Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #462221 > unrolled thread
| Started by | DFS <nospam@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-08-10 09:15 -0400 |
| Last post | 2018-08-11 01:57 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 244 — 14 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
Trump vs shitv DFS <nospam@nospam.com> - 2018-08-10 09:15 -0400
Re: Trump vs shitv owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-08-10 14:11 +0000
Trump the liar chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-10 09:18 -0500
Re: Trump the liar owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-08-10 14:45 +0000
Re: Trump the liar SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-08-10 14:59 +0000
Re: Trump the liar owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-08-10 15:10 +0000
Re: Trump the liar SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-08-10 15:46 +0000
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-10 08:24 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-10 08:43 -0700
Re: Trump the liar chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-10 10:17 -0500
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-10 08:21 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-10 08:28 -0700
Re: Trump the liar owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-08-10 15:29 +0000
Re: Trump the liar SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-08-10 15:48 +0000
Re: Trump the liar owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-08-10 16:47 +0000
Re: Trump the liar chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-10 12:46 -0500
Re: Trump the liar owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-08-10 18:11 +0000
Re: Trump the liar chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-10 13:24 -0500
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-10 11:35 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-10 11:51 -0700
Re: Trump the liar owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-08-10 18:53 +0000
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-10 12:22 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-10 16:01 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-10 16:02 -0700
Re: Trump the liar chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-14 07:39 -0500
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-14 06:52 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-14 08:15 -0700
Re: Trump the liar vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-08-14 15:21 +0000
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-14 09:26 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-14 19:32 +0000
Re: Trump the liar Helinka Svoboda <helinkasvoboda@protestant.com> - 2018-08-15 00:35 +0000
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-14 08:44 -0700
Re: Trump the liar chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-14 12:07 -0500
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-14 10:21 -0700
Re: Trump the liar chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-14 13:19 -0500
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-14 12:29 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-14 19:38 +0000
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-14 12:54 -0700
Re: Trump the liar chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-16 08:53 -0500
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-16 07:18 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-16 08:18 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-16 08:52 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-16 08:52 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-16 08:54 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-16 10:56 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-16 11:14 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Chuck Chop <"butwaitthere is more"@ginsu.org> - 2018-08-16 21:24 -0400
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-16 19:11 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Chuck Chop <"butwaitthere is more"@ginsu.org> - 2018-08-16 22:38 -0400
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-16 10:55 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Andrzej Matuch <a.m@vt.ca> - 2018-08-17 12:47 +0000
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 06:16 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-17 08:51 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 09:06 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-14 19:32 +0000
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-14 19:32 +0000
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-14 19:32 +0000
Re: Trump the liar -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-08-14 11:14 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-14 12:25 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-14 19:38 +0000
Re: Trump the liar -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-08-14 14:00 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-14 14:28 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-14 15:20 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-14 15:46 -0700
Re: Trump the liar vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-08-15 00:24 +0000
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-14 17:52 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-14 18:22 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-14 18:40 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-14 19:04 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-14 19:43 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-14 19:16 -0700
Re: Trump the liar -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-08-14 19:48 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-14 20:09 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-14 20:23 -0700
Re: Trump the liar -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-08-15 03:28 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-15 03:47 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-15 06:22 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-15 08:13 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-15 08:56 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-15 09:44 -0700
Re: Trump the liar -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-08-15 11:20 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-15 11:48 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-15 12:19 -0700
Re: Trump the liar -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-08-15 13:17 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-15 13:54 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-15 14:07 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-15 14:28 -0700
Re: Trump the liar -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-08-16 04:11 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-16 04:27 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-16 06:29 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-16 06:47 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-16 08:46 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-16 08:56 -0700
Re: Trump the liar -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-08-16 09:35 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-16 09:55 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-16 10:52 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-16 12:20 -0700
Re: Trump the liar -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-08-16 13:09 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-16 13:30 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-16 13:35 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-16 13:40 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-16 14:04 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-16 14:22 -0700
Re: Trump the liar -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-08-16 15:05 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-16 15:26 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-16 16:17 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-16 16:30 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-16 16:44 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-16 17:14 -0700
Re: Trump the liar -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-08-17 03:57 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-17 07:36 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 07:38 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-17 09:03 -0700
Re: Trump the liar -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-08-20 07:03 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-20 07:11 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 08:32 -0700
Re: Trump the liar -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-08-20 10:13 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 10:34 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-20 10:48 -0700
Re: Trump the liar -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-08-20 13:21 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 14:29 -0700
Re: Trump the liar -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-08-20 15:22 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Helinka Svoboda <helinkasvoboda@protestant.com> - 2018-08-20 22:30 +0000
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 15:43 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 16:34 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Helinka Svoboda <helinkasvoboda@protestant.com> - 2018-08-20 23:46 +0000
Re: Trump the liar Chuck Chop <"butwaitthere is more"@ginsu.org> - 2018-08-20 20:03 -0400
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 17:21 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Chuck Chop <"butwaitthere is more"@ginsu.org> - 2018-08-20 20:33 -0400
Re: Trump the liar Helinka Svoboda <helinkasvoboda@protestant.com> - 2018-08-21 00:35 +0000
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 18:47 -0700
Re: Trump the liar SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-08-21 11:43 +0000
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-21 05:01 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-21 08:14 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-21 08:23 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-21 08:25 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-21 08:20 -0700
Re: Trump the liar -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-08-20 18:48 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Helinka Svoboda <helinkasvoboda@protestant.com> - 2018-08-21 02:29 +0000
Re: Trump the liar -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-08-21 03:33 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-21 03:58 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-21 04:30 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Helinka Svoboda <helinkasvoboda@protestant.com> - 2018-08-21 14:08 +0000
Re: Trump the liar Chuck Chop <"butwaitthere is more"@ginsu.org> - 2018-08-21 10:11 -0400
Re: Trump the liar Helinka Svoboda <helinkasvoboda@protestant.com> - 2018-08-21 14:14 +0000
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-21 07:37 -0700
Re: Trump the liar SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-08-21 14:30 +0000
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-21 08:03 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-21 08:18 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-21 08:46 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-20 20:03 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 20:05 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-20 20:18 -0700
Re: Trump the liar -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-08-21 03:56 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-21 08:03 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-21 08:35 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-21 08:45 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-21 08:52 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-20 20:01 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-20 19:58 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-20 20:11 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-20 19:45 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Chuck Chop <"butwaitthere is more"@ginsu.org> - 2018-08-20 22:54 -0400
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-21 08:49 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-20 20:14 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 10:40 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-20 10:50 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-20 10:51 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 11:18 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-20 10:36 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 11:03 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Andrzej Matuch <a.m@vt.ca> - 2018-08-17 12:59 +0000
Re: Trump the liar chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-17 10:42 -0500
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 09:25 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-17 09:35 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 09:53 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Andrzej Matuch <a.m@vt.ca> - 2018-08-17 16:31 +0000
Re: Trump the liar -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-08-20 07:15 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-20 07:18 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 07:25 -0700
Re: Trump the liar chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-20 09:32 -0500
Re: Trump the liar -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-08-20 10:25 -0700
Re: Trump the liar chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-20 13:00 -0500
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 11:24 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-20 16:52 -0700
Re: Trump the liar chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-21 08:41 -0500
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 11:50 -0700
Re: Trump the liar -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-08-20 13:43 -0700
Re: Trump the liar SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-08-20 21:32 +0000
Re: Trump the liar Helinka Svoboda <helinkasvoboda@protestant.com> - 2018-08-20 21:47 +0000
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 15:12 -0700
Re: Trump the liar SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-08-20 22:49 +0000
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 15:59 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 16:14 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 14:40 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 14:56 -0700
Re: Trump the liar chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-21 08:08 -0500
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-21 08:37 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-20 20:12 -0700
Re: Trump the liar chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-21 08:06 -0500
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-21 08:38 -0700
Re: Trump the liar -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-08-21 14:26 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-21 14:36 -0700
Re: Trump the liar chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-22 07:08 -0500
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-22 06:50 -0700
Re: Trump the liar DFS <nospam@nospam.com> - 2018-08-22 10:21 -0400
Re: Trump the liar -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-08-22 11:33 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-17 08:52 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-16 11:00 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-16 11:30 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-16 13:51 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-15 14:14 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-15 14:25 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-15 14:07 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-15 11:56 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-15 08:53 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-15 09:49 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-15 09:36 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-14 20:04 -0700
People who overdosed on drugs, and died. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-08-14 16:54 -0700
Enertainment comes first and foremost. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-08-16 16:59 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-14 19:32 +0000
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-14 12:45 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-14 13:10 -0700
Re: Trump the liar -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-08-14 14:46 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-14 15:22 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-14 20:06 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2018-08-15 04:21 +0000
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-15 04:49 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-10 16:05 -0700
Re: Trump the liar SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-08-10 18:11 +0000
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-10 11:20 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-10 16:04 -0700
Re: Trump the liar Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-10 16:06 -0700
Re: Trump the liar chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-08-10 10:52 -0500
Re: Trump the liar owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-08-10 16:04 +0000
Re: Trump the liar Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-10 09:30 -0700
Re: Trump vs shitv Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-10 07:41 -0700
Re: Trump vs shitv SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-08-10 14:52 +0000
Re: Trump vs shitv SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-08-10 14:50 +0000
Re: Trump vs shitv Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-10 07:56 -0700
Re: Trump vs shitv Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-10 08:24 -0700
Trump makes people think, and it hurts their heads. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-08-11 01:22 -0700
Re: Trump makes people think, and it hurts their heads. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-08-11 01:57 -0700
Page 3 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 13 Next page →
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-16 08:18 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Trump the liar |
| Message-ID | <ftlitcFdciuU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #463295 |
On 8/16/18 6:53 AM, chrisv wrote: > Steve Carroll wrote: > >>> Even more idiotic than that is Trump's assertion that Mexico would pay >>> for it. >> >> "Aside from who pays..." > > I'm less interested in the "aside". > > No one can know, for sure, whether a bigger wall would be a net gain > for the US. Reasonable people may disagree, as to its merit. > > However, no reasonable person could think that Mexico would pay for > our wall. > > This makes anyone who would make the claim, that Mexico would pay for > it, either an idiot or a liar. > Or both. :) -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-16 08:52 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Trump the liar |
| Message-ID | <cc4d3d03-a6d1-4513-a2ec-e33fe4ddfccc@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #463311 |
On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 8:18:08 AM UTC-7, Snit wrote:
> On 8/16/18 6:53 AM, chrisv wrote:
> > Steve Carroll wrote:
> >
> >>> Even more idiotic than that is Trump's assertion that Mexico would pay
> >>> for it.
> >>
> >> "Aside from who pays..."
> >
> > I'm less interested in the "aside".
> >
> > No one can know, for sure, whether a bigger wall would be a net gain
> > for the US. Reasonable people may disagree, as to its merit.
> >
> > However, no reasonable person could think that Mexico would pay for
> > our wall.
> >
> > This makes anyone who would make the claim, that Mexico would pay for
> > it, either an idiot or a liar.
> >
>
> Or both. :)
>
> --
> Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They
> cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel
> somehow superior by attacking the messenger.
>
> They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.
>
> <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
Carroll, 4/10/2015 4:04 PM:
-----
Cute trick... To the guy who hacked my Google account.
-----
No details. Seems to treat it as a joke.
Carroll, 4/10/2015 5:02 PM, <https://goo.gl/51rsmZ>:
-----
Email Hacking Is A Serious Crime
-----
No longer "cute"... now it is a serious crime. OK.
Carroll, 4/10/2015 5:07 PM:
By now he is posting more links to how serious this crime against him is.
Carroll, 4/10/2015 7:25 PM:
-----
I didn't write that.
-----
Now he is denying the posts from his own account. OK, he was "hacked". Someone else posted this. Hard to hack a gmail account given how they use two-step authentication and someone would need access to his phone or the like... but at least POSSIBLE.
Even then, though, if someone tries to guess your password Google alerts you and lets you know what IP address and other info. I know because someone in a Denver internet cafe has tried mine on several occasions.
Google even forces you to change your password when this happens. Very hard to hack these days.
So already Carroll's story is unlikely.
But let us accept it... someone somehow hacked his account bypassing the two step verification. This person did not, however, change his password and Carroll posted within an hour of the "hacker". Before that, unless he is an idiot, he changed his password and the "hacker" was locked out. The "hacker" got one post in.
But Carroll could not leave his story there.
Carroll, 4/10/2015 8:36 PM, <https://goo.gl/NJ2bMH>:
-----
Someone hacked my fretwizzer gmail acct so, for the time being,
don't trust anything from it.
-----
Wait. What? Even after Carroll figured out this "hacker" who was too stupid to change his password had broken into his account and Carroll *surely* must have changed his own password, he is saying the "hacker" might still have access. Might be able to break Google's two-step verification process *again*.
This is *very* unlikely... to the point of being unbelievable.
Even worse for him: he notes which of his accounts he is claiming was hacked - but in the past he has denied even using the other accounts! LOL! He screwed up and made it very clear he has multiple accounts and felt the need to note which one. He made the same mistake in the next quote where he speaks of WHICH of his gmail accounts he is claiming was hacked. Oops! If he only posts with one there would be no need to specify which one!
He has completely screwed up in his game to pretend he posts with only one gmail account. Completely idiotic of him, too!
Carroll, 4/10/2015 8:38 PM, <https://goo.gl/YA7gMO>:
-----
Some mentally deficient child hacked my 'fretwizzer' gmail account
so I may have to kill it. For the time being, don't assume
anything that's coming from it was written by me.
-----
He is still saying that he may have to kill the account instead of just changing the password which anyone with half a brain would have already done (and Google *forces* you to do when someone even tries to hack your account... I know because someone in the Denver area has tried to hack mine multiple times... likely Carroll but I have no proof of this). And he specifies WHICH of his accounts! He is directly admitting he uses more than one account! His claim of being "forged" with his second account is a lie. Proved.
Carroll, 4/10/2015 8:40 PM, <https://goo.gl/j6yCuV>:
-----
Looks like it's still being hacked despite me taking precautions,
I may have to kill the account.
-----
What makes it look like its still being hacked? And what precautions other than changing the two-step verification options does he need? And how would someone bypass this... is he really on the NSA watch list? Seems you would need someone at that level to be doing this. He watches too much TV where they computer hackers spend thirty seconds and bypass all security.
Just nonsense.
Carroll, 4/11/2015 12:05 PM:
-----
Apparently Google is having issues with their accounts to the
point where they're ready to undertake some additional measures.
-----
But, of course, no evidence of this... and what measures? They already alert users if someone else tries to guess your password and use two-step authentication and even force you to make a new password if it seems someone is trying to hack you.
-----
They're now involving several federal agencies in things they
didn't bother with previously in an effort to deal with people who
hack into accounts. They've asked me to leave the account open.
-----
So now Google is letting Carroll know how they are handling these things - and asking him to leave a *hacked* account open... one someone can be using to steal his identity. No. This does not pass the sniff test in any way. Even if they were doing this for some bizarre sting operation, which is in itself far fetched, they would have told Carroll to not make it public information so the hacker would not know.
Just insanity. His own story is so idiotic and full of idiotic claims it simply cannot be true. Carroll uses his secondary Google account - the one he accesses via Tor and is referred to as his Tor account - to have plausible deniability for things he says there. Now he is working to do the same thing with his main account. Maybe Carroll read a report like this: <http://cnnmon.ie/111QeT8> [money.com]. If so he missed the part where they note if you are *really* hacked, which is rare, the hackers change your password and lock you out. Why would they not?
-----
There's some new legislation that will help them deal with this
issue... which probably means more BS for us ;)
-----
Yes, new legislation to make sure Carroll does not have to deal with "hackers" and "forgers" which do not even exist.
The funny part is, this happened shortly after someone in the Denver area, likely Carroll, tried to guess *my* passwords and they did it from an Internet café (Google tells you the IP and that can be used to trace back).
My guess: Carroll is the one who was working to guess my password and figured this new lie of his was a good way to deny his own words even more than he does with his Tor account *and* a way to make it so if I had talked about him trying to hack my account he could say I was just copying his comments. "Proving" I read his posts... which for now I am to see how absurd his lies are. :)
Carroll, 4/11/2015 12:25 PM:
-----
The person who hacked into my Gmail acct. changed the wording on
this post. I've removed the others but Google asked me to leave
one standing for some odd reason.
-----
Here Carroll claims the hacker changed the wording on a post of his from *before* he had even claimed he was hacked. So this hacker not only can *post* for him but edit his old Usenet posts.
I call utter bullshit on this. Out and out lie from Carroll. And then Carroll says Google asked him to not delete these "hacked" posts... this is nonsense. Why would Google want him to leave forged posts in the public and why would Google not just keep their own copy? Even Carroll notes it is for "some odd reason" - yeah, because Carroll is telling stories that make *no* sense at all.
Carroll is lying. Maybe there is some kernel of truth to his stories? Even if so - and frankly it is unlikely he will ever show any evidence to back his claims - the details he is posting are absurd.
Carroll, 4/11/2015 2:10 PM:
-----
And he's so high he thinks people still have to manually enter all
their passwords in whenever they want to use anything that's been
password protected ;)
-----
Nobody had suggested, hinted, implied, or said anything like what Carroll says they did.
Maybe his story will be someone stole his laptop (or mobile device) and he had his passwords saved? If so why not have the device deactivated remotely? Why has he not said anything about this?
My guess: he realizes he screwed up when trying to guess my passwords and is now building a story so he can say his computer was stolen and it was not him. Or, LOL, maybe someone broke into his house and did it.
This unknown hacker knew he was obsessed with me and carried on acting like him. Makes complete sense, eh?
Carroll, 4/12/2015 8:45 AM, <https://goo.gl/KMf4pa>:
-----
The first one, that has since been deleted. My bad for having such
a feeble password on this account.
-----
Now he suggests it was merely from someone guessing his password - which contradicts his above insinuations that it could have been from a saved password on a device he had.
His story changes with the telling.
But as noted, when someone tries to guess your password Google has ways to deal with it. I know - Carroll or someone in his neck of the woods recently tried it with me.
Carroll, 4/12/2015 9:29 AM:
-----
The account in question here is a gmail account. Contrary to
Snit's delusions, I have no idea what a TOR account looks like but
it's a good bet it doesn't bear much of a resemblance to a gmail
account.
-----
Here Carroll plays stupid and pretends that if when he or anyone uses the Tor browser *Carroll* pointed to this somehow changes the way the gmail interface looks. Um, no. Worse it might do is make Google think you are in another country and you would have to set it back to English. But the basic look stays the same.
He is playing stupid and pretending to not know how the Tor browser he pointed to works. Just idiotic of him.
-----
That idiocy aside, I love how Snit has repeatedly, for years,
feigned ignorance about gmail accounts, yet, he keeps disclosing
info that proves he knows about them. Some fools do stuff like
this when they believe people are as stupid as the fool needs them
to be ;)
-----
I do not think Google would allow you to edit your Usenet / groups posts but I do not use it much and do not know for sure. Seems absurd that they would... and others have now said they do not. But given how I do not use Google Groups for posting why would I know the details of their system for certain?
Carroll, 6/16/2015 8:47 PM:
-----
Your obsession with me is insane. Working with Google I now have
proof you and ebot worked together to hack me. Clever. If I press
charges against you I have to also include her so you remain safe
for now.
Do not think this is over.
-----
No evidence of working with Google on this (and all out and out lies). Carroll is making public threats based on lies.
Carroll, 6/16/2015 8:50 PM:
-----
I promised COLA your trolling days were over so you contacted ebot
and worked with her to hack my account. I might not be able to get
your ass handed to you in court over this but wait until your boss
at Yavapai College contacts you.
Maybe you should make that call first. Ask about your comments on
incest.
See if those can not be quoted.
-----
Direct lies and threats by Carroll.
Carroll, 6/16/2015 8:51 PM:
-----
You went too far this time Snit. We have trolled each other for
years but to contact ebot and get her to help you hack my account
was over a line.
-----
A complete and utter lie from Carroll.
Carroll, 6/16/2015 8:52 PM:
-----
The above post is Snit hacking my account.
-----
A complete and utter lie... more false accusations from him.
Carroll, 6/16/2015 8:53 PM:
-----
You edited those posts when you hacked my account. Do not trust
anything from my fretwizzer account now that Snit and ebot have
access to it.
-----
More unsupported claims and attacks by Carroll.
Carroll, 4/16/2015 8:56 PM:
-----
Working with Google I now have proof Snit and ebot hacked the
account. Many of the older posts were edited. You can see evidence
of this by Snit pointing to "old" posts which have been modified to
say I claimed I was his "personal newsgroup rapist", a phrase I
have never used.
-----
No evidence of Carroll working with Google. No evidence of any older posts being edited.
--
Eight things to never feed your dog
https://youtu.be/HMx0RyzbPgQ
http://bit.ly/2oNYRgv
Jonas Eklundh Communication
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-16 08:52 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Trump the liar |
| Message-ID | <ef47508f-f1c3-42f1-b877-4c0d7f2353f1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #463295 |
On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 7:53:45 AM UTC-6, chrisv wrote: > Steve Carroll wrote: > > >> Even more idiotic than that is Trump's assertion that Mexico would pay > >> for it. > > > >"Aside from who pays..." > > I'm less interested in the "aside". > > No one can know, for sure, whether a bigger wall would be a net gain > for the US. I agree... which is why I wrote what I did in my first post in this thread. > Reasonable people may disagree, as to its merit. No question. > However, no reasonable person could think that Mexico would pay for > our wall. > > This makes anyone who would make the claim, that Mexico would pay for > it, either an idiot or a liar. That's why I said costs aside.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-16 08:54 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Trump the liar |
| Message-ID | <4483b958-ff87-4e3f-9bb9-53e934386855@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #463320 |
On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 9:53:00 AM UTC-6, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 7:53:45 AM UTC-6, chrisv wrote: > > Steve Carroll wrote: > > > > >> Even more idiotic than that is Trump's assertion that Mexico would pay > > >> for it. > > > > > >"Aside from who pays..." > > > > I'm less interested in the "aside". > > > > No one can know, for sure, whether a bigger wall would be a net gain > > for the US. > > I agree... which is why I wrote what I did in my first post in this thread. > > > Reasonable people may disagree, as to its merit. > > No question. > > > However, no reasonable person could think that Mexico would pay for > > our wall. > > > > This makes anyone who would make the claim, that Mexico would pay for > > it, either an idiot or a liar. > > That's why I said costs aside. I meant who pays the cost should be put aside. I doubt anyone, even Trump, ever believed that bunk.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-16 10:56 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Trump the liar |
| Message-ID | <ftls6hFfislU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #463322 |
On 8/16/18 8:54 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 9:53:00 AM UTC-6, Steve Carroll wrote: >> On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 7:53:45 AM UTC-6, chrisv wrote: >>> Steve Carroll wrote: >>> >>>>> Even more idiotic than that is Trump's assertion that Mexico would pay >>>>> for it. >>>> >>>> "Aside from who pays..." >>> >>> I'm less interested in the "aside". >>> >>> No one can know, for sure, whether a bigger wall would be a net gain >>> for the US. >> >> I agree... which is why I wrote what I did in my first post in this thread. >> >>> Reasonable people may disagree, as to its merit. >> >> No question. >> >>> However, no reasonable person could think that Mexico would pay for >>> our wall. >>> >>> This makes anyone who would make the claim, that Mexico would pay for >>> it, either an idiot or a liar. >> >> That's why I said costs aside. > > I meant who pays the cost should be put aside. I doubt anyone, even > Trump, ever believed that bunk. Who pays for a big, mostly useless, symbolic wall matters a lot. I do not want to pay for it! -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-16 11:14 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Trump the liar |
| Message-ID | <a6484bc3-f289-44d4-a3ef-1ea9e4a7c041@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #463347 |
On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 10:56:36 AM UTC-7, Snit wrote: > On 8/16/18 8:54 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > > On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 9:53:00 AM UTC-6, Steve Carroll wrote: > >> On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 7:53:45 AM UTC-6, chrisv wrote: > >>> Steve Carroll wrote: > >>> > >>>>> Even more idiotic than that is Trump's assertion that Mexico would pay > >>>>> for it. > >>>> > >>>> "Aside from who pays..." > >>> > >>> I'm less interested in the "aside". > >>> > >>> No one can know, for sure, whether a bigger wall would be a net gain > >>> for the US. > >> > >> I agree... which is why I wrote what I did in my first post in this thread. > >> > >>> Reasonable people may disagree, as to its merit. > >> > >> No question. > >> > >>> However, no reasonable person could think that Mexico would pay for > >>> our wall. > >>> > >>> This makes anyone who would make the claim, that Mexico would pay for > >>> it, either an idiot or a liar. > >> > >> That's why I said costs aside. > > > > I meant who pays the cost should be put aside. I doubt anyone, even > > Trump, ever believed that bunk. > > Who pays for a big, mostly useless, symbolic wall matters a lot. I do > not want to pay for it! > > > -- > Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They > cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel > somehow superior by attacking the messenger. > > They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. > > <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308> Nobody gets it, I barely understand it. Oh goodness, that is just tons of bitching. You are mere seconds away from being in everyone's kill file. -- Puppy Videos https://youtu.be/Z5wo5aE7MUk Jonas Eklundh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chuck Chop <"butwaitthere is more"@ginsu.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-16 21:24 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Trump the liar |
| Message-ID | <ftmmejFl890U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #463347 |
On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 10:56:33 -0700, Snit wrote: > On 8/16/18 8:54 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >> On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 9:53:00 AM UTC-6, Steve Carroll wrote: >>> On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 7:53:45 AM UTC-6, chrisv wrote: >>>> Steve Carroll wrote: >>>> >>>>>> Even more idiotic than that is Trump's assertion that Mexico would pay >>>>>> for it. >>>>> >>>>> "Aside from who pays..." >>>> >>>> I'm less interested in the "aside". >>>> >>>> No one can know, for sure, whether a bigger wall would be a net gain >>>> for the US. >>> >>> I agree... which is why I wrote what I did in my first post in this thread. >>> >>>> Reasonable people may disagree, as to its merit. >>> >>> No question. >>> >>>> However, no reasonable person could think that Mexico would pay for >>>> our wall. >>>> >>>> This makes anyone who would make the claim, that Mexico would pay for >>>> it, either an idiot or a liar. >>> >>> That's why I said costs aside. >> >> I meant who pays the cost should be put aside. I doubt anyone, even >> Trump, ever believed that bunk. > > Who pays for a big, mostly useless, symbolic wall matters a lot. I do > not want to pay for it! You don't even have a fucking job snit so you have nothing to say about paying for anything. You don't pay taxes. You sponge off the government. And guess what snit? I don't want to fucking pay for you which is why I reported you for potential welfare / disability fraud. Have fun snit.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-16 19:11 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Trump the liar |
| Message-ID | <ftmp68Flor5U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #463408 |
On 8/16/18 6:24 PM, Chuck Chop wrote: > On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 10:56:33 -0700, Snit wrote: > >> On 8/16/18 8:54 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>> On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 9:53:00 AM UTC-6, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>> On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 7:53:45 AM UTC-6, chrisv wrote: >>>>> Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> Even more idiotic than that is Trump's assertion that Mexico would pay >>>>>>> for it. >>>>>> >>>>>> "Aside from who pays..." >>>>> >>>>> I'm less interested in the "aside". >>>>> >>>>> No one can know, for sure, whether a bigger wall would be a net gain >>>>> for the US. >>>> >>>> I agree... which is why I wrote what I did in my first post in this thread. >>>> >>>>> Reasonable people may disagree, as to its merit. >>>> >>>> No question. >>>> >>>>> However, no reasonable person could think that Mexico would pay for >>>>> our wall. >>>>> >>>>> This makes anyone who would make the claim, that Mexico would pay for >>>>> it, either an idiot or a liar. >>>> >>>> That's why I said costs aside. >>> >>> I meant who pays the cost should be put aside. I doubt anyone, even >>> Trump, ever believed that bunk. >> >> Who pays for a big, mostly useless, symbolic wall matters a lot. I do >> not want to pay for it! > > You don't even have a fucking job snit so you have nothing to say about > paying for anything. > You don't pay taxes. > You sponge off the government. > And guess what snit? > I don't want to fucking pay for you which is why I reported you for > potential welfare / disability fraud. > Have fun snit. > Just speak to me with your normal name and not the sock. Geeeez. Your need for attention is bizarre. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chuck Chop <"butwaitthere is more"@ginsu.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-16 22:38 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Trump the liar |
| Message-ID | <ftmqq3Fm3bmU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #463417 |
On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 19:11:20 -0700, Snit wrote: > On 8/16/18 6:24 PM, Chuck Chop wrote: >> On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 10:56:33 -0700, Snit wrote: >> >>> On 8/16/18 8:54 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>> On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 9:53:00 AM UTC-6, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>> On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 7:53:45 AM UTC-6, chrisv wrote: >>>>>> Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>> Even more idiotic than that is Trump's assertion that Mexico would pay >>>>>>>> for it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Aside from who pays..." >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm less interested in the "aside". >>>>>> >>>>>> No one can know, for sure, whether a bigger wall would be a net gain >>>>>> for the US. >>>>> >>>>> I agree... which is why I wrote what I did in my first post in this thread. >>>>> >>>>>> Reasonable people may disagree, as to its merit. >>>>> >>>>> No question. >>>>> >>>>>> However, no reasonable person could think that Mexico would pay for >>>>>> our wall. >>>>>> >>>>>> This makes anyone who would make the claim, that Mexico would pay for >>>>>> it, either an idiot or a liar. >>>>> >>>>> That's why I said costs aside. >>>> >>>> I meant who pays the cost should be put aside. I doubt anyone, even >>>> Trump, ever believed that bunk. >>> >>> Who pays for a big, mostly useless, symbolic wall matters a lot. I do >>> not want to pay for it! >> >> You don't even have a fucking job snit so you have nothing to say about >> paying for anything. >> You don't pay taxes. >> You sponge off the government. >> And guess what snit? >> I don't want to fucking pay for you which is why I reported you for >> potential welfare / disability fraud. >> Have fun snit. >> > > Just speak to me with your normal name and not the sock. Geeeez. Your > need for attention is bizarre. Leave the psycho babble to someone who actually knows what they are doing, snit. Your attempt at deflection is lame. BTW, do you know your house is classified by the county where you live as a trailer? Double-wide, but still a trailer. I sure hope you aren't running a business from your trailer because it's not legal in the county you live in.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-16 10:55 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Trump the liar |
| Message-ID | <ftls5aFfislU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #463320 |
On 8/16/18 8:52 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 7:53:45 AM UTC-6, chrisv wrote: >> Steve Carroll wrote: >> >>>> Even more idiotic than that is Trump's assertion that Mexico would pay >>>> for it. >>> >>> "Aside from who pays..." >> >> I'm less interested in the "aside". >> >> No one can know, for sure, whether a bigger wall would be a net gain >> for the US. > > I agree... which is why I wrote what I did in my first post in this thread. Yet you are OK with spending billions of dollars of other people's money even as you speak about having trouble putting food on the table. >> Reasonable people may disagree, as to its merit. > > No question. > >> However, no reasonable person could think that Mexico would pay for >> our wall. >> >> This makes anyone who would make the claim, that Mexico would pay for >> it, either an idiot or a liar. > > That's why I said costs aside. Costs matter in making decisions like this! -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrzej Matuch <a.m@vt.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-17 12:47 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Trump the liar |
| Message-ID | <FtzdD.158011$Nx7.77216@fx31.iad> |
| In reply to | #463295 |
On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 08:53:42 -0500, chrisv wrote: > Steve Carroll wrote: > >>> Even more idiotic than that is Trump's assertion that Mexico would pay >>> for it. >> >>"Aside from who pays..." > > I'm less interested in the "aside". > > No one can know, for sure, whether a bigger wall would be a net gain for > the US. Reasonable people may disagree, as to its merit. It's not a bigger wall; it's an insurmountable wall. As it is, the wall keeping the Central Americans (they're not actually Mexican) out can easily be climbed and the illegal immigrants have shown that they can do it (on camera no less). The new design proposed would be impossible for them to manage (it's been tested by the military) and allow border security to see who is on the other side so they can be at the right place at the right time to stop them if they DO manage to get through. > However, no reasonable person could think that Mexico would pay for our > wall. > > This makes anyone who would make the claim, that Mexico would pay for > it, either an idiot or a liar. If there's a trade deficit with Mexico - and there is - it would be possible to negotiate terms where it would seem as though Mexico is paying for the wall by making up for that deficit. That was my understanding from day one. Mexico actually coughing up the money from nowhere to benefit the United States is unlikely, I would have to agree. -- Andrzej Matuch FSF Contributor / EFF Member / Free speech advocate
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-17 06:16 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Trump the liar |
| Message-ID | <6ace79b1-d169-4443-9517-d73365312fb6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #463495 |
On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 5:47:36 AM UTC-7, Andrzej Matuch wrote: > On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 08:53:42 -0500, chrisv wrote: > > > Steve Carroll wrote: > > > >>> Even more idiotic than that is Trump's assertion that Mexico would pay > >>> for it. > >> > >>"Aside from who pays..." > > > > I'm less interested in the "aside". > > > > No one can know, for sure, whether a bigger wall would be a net gain for > > the US. Reasonable people may disagree, as to its merit. > > It's not a bigger wall; it's an insurmountable wall. As it is, the wall > keeping the Central Americans (they're not actually Mexican) out can > easily be climbed and the illegal immigrants have shown that they can do > it (on camera no less). The new design proposed would be impossible for > them to manage (it's been tested by the military) and allow border > security to see who is on the other side so they can be at the right > place at the right time to stop them if they DO manage to get through. > > > However, no reasonable person could think that Mexico would pay for our > > wall. > > > > This makes anyone who would make the claim, that Mexico would pay for > > it, either an idiot or a liar. > > If there's a trade deficit with Mexico - and there is - it would be > possible to negotiate terms where it would seem as though Mexico is > paying for the wall by making up for that deficit. That was my > understanding from day one. Mexico actually coughing up the money from > nowhere to benefit the United States is unlikely, I would have to agree. > > > -- > Andrzej Matuch > FSF Contributor / EFF Member / Free speech advocate Can you get over it? Can UTF-8 characters be concatenated into a string with a logical connection to the "real" world; that is the question posed recently by those astonished at the endless babbling of "advocates" and basement-dwelling ultra-cranks. Now let us see knows the DOM API, is a web developer, has stolen Steve Carroll's account, has poor impulse control and is a huge tantrum throwing redneck who posts lie after lie after lie even when he's *not* flooding... AND... who endeavors to blame everything _he_ is doing on "Steve Carroll" and has for his whole life? -- This Trick Gets Women Hot For You! https://youtu.be/UkAyrfOZaXc https://youtu.be/D_so1dvjeyI Jonas Eklundh Communication
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-17 08:51 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Trump the liar |
| Message-ID | <fto985F1s00U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #463495 |
On 8/17/18 5:47 AM, Andrzej Matuch wrote: > On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 08:53:42 -0500, chrisv wrote: > >> Steve Carroll wrote: >> >>>> Even more idiotic than that is Trump's assertion that Mexico would pay >>>> for it. >>> >>> "Aside from who pays..." >> >> I'm less interested in the "aside". >> >> No one can know, for sure, whether a bigger wall would be a net gain for >> the US. Reasonable people may disagree, as to its merit. > > It's not a bigger wall; it's an insurmountable wall. As it is, the wall > keeping the Central Americans (they're not actually Mexican) out can > easily be climbed and the illegal immigrants have shown that they can do > it (on camera no less). The new design proposed would be impossible for > them to manage (it's been tested by the military) and allow border > security to see who is on the other side so they can be at the right > place at the right time to stop them if they DO manage to get through. And does nothing to stop the bigger issue of people crossing the border legally and then not going back, does not stop drones, etc. But it is symbolic and expensive... just the thing conservatives love, esp. with its ties to bigotry. >> However, no reasonable person could think that Mexico would pay for our >> wall. >> >> This makes anyone who would make the claim, that Mexico would pay for >> it, either an idiot or a liar. > > If there's a trade deficit with Mexico - and there is - it would be > possible to negotiate terms where it would seem as though Mexico is > paying for the wall by making up for that deficit. That was my > understanding from day one. Mexico actually coughing up the money from > nowhere to benefit the United States is unlikely, I would have to agree. Mexico is going to China more and more for trade. Trump is making MASSIVE mistakes in working with them. And he lied about them paying for the wall, of course. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-17 09:06 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Trump the liar |
| Message-ID | <dacf798d-2a13-4f26-b06e-dcb902d43b82@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #463555 |
On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 8:51:37 AM UTC-7, Snit wrote: > On 8/17/18 5:47 AM, Andrzej Matuch wrote: > > On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 08:53:42 -0500, chrisv wrote: > > > >> Steve Carroll wrote: > >> > >>>> Even more idiotic than that is Trump's assertion that Mexico would pay > >>>> for it. > >>> > >>> "Aside from who pays..." > >> > >> I'm less interested in the "aside". > >> > >> No one can know, for sure, whether a bigger wall would be a net gain for > >> the US. Reasonable people may disagree, as to its merit. > > > > It's not a bigger wall; it's an insurmountable wall. As it is, the wall > > keeping the Central Americans (they're not actually Mexican) out can > > easily be climbed and the illegal immigrants have shown that they can do > > it (on camera no less). The new design proposed would be impossible for > > them to manage (it's been tested by the military) and allow border > > security to see who is on the other side so they can be at the right > > place at the right time to stop them if they DO manage to get through. > > And does nothing to stop the bigger issue of people crossing the border > legally and then not going back, does not stop drones, etc. > > But it is symbolic and expensive... just the thing conservatives love, > esp. with its ties to bigotry. > > >> However, no reasonable person could think that Mexico would pay for our > >> wall. > >> > >> This makes anyone who would make the claim, that Mexico would pay for > >> it, either an idiot or a liar. > > > > If there's a trade deficit with Mexico - and there is - it would be > > possible to negotiate terms where it would seem as though Mexico is > > paying for the wall by making up for that deficit. That was my > > understanding from day one. Mexico actually coughing up the money from > > nowhere to benefit the United States is unlikely, I would have to agree. > > Mexico is going to China more and more for trade. Trump is making > MASSIVE mistakes in working with them. And he lied about them paying for > the wall, of course. > > > -- > Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They > cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel > somehow superior by attacking the messenger. > > They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. > > <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308> Just about everything vallor says about Klaus Schadenfreude is false as everyone knows. Regardless of my strong knowledge of openSUSE, I even now continue to install it for users who have had problems with OS X, particularly if I feel that they are not very competent at securing their computers and ignoring of all of the online threats. Proof vallor accuses everyone of being Snit http://sandman.net/files/snit_circus.png. I don't understand that. Crudeness is crudeness and there are many who are okay with it. Some are even programmers.I quoted specific examples of vallor lying, flooding every group I post to, etc. His response: to troll Klaus Schadenfreude. -- E-commerce Simplified! https://www.facebook.com/JonasEklundh Jonas Eklundh Communication
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-14 19:32 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Trump the liar |
| Message-ID | <ftgp2uFai5eU5@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #462957 |
chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote: > Steve Carroll wrote: > >> Aside from who pays, are you're convinced it would have little >> effectiveness in an overall plan? Given what you just wrote, that's >> what it seems like. > > Given wrote I just wrote, it seems that I think that it was ludicrous > for Trump to claim that Mexico would pay for a wall. > >> What "idiocy"? > > Your "decriminalize all drugs" and "open the border" idiocy, for > example. > >> To me the dispute with the wall would >> seem to be the belief that it would't work vs it would work > > Even more idiotic than that is Trump's assertion that Mexico would pay > for it. > Trump lied. Carroll will never speak of that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-14 19:32 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Trump the liar |
| Message-ID | <ftgp2tFai5eU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #462941 |
Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tuesday, August 14, 2018 at 11:07:13 AM UTC-6, chrisv wrote: >> Steve Carroll wrote: >> >>> So what's your plan >> >> If I thought a wall was so important, I would "plan" on paying for it >> myself, not making the ludicrous claim that Mexico would pay for it. > > Aside from who pays, are you're convinced it would have little > effectiveness in an overall plan? Given what you just wrote, that's > what it seems like. > > >>> (idiocy snipped) > > What "idiocy"? > >> >> Like your play-pal > > LOL! "play-pal"? Do you ever do more than use 'identity BS' to avoid > an actual discussion... like your "play-pal" does? Ah, someone played your game. Boo hoo for you. > >> , you like to pretend that the dispute is about >> something that it is not. > > WTH are you talking about? To me the dispute with the wall would > seem to be the belief that it would't work vs it would work and it'd > be cost effective in doing so if the latter was the case. What we're > doing now (our current version of a "wall") clearly isn't working. >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-14 19:32 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Trump the liar |
| Message-ID | <ftgp2tFai5eU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #462936 |
chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote: > Steve Carroll wrote: > >> So what's your plan > > If I thought a wall was so important, I would "plan" on paying for it > myself, not making the ludicrous claim that Mexico would pay for it. Include a sensible immigration policy, focus on employers as much or more than the workers, stop crying about people who have been here for years and help them gain legal status, fix our border where needed but do not spend billions on a largely symbolic wall, stop pretending most who are here illegally came here illegally. >> (idiocy snipped) > > Like your play-pal, you like to pretend that the dispute is about > something that it is not. > Slimer?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-14 11:14 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Trump the liar |
| Message-ID | <5363fae0-1c43-45ba-8217-a1836a3f77ee@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #462912 |
On Tuesday, August 14, 2018 at 11:15:55 AM UTC-4, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Tuesday, August 14, 2018 at 6:39:20 AM UTC-6, chrisv wrote: > > chrisv wrote: > > > > >Is it true that that clown threatened to shut-down the government, if > > >he doesn't get funding for his Mexico wall? Only an idiot would think > > >the wall a good idea in the first place! > > > > Personally, if I hear some guy saying that "we're going to build a > > wall, and Mexico is going to pay for it", I think "this guy is an > > idiot". > > I initially disagreed with the wall, I'm still not fully convinced. Considering that most 'illegals' are Visa overstays *and* these entries are by gateways other than the Southwest border, even if the wall could be made 100% perfect, the absolute best that a wall could theoretically do is a 40% reduction. > OTOH, once one takes into consideration the annual amount spent > on illegal immigration, costs attempting to deal with drugs that > are pouring, no **flooding** across the southern border, costs > of dealing with drug addiction (including *loss of life, lost > productivity, incarceration, etc.) a wall, which we all know > won't be 100% effective, looks like it could be at least part > of a better solution than our current, feeble attempts. Drug addiction and immigration are two independent topics which are best to not be conflated. Specifially, the current epidemic isn't from huge changes in the coke, heroin or pot from South/Latin America, but is with Opioids. The primary sources of Opioids is (a) Big Pharma and China (the latter is largely Fentanyl, shipped through the mail). Those who claim that a wall will stop this are "Pants on Fire" wrong: <https://www.politifact.com/north-carolina/statements/2018/feb/02/ann-coulter/would-wall-have-prevented-opioid-epidemic/> > > But hey, that's just me. > > Ok, 'just you', what about this stuff... > > * "Nationally, ... Now read your own quote for comprehension, specifically this part: > Opioids – ranging from illegal street drugs like heroin to > prescription painkillers – have played an especially lethal > role: About two-thirds (66%) of the fatal overdoses in 2016 > involved an opioid." > > <http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/05/30/as-fatal-overdoses-rise-many-americans-see-drug-addiction-as-a-major-problem-in-their-community/> Similarly, "...nearly 80 percent of heroin users reported using prescription opioids prior to heroin," the Institute on Drug Abuse notes on a webpage explaining prescription opioids as a gateway drug." <https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/relationship-between-prescription-drug-heroin-abuse/prescription-opioid-use-risk-factor-heroin-use> FYI, a lot of the switch to heroin is economic (Opioids are more expensive). > "...Many of the deaths are from an extremely potent opioid, fentanyl, which is trafficked from Mexico.[16]..." > > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opioid_epidemic> Need to read the cite and understand. For example, that was a drug bust based on contraband brought in by air, not a southwest border crossing. Similarly, to have the insight to understand that there's not Fentanyl manufacturing facilities in Mexico, so these existing drug cartels are just a "middleman" who see a profit incentive. > So what's your plan, stick with the status quo? You don't believe that > it might be time to try something more aggressive? The "more aggressive" approach has spent $1T (and counting)...but that's basically just law enforcement, so it doesn't include the additional $40B/yr being spent on jails for drug-related crimes. <https://elevationshealth.com/annual-cost-war-on-drugs/> > Or do you think we should decriminalize all drugs? Open the > border and take whatever additional hits there are to take? Well, one definition of insanity is to repeat the same actions while expecting a different outcome... /S As others have pointed out, Portugal is taking a different approach which appears to be working...and at a lower cost. Another question that one should also ask is the demographics of the epidemic's users to seek out what underlying social factors may be contributing factors. What I believe I've read here is a big upswing in addicts amongst older, white & middle class who have increasingly been fiscally marginalized and stressed ... these are the casualties of income inequity. -hh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-14 12:25 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Trump the liar |
| Message-ID | <3c613186-09d9-4038-8f20-419ed28d593f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #462955 |
On Tuesday, August 14, 2018 at 12:14:18 PM UTC-6, -hh wrote: > On Tuesday, August 14, 2018 at 11:15:55 AM UTC-4, Steve Carroll wrote: > > On Tuesday, August 14, 2018 at 6:39:20 AM UTC-6, chrisv wrote: > > > chrisv wrote: > > > > > > >Is it true that that clown threatened to shut-down the government, if > > > >he doesn't get funding for his Mexico wall? Only an idiot would think > > > >the wall a good idea in the first place! > > > > > > Personally, if I hear some guy saying that "we're going to build a > > > wall, and Mexico is going to pay for it", I think "this guy is an > > > idiot". > > > > I initially disagreed with the wall, I'm still not fully convinced. > > Considering that most 'illegals' are Visa overstays I agree that they appear to be overstays, but I'm one of the people that is "skeptical" of this 'stat'. I'm sure this will shock the hell outta you ;) > *and* these > entries are by gateways other than the Southwest border, even if > the wall could be made 100% perfect, the absolute best that a wall > could theoretically do is a 40% reduction. I'm good with 30%... 25% even. > > OTOH, once one takes into consideration the annual amount spent > > on illegal immigration, costs attempting to deal with drugs that > > are pouring, no **flooding** across the southern border, costs > > of dealing with drug addiction (including *loss of life, lost > > productivity, incarceration, etc.) a wall, which we all know > > won't be 100% effective, looks like it could be at least part > > of a better solution than our current, feeble attempts. > > Drug addiction and immigration are two independent topics which > are best to not be conflated. I'm just pointing out that there are costs from both. Notably, your article indicates the experts are merely"skeptical" Translation: like everyone else, they can't really say. "Trump has said that building a wall between the United States and Mexico would curb opioid use in America, and experts told PolitiFact ' in October they’re skeptical a wall would have a drastic impact." As much as I hate the idea of walls, I'm willing to give it a shot as our current 'wall' sucks... *totally*. > Specifially, the current epidemic isn't from huge changes in the > coke, heroin or pot from South/Latin America, but is with Opioids. A lot of heroin comes from down south... and the deaths (and addictions) have sure gone up: "Between 2002 and 2013, the rate of heroin-related overdose deaths nearly quadrupled..." "45% of people who used heroin were also addicted to prescription opioid painkillers" <https://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/heroin/> > The primary sources of Opioids is (a) Big Pharma and China (the > latter is largely Fentanyl, shipped through the mail). So? Mexico is a huge source for powdered and crack cocaine, heroin, meth, *fentanyl, weed, etc. > Those who claim that a wall will stop this are "Pants on Fire" wrong: Nothing can "stop" it, you can only hope to slow illegal immigration and drug trafficking down. What I see is a concerted effort to sell the idea that a wall stands no chance of making much of a difference and it's pushed *hard* in the media. I don't buy any of the arguments I've seen, your mileage obviously varies. > <https://www.politifact.com/north-carolina/statements/2018/feb/02/ann-coulter/would-wall-have-prevented-opioid-epidemic/> > > > > > But hey, that's just me. > > > > Ok, 'just you', what about this stuff... > > > > * "Nationally, ... > > Now read your own quote for comprehension, specifically this part: > > > Opioids – ranging from illegal street drugs like heroin to > > prescription painkillers – have played an especially lethal > > role: About two-thirds (66%) of the fatal overdoses in 2016 > > involved an opioid." I 'comprehended' it the first time, doesn't change my mind based on other things I've read, as well <shrug>. > > <http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/05/30/as-fatal-overdoses-rise-many-americans-see-drug-addiction-as-a-major-problem-in-their-community/> > > Similarly, > > "...nearly 80 percent of heroin users reported using prescription opioids > prior to heroin," the Institute on Drug Abuse notes on a webpage > explaining prescription opioids as a gateway drug." > > <https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/relationship-between-prescription-drug-heroin-abuse/prescription-opioid-use-risk-factor-heroin-use> > > FYI, a lot of the switch to heroin is economic (Opioids are more expensive). That, and availability. > > "...Many of the deaths are from an extremely potent opioid, fentanyl, > which is trafficked from Mexico.[16]..." > > > > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opioid_epidemic> > > Need to read the cite and understand. For example, that was a drug > bust based on contraband brought in by air, not a southwest border > crossing. Similarly, to have the insight to understand that there's > not Fentanyl manufacturing facilities in Mexico, so these existing > drug cartels are just a "middleman" who see a profit incentive. I understand that there are still a sizable number of deaths and addictions from things other than fentanyl that do come across the southern border. > > So what's your plan, stick with the status quo? You don't believe that > > it might be time to try something more aggressive? > > The "more aggressive" approach has spent $1T (and counting) I don't call that more aggressive, I call that 'business as usual'. Someone is making money off the U.S. taxpayer and it's not just the drug dealers. > ...but > that's basically just law enforcement, so it doesn't include the > additional $40B/yr being spent on jails for drug-related crimes. > > <https://elevationshealth.com/annual-cost-war-on-drugs/> > > > Or do you think we should decriminalize all drugs? Open the > > border and take whatever additional hits there are to take? > > Well, one definition of insanity is to repeat the same actions > while expecting a different outcome... /S > > As others have pointed out, Portugal is taking a different > approach which appears to be working...and at a lower cost. Portugal has 10 million people and is the size of Indiana. I'd build a wall long before I followed their lead. > Another question that one should also ask is the demographics > of the epidemic's users to seek out what underlying social > factors may be contributing factors. What I believe I've > read here is a big upswing in addicts amongst older, white & > middle class who have increasingly been fiscally marginalized > and stressed ... these are the casualties of income inequity. Ages 50-56 do pills, as opposed to heroin by users aged 20-35. From what I've read on this the last time I bothered, the latter was on the upswing while the former is decreasing.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-14 19:38 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Trump the liar |
| Message-ID | <ftgpdkFakihU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #462970 |
Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tuesday, August 14, 2018 at 12:14:18 PM UTC-6, -hh wrote: >> On Tuesday, August 14, 2018 at 11:15:55 AM UTC-4, Steve Carroll wrote: >>> On Tuesday, August 14, 2018 at 6:39:20 AM UTC-6, chrisv wrote: >>>> chrisv wrote: >>>> >>>>> Is it true that that clown threatened to shut-down the government, if >>>>> he doesn't get funding for his Mexico wall? Only an idiot would think >>>>> the wall a good idea in the first place! >>>> >>>> Personally, if I hear some guy saying that "we're going to build a >>>> wall, and Mexico is going to pay for it", I think "this guy is an >>>> idiot". >>> >>> I initially disagreed with the wall, I'm still not fully convinced. >> >> Considering that most 'illegals' are Visa overstays > > I agree that they appear to be overstays, but I'm one of the people that is > "skeptical" of this 'stat'. I'm sure this will shock the hell outta you ;) Skeptical thinking is fine. What would be shocking is if you backed your view with evidence. > >> *and* these >> entries are by gateways other than the Southwest border, even if >> the wall could be made 100% perfect, the absolute best that a wall >> could theoretically do is a 40% reduction. > > I'm good with 30%... 25% even. Spending my money as you speak about having trouble putting food I’m on the table. >>> OTOH, once one takes into consideration the annual amount spent >>> on illegal immigration, costs attempting to deal with drugs that >>> are pouring, no **flooding** across the southern border, costs >>> of dealing with drug addiction (including *loss of life, lost >>> productivity, incarceration, etc.) a wall, which we all know >>> won't be 100% effective, looks like it could be at least part >>> of a better solution than our current, feeble attempts. >> >> Drug addiction and immigration are two independent topics which >> are best to not be conflated. > > I'm just pointing out that there are costs from both. And bigger costs with supporting the rich. Never see you cry about that though. They are mostly white, though. > Notably, your article indicates the experts are merely"skeptical" > Translation: like everyone else, they can't really say. > > "Trump has said that building a wall between the United States and > Mexico would curb opioid use in America, and experts told PolitiFact ' > in October they’re skeptical a wall would have a drastic impact." > > As much as I hate the idea of walls, I'm willing to give it a shot as our > current 'wall' sucks... *totally*. > >> Specifially, the current epidemic isn't from huge changes in the >> coke, heroin or pot from South/Latin America, but is with Opioids. > > A lot of heroin comes from down south... and the deaths (and addictions) > have sure gone up: > > "Between 2002 and 2013, the rate of heroin-related overdose deaths nearly quadrupled..." > "45% of people who used heroin were also addicted to prescription opioid painkillers" > <https://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/heroin/> > >> The primary sources of Opioids is (a) Big Pharma and China (the >> latter is largely Fentanyl, shipped through the mail). > > So? Mexico is a huge source for powdered and crack cocaine, heroin, meth, > *fentanyl, weed, etc. The only way you can stop your drug abuse is with a wall? >> Those who claim that a wall will stop this are "Pants on Fire" wrong: > > Nothing can "stop" it, you can only hope to slow illegal immigration and > drug trafficking down. What I see is a concerted effort to sell the idea > that a wall stands no chance of making much of a difference and it's > pushed *hard* in the media. I don't buy any of the arguments I've seen, > your mileage obviously varies. > >> <https://www.politifact.com/north-carolina/statements/2018/feb/02/ann-coulter/would-wall-have-prevented-opioid-epidemic/> >> >> >>>> But hey, that's just me. >>> >>> Ok, 'just you', what about this stuff... >>> >>> * "Nationally, ... >> >> Now read your own quote for comprehension, specifically this part: >> >>> Opioids – ranging from illegal street drugs like heroin to >>> prescription painkillers – have played an especially lethal >>> role: About two-thirds (66%) of the fatal overdoses in 2016 >>> involved an opioid." > > I 'comprehended' it the first time, doesn't change my mind based on > other things I've read, as well <shrug>. > >>> <http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/05/30/as-fatal-overdoses-rise-many-americans-see-drug-addiction-as-a-major-problem-in-their-community/> >> >> Similarly, >> >> "...nearly 80 percent of heroin users reported using prescription opioids >> prior to heroin," the Institute on Drug Abuse notes on a webpage >> explaining prescription opioids as a gateway drug." >> >> <https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/relationship-between-prescription-drug-heroin-abuse/prescription-opioid-use-risk-factor-heroin-use> >> >> FYI, a lot of the switch to heroin is economic (Opioids are more expensive). > > That, and availability. > >>> "...Many of the deaths are from an extremely potent opioid, fentanyl, >> which is trafficked from Mexico.[16]..." >>> >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opioid_epidemic> >> >> Need to read the cite and understand. For example, that was a drug >> bust based on contraband brought in by air, not a southwest border >> crossing. Similarly, to have the insight to understand that there's >> not Fentanyl manufacturing facilities in Mexico, so these existing >> drug cartels are just a "middleman" who see a profit incentive. > > I understand that there are still a sizable number of deaths and addictions > from things other than fentanyl that do come across the southern border. > >>> So what's your plan, stick with the status quo? You don't believe that >>> it might be time to try something more aggressive? >> >> The "more aggressive" approach has spent $1T (and counting) > > I don't call that more aggressive, I call that 'business as usual'. Someone > is making money off the U.S. taxpayer and it's not just the drug dealers. > >> ...but >> that's basically just law enforcement, so it doesn't include the >> additional $40B/yr being spent on jails for drug-related crimes. >> >> <https://elevationshealth.com/annual-cost-war-on-drugs/> >> >>> Or do you think we should decriminalize all drugs? Open the >>> border and take whatever additional hits there are to take? >> >> Well, one definition of insanity is to repeat the same actions >> while expecting a different outcome... /S >> >> As others have pointed out, Portugal is taking a different >> approach which appears to be working...and at a lower cost. > > Portugal has 10 million people and is the size of Indiana. I'd build > a wall long before I followed their lead. > >> Another question that one should also ask is the demographics >> of the epidemic's users to seek out what underlying social >> factors may be contributing factors. What I believe I've >> read here is a big upswing in addicts amongst older, white & >> middle class who have increasingly been fiscally marginalized >> and stressed ... these are the casualties of income inequity. > > Ages 50-56 do pills, as opposed to heroin by users aged 20-35. > From what I've read on this the last time I bothered, the latter was > on the upswing while the former is decreasing. >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 13 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web