Thrown out of an FBO...

That should be obvious.

mike

"Jessica Taylor" wrote in message
...

And why cannot you tolerate someone's religion?

Wow.
..
..
..
Wow.

mike

"Jessica Taylor" wrote in message
...

Unfortunately, Mr. Regish seems to only want to go after the terrorists
who are
either already dead or only happen to have trained in the same country
that the
dead hijackers trained in. If radicals want to kill you, why would you
only want
to go after the radicals in one geographic location at the moment?

"Jessica Taylor" wrote in message
...
Actually, you made a blanket generalization that generalizations are
offensive.

Are you kidding me? You are seriously thinking that debating the
philosophical merits of "never say never" is relevant here?

Now you are making another generalization about "anyone with a proper
upbringing."

Are you offended? If not, then so what? If so, then you have simply proved
my point. Either way, I fail to see how that helps your cause.

If you can't comprehend this, then I believe it is hopeless to try to
explain the specifics of the situation to you.

That's not nice, Pete.

What's not nice? I made a simple, factual statement. It's impossible to
explain higher level concepts to someone who does not yet understand the
fundamentals. It's like trying to teach calculus to someone that doesn't
even understand basic arithmetic yet.

You don't even understand
the underlying concepts.

Incorrect.

You already admitted that you don't. How can my statement now be incorrect?

Pete

"Jessica Taylor" wrote in message
...
The comparison of sharing one's experience with others in a public forum
to
mugging, stealing, and murdering is quite impressive, if not eccentric.

I'm sorry. I didn't realize that using such a graphic analogy would be so
offensive to your tender sensibilities. Try this one instead:

Suppose a little girl wants to have a tea party. She has a desire to both
a) pour and consume imaginary tea from very tiny, doll-sized cups, and b)
engage in friendly, witty conversation with her doll friends.

Does the fact that she wants to drink imaginary tea negate the fact that
they also want to have a conversation with her dolls? Do we decide that she
is not a conversationalist, simply because she is also a drinker of
imaginary tea?

Why you fail to comprehend this, I can't say. But the fact remains, the
exact example is irrelevant. Whether I talk about a murderer or someone
attending a tea party, the point is that if a person has two motivations,
they are BOTH valid and open for criticism or comment. Having one
motivation in no way makes a second motivation irrelevant or nonexistent.

But you like to toss around words like idiotic, so suit yourself.

Anyone here, even those who rarely agree with me, can attest to the fact
that I do *not* "like to toss around words like idiotic". I use them very
rarely, and only when they seem clearly applicable.

In other words, if the shoe fits...

Pete

Peter Duniho wrote:

"Jessica Taylor" wrote in message
...
Actually, you made a blanket generalization that generalizations are
offensive.

Are you kidding me? You are seriously thinking that debating the
philosophical merits of "never say never" is relevant here?

I was pointing out what you said.



Now you are making another generalization about "anyone with a proper
upbringing."

Are you offended? If not, then so what?

Just pointing out that you don't mind being offensive. (You described
generalizations as offensive, not me).

If so, then you have simply proved
my point. Either way, I fail to see how that helps your cause.

If you can't comprehend this, then I believe it is hopeless to try to
explain the specifics of the situation to you.

That's not nice, Pete.

What's not nice? I made a simple, factual statement. It's impossible to
explain higher level concepts to someone who does not yet understand the
fundamentals. It's like trying to teach calculus to someone that doesn't
even understand basic arithmetic yet.

You can get off your condescending "I'm more educated than you" high horse. You
proclaim how generalizations are offensive and should be avoided while making
generalizations.



You don't even understand
the underlying concepts.

Incorrect.

You already admitted that you don't. How can my statement now be incorrect?

Because your statement is false.

Peter Duniho wrote:
bunch of rambling analogies snipped to conserve bandwidth

Don't worry, Pete, no offense taken, although your imaginary dolls and
murder/usenet posting analogies are quite humorous to read! I did appreciate
the chuckle, so thank you.

"Jessica Taylor" wrote in message
...
[...]
You don't even understand
the underlying concepts.

Incorrect.

You already admitted that you don't. How can my statement now be
incorrect?

Because your statement is false.

You are the one who could not understand how generalizations are offensive.
That's the underlying concept you don't understand, by your own admission.
If my statement is false, it is only because you lied.

Pete

On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 22:41:33 -0500, mike regish wrote:

Well, there's about a billion of 'em. Better get started.

you have nukes. Better use them. ... NOT.

mike

#m

"Ron Lee" wrote in message
...
Er, um, Mike. Radical muslims are everywhere. Many countries in the
middle east, Europe, and yes even in the USA. You are perhaps of the
mindset that you can talk reason with those who want to kill
Americans. Nope. The best thing is to identify and kill them. And
people like that will always be somewhere in the world just like there
will always be criminals. Accept that fact and be prepared to defend
our country (which means killing them first) and we will stay free.

Ron Lee


--
Enemy Combatant http://itsnotallbad.com/

On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 09:40:02 +0100, Martin Hotze wrote:
you have nukes. Better use them. ... NOT.

Use 'em or lose 'em... Works for me... Perhaps we can convince all the
camel ****in' Bedoins to go to Mecca at the same time and then give them a
couple of well placed nukes for company? Yeah, we'll have a bit of PR to
deal with, but with a bit of work, we should be able to spin it to our
advantage... The worst that can happen is that some countries will hate
us... Oh, wait a minute... That hate us *already*... Hmmmm... Once you
look at it that way, it doesn't seem like there really is *any* downside
to it...

Yeah. I remember when they all actually LIKED us there for a while. That was
right up until about the time W made it obvious that he was going into Iraq
no matter what Sadaam did. Planned on it all along. That's when the world
started hating us. Hopefully they know that not all Americans are to blame.

mike

"Grumman-581" wrote in message
news

Oh, wait a minute... That hate us *already*... Hmmmm... Once you
look at it that way, it doesn't seem like there really is *any* downside
to it...