." -- Father
> >>> Dennis Edward O'Brien, Sergeant, USMC
> >>
> >> what a load of crap. the united states hasn't been in a war since
> >> wwii (and maybe not even then) that had anything to do with 'giving us
> >> our freedoms.' that's already handled under the constitution.
> >>
> >> and since it was pretty damned unlikely that the nazis or the japanese
> >> empire would conquer the u.s., likely that is crap as well. korea and
> >> vietnam, even less so. iraq - don't make me laugh.
> >>
> >> note that this is not to say we should not be grateful to our vets,
> >> but preserving our rights is *not* what they were doing. we citizens
> >> have to do that ourselves, and here in this country, not overseas.
> >>
> >> (jeez, sounds pretty wingnutty, huh?)

> > You miss the whole point. None of these freedoms would be available to
> > you if it were not for the soldiers/sailors/airmen who preserve and
> > defend this country and its constitution from people who would take all
> > the liberties and property you have.
> >
> > The fact that we have never had to defend the mainland USA from forces
> > that would occupy it only serves to prove that the threat of action by
> > our military (to defend the USA) has been effective.
> >
> > Iraq, Vietnam, Korea etc are totally irrelevant to Sgt. O'Brien's
> > statement.

> Sorry EJ. I was irritated, but read it from your reply. I was really
> irritated at Murphy. I missed the start/stop of the posts.

> Feel free to call me a "wingnut". I will absorb that as something people
> not willing to put their life on the line to preserve the freedoms of
> all, are the same people that I protected when I served. I have zero
> issue with your opinion, but I do consider it rather lame.
>
> If someone else is willing to put their life on the line for you to have
> a verbal opinion, what does that make them?
>
> I would never have an issue with you having a "ponce" opinion about
> anything.
>
> I consider your stance that my protecting that right and meaning
> nothing, a sore point.
>
> Next you will say that the jews have nothing to complain about in regard
> to WWII.
>
> Defending the homeland? That is your point?
>
> You are a ponce.
>
> Just because we have not been invaded is not an excuse for not taking
> responsibility for out actions. Nor is it a good excuse for not taking
> action when we were isolationists.
>
> We all have to be responsible for our actions, or our inactivity.
>
> That includes you.
>
> You lost my respect today.
>
> I know that means nothing to you... but it is still a fact.

Thank you for your service, Mr. Muncie.

--
Nick, KI6VAV. Support severely wounded and disabled Veterans and their
families: https://www.woundedwarriorproject.org/ Thank a Veteran!
Support Our Troops: http://anymarine.com/ You are not forgotten.
Thanks ! ! ~Semper Fi~ USMC 1365061

Kitty > wrote:
> [ . . . ]
> It is disgusting that a person would have so little respect for the
> Love and caring that people want to show to the Military Men and Women
> of our country who have served with Honor and Dignity and to the
> sacrifices they have made for the love of YOUR country (supposedly)
> that you would Hijack their tribute to turn it to focus on your petty
> differences with the country which they serve. It truly matters not
> how much you dislike the country of your birth or adoption to the
> tribute given to those loving and giving enough to have made those
> sacrifices.
>
> your tirade belittles their Love, their sacrifice and these who honor
> them by trying to make it meaningless. keep your opinions to yourself
> if you have so little respect. Don't IMAGINE that you can possibly
> say that you honor their sacrifice while saying that it meant
> nothing. you have NO IDEA of the truth behind your allegations, for
> you are not privy to the behind closed doors intel that prompted the
> actions you belittle, but your very attitude assumes you know all.
>
> You're a mindless puppet of a media who hates the country and the
> people they purport to serve and who's very attitude of grovelling to
> one political party while ripping to shreds the other party
> demonstrates their total LACK of the impartiality they claim to offer
> to the people.
>
> Leave a tribute or memorial alone rather than try to pull it down, for
> the tribute is in the hearts of the people who make it not in the
> hearts of the observers who mock it. Those who leave it alone honor
> the love of those who offer it, whether or not they honor the cause.
> Those who MUST try to tear down such a tribute show their fear and
> hatred of that love and their jealousy of that honor given.

That's very well put, Kitty,

--
Nick, KI6VAV. Support severely wounded and disabled Veterans and their
families: https://www.woundedwarriorproject.org/ Thank a Veteran!
Support Our Troops: http://anymarine.com/ You are not forgotten.
Thanks ! ! ~Semper Fi~ USMC 1365061

Dan Abel wrote:

>>>> Do I have questions on why the decision to go to into Iraq? Yes. But I
>>>> also do not have all the details.
>>> you don't have 'all the details' because the bush administration
>>> deliberately chose to lie about them. surprise!
>>>
>>> blake
>> I don't know if lies were involved. But I do know that we as civvies are
>> often left out of the decisions as the administrations don't share info,
>> and if they had, by the time we did have input, it would likely be
>> ineffective for out input capability.
>
> You bring up some good points, Bob, but I think the question now is not
> whether every person in the world had the necessary information to
> decide whether to invade Iraq back then because of WOMD, but whether we
> *now* have the information to decide if we *should* have done it.


A lot of the rest of us did not believe the stories at the time. The US
administration tried to undermine the credibility of the UN weapons
inspectors. who said that they didn't think Iraq had WMDs. We did not
believe Powell's smoke and mirrors, like showing high altitude photos of
trucks and the artists renderings of what a mobile bio-chemical warfare
labs might look like, as if those trucks were bio-chemical labs. It
was said at the time that the Nigerian yellow cake papers were
forgeries. There are so many lies about what they found that a
surprisingly high number of Americans still think that the troops did
find WMDs, even after the administration admitted that there were none
found and that they had acted on faulty intelligence.


While some Americans may like to try to claim that they *now* have the
information, most of the rest of the world knew it at the time.
Americans chose to go along with Bush the Lesser and adopt that idiotic
with us or agin us mentality and brand us as anti-American as he
proceeded to invade another country on the basis of a pack of lies.

On Sun, 15 Nov 2009 00:16:27 -0500, Bob Muncie wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
>> On Fri, 13 Nov 2009 18:48:11 -0500, Bob Muncie wrote:
>>> Do I have questions on why the decision to go to into Iraq? Yes. But I
>>> also do not have all the details.
>>
>> you don't have 'all the details' because the bush administration
>> deliberately chose to lie about them. surprise!
>>
>> blake
>
> I don't know if lies were involved. But I do know that we as civvies are
> often left out of the decisions as the administrations don't share info,
> and if they had, by the time we did have input, it would likely be
> ineffective for out input capability.
>
> Bob

huh? you *still* don't know if lies were involved?

blake

On Sun, 15 Nov 2009 00:25:40 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:

> In article >,
> Bob Muncie > wrote:
>
>> blake murphy wrote:
>>> On Fri, 13 Nov 2009 18:48:11 -0500, Bob Muncie wrote:
>>>> Do I have questions on why the decision to go to into Iraq? Yes. But I
>>>> also do not have all the details.
>>>
>>> you don't have 'all the details' because the bush administration
>>> deliberately chose to lie about them. surprise!
>>>
>>> blake
>>
>> I don't know if lies were involved. But I do know that we as civvies are
>> often left out of the decisions as the administrations don't share info,
>> and if they had, by the time we did have input, it would likely be
>> ineffective for out input capability.
>
> You bring up some good points, Bob, but I think the question now is not
> whether every person in the world had the necessary information to
> decide whether to invade Iraq back then because of WOMD, but whether we
> *now* have the information to decide if we *should* have done it.

actually, the information was available then. it's just that anyone who
pointed to it was a 'traitor,' 'friend of the terrorists' or 'not
supporting our president in a time of war.' (funny how the last one has
flown out the window with a democratic administration.)

your pal,
blake

Dan Abel wrote:
> In article >,
> Bob Muncie > wrote:
>
>> blake murphy wrote:
>>> On Fri, 13 Nov 2009 18:48:11 -0500, Bob Muncie wrote:
>>>> Do I have questions on why the decision to go to into Iraq? Yes. But I
>>>> also do not have all the details.
>>> you don't have 'all the details' because the bush administration
>>> deliberately chose to lie about them. surprise!
>>>
>>> blake
>> I don't know if lies were involved. But I do know that we as civvies are
>> often left out of the decisions as the administrations don't share info,
>> and if they had, by the time we did have input, it would likely be
>> ineffective for out input capability.
>
> You bring up some good points, Bob, but I think the question now is not
> whether every person in the world had the necessary information to
> decide whether to invade Iraq back then because of WOMD, but whether we
> *now* have the information to decide if we *should* have done it.
>

I agree that is also a sore point, and likely more timely.

Bob

Kitty wrote:
> On Nov 12, 9:50 am, blake murphy > wrote:
>
>> what a load of crap. the united states hasn't been in a war since wwii
>> (and maybe not even then) that had anything to do with 'giving us our
>> freedoms.' that's already handled under the constitution.
>>
>> and since it was pretty damned unlikely that the nazis or the japanese
>> empire would conquer the u.s., likely that is crap as well. korea and
>> vietnam, even less so. iraq - don't make me laugh.
>>
>> note that this is not to say we should not be grateful to our vets, but
>> preserving our rights is *not* what they were doing. we citizens have to
>> do that ourselves, and here in this country, not overseas.
>>
>> (jeez, sounds pretty wingnutty, huh?)
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake
>
> It is disgusting that a person would have so little respect for the
> Love and caring that people want to show to the Military Men and Women
> of our country who have served with Honor and Dignity and to the
> sacrifices they have made for the love of YOUR country (supposedly)
> that you would Hijack their tribute to turn it to focus on your petty
> differences with the country which they serve. It truly matters not
> how much you dislike the country of your birth or adoption to the
> tribute given to those loving and giving enough to have made those
> sacrifices.
>
> your tirade belittles their Love, their sacrifice and these who honor
> them by trying to make it meaningless. keep your opinions to yourself
> if you have so little respect. Don't IMAGINE that you can possibly
> say that you honor their sacrifice while saying that it meant
> nothing. you have NO IDEA of the truth behind your allegations, for
> you are not privy to the behind closed doors intel that prompted the
> actions you belittle, but your very attitude assumes you know all.
>
> You're a mindless puppet of a media who hates the country and the
> people they purport to serve and who's very attitude of grovelling to
> one political party while ripping to shreds the other party
> demonstrates their total LACK of the impartiality they claim to offer
> to the people.
>
> Leave a tribute or memorial alone rather than try to pull it down, for
> the tribute is in the hearts of the people who make it not in the
> hearts of the observers who mock it. Those who leave it alone honor
> the love of those who offer it, whether or not they honor the cause.
> Those who MUST try to tear down such a tribute show their fear and
> hatred of that love and their jealousy of that honor given.
>
> FWIW, kitty

Write on Kitty, Right on!

EJ in NJ

On Sun, 15 Nov 2009 20:59:26 -0500, EJ Willson wrote:

> Kitty wrote:
>> On Nov 12, 9:50 am, blake murphy > wrote:
>>
>>> what a load of crap. the united states hasn't been in a war since wwii
>>> (and maybe not even then) that had anything to do with 'giving us our
>>> freedoms.' that's already handled under the constitution.
>>>
>>> and since it was pretty damned unlikely that the nazis or the japanese
>>> empire would conquer the u.s., likely that is crap as well. korea and
>>> vietnam, even less so. iraq - don't make me laugh.
>>>
>>> note that this is not to say we should not be grateful to our vets, but
>>> preserving our rights is *not* what they were doing. we citizens have to
>>> do that ourselves, and here in this country, not overseas.
>>>
>>> (jeez, sounds pretty wingnutty, huh?)
>>>
>>> your pal,
>>> blake
>>
>> It is disgusting that a person would have so little respect for the
>> Love and caring that people want to show to the Military Men and Women
>> of our country who have served with Honor and Dignity and to the
>> sacrifices they have made for the love of YOUR country (supposedly)
>> that you would Hijack their tribute to turn it to focus on your petty
>> differences with the country which they serve. It truly matters not
>> how much you dislike the country of your birth or adoption to the
>> tribute given to those loving and giving enough to have made those
>> sacrifices.
>>
>> your tirade belittles their Love, their sacrifice and these who honor
>> them by trying to make it meaningless. keep your opinions to yourself
>> if you have so little respect. Don't IMAGINE that you can possibly
>> say that you honor their sacrifice while saying that it meant
>> nothing. you have NO IDEA of the truth behind your allegations, for
>> you are not privy to the behind closed doors intel that prompted the
>> actions you belittle, but your very attitude assumes you know all.
>>
>> You're a mindless puppet of a media who hates the country and the
>> people they purport to serve and who's very attitude of grovelling to
>> one political party while ripping to shreds the other party
>> demonstrates their total LACK of the impartiality they claim to offer
>> to the people.
>>
>> Leave a tribute or memorial alone rather than try to pull it down, for
>> the tribute is in the hearts of the people who make it not in the
>> hearts of the observers who mock it. Those who leave it alone honor
>> the love of those who offer it, whether or not they honor the cause.
>> Those who MUST try to tear down such a tribute show their fear and
>> hatred of that love and their jealousy of that honor given.
>>
>> FWIW, kitty
>
> Write on Kitty, Right on!
>
> EJ in NJ

evidently you don't understand what i wrote, either.

blake