For those still insisting that France has always been our friend...

tim gueguen wrote in message
news:yYUmb.190644$6C4.156042@pd7tw1no...

"tscottme" wrote in message
...

"If Gen. Boykin had been caught giving talks to NAMBLA instead of
church
groups, Democrats would be hailing him as a patriot for exercising
his
First Amendment rights." Ann Coulter

Come on, you can't be stupid enough to believe bull**** like that.

tim gueguen 101867

Good point, there's probably no circumstance in which the Democrats
would defend a white, male, military officer, short of his collaborating
with the enemy.

--

Scott
--------
"If Gen. Boykin had been caught giving talks to NAMBLA instead of church
groups, Democrats would be hailing him as a patriot for exercising his
First Amendment rights." Ann Coulter
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2003/102203.htm

"Cub Driver" wrote in message
...

"If Gen. Boykin had been caught giving talks to NAMBLA instead of
church
groups, Democrats would be hailing him as a patriot for exercising his
First Amendment rights." Ann Coulter

Come on, you can't be stupid enough to believe bull**** like that.

Believe it, Tim!

Damn, reading you saying something like that is really disappointing.

tim gueguen 101867

On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 16:47:51 -0500, Cub Driver
wrote:

Obviously you don't live in a university community. (Perhaps, instead
of saying "Democrats", the poster should have said "the Good People".)

I do live in a university community... or at least a college
community... and it's still bull****. Apparently, Ann Coulter is
engaged in a social experiment, trying to find a lie so filthy that
even people who quote her is a .sig file won't believe it. Evidently,
she hasn't found one yet.

Scott

Scott MacEachern wrote in message . ..
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 16:47:51 -0500, Cub Driver
wrote:

Obviously you don't live in a university community. (Perhaps, instead
of saying "Democrats", the poster should have said "the Good People".)

I do live in a university community... or at least a college
community... and it's still bull****. Apparently, Ann Coulter is
engaged in a social experiment, trying to find a lie so filthy that
even people who quote her is a .sig file won't believe it. Evidently,
she hasn't found one yet.

Scott

Find one "lie" that Ann Coulter has told. I challenge you. Put up or shutup.

"tscottme" wrote in message ...
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...le.asp?ID=6976

Yep, about 10% of France is now Muslim, they are France's Hispanics (I
know its hard to beleive but with a worse attitude). The French are
silenced by the prevailing multicrapism ideology and frightened of
dealing in the world as a proud and independant nation. The Ghost of
Americas future perhaps?

They fear either terrorism on their soil or an electoral backlash.
The muslims have sufficient ethnic consciousness and social cohesion
to achieve that while White westerners are wrecked by self doubt,
guilt and politically correct self loathing that drips like venom form
the parasite infected media and institutions of education.

Here is a far more hard hitting version of what is REALLY going on (in
English):

Avant-Guer Chronique d'un cataclysme annoncé
(Pre-War: Account of an Impending Cataclysm)
http://theoccidentalquarterly.com/vol3no2/mo-worldwara.html

Ironically it was Jean Marie Le Penn who could have changed all that
but he was anti immigration and the lunar left and white hating nazi
baiters prefer the corrupt and pathetic Quisling right winger Chirac
to someone that might preserve an European nation, and prevent its
ethnocide as an European nation.

"The Enlightenment" a écrit dans le message de news:
...
"tscottme" wrote in message
...
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...le.asp?ID=6976

Yep, about 10% of France is now Muslim, they are France's Hispanics (I
know its hard to beleive but with a worse attitude). The French are
silenced by the prevailing multicrapism ideology and frightened of
dealing in the world as a proud and independant nation. The Ghost of
Americas future perhaps?

They fear either terrorism on their soil or an electoral backlash.
The muslims have sufficient ethnic consciousness and social cohesion
to achieve that while White westerners are wrecked by self doubt,
guilt and politically correct self loathing that drips like venom form
the parasite infected media and institutions of education.

Here is a far more hard hitting version of what is REALLY going on (in
English):

Avant-Guer Chronique d'un cataclysme annoncé
(Pre-War: Account of an Impending Cataclysm)
http://theoccidentalquarterly.com/vol3no2/mo-worldwara.html

Ironically it was Jean Marie Le Penn who could have changed all that
but he was anti immigration and the lunar left and white hating nazi
baiters prefer the corrupt and pathetic Quisling right winger Chirac
to someone that might preserve an European nation, and prevent its
ethnocide as an European nation.

Guillaume Faye, the man mentionned in the article linked above, is a
far-right ideologyst, with open tied to european NEO-NAZI parties.
You can use him as a reference, but at your own peril.
For an *Enlightenment" you seem pretty narrow minded and racist (or a plain
red-necked biggot?).
I'm sorry I you're shocked by these words but if you defend Faye's and
LePen's ideas that all you are.
If you really know what ideas they defend, of course.
--
_________________________________________
Pierre-Henri BARAS

Co-webmaster de French Fleet Air Arm
http://www.ffaa.net
Encyclopédie de l'Aviation sur le web
http://www.aviation-fr.info

Good point, there's probably no circumstance in which the Democrats
would defend a white, male, military officer, short of his collaborating
with the enemy.

There is at least a fair chance that they will nominate one.

Circumstances alter cases. In 1992 I was doing the New Hampshire
Primary thing and bumped into my favorite liberal. I offered a pact: I
would write Colin Powell's name into the Republican ballot if she
would do the same on the Democratic one. She said: "Oh! I could
*never* vote for a military man!"

She is now the town chairman for Wesley Clark.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

Yep, about 10% of France is now Muslim, they are France's Hispanics (I
know its hard to beleive but with a worse attitude). The French are
silenced by the prevailing multicrapism ideology and frightened of
dealing in the world as a proud and independant nation. The Ghost of
Americas future perhaps?

Well, the Hispanics are mostly Roman Catholic

Still, your point is worth taking. While American Muslims are far from
being the homogeneous group you'll find in France (I presume they're
most Algerian-French, or at least with ties to North Africa), Islam
has indeed made remarkable gains in the U.S. In part this is because
of the Black Muslim movement of the 1960s. Many if not a majority of
U.S. Muslims are African-American, and of those, many if not a
majority were baptized as children. It will be interesting to see how
this plays out.

The U.S. of course has had considerable experience with diverse
populations--that's how the country was fashioned. And we don't have a
situation where 90 percent of the population is of European origin and
10 percent North African / Muslim. California is already a state
without a majority ethnic group. The U.S. as a whole will get there
eventually. Indeed, if the "melting pot" hadn't worked so well in
earlier generations, we would have been there almost from the
beginning. Both my parents were born in Ireland. I have no relatives
in the U.S. except my immediate family. I hold Irish and American
passports and citizenship. My only child is married to an Englishman;
my granddaughters hold British and American passports. Yet I feel
perfectly at home here.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

(The Enlightenment) wrote in message . com...
Scott MacEachern wrote in message . ..
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 16:47:51 -0500, Cub Driver
wrote:

Obviously you don't live in a university community. (Perhaps, instead
of saying "Democrats", the poster should have said "the Good People".)

I do live in a university community... or at least a college
community... and it's still bull****. Apparently, Ann Coulter is
engaged in a social experiment, trying to find a lie so filthy that
even people who quote her is a .sig file won't believe it. Evidently,
she hasn't found one yet.

Scott

Find one "lie" that Ann Coulter has told. I challenge you. Put up or shutup.

Go buy Al Franken's bestseller titled "Lies and the Lying Liars Who
Tell Them, A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right" and you can count
them yourself.

(The Enlightenment) wrote in message . com...

Find one "lie" that Ann Coulter has told. I challenge you. Put up or shutup.

Certainly... the quote in that .sig, for example. That's why I brought
it up. A few other examples, culled at random:

(1) From http://archive.salon.com/books/featu...er/index1.html

"The following passage gives a good example of how "Slander" works:

"After Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas wrote an opinion contrary
to the clearly expressed position of the New York Times editorial
page, the Times responded with an editorial on Thomas titled 'The
Youngest, Cruelest Justice.' That was actually the headline on a lead
editorial in the Newspaper of Record. Thomas is not engaged on the
substance of his judicial philosophy. He is called 'a colored lawn
jockey for conservative white interests,' 'race traitor,' 'black
snake,' 'chicken-and-biscuit-eating Uncle Tom,' 'house Negro' and
'handkerchief head,' 'Benedict Arnold' and "Judas Iscariot'."

The passage is conveniently phrased to make it look as if the quotes,
as well as the headline, appear in the Times editorial. They don't
(notes in the back of the book identify the sources as former Surgeon
General Jocelyn Elder's interview in Playboy, and Joseph Lowery at a
meeting of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference quoted in the
New Yorker). Coulter sets up the passage to give the impression that
the Times called Thomas a "lawn jockey" and a "house Negro" and hopes
that we won't notice that she's fudged it."

(2) http://www.prospect.org/webfeatures/...#500pmcoulter2
(Coulter thinks the left should just get over the whole civil rights
thingie...)

"FACT CHECK ANN COULTER: THE SELMA LIE. Live by LexisNexis, die by
LexisNexis. That certainly seems to be the case with Ann Coulter's
latest book, Slander. Yesterday we exposed a blatantly false statement
in her book about the use of the phrase "liberal Republican" in the
New York Times, and today we expose another. Here is the relevant
passage, from p. 199 of Slander:

Since abortion is not the left's proudest moment, liberals prefer
to keep reminiscing about the last time they were giddily
self-righteous. Like a senile old man who keeps telling you the same
story over and over again, liberals babble on and on about the "heady"
days of civil rights marches. Between 1995 and 2001, the New York
Times alone ran more than one hundred articles on "Selma" alone. I
believe we may have revisited this triumph of theirs sufficiently by
now. For anyone under fifty, the "heady" days of civil rights marches
are something out of a history book. The march on Selma was
thirty-five years ago.

Tapped smelled a rat here. Maybe it was Coulter's repetition of the
word "alone"; or maybe it was the fact that the famous 1965 "Bloody
Sunday" march was from Selma to Montgomery, not a march "on" Selma. So
we searched the New York Times archives on LexisNexis for the word
"Selma" for the years 1995-2001. This produced 776 total hits. Of
these, 424 were death notices, 18 were wedding announcements, 25 were
other sorts of paid notices, 5 were in photo captions, and 234 were
either: a) contents listings; b) people with the name Selma; c)
references to Selma, California; or d) references to Selma, Alabama
that had nothing to do with civil rights (b, c, and d includes letters
and op-eds as well as regular articles). Of the remaining 70 items, in
our judgment only 16 were centrally concerned with historic happenings
at Selma from the civil rights era. The other 54 contained brief
mentions of Selma and civil rights but appeared in articles on
different topics. Once again, Coulter's dubious claim -- that "between
1995 and 2001, the New York Times alone ran more than one hundred
articles on 'Selma'" -- is false."

(3) And, if you want a good _conservative_ look at _Treason_, check
out http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...le.asp?ID=9080,
which is a symposium on the book. When you have a bunch of
conservative critics, trashing the book, that oughta tell you
something.

And that was about 5 minutes of looking. She's a lousy writer,
pandering to credulous nitwits.

Scott